Return to Main Page

 

7. The McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner insisted she’d seen someone carrying a child close to the McCanns’ apartment at 9.15pm the evening she was reported missing. But she changed her description of this person several times. Later, one of the McCanns’ detectives said she might have seen a woman, not a man. She claimed that when she saw this man, she walked past Gerry McCann and a friend, Jez Wilkins. But neither of them could remember seeing her.

 

Verdict - False
Source - Police Files, TV Interviews and Media Reports

 

Summary of Verifiable Facts Discussion 1. Did Jane Tanners descriptions change several times? Jane Tanner Descriptions Description Categories Table of Comparisons Conclusions Additional Notes Another Witness' description Sources - Jane Tanner's statements First Interview - 4th May 2007 Statement 2 - 10th May 2007 Rogatory Interview - 8th April 2008 2. Did Jane Tanner say she saw a woman, not a man? Conclusions 3.  She claimed that when she saw this man, she walked past Gerry McCann and a friend, Jez Wilkins. But neither of them could remember seeing her. Conclusion

 

Summary of Verifiable Facts

 

1. Jane Tanner's description of the abductor has been consistent since 2007.
2. There are numerous media accounts of her testimony which differ from those which we know to be her own words.

 

Discussion

 

This "fact" consists of several independent statements which need to be addressed separately.

 

1. The McCann's friend Jane Tanner insisted she’d seen someone carrying a child close to the McCann's apartment at 21:15 the evening she was reported missing. But she changed her description of this person several times.
2. Later, one of the McCann's detectives said she might have seen a woman, not a man.
3. She claimed that when she saw this man, she walked past Gerry McCann and a friend, Jez Wilkins.
4. But neither of them could remember seeing her.

 

1. Did Jane Tanners descriptions change several times?

 

Jane Tanner Descriptions

Jane Tanner gave descriptions of the man on the following occasions.  The level of detail between these varies.

 

1. Statement on 4th May, 2007
2. Statement on 10th May 2007
3. Panorama Interview on 19th November 2007
4. Rogatory Interview on 8th April 2008

 

Description Categories

She described the man using the following categories:

 

1. Gender
2. Age
3. Height
4. Build
5. Complexion
6. Hair
7. Jacket
8. Shoes

 

Table of Comparisons

 

Category	First Interview 4th May 2007	Interview 2 10th May 2007	Panorama 19th November 2007	Rogatory Interview 8th April 2008	Discrepancies
Gender	Male	Male	Male	Male	None
Age	35-40	-	-	-	None
Height	1.70m   (see red text in Rogatory Interview column)	-	probably 5'8 tall   he was taller than me but not 6' and so between those two.	not six foot but taller than me   I think that had got confused in translation because I don’t know what it was in metres and they sort of then transferred that into metres from my statement, so I think it came out actually lower.    But I think it was sort of like five foot nine, five foot ten, as much as I could, so”.	She was less precise about height but consistent in saying that he was taller than her but not as tall as 6ft.    In her Rogatory Interview, she was at pains to point out why her original height was incorrectly low.
Build	Slim	-	-	Medium, well sort of just normal build  Baggy clothes may have made him look bigger	When given the opportunity to do so, she explained that the baggy clothes may have made him look bigger.
Complexion	Dark skinned	-	-		None
Hair	Very dark, thick hair, longer at the back Very dark, thick hair, longer at the back	-	lot of dark, reasonably-long-to-the-neck hair	Long into the neck  Layered  Dark and glossy	None
Jacket	A “duffy” (duffel) type jacket but not that thick	-	big heavy jacket	Dark	None
Trousers	Linen-type  Beige to golden in colour	Slightly wide their entire length, being straight  The colour of "corticite”	-	Baggy  Sort of a yellowy dark browny, horrible colour  sort of not Chinos but not Farrahs either	None
Shoes	Dark, classic style	shoes which enabled the man to be fleet-footed	-	-	None

 

 

Conclusions

 

Jane Tanner's descriptions varied slightly in terms of the height and build of the man she saw. However, she explains that his baggy clothes made it difficult to adequately describe his build and that initial smaller height was due to her misunderstanding the metric system.

On the whole, her descriptions have remained consistent where they can be compared.

 

 

Additional Notes

Several media stories attributed different descriptions to those above; however, the above are the only ones which are on record as coming from Jane Tanner. Given the high level of false reporting in the McCann case, it would be unjust to use them in comparison with those that have credible sources.

 

Media stories which reported differing descriptions to those on record:

Guardian on 25th May 2007- Description which includes "Caucasian" is attributed to Inspector Olegario Sousa, not Jane Tanner

BBC on 16th November 2007 - Article is about the Panorama Interview but quotes First Interview description

Sydney Morning Herald on 26th October 2007 - Adds its own opinion that the man appears to be "European or Mediterranean" appearance but does not attribute these words to Jane Tanner. Instead this appears to be an opinion held by the journalist based upon an artist's impression of Jane Tanner's description.

Daily Mail 20th November 2007 - Attributes a description of "more local or Mediterranean looking" with "swarthy skin" to "an interview" which Jane Tanner had given the previous day. Later in the article, the Daily Mail specifically mentions Jane Tanner's interview with Panorama the previous night. However Ms Tanner did not give any such description on Panorama (transcript is here). On the same day, The LiverPool Daily Post  (original article no longer online) attributes this quote to Jane Tanner's "exclusive interview" with The Sun on 20th November (original article no longer online). However, the article in question contains no such quote. It seems possible that this particular quote may have come about as a result of the rampant media recycling which took place in the early days of the case.

The Mirror 28th October 2007 - Added a maroon shirt to the mix via an unnamed source. 

 

 

Another Witness' description

The following is a summary of Martin Smith's description of the man carrying a young child on 3rd May 2007. Note how similar this description is to Jane Tanner's and how similar it is to some of the media descriptions falsely attributed to Jane Tanner:-

Height: 175 to 180 cm tall (5’ 9’’ to 5’ 11’)
Age: 30-35

Hair: Short, brown hair

Skin: White

Top clothes: A darker top. The man is not dressed like a tourist

Trousers: Cream or beige trousers, classic cut, of linen or cotton

Build: Average build, physically fit

Shoes: Not specified

 

 

Sources - Jane Tanner's statements

 

First Interview - 4th May 2007

Quote: from a translation of the Files done by Anne Esse

Dark skinned individual, male sex, aged between 35 – 40, slim physical appearance, about 1.70m tall. Very dark, thick hair, longer at the back (she could only see him from behind). He was wearing linen type cloth trousers, beige to golden in colour, a "duffy" sic type jacket (but not that thick). His shoes were dark in colour, classic type. He had a hurried walk. He was carrying a child, who was lying on both his arms, in front of his chest. By the way he was dressed, he gave her the impression that he was not a tourist, because he was very "warmly dressed".

 

 

Statement 2 - 10th May 2007

Not a detailed physical description.

 

Quote: 

Confronted with the information that the [tracker] dog teams had followed/followed the scent trails in which, purportedly, Madeleine Beth McCann had not passed the intersection where she indicated a man carried a child, she affirmed, immediately, that she was not lying, maintaining the honesty of her initial version. That, indeed, there had passed in front of her a man carrying, in his arms, a barefoot child. At the time she had not paid him much attention because it is common, at the Ocean Club, for children to pass in the arms of their parents between the crèche and their respective homes, when they have collected them from the baby-sitting service. Only it was strange that the child had no cover (blanket) and the way the man walked, rapidly, and how he was dressed, the trousers were slightly wide their entire length, being straight. They (trousers) were as to colour, identical to "corticite" [a type of floor covering], "chino" style. As for the coat it was dark coloured, she was not able to specify what, seeming to be the same material as the trousers, it being a type of "anorak". As for the footwear she relates that she cannot confirm with certainty but [they were] shoes which enabled the man to be fleet-footed.

 

 

Rogatory Interview - 8th April 2008

Quote: 

4078    “Right.  And when you first became aware of this man holding the child, if you can try and picture in your mind, as I am sure you have done over and over again, and start from the top of his head and work your way down and tell me what he looked like?” Reply    “You see this is where now I’m really, I don’t even know whether it’s worth doing this, because there’s been so much, since then I’ve had the, when they took me round for the surveillance to look at, and I’m guessing now it’s MURAT they wanted me to look at and, you know, all the other bits and bobs, I really don’t know, but I think I’d prefer just to stick with what I said in my original statement, in terms of the, because even, I mean, this is coming back to the sketch, even when I did the sketch, by that stage, you know, things were, were murky,I needed to that sketch that first night, I mean, they took me in to do the sketch, but they only had, erm, front facing software, so you know, and at that point I said, you know, is there, can I do, because the clothes and everything was the thing was the thing that was the most in my mind then and I can remember saying to the chap I met on the stairs earlier, I think it’s (inaudible), is it?” 4078    “Yeah”. Reply    “Because he took me in the car back and forth and I can remember saying to him on the way back ‘Look, is there a way I can do a sketch with clothes, you know, do you have software or any way that I can do a sketch of the clothes or a side, a side view’.  And he sort of said ‘No, we don’t have that feasible, you know, feasibility or availability’.  And I said then ‘Can I do that when I go back to the UK’, you know, because at that point it was in my head and it would have been, and they were the bits that I think would have been recognisable to get down on paper.  But at that point it was like ‘Oh no, we can’t do that, we don’t work in that way’.  Which I can understand and, you know, now obviously I think ‘Oh I should have pushed and really pushed’, but at that point you rely on, you don’t, you know, you’re just in such shock and you just think ‘Okay that’s the way things do’, but”. 4078    “Yeah”. Reply    “But, I mean, I think, so the things that I’m happy, that are still in my head, that still stick in my head is the hair and it was longer, it was sort of longish and, erm, I don’t know how to (inaudible), but each, each, almost the hair was long, the bits of hair were long, so it was long into the neck, you know, sort of in, when people have a number one or whatever at the back and it’s shaved, not shaved up, but, you know, sort of layered up, this was more long into the neck, so sort of long, each, each individual hair was long, erm, and dark, it was sort of quite dark and glossy, that sticks in my head.  And sort of the dark, dark clothes and quite billowy, not billowy clothes, but quite baggy, sort of they seemed, erm, not ill fitting but quite baggy clothes, like not jeans, but trousers sort of not Chinos but not Farrahs either, but sort of baggy’ish sort of ill fitting more than.  And they’re the bits that I remember quite vividly sort of”. 4078    “And what colours?” Reply    “Dark colours, but again it was, I think it was quite dark, so dark, sort of darkish jacket but then a more, a lighter trouser but a horrible colour, again this is, sort of a yellowy dark browny, horrible, but not, not a nice colour trousers, but then I wonder whether that was the lights making them look, making them look more of a sort of a mustard, it wasn’t mustard because that’s too bright, but it was just like a, as I say they weren’t nice, they weren’t the sort of clothes I’d expect somebody on a MARK WARNER holiday to, they was, I can’t think of the material, I tried to describe this before, but sort of a cottony material but baggy”. 4078    “You know the artist’s impression that you”. Reply    “Umm”. 4078    “That has been circulated a lot.  How happy are you with that?” Reply    “Erm, phew, reasonably, but, I mean, it was the best I could do after that time, I mean, it was more, the hair was the one thing on that that I wasn’t completely happy about but we couldn’t get it any better because it was the sort of, I almost think that might have been slightly too long or just, but on the whole I think the actual sort of style and everything was, was fairly right.  I mean, I tried to do that though from my original description that we wrote down, sort of well afterwards (inaudible) we tried to get all our thoughts down and I tried to do it as much as I could from that, because six months on, as I say, there was, I think the problem is there’d been so much put into my head since then, like doing the surveillance and, you know, looking at people on that and things, it was very hard to, to do it”. 4078    “I must come back and talk about that when we have finished going through everything”. Reply    “Yeah, that’s fine, yeah”. 4078    “What about the height of the man?” Reply    “Erm, phew, well, you know, I did it on the, I sort of pointed out where it was on the person that interviewed me originally and, erm, sort of, not six foot but taller than me but sort of not, but not, I’d say I think it was sort of about five foot nine, five foot ten.  But I think that had got confused in translation because I don’t know what it was in metres and they sort of then transferred that into metres from my statement, so I think it came out actually lower.  But I think it was sort of like five foot nine, five foot ten, as much as I could, so”. 4078    “Okay.  And his build?” Reply    “Medium, well sort of just normal build.  As I say, I think the clothes were quite baggy, so I think they made him look more bigger than he probably was, but.  And also he would have been, his shoulders would have been out, you know, sort of.  So, I think, erm, yeah, medium’ish, a medium’ish build”. 4078    “And you said earlier you thought he was, I can’t remember what word you used, walking, you didn’t say briskly, but”. Reply    “Purposefully”. 4078    “Purposefully”. Reply    “Yeah”. 4078    “Did you notice anything else about the way he walked?” Reply    “Not really, just that it was very, as I say, it did seem quite a very, you know, a purposeful.  And also the way he was carrying was sort of, it’s the way I would pick my children up if I didn’t want to wake them up, you know, if you’re sort of picking them up to put them into another bed or something, it is the way I would pick them up if they were asleep, because it’s, normally you would imagine you would carry them over your shoulder or something.  So, again, in hindsight, that was probably a bit of an odd way to be, you know, be carrying, but”. 4078    “Is there anything else about the man that you can remember now?” Reply    “No, I mean, I would be so worried now about things that are put into my, I think the only two things that I’m still absolutely adamant on is a lot of hair, sort of a lot of thick, thick hair and sort of dark and baggy, well not, ill fitting clothes I think is the sort of, you know, sort of is the two things that still, I mean obviously I get this image in my head all the time and they are the two things that are still, are still, are still there”.

 

 

2. Did Jane Tanner say she saw a woman, not a man?

 

There is no record of Jane Tanner saying this.  However, according to the Madeleine Foundation website, one of the McCann's private detectives, David Edgar, stated the following in a press conference:-

 

Quote:

David Edgar: “Well, obviously, the Jane Tanner sighting, she's...her perception was it was a man and this...this is a woman. We obviously haven't...Jane Tanner could have been wrong- it could have been a woman, errm...so we've got an open mind on that”.

 

 

Conclusions

 

This would appear to contradict their other claim that Jane Tanner said she may have seen a woman!

 

 

3.  She claimed that when she saw this man, she walked past Gerry McCann and a friend, Jez Wilkins. But neither of them could remember seeing her.

 

This was widely reported in the press at the time, and therefore not something that the British media have sought to suppress! There is no contradiction, no retraction here - Jane says she saw the two men deep in conversation, on the other side of the road, she says she did not greet them, they did not see her. She has never changed her story in this regard.

 

Conclusion

 

There is nothing suspicious to be inferred from this - indeed if there had been an attempt by Jane Tanner and Gerry McCann to concoct a fake 'man with child' story, it would have helped to validate Jane's story to have Gerry recall that he HAD seen her at the time and place she described.