How could Jez and Gerry not see Jane?

[sadie]

A reconstruction could have determined the change of lighting in the room resulting from raising the shutters.  Did Matt miss the signs of the raised shutters?  Oh it is "brighter than expected" but do nothing about it!

Matt had not set the shutters up .. and couldn't be aware of exactly how Gerry and kate might have left them.

He was judging by how his daughters shutters gave in light, imo

[slartibartfast]

I am surprised with your undoubted engineering/architectural skills that no one taught you thatfor maximum accuracy when measuring, the best way was to increase the scale of the map you are measuring as much as you can.  In my case I have an extra large screen and at full screen I can measure th actual width of the pavement on that corner, on that map,
as 14 cm.

Bad news for YOU, because I have erred on your side at all times, but now that I have so elarged it, I can see that on the GE measure it is 250cm and NOT the generous to you 230 240 cm I mentioned before.

So another 10 cm potential gap between Jane and the back of Gerry.

And this was measured on a scale of 1

As for the fuzzy lines, you can measure from the middle of each to the other ...or probably the better method is to measure from the west of the one fuzzy line to the west of the other fuzzy line.  Then check by measuring from the east of the one line to the east of the other line.

Compare results and take the average.

I really am surprised that you, with your ?superior knowledge, were not aware of these two techniques for greater accuracy.

OK ... so the width of the pavement by the corner of the alleyway is 2metres50.  Gerry is in the road as is Jez.  ***

I have volunteered that Jane is 60cm [she will be slimmer than that undobtedly] and have given you extra there.  She could have at least 190cm between her and Gerry.  That is the lemgth of a bed.  It is not 30 cm as Slarti tried to kid us.

And these measurements are assuming that Gerry was in the actual road, as indicated by Jane [in the Cutting Egde Video at 10.05 onwards] but right spot on the edge of the kerb.  He might have been a little further into the road giving extra space for Jane to pass by.

Give up and if you are any sort of gentleman apologise to Kate and Gerry for putting about disinformation.



*** That means that I have a scale of 1:18 ... not your rediculous 1:250 
[ 250/14 gives you this scale of 1:14 ].  At such a scale, despite fuzzy lines, quite accurate measurements can be taken

So what angle is the satellite to the ground at that point?

[Robittybob1]

Matt had not set the shutters up .. and couldn't be aware of exactly how Gerry and kate might have left them.

He was judging by how his daughters shutters gave in light, imo

Was then the biggest mistake made by the McCanns just allowing Matt to do the 9:30 check, for he had no experience of the McCann's apartment.  He needed "Checking" training.

[sadie]

Very considerate abductors too, they even closed the doors behind them.

They wanted it to look as tho Madeleine had opened the window and gone of her own volition, so no-one would search for an abductor.  Or at least to give them more time for the getaway

Also they wanted to take the attention away from the door ...and who supplied the keys ... Someone from OC ?

[sadie]

So what angle is the satellite to the ground at that point?

Doesn't make it less than the width I have mentioned.

The greater the angle of the satellite the more it will make the measurement of the pavement LOOK smaller.  Surely you knew that?

All that will do will do is make the actual width even greater than measured

Soz slarti

Just admit you were wrong and apologise to the Mccanns.  That would make you a better, more trustworthy man in most peoples eyes.

Just do it and get it over with.  Honesty and remorse is NOT that painful

[Alice Purjorick]

I am surprised with your undoubted engineering/architectural skills that no one taught you thatfor maximum accuracy when measuring, the best way was to increase the scale of the map you are measuring as much as you can.  In my case I have an extra large screen and at full screen I can measure th actual width of the pavement on that corner, on that map,
as 14 cm.

Bad news for YOU, because I have erred on your side at all times, but now that I have so elarged it, I can see that on the GE measure it is 250cm and NOT the generous to you 230 240 cm I mentioned before.

So another 10 cm potential gap between Jane and the back of Gerry.

And this was measured on a scale of 1:18 ... not 1:250 as you suggested

As for the fuzzy lines, you can measure from the middle of each to the other ...or probably the better method is to measure from the west of the one fuzzy line to the west of the other fuzzy line.  Then check by measuring from the east of the one line to the east of the other line.

Compare results and take the average.

I really am surprised that you, with your ?superior knowledge, were not aware of these two techniques for greater accuracy.

OK ... so the width of the pavement by the corner of the alleyway is 2metres50.  Gerry is in the road as is Jez.  ***

I have volunteered that Jane is 60cm [she will be slimmer than that undobtedly] and have given you extra there.  She could have at least 190cm between her and Gerry.  That is the lemgth of a bed.  It is not 30 cm as Slarti tried to kid us.

And these measurements are assuming that Gerry was in the actual road, as indicated by Jane [in the Cutting Egde Video at 10.05 onwards] but right spot on the edge of the kerb.  He might have been a little further into the road giving extra space for Jane to pass by.

Give up and if you are any sort of gentleman apologise to Kate and Gerry for putting about disinformation.



*** That means that I have a scale of 1:18 ... not your rediculous 1:250 
[ 250/14 gives you this scale of 1:18 ].  At such a scale, despite fuzzy lines, quite accurate measurements can be taken

1. I was taught; that is why I am picking holes in what you have posted.
2. Why would I apologise to people I have not maligned?
3. Delineate precisely the disinformation I am spreading?

[Robittybob1]

 ..... considerably less intelligent than I thought

(That is quite a compliment isn't it.)

[sadie]

1. I was taught; that is why I am picking holes in what you have posted.
2. Why would I apologise to people I have not maligned?
3. Delineate precisely the disinformation I am spreading?

I see that my response to this has been wiped.

Just a precis of my post, cos I have a right of response.

1)  I have taught subjects such as this and if your teacher taught you some of the things that you have come out with, then he needs retraining. 

2)  You have continually tried to make facts seem wrong, to the detriment of the Mccanns, Gerry in particular.  That is a form of disinformation.  Untruthfulness.  Surely your Mummy and Daddy (your words, not mine) taught you to tell the truth ?

[John]

Lets try to keep posts amiable please.  TY

[sadie]

Lets try to keep posts amiable please ladies.  TY

How about the so called gentlemen?  Is it ok for them to keep ruthlessly attacking?  with disinformation or stuff to confuse?

No sexism here please.

TY John

[Robittybob1]

I'm sure Russell means that Jane told him about Jez and Gerry when she returned to the table.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN.htm

remembers that Jane commented on having passed Gerry on the road, and that he was talking to another guest in the same locale, named Jez.

[G-Unit]

..... considerably less intelligent than I thought

(That is quite a compliment isn't it.)

It's called a back-handed compliment where I come from. That means an insult disguised as a compliment sometimes done accidentally and sometimes deliberately. When done deliberately it's done with the intention of belittling or condescending.

[slartibartfast]

I see that my response to this has been wiped.

Just a precis of my post, cos I have a right of response.

1)  I have taught subjects such as this and if your teacher taught you some of the things that you have come out with, then he needs retraining. 

2)  You have continually tried to make facts seem wrong, to the detriment of the Mccanns, Gerry in particular.  That is a form of disinformation.  Untruthfulness.  Surely your Mummy and Daddy (your words, not mine) taught you to tell the truth ?

You are making statements that you struggle to defend based on the best possible scenario to make your theories work. You are guilty of producing disinformation which does nothing to help find Madeleine because it reinforces a narrative that has been discounted.

[sadie]

You are making statements that you struggle to defend based on the best possible scenario to make your theories work. You are guilty of producing disinformation which does nothing to help find Madeleine because it reinforces a narrative that has been discounted.

We are not on about my theories in this argument.

We are on about your statement that there was only a 30 cm gap between Jane and Gerry,

You have failed miserably to show that ... and what is more I have PROVED that there could have been a nearly 2 metres gap between them.


To fail to agree with the evidence that i have presented shows you to be lacking in something

And i dont think it is understanding of what i have proved,


To say it again:

The gap between Gerry and Jane was potentially up to 190cm NOT 30 cm which you so wrongly claimed.


or in imperial measurements

The gap was potentially over 6 feet not the miserly one foot that you claimed

A six fold inctease on what you claimed.



If you are not about to acknowledge that your size was incorrect and acknowledge the size that i have shown ..... please show YOUR calculations and reasonings for your 30 cm

You cant !



An apology to Kate and especially Gerry would be in order.   Why dont you just "Do it"

[stephen25000]

We are not on about my theories in this argument.

We are on about your statement that there was only a 30 cm gap between Jane and Gerry,

You have failed miserably to show that ... and what is more I have PROVED that there could have been a nearly 2 metres gap between them.


To fail to agree with the evidence that i have presented shows you to be lacking in something

And i dont think it is understanding of what i have proved,


To say it again:

The gap between Gerry and Jane was potentially up to 190cm NOT 30 cm which you so wrongly claimed.


or in imperial measurements

The gap was potentially over 6 feet not the miserly one foot that you claimed

A six fold inctease on what you claimed.



If you are not about to acknowledge that your size was incorrect and acknowledge the size that i have shown ..... please show YOUR calculations and reasonings for your 30 cm

You cant !



An apology to Kate and especially Gerry would be in order.   Why dont you just "Do it"

Oh dear, once more to the treadmill of Mccann adoration.