About BBC's UK Crimewatch, we said here that its content had the unique quality of not having a single truthful
reconstruction and that is according to both White Hat and Black Hat
versions alike.
True to our words, we are now exposing discrepancies found.
And we're talking exclusively about the UK Crimewatch and is the only one we're focusing on for now.
Today we are posting the first 8 discrepancies.
Why there was a UK version and a German one, or why we have different reconstructions for different countries, is a matter to be analysed under a different context.
UK Crimewatch is the only version that has Scotland Yard's explicit seal of approval on it.
We are an investigative blog.
We, as we have said before, like to act, never to react.
However, we couldn't ignore this call for arms and we presented ourselves for duty, and contributed the best we could in stopping this farce.
The amount of information influx has been simply staggering so we would like to apologise upfront for not acknowledging readers, whenever the case, for information that we may be posting.
And this non-acknowledgment is, in our opinion, the very real importance of this Crimewatch episode: we, in the internet, have made history.
You may have not realized it, but we, all of us, have changed forever the face of the internet.
They thought that they could come out and just say that Bundleman was Crèche Dad and that the general public, where we're included, would just moan and groan, throw a bad face and end up accepting it as fact.
Why? Because it has been so for all time. The Establishment determines and the populace follows.
So if Britain's top Police force, Scotland Yard said Bundleman was Crèche Dad, then as of Oct 14 2013, Bundleman was to be wiped out of history books and replaced by Crèche Dad. So determined the Establishment.
Very simple and straightforward and the way it has always been done.
Sure, they expected a fierce reaction from the internet, but those armchair conspiracy theorists detectives could howl as loud as they wanted but it would just be noise that would eventually dwindle down into habitual silence and conformism.
But what happened this week is that we all showed the Establishment that this part of the internet is a civilized place (sure we have our fair share of lunatics and evil people) where lies are debated in a logical, reasonable and determined manner.
Plus, the percentage of those of us who write and comment is very small compared with those who read us and, very importantly, are able to think for themselves.
They expected a fierce, emotional reaction, but they got a firm and substantiated one.
Just like the quote from The Guardian (04Jan12) that we have on the blog's front page: "Once information networks become social, the implications are massive: truth can now travel faster than lies, and all propaganda becomes instantly flammable. Sure,you can try to insert spin, but the instantly networked consciousness of millions of people will set it right: they act like white blood cells against infection so that ultimately the truth, or something close to it, persists much longer than disinformation."
Our collective response surprised them. Caught them completely off-guard.
The fact that up to today there are absolutely no new developments on Scotland Yard's part, after announcing that they had the suspect named and basically having given, in a crescendo since the beginning of this month, the general public the impression that an arrest would be coming very soon, means that we stopped them short.
Not only stopped them, as we have shown how they've painted themselves into a corner.
They have one of three options:
One, choose to continue with whitewashing. It's the only way to keep, somehow, Scotland Yard's credibility alive. The credible, civilised internet is this option's biggest enemy and this week we have shown how strong and resolute we are.
Two, let the issue dwindle away. Very difficult to achieve as they created all the hype themselves and this issue needs closure. We must remember that this was a task assigned to Scotland Yard by the British Prime-Minister himself in May 2011.
Three, apologise for the farce and tackle the truth. Painful. Very painful indeed, but, to us, the only viable option.
We are fully aware that currently we are all deliberately being confused.
We all need to work together for the true facts to be presented, so we welcome all good-natured corrections to anything we say about this.
That has always been our modus operandi but now more than ever as we are all under a massive disinformation and misinformation campaign.
Here are the first 8 discrepancies we found in UK Crimewatch:
And we're talking exclusively about the UK Crimewatch and is the only one we're focusing on for now.
Today we are posting the first 8 discrepancies.
Why there was a UK version and a German one, or why we have different reconstructions for different countries, is a matter to be analysed under a different context.
UK Crimewatch is the only version that has Scotland Yard's explicit seal of approval on it.
We are an investigative blog.
We, as we have said before, like to act, never to react.
However, we couldn't ignore this call for arms and we presented ourselves for duty, and contributed the best we could in stopping this farce.
The amount of information influx has been simply staggering so we would like to apologise upfront for not acknowledging readers, whenever the case, for information that we may be posting.
And this non-acknowledgment is, in our opinion, the very real importance of this Crimewatch episode: we, in the internet, have made history.
You may have not realized it, but we, all of us, have changed forever the face of the internet.
They thought that they could come out and just say that Bundleman was Crèche Dad and that the general public, where we're included, would just moan and groan, throw a bad face and end up accepting it as fact.
Why? Because it has been so for all time. The Establishment determines and the populace follows.
So if Britain's top Police force, Scotland Yard said Bundleman was Crèche Dad, then as of Oct 14 2013, Bundleman was to be wiped out of history books and replaced by Crèche Dad. So determined the Establishment.
Very simple and straightforward and the way it has always been done.
Sure, they expected a fierce reaction from the internet, but those armchair conspiracy theorists detectives could howl as loud as they wanted but it would just be noise that would eventually dwindle down into habitual silence and conformism.
But what happened this week is that we all showed the Establishment that this part of the internet is a civilized place (sure we have our fair share of lunatics and evil people) where lies are debated in a logical, reasonable and determined manner.
Plus, the percentage of those of us who write and comment is very small compared with those who read us and, very importantly, are able to think for themselves.
They expected a fierce, emotional reaction, but they got a firm and substantiated one.
Just like the quote from The Guardian (04Jan12) that we have on the blog's front page: "Once information networks become social, the implications are massive: truth can now travel faster than lies, and all propaganda becomes instantly flammable. Sure,you can try to insert spin, but the instantly networked consciousness of millions of people will set it right: they act like white blood cells against infection so that ultimately the truth, or something close to it, persists much longer than disinformation."
Our collective response surprised them. Caught them completely off-guard.
The fact that up to today there are absolutely no new developments on Scotland Yard's part, after announcing that they had the suspect named and basically having given, in a crescendo since the beginning of this month, the general public the impression that an arrest would be coming very soon, means that we stopped them short.
Not only stopped them, as we have shown how they've painted themselves into a corner.
They have one of three options:
One, choose to continue with whitewashing. It's the only way to keep, somehow, Scotland Yard's credibility alive. The credible, civilised internet is this option's biggest enemy and this week we have shown how strong and resolute we are.
Two, let the issue dwindle away. Very difficult to achieve as they created all the hype themselves and this issue needs closure. We must remember that this was a task assigned to Scotland Yard by the British Prime-Minister himself in May 2011.
Three, apologise for the farce and tackle the truth. Painful. Very painful indeed, but, to us, the only viable option.
We are fully aware that currently we are all deliberately being confused.
We all need to work together for the true facts to be presented, so we welcome all good-natured corrections to anything we say about this.
That has always been our modus operandi but now more than ever as we are all under a massive disinformation and misinformation campaign.
Here are the first 8 discrepancies we found in UK Crimewatch:
Discrepancy 01 - The Buggy
The buggy, or the fact there wasn't one on the first day, Sat 28 Apr 2007, is the the starting point of all Neglect Theory
It was because of its absence the T9 decided, according to what is written in their statements in the PJ Files, in solidarity with the enormous effort made by the McCanns to carry the twins from apartment 5A to the Millenium, to no longer eat there and get a week's special reservation for dinner at Tapas.
There, at Tapas, they were, as is commonly understood wrongly, neglectful.
It was because of its absence the T9 decided, according to what is written in their statements in the PJ Files, in solidarity with the enormous effort made by the McCanns to carry the twins from apartment 5A to the Millenium, to no longer eat there and get a week's special reservation for dinner at Tapas.
There, at Tapas, they were, as is commonly understood wrongly, neglectful.
Either no buggy, and that means dinners at Tapas and neglect OR there's a buggy, like UK Crimewatch has shown, and that means no dinners at Tapas and no neglect.
No neglect, no abduction. That buggy shouldn't have appeared.
No neglect, no abduction. That buggy shouldn't have appeared.
Discrepancy 02 - The First Swim
This afternoon swim only appears in Kate's book in 2011, 4 years after the events.
In the statements (note the plural) that both parents gave to the PJ, where they did detail the best they could all the family's activities during that week, they didn't mention this swim.
None of the three families that settled in the resort with the McCanns speak of this first swim.
Both Kate and Gerry McCann describe these first hours at the Ocean Club, in the PJ Files, as the whole family listening to a sort of lecture at Tapas about tennis, after which they went to dinner (without any buggy) at Ocean Club's restaurant, the Millenium.
If they remembered the lecture, they would have certainly remembered this swim as it could be exactly the first time Maddie could have been seen by their concocted abductor.
If they remembered the lecture, they would have certainly remembered this swim as it could be exactly the first time Maddie could have been seen by their concocted abductor.
Yes, it's absurd and that's why, 4 yrs later, Kate comes up with this afternoon swim.
More absurd is Scotland Yard echoing this.
The importance of this discrepancy is very high because it clarifies that from the outset that UK Crimewatchis not about truth but about something else entirely.
The importance of this discrepancy is very high because it clarifies that from the outset that UK Crimewatchis not about truth but about something else entirely.
Discrepancy 03 - The Shoes
In the controversial picture of Maddie in the tennis courts she appears to be wearing socks and sandals.
In UK Crimewatch, it's clear that the girl that plays Maddie appears to be wearing trainers, more suitable to run around and pick up balls.
From the PJ statements it's not possible to determine when this picture was supposedly taken, as one is made to assume that Maddie and the twins hardly had any time outside the crêche, lunch and bathtime with their parents.
With the exception of a single stroll to the beach, which we spoke of here and here, the impression is that the T9 children were literally deposited in the crêche at every opportunity during the day so that the adults could enjoy... tennis.
Obviously this "tennis court reconstruction" was meant to give the impression to those unaware of details, that Maddie spent lots of time with her parents, which we believe not to be true.
In fact, there is no proof that the "sandals" picture was taken in Praia da Luz. There are some that have substantiated that it wasn't.
Discrepancy 04 - The Reflection
Scotland Yard has unwittingly debunked one the biggest tear-jerkers from the McCann propaganda machine: the last photo.
UK Crimewatch only shows the obvious: horizontal patterns produce horizontal reflections.
Discrepancy 05 - The Living-Room Corner
Scotland Yard seems to have found an apartment very similar to 5A with the exception of the furniture and the absence of the corner of the living-room where the dogs signalled the existence of blood and cadaverine:
The same corner of the living room, where FSS says that stain #9 was made up by CG, a 2 yr old little boy, as we showed here, and where other stains also with DNA were also found as we showed here.
In the digital reconstruction presented in UK Crimewatch of the interior of the apartment, this corner, which we consider of pivotal importance to deteremine Maddie's fate that evening, isn't shown.
![]()
Even Emma Loach got this detail about the kids' bedroom door right in Mock - The Pimpleman, when filming, in Rothley, the reconstruction of the "how-we-had-left-it", as we showed here, but it seems that prestigious Scotland Yard wasn't able to.
They put Maddie in a room where the door opens to the left instead of the right.
This door has been, according to the Black Hats, the "abductor's hiding place"while Gerry was in the apartment where he supposedly saw Maddie alive for the last time. There's absolutely nothing in the PJ Files that substantiates this thesis.
The fact that the door opens to the left, invalidates completely Matthew Oldfield's statement of checking on the McCann children but above all takes away the "proud father moment" that Gerry so much relished on, in Mock.
It drastically shortens to an impossibility the time window in which the Black Hats have maintained possible all these 6 years for the abductor to abduct Maddie.
He was, as we have just said, according to the Black Hats, supposedly hiding behind the door while Gerry went to the toilet, something that is not referred him doing in UK Crimewatch.
With the door opening to the left, Bundleman has nowhere to hide, so there's simply no window of time for him to abduct.
As per PJ Files, Gerry comes out of the toilet and walks out of the apartment via patio doors. Encounters Jez Wilkins and engages in a 5 minute conversation. In the middle of these 5 minutes, Jane Tanner walks by them and sees Bundleman crossing the street.
No time for Bundleman to get in, grab Maddie and get out in time to be seen at that crossing.
And without Bundleman, where's the evidence of an abduction?
Scotland Yard, by explicitly saying that Bundleman is Crèche Dad, obliterates the only shred of evidence the Black Hats had to justify an abduction.
![]()
![]()
![]()
Finally we witness an attempt in replicating our dearest friend: the Big Round Table (BRT).
As UK Crimewatch was filmed in Spain and not Portugal, Scotland Yard can always have the excuse that any discrepancies we may point out are because they didn't film the original BRT.
So the BRT, the true BRT, remains as illusive as Pimpleman, the differrence being that everyone knows where the BRT supposedly is but no one is willing to go find it and photograph it.
