Was 50 metres from the apartment 50 metres too far?

[Luz]

What about smoking Luz?  Was it permitted in Portuguese restaurants in 2007?

In there maybe it was permitted, because it was outside. But I don't know.

[Luz]

What was seen or not from the restaurant is irrelevant. If the child suffered an accident they couldn't have seen it. If, as they argumented, the child was abducted through the bedroom window, the back door or the front door, they wouldn't see anything.

Logic tells us that no stupid abductor would take a child through the back doors, even if they were ever opened. Logic tells us that no abductor would take a child from inside an apartment when there are dozens of children playing on the street everyday. And much less would they take a child of that age when they had younger ones at hand on the exact same site.

[John]

Was the 50 metres, the approx distance from the patio of apartment 5a to the tapas restaurant, a 50 metres too far?

[Sherlock Holmes]

What was seen or not from the restaurant is irrelevant. If the child suffered an accident they couldn't have seen it. If, as they argumented, the child was abducted through the bedroom window, the back door or the front door, they wouldn't see anything.

Logic tells us that no stupid abductor would take a child through the back doors, