I think the whole issue of what happened to Madeleine on the 3rd of May has been on the one hand so ludicrously exaggerated as to be beyond reason; while at the same time has been simplified in a way which defies logic.
The merit of Sadie's theory of what might have been the circumstances surrounding Madeleine's disappearance lies in the fact that nothing she has suggested is beyond the realms of possibility and much is backed-up with anecdotal evidence, some of which appears in the files.
The balcony in block six overlooking the McCann apartment where the cigarette ends were found, could have been used for surveillance.
Any one of the men seen showing enough interest in the apartment to attract the attention of passersby might have had an involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.
Neither has Jane Tanner's eye witness testimony been entirely ruled out of the equation ... "almost certainly" is in my opinion too substantial a caveat to enable that.
The problem with the theory is that on the one hand it's suggested that Madeleine was vitally important to someone, and on the other he hired the most inefficient gang of abductors he could find.
They spent the week lurking around staring at the apartment they planned to enter, or trying to collect money door to door.
There was a lookout who didn't see three people and who left evidence of his presence.
There was a getaway driver who got away without the child, and a 'carrier' wandering around the streets drawing attention to himself by looking and behaving nothing like a tourist.
They went in and moved the bedroom door, according to the witnesses, between 8.30 and 9.05, between 9.15 and 9.35 and between 9.35 and 10.00. Why?