And is that photograph important? Of course it is.
Without the BRT, there are no Tapas dinners and without these, the desired negligence is unchievable which, in turn, is essential for the abduction to have happened.
But it's not only because of this is the BRT important.
It is indeed important because if it doesn't exist then it implicates both the Ocean Club and the guests who said they dined with the T9 at Tapas that week. Their names are on the "reservation sheets".
That said, we would like to thank Scotland Yard for pointing out something that we hadn't noticed: the ridiculousness of Kate's seating plan:
![]()
If the Paynes arrived later than all others, then it would be logical for them to have sat together.
Exactly like it's played out in UK Crimewatch. But that is not what Kate said happened at Tapas on May 3rd, is it?
In between the Paynes we see Gerry and Matt. Were there marked places?
There could indeed be marked places because, as UK Crimewatch shows, Tapas was NOT, after all, the alternative to the Millenium but apparently Ocean Club's "Executive Class Restaurant"! Very, very posh indeed.
Impecable linen tablecloths, glasses for water and wine and even, do be amazed, a vase centrepiece!
No wonder people queued up to get a reservation!!
Imagine paying the same for having to walk up the road and eating at the Millenium that is located at the far end of the complex and being poshly served at Tapas, just outside your apartment, which one would you choose? Tapas, of course!
Would you queue up? I would!
Such a posh restaurant and hardly mentioned in the reviews, as we showed here. Isn't that just unbelievable?
The Mirror, on Oct 13, the day before the UK Crimewatch aired showed this picture as being the Tapas Bar:
![]()
Very posh indeed! Pity it isn't Tapas.
The fact that the chairs do have the same shape (we're sure that Tapas outdoor chairsweren't custom made for Tapas) and the tables are similarly small, the beams are not right and those stone walls don't exist.
![]()
Google Maps above, suggests that the Tapas esplanade remains an open space.
The Mirror image is only important in terms of showing how in synch and in closed ranks is the Establishment acting.
What matters is that Tapas in May 2007 was as pictured below:
![]()
We would also like to thank Scotland Yard for showing that we were right all along: the table shown is of significant size, would cause a visual impact and its presence make a memorable impression in the middle of Tapas:
![]()
We, like we said in our post here, we don't see any table with similar, or even approximate, dimensions at Tapas:
![]()
And that's why we have questioned, and question, BRT's existence, at Tapas, in May 2007.
Do note that the chairs at Tapas are wider than those used in UK Crimewatch.
And we do have confirmation from Martin Brunt, as we showed in our here and here, that the furniture where he's sitting below is the one actually used by the T9 at Tapas:
![]()
There's an optical illusion that wasn't noticed but was presented to us by the BBC/Crimewatch team: by placing a tree in the foreground they deliberately have diminished both BRT's dimensions and visual effect:
![]()
Even so, what is visible is still significantly big to cause visual impact.
Why would a restaurant own a single table completely different from all others, when joining up tables is a much simpler and practical solution?
Then we have that beautiful centrepiece. A vase with a plant. Another optical illusion, that is used worldwide to compensate the void that always exists in the centre big round tables:
![]()
And would Gerry describe the UK Crimewatch BRT in the same the way he did in Mock, as below?
![]()
Lastly, it was rather unfortunate to put Gerry with his back to the apartments. Because when he says this:
![]()
He's saying he was looking at something he wasn't.
The shape and size of the BRT are very important because, as we have said and are now emphatically repeating, no dinners took place at Tapas Bar by the T9.
Their presence there for dinners is a fabrication. Except on May 3rd but even on that night they didn't sit around a BRT because that particular object never existed.
There is no proof of its existence in any photo, independent or otherwise, and its size defies logic taking into account both the remainder furniture as well as the snack-type purpose of the bar.
It can't be the table photographed in Mr Amaral's book, nor any of the other tables that also appear.
A table so significantly different in dimensions from all others would have been pointed out to him and he would have photographed it.
Dianne Webster says she's the only one that took pictures of those dinners (so supposedly of the BRT too) but we're yet to see them.
We, back in 2011, even defied, here, Kate to publish them in her book. The question was explicit: will Kate's book prove Textusa wrong?
Although we know Kate reads our blog, as we showed here, she didn't accept our challenge and didn't publish any photo with the T9 sitting around the BRT that fategful week.
Being a fabrication itself, as it is, all other things related with the BRT, like the seating arrangements, are too.
The Tapas bar may have been the mustering point for swinging activities, although there are other possibilities for that.
![]()
![]()
One thing that every one remembers about Mock is how humiliated Jane Tanner was by Dave Edgar and Gerry McCann when she was literally told on what side of the road she saw Gerry and Jez Wilkins talking to each other:
![]()
Even though both Tanner's and Wilkins statements in the PJ Files are clear as to where this conversation took place (on the Tapas side of the road near 5A's backgate) and that in none of Gerry's statements is this location specified, it's Gerry's version that is upheld in Mock, like we showed you here:
![]()
![]()
UK Crimewatchmaintains and even reinforces this discrepancy. Not only is the conversation between Gerry and Jez on the right side of the road if you go up (the apartment and Tapas would be on the left) as Jane is seen walking completely alone in the street.
No sign of Gerry or Jez.
One thing Scotland Yard doesn't explain, is that when it says "at about the same time" that Gerry and Jez are talking, Jane gets up to do her checking, so, logically, they should have crossed paths somewhere.
It isn't shown. Gerry had vaporised into thin air.
See also UK Crimewatch - Discrepancies II
Discrepancy 06 - The Door
Even Emma Loach got this detail about the kids' bedroom door right in Mock - The Pimpleman, when filming, in Rothley, the reconstruction of the "how-we-had-left-it", as we showed here, but it seems that prestigious Scotland Yard wasn't able to.
They put Maddie in a room where the door opens to the left instead of the right.
This door has been, according to the Black Hats, the "abductor's hiding place"while Gerry was in the apartment where he supposedly saw Maddie alive for the last time. There's absolutely nothing in the PJ Files that substantiates this thesis.
The fact that the door opens to the left, invalidates completely Matthew Oldfield's statement of checking on the McCann children but above all takes away the "proud father moment" that Gerry so much relished on, in Mock.
It drastically shortens to an impossibility the time window in which the Black Hats have maintained possible all these 6 years for the abductor to abduct Maddie.
He was, as we have just said, according to the Black Hats, supposedly hiding behind the door while Gerry went to the toilet, something that is not referred him doing in UK Crimewatch.
With the door opening to the left, Bundleman has nowhere to hide, so there's simply no window of time for him to abduct.
As per PJ Files, Gerry comes out of the toilet and walks out of the apartment via patio doors. Encounters Jez Wilkins and engages in a 5 minute conversation. In the middle of these 5 minutes, Jane Tanner walks by them and sees Bundleman crossing the street.
No time for Bundleman to get in, grab Maddie and get out in time to be seen at that crossing.
And without Bundleman, where's the evidence of an abduction?
Scotland Yard, by explicitly saying that Bundleman is Crèche Dad, obliterates the only shred of evidence the Black Hats had to justify an abduction.
Discrepancy 07 - The Big Round Table
Finally we witness an attempt in replicating our dearest friend: the Big Round Table (BRT).
As UK Crimewatch was filmed in Spain and not Portugal, Scotland Yard can always have the excuse that any discrepancies we may point out are because they didn't film the original BRT.
So the BRT, the true BRT, remains as illusive as Pimpleman, the differrence being that everyone knows where the BRT supposedly is but no one is willing to go find it and photograph it.
And is that photograph important? Of course it is.
Without the BRT, there are no Tapas dinners and without these, the desired negligence is unchievable which, in turn, is essential for the abduction to have happened.
But it's not only because of this is the BRT important.
It is indeed important because if it doesn't exist then it implicates both the Ocean Club and the guests who said they dined with the T9 at Tapas that week. Their names are on the "reservation sheets".
That said, we would like to thank Scotland Yard for pointing out something that we hadn't noticed: the ridiculousness of Kate's seating plan:
If the Paynes arrived later than all others, then it would be logical for them to have sat together.
Exactly like it's played out in UK Crimewatch. But that is not what Kate said happened at Tapas on May 3rd, is it?
In between the Paynes we see Gerry and Matt. Were there marked places?
There could indeed be marked places because, as UK Crimewatch shows, Tapas was NOT, after all, the alternative to the Millenium but apparently Ocean Club's "Executive Class Restaurant"! Very, very posh indeed.
Impecable linen tablecloths, glasses for water and wine and even, do be amazed, a vase centrepiece!
No wonder people queued up to get a reservation!!
Imagine paying the same for having to walk up the road and eating at the Millenium that is located at the far end of the complex and being poshly served at Tapas, just outside your apartment, which one would you choose? Tapas, of course!
Would you queue up? I would!
Such a posh restaurant and hardly mentioned in the reviews, as we showed here. Isn't that just unbelievable?
The Mirror, on Oct 13, the day before the UK Crimewatch aired showed this picture as being the Tapas Bar:
Very posh indeed! Pity it isn't Tapas.
The fact that the chairs do have the same shape (we're sure that Tapas outdoor chairsweren't custom made for Tapas) and the tables are similarly small, the beams are not right and those stone walls don't exist.
Google Maps above, suggests that the Tapas esplanade remains an open space.
The Mirror image is only important in terms of showing how in synch and in closed ranks is the Establishment acting.
What matters is that Tapas in May 2007 was as pictured below:
We would also like to thank Scotland Yard for showing that we were right all along: the table shown is of significant size, would cause a visual impact and its presence make a memorable impression in the middle of Tapas:
We, like we said in our post here, we don't see any table with similar, or even approximate, dimensions at Tapas:
And that's why we have questioned, and question, BRT's existence, at Tapas, in May 2007.
Do note that the chairs at Tapas are wider than those used in UK Crimewatch.
And we do have confirmation from Martin Brunt, as we showed in our here and here, that the furniture where he's sitting below is the one actually used by the T9 at Tapas:
There's an optical illusion that wasn't noticed but was presented to us by the BBC/Crimewatch team: by placing a tree in the foreground they deliberately have diminished both BRT's dimensions and visual effect:
Even so, what is visible is still significantly big to cause visual impact.
Why would a restaurant own a single table completely different from all others, when joining up tables is a much simpler and practical solution?
Then we have that beautiful centrepiece. A vase with a plant. Another optical illusion, that is used worldwide to compensate the void that always exists in the centre big round tables:
And would Gerry describe the UK Crimewatch BRT in the same the way he did in Mock, as below?
Lastly, it was rather unfortunate to put Gerry with his back to the apartments. Because when he says this:
He's saying he was looking at something he wasn't.
The shape and size of the BRT are very important because, as we have said and are now emphatically repeating, no dinners took place at Tapas Bar by the T9.
Their presence there for dinners is a fabrication. Except on May 3rd but even on that night they didn't sit around a BRT because that particular object never existed.
There is no proof of its existence in any photo, independent or otherwise, and its size defies logic taking into account both the remainder furniture as well as the snack-type purpose of the bar.
It can't be the table photographed in Mr Amaral's book, nor any of the other tables that also appear.
A table so significantly different in dimensions from all others would have been pointed out to him and he would have photographed it.
Dianne Webster says she's the only one that took pictures of those dinners (so supposedly of the BRT too) but we're yet to see them.
We, back in 2011, even defied, here, Kate to publish them in her book. The question was explicit: will Kate's book prove Textusa wrong?
Although we know Kate reads our blog, as we showed here, she didn't accept our challenge and didn't publish any photo with the T9 sitting around the BRT that fategful week.
Being a fabrication itself, as it is, all other things related with the BRT, like the seating arrangements, are too.
The Tapas bar may have been the mustering point for swinging activities, although there are other possibilities for that.
Discrepancy 08 - The Discrepancy
One thing that every one remembers about Mock is how humiliated Jane Tanner was by Dave Edgar and Gerry McCann when she was literally told on what side of the road she saw Gerry and Jez Wilkins talking to each other:
Even though both Tanner's and Wilkins statements in the PJ Files are clear as to where this conversation took place (on the Tapas side of the road near 5A's backgate) and that in none of Gerry's statements is this location specified, it's Gerry's version that is upheld in Mock, like we showed you here:
UK Crimewatchmaintains and even reinforces this discrepancy. Not only is the conversation between Gerry and Jez on the right side of the road if you go up (the apartment and Tapas would be on the left) as Jane is seen walking completely alone in the street.
No sign of Gerry or Jez.
One thing Scotland Yard doesn't explain, is that when it says "at about the same time" that Gerry and Jez are talking, Jane gets up to do her checking, so, logically, they should have crossed paths somewhere.
It isn't shown. Gerry had vaporised into thin air.
See also UK Crimewatch - Discrepancies II