How could Jez and Gerry not see Jane?

[slartibartfast]

Bluster wont get you anywhere Slarti.


The carefully measured width of the pavement at that point is 230 centimeters ... approx 30 cm wider than a regular bed is long.   That's a big width.


The fact of the matter is that the combined space taken up by Gerry and Janes bodies is less than 110 cm leaving potential clear space of 1m20.between them.

That is approximately 4 feet GAP BETWEEN them.

Now that it has plainly been set out for you, it is downright dishonest to still try and argue otherwise.


Mods, most especially, should not behave like this.... imo

It's not bluster, it's fact. You take measurements from fuzzy satellite photos where you think they were standing then take the best possible scenario from your point of view and try to convince people they were far apart. Doesn't wash. Being a mod does not prevent me debunking your myths.

[Alice Purjorick]

It's not bluster, it's fact. You take measurements from fuzzy satellite photos where you think they were standing then take the best possible scenario from your point of view and try to convince people they were far apart. Doesn't wash. Being a mod does not prevent me debunking your myths.

You missed some of the best bits:
Not only fuzzy satellite photos and guessing where people are but:
Scale 1:250.
Alot of features covered by foliage.
A cursor that is so tiny the datum points will be a bit hit and miss.
The notion the measurement is accurate to within 20mm ?
I suppose words like "mensuration" and "metrology" are missing from the vocabulary.

http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/09/f3/HDBK11402001_Part3.pdf

see section 3 of linked document.
There are lots of pretty sketches and dimensions.

[sadie]

You missed some of the best bits:
Not only fuzzy satellite photos and guessing where people are but:
Scale 1:250.
Alot of features covered by foliage.
A cursor that is so tiny the datum points will be a bit hit and miss.
The notion the measurement is accurate to within 20mm ?
I suppose words like "mensuration" and "metrology" are missing from the vocabulary.

http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/09/f3/HDBK11402001_Part3.pdf

see section 3 of linked document.
There are lots of pretty sketches and dimensions.

Excuses, excuses, excuses.
Throwing long words in to make yourself sound impressive, are you Alice? 
Words not even needed in this particular situation as i suspect you know full well!

Immediately before (whilst the Mccanns were in PdL) the hedges were cut back.

At junction with the alleyway, the footpath actually measures 240 cm, but I erred on the safe side and called it 230cm.



I notice that you prefer to back Slarti who is stating the distance between Jane and Gerry was 30 cm rather than back the truth which was 120cm(+)

In English Imperial measurement this equates to:
1 foot against the potential for 4 feet.

So Slarti is trying to make out that Jane was only one foot behind Gerry as she passed him, whilst in actual fact, Jane had the potential to have been over 4 feet (away) behind him


That is a big difference in a situation like this.

Slarti, Alice, please stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes. 

[slartibartfast]

Excuses, excuses, excuses.
Throwing long words in to make yourself sound impressive, are you Alice? 
Words not even needed in this particular situation as i suspect you know full well!

Immediately before (whilst the Mccanns were in PdL) the hedges were cut back.

At junction with the alleyway, the footpath actually measures 240 cm, but I erred on the safe side and called it 230cm.



I notice that you prefer to back Slarti who is stating the distance between Jane and Gerry was 30 cm rather than back the truth which was 120cm(+)

In English Imperial measurement this equates to:
1 foot against the potential for 4 feet.

So Slarti is trying to make out that Jane was only one foot behind Gerry as she passed him, whilst in actual fact, Jane had the potential to have been over 4 feet (away) behind him


That is a big difference in a situation like this.

Slarti, Alice, please stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

So you think JT was scraping along the wall trying not to be seen?

[G-Unit]

Excuses, excuses, excuses.
Throwing long words in to make yourself sound impressive, are you Alice? 
Words not even needed in this particular situation as i suspect you know full well!

Immediately before (whilst the Mccanns were in PdL) the hedges were cut back.

At junction with the alleyway, the footpath actually measures 240 cm, but I erred on the safe side and called it 230cm.

I notice that you prefer to back Slarti who is stating the distance between Jane and Gerry was 30 cm rather than back the truth which was 120cm(+)

In English Imperial measurement this equates to:
1 foot against the potential for 4 feet.

So Slarti is trying to make out that Jane was only one foot behind Gerry as she passed him, whilst in actual fact, Jane had the potential to have been over 4 feet (away) behind him


That is a big difference in a situation like this.

Slarti, Alice, please stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

I wonder if there's a cite for the hedge trimming?

[slartibartfast]

Hmmm.

[Brietta]

Plenty of leeway for an individual to pass behind another standing at the kerb,
particularly if the passing point was in line with the entrance to the lane.

[sadie]

I wonder if there's a cite for the hedge trimming?

Brilliant Brietta .. Thanks ... two birds with one stone  
Freshly cut hedge AND the depth of the pavement on that corner
And also, Gerry, showing how much space he would have taken

Plenty of leeway for an individual to pass behind another standing at the kerb,
particularly if the passing point was in line with the entrance to the lane.

The 230/240cm in previous posts is from the kerb to that black line by Gerrys foot.  Whilst talking to Jez, Gerry was standing on the kerb.   Plenty of space. 

Please no more comments about there only being a squeeze of 30 cm (1 Foot) behind Gerry.  Please not even in a couple of years time!

