Sadie's theory, the watcher and a getaway car.

[sadie]

It's fairly clear that no-one went in through that window, so there's no need to surmise it was opened from the outside any more.

It's fairly obvious that no-one went in or out through that window.  Glad to agree with you for a change

IMHO

[sadie]

There is a school of thought that any abductors were in the alley, from where they could see the Tapas very easily. Once everyone was seated, all they had to do then was nip up the steps into the apartment. Job done, Sadie's watchers and keys not needed.

Let's have that theory and examine it in detail, shall we?   Why dont you promote it ?

I don't have a monopoly on theories and altho mine seems to fit exceptionally well, maybe some others will too.

Roll em out but under a new thread name, if you wouldn't mind.

[sadie]

You would only need a team of two, possibly three, two or three burner phones and a getaway motor imo.
We have to satisfy the condition of "no sign of a break in" as reported by the police who attended the scene.
I have this great idea..................

Oooo ... let's have it then Alice.

[sadie]

I think it more likely to be an accident of some sort.

https://www.worldnomads.com/travel-safety/europe/portugal/portugese-petty-crime

"One event that bears mentioning is the 2007 disappearance of 3 year old Madeleine McCann, who was vacationing with her family in Portugal's Algarve region.

The crime made international news and rocked Portugal. Many rumors and theories have surfaced, but to date none have been proven and the child has never been found.

While the tragedy has not yet been solved and is still under investigation, it appears to be an isolated incident. There haven't been any other similar crimes there since".

Note what does not have a mention......

1After all the publicity and police work of the Madeleine case, it would take a brave and foolish man to abduct another child in the region.

2However it appears that some children have been abused in their own beds as their parents slept nearby.

[Alice Purjorick]

1After all the publicity and police work of the Madeleine case, it would take a brave and foolish man to abduct another child in the region.

2However it appears that some children have been abused in their own beds as their parents slept nearby.

1 Why? on that basis most crime would cease everywhere.
2 That is the bit that has no mention in the link I posted. Unless there is a worldwide conspiracy why no mention of it

[G-Unit]

Our discussion began because I thought your posts insisting that the balcony was 'bathed in light' and that the patio doors were in full view of the Tapas diners were not based on available evidence.

I provided evidence which suggested the balcony was actually pretty dark and the diners stated that they couldn't see the patio doors.

It would be nice if you could concentrate on answering my points.

[sadie]

Our discussion began because I thought your posts insisting that the balcony was 'bathed in light' and that the patio doors were in full view of the Tapas diners were not based on available evidence.

I provided evidence which suggested the balcony was actually pretty dark and the diners stated that they couldn't see the patio doors.

It would be nice if you could concentrate on answering my points.

The patiio area was bathed in light from the street light opposite .. but I always made it clear that it was not a strong light

http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AG/Extras_do_livro_Page_5.jpg


The hedge is blanking off much of the patio / balcony area in the lower image

I dont know why the light didn't appear very much on the video.  I am not technical but perhaps it was because the camera wasn't terribly high quality and hadn't the necessary pixels or power or something.  And i accept that these images above could be brighter from a longer exposure than was necessary.   To be honest we dont know all the technical bits and because of that it is swings and roundabouts.  Too exposed?  OR  No pixels/ power/ poor quality camera?  We just dont know

What ever you try and claim Gunit, the patio area WAS illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite.  I have made a point of never claiming that it was brightly lit.  However, it couldn't have been too bad, that close to a street lamp, could it?

[barrier]

What ever you try and claim Gunit, the patio area WAS illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite.  I have made a point of never claiming that it was brightly lit.  However, it couldn't have been too bad, that close to a street lamp, could it?

It wasn't good enough to allow GM and JW to see JT .

[G-Unit]

The patiio area was bathed in light from the street light opposite .. but I always made it clear that it was not a strong light

http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AG/Extras_do_livro_Page_5.jpg


The hedge is blanking off much of the patio / balcony area in the lower image

I dont know why the light didn't appear very much on the video.  I am not technical but perhaps it was because the camera wasn't terribly high quality and hadn't the necessary pixels or power or something.  And i accept that these images above could be brighter from a longer exposure than was necessary.   To be honest we dont know all the technical bits and because of that it is swings and roundabouts.  Too exposed?  OR  No pixels/ power/ poor quality camera?  We just dont know

What ever you try and claim Gunit, the patio area WAS illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite.  I have made a point of never claiming that it was brightly lit.  However, it couldn't have been too bad, that close to a street lamp, could it?

Thank you. As you say, it's not possible to be sure either way because the camera can give a false impression. Consequently it's not possible, in my opinion, to say whether the balcony was bathed in light or not. as you have been declaring for years;

that patio area was bathed in light from the street light immediately opposite.

It was also only 50 metres away from the parents and their friends and they could see the whole area.
 Reply #167 on: September 30, 2016, 10:57:03 PM »
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7643.msg357681#msg357681

I see no reason why your theory is more believable than that of Ian Horrocks;

Due to the height of the wall and foliage on top of it, as well as the area inside being well lit, in contrast to the darkness elsewhere, those dining would have been easily observed whilst anyone in the alleyway could remain unseen........

Anyone observing their routine would have known that they had at least 20 minutes between each check. They would have observed the group for a few minutes and then gone to the apartment. At the end of the alleyway they could see that the road was clear, it is then only literally a second for someone to go through the gate and into the garden area, where they would be virtually out of sight. It is then simple to enter the apartment through the patio doors, which although closed, had been left unlocked.
http://www.bgpglobalservices.com/happened-madeleine-mccann-2/

A very simple theory but it works.