[Robittybob1]

Brilliant Brietta .. Thanks ... two birds with one stone  
Freshly cut hedge AND the depth of the pavement on that corner
And also, Gerry, showing how much space he would have taken

The 230/240cm in previous posts is from the kerb to that black line by Gerrys foot.  Whilst talking to Jez, Gerry was standing on the kerb.   Plenty of space. 

Please no more comments about there only being a squeeze of 30 cm (1 Foot) behind Gerry.  Please not even in a couple of years time!

Did you work out when that photo was taken?

[slartibartfast]

Brilliant Brietta .. Thanks ... two birds with one stone  
Freshly cut hedge AND the depth of the pavement on that corner
And also, Gerry, showing how much space he would have taken

The 230/240cm in previous posts is from the kerb to that black line by Gerrys foot.  Whilst talking to Jez, Gerry was standing on the kerb.   Plenty of space. 

Please no more comments about there only being a squeeze of 30 cm (1 Foot) behind Gerry.  Please not even in a couple of years time!

As long as you have carefully selected your circumstances to allow your theories...

[G-Unit]

I take it there is no cite for the hedges having been trimmed while the McCanns were in residence then. It must be one of those myths that end up being quoted as if they were 'facts'.

The people on the ground were not convinced that it was possible for Jane to pass the men without being seen, which is one of the reasons they wanted a reconstitution;

 The physical, real and effective, proximity between JANE TANNER, GERALD McCANN and JEREMY WILKINS, at the moment when the former passed them, and which coincided with the sighting of the supposed suspect, carrying a child. It results, from our understanding, as unusual that neither GERALD McCANN nor JEREMY WILKINS did not see her, nor the alleged abductor, despite the small dimensions of the space;
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

The whole thing rests on where the men were of course. Jane says they were near the path. Jeremy says they were near the gate. Gerry says they were across the road. If Jeremy was correct, the space was indeed small. If Jane was correct the space was the same unless she veered into the entrance to the path in order to get round him and she doesn't say she did that. Imagine this policeman on the kerb;

[sadie]

As long as you have carefully selected your circumstances to allow your theories...

Diversifying!  This particular point is nothing to do with my theories as you MUST know.. 

I was just sorting out your disinformation below.

It would be much more appreciated by readers if you were big enough to concede you were incorrect and apologise to Kate and Gerry.

So you are saying you wouldn't notice if some walked within 30 cm of you in a quiet street.

Another MYTH BUST, thanks to Briettas photo and dear old Google Earth

[Brietta]

Brilliant Brietta .. Thanks ... two birds with one stone  
Freshly cut hedge AND the depth of the pavement on that corner
And also, Gerry, showing how much space he would have taken

The 230/240cm in previous posts is from the kerb to that black line by Gerrys foot.  Whilst talking to Jez, Gerry was standing on the kerb.   Plenty of space. 

Please no more comments about there only being a squeeze of 30 cm (1 Foot) behind Gerry.  Please not even in a couple of years time!

The resulting image depends on the view point from which the photograph is taken ... I have seen one taken from the pathway looking towards block six with a figure (Jon Corner, I think?) in frame which shows how much space there actually is on the pavement at that particular spot, but can't find it again; perhaps it was in a video.

Maybe this is a project for Shining as I think it could be carried out discretely; every photograph I have seen of this area gives a different idea of perspective ... therefore the only true conclusions must be reached from measurement, as you have done, Sadie.

[sadie]

I take it there is no cite for the hedges having been trimmed while the McCanns were in residence then. It must be one of those myths that end up being quoted as if they were 'facts'.

The people on the ground were not convinced that it was possible for Jane to pass the men without being seen, which is one of the reasons they wanted a reconstitution;

 The physical, real and effective, proximity between JANE TANNER, GERALD McCANN and JEREMY WILKINS, at the moment when the former passed them, and which coincided with the sighting of the supposed suspect, carrying a child. It results, from our understanding, as unusual that neither GERALD McCANN nor JEREMY WILKINS did not see her, nor the alleged abductor, despite the small dimensions of the space;
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

The whole thing rests on where the men were of course. Jane says they were near the path. Jeremy says they were near the gate. Gerry says they were across the road. If Jeremy was correct, the space was indeed small. If Jane was correct the space was the same unless she veered into the entrance to the path in order to get round him and she doesn't say she did that. Imagine this policeman on the kerb;

I haven't looked.   No need to with Briettas photo, which is almost certainly very soon after the abduction.  Photo taken early in the morning before the press have amassed.  See the shadows .

As you know my eyesight is beginning to fade.  I no longer normally bother with the statements because they hurt my eyes.

In this case there is enough evidence to prove that Jane could have had a gap between her and Gerry of 120 metres

NOT 30 cm as claimed by Slarti



Now I will leave you to stew and ...

try and find some more excuses, excuses, excuses. 


If you dont want to upset readers, my advice to you is to try and concede gracefully


The myth is bust.

[Robittybob1]

The resulting image depends on the view point from which the photograph is taken ... I have seen one taken from the pathway looking towards block six with a figure (Jon Corner, I think?) in frame which shows how much space there actually is on the pavement at that particular spot, but can't find it again; perhaps it was in a video.

Maybe this is a project for Shining as I think it could be carried out discretely; every photograph I have seen of this area gives a different idea of perspective ... therefore the only true conclusions must be reached from measurement, as you have done, Sadie.

From aerial photos I've seen I would sat the blue arrow is pointing to the wrong place. 
That lane goes to the back gates of apartments B, C, D, E and F