[Brietta]

Thank you. As you say, it's not possible to be sure either way because the camera can give a false impression. Consequently it's not possible, in my opinion, to say whether the balcony was bathed in light or not. as you have been declaring for years;

that patio area was bathed in light from the street light immediately opposite.

It was also only 50 metres away from the parents and their friends and they could see the whole area.
 Reply #167 on: September 30, 2016, 10:57:03 PM »
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7643.msg357681#msg357681

I see no reason why your theory is more believable than that of Ian Horrocks;

Due to the height of the wall and foliage on top of it, as well as the area inside being well lit, in contrast to the darkness elsewhere, those dining would have been easily observed whilst anyone in the alleyway could remain unseen........

Anyone observing their routine would have known that they had at least 20 minutes between each check. They would have observed the group for a few minutes and then gone to the apartment. At the end of the alleyway they could see that the road was clear, it is then only literally a second for someone to go through the gate and into the garden area, where they would be virtually out of sight. It is then simple to enter the apartment through the patio doors, which although closed, had been left unlocked.
http://www.bgpglobalservices.com/happened-madeleine-mccann-2/

A very simple theory but it works.

Indeed it does and ties in nicely with Sadie's Theory of how easily Madeleine might have been abducted from her bed by a stranger/s.

[G-Unit]

Indeed it does and ties in nicely with Sadie's Theory of how easily Madeleine might have been abducted from her bed by a stranger/s.

The only thing they have in common, however.

Horrocks  seems to prefer the  Tanner sighting to the Smith sighting but has overlooked the fact that no-one would emerge from that passageway and go in the gate while Gerry McCann was standing in the street.

[sadie]

The only thing they have in common, however.

Horrocks  seems to prefer the  Tanner sighting to the Smith sighting but has overlooked the fact that no-one would emerge from that passageway and go in the gate while Gerry McCann was standing in the street.

If they had a key,, though, he might have gone in via the front door

if you have a theory Gunit, let it rip    That is what it is all about, trying to find out what might have happened.

[sadie]

The patiio area was bathed in light from the street light opposite .. but I always made it clear that it was not a strong light

http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/AG/Extras_do_livro_Page_5.jpg


The hedge is blanking off much of the patio / balcony area in the lower image

I dont know why the light didn't appear very much on the video.  I am not technical but perhaps it was because the camera wasn't terribly high quality and hadn't the necessary pixels or power or something.  And i accept that these images above could be brighter from a longer exposure than was necessary.   To be honest we dont know all the technical bits and because of that it is swings and roundabouts.  Too exposed?  OR  No pixels/ power/ poor quality camera?  We just dont know

What ever you try and claim Gunit, the patio area WAS illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite.  I have made a point of never claiming that it was brightly lit.  However, it couldn't have been too bad, that close to a street lamp, could it?

Last night I found an image that explained why the Matt and Gerry were so poorly lit.  Unfortunately I cant find it again.

It showed in daylight, very clearly, that there was a solid screen that could be, and was sometimes, fitted behind the mesh screen that 3/4 fills that Arched window.  I am talking about the arched window through which the street lamp throws its light into the balcony  / patio area.   With that in place, no light would have hit the two men.  They were in shadow.

I will show you what I have found, but I cannot unfortunately find the best illustration of the screen again.  If any one comes across it, please would they kindly post it.  TY.


1.  Official Channel 4 Cutting Edge Video of the reconstruction
http://youtu.be/lkc3C6csaHI
[youtube]https://youtu.be/lkc3C6csaHI[/youtube]


Go to about 10.35 – 10.38 on the official video.  Enlarge it.  Take a good look at it.

The bottom two thirds of the arch is covered with a light mesh, but also with a blanking off screen.  No light could pass that screen.

Without that solid screen most of the balcony would have been bathed in light.

That is the reason that it was so dark in the video and the men are not lit up..  No appreciable light was getting there thanks to this solid screen



2.   Now how it was when Madeleine went missing:

1  As the archway opposite the street light was on May 3rd 2007

http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article10324943.ece/ALTERNATES/s482b/Madeleine-McCann-Apartment-blocks-Praia-da-Luz-Portugal.jpg


This shows the side of the balcony / patio area archway clear of impediment apart from a light security /safety grill.  This can clearly be seen thru, so would pass almost  all light  through.

On the 5th May, 2007 the patio area/ balcony would have been bathed in light, although as I have said before it may not have been  soft rather than hard.  Enough to see anybody around tho'.


AIMHO (and Amarals too, it seems, cos he said no-one would attempt to go in thru the patio doors with the parents so close - implying that it was lit.

[G-Unit]

If they had a key,, though, he might have gone in via the front door

if you have a theory Gunit, let it rip    That is what it is all about, trying to find out what might have happened.

I have no 'abduction' theory because I have yet to be convinced there was an abductor, Sadie. Having looked at what evidence exists I pretty much agree with the archiving report from 2007. I don't know what the crime was or who did it.

[sadie]

the external blinds closed but with some slats open,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm




Senior Editor comment

To avoid any misunderstanding, this photo was taken many years after Madeleine disappeared when the trees bordering the car park east side had been removed.  The shutter appears as it was in May 2007.

John, I appreciate that you have made a comment in red, but I don't think it is clear what you mean.

IMO the last sentence should say that the shutter does NOT appear as it was in May 2007, because there was no light reflecting from it then, because they were blanked off by the heads of the trees.

All these trees to the east and north of the car park were removed just before Pat Browns visit
.... so about ?5 years ago?.  They were very bushy in May 2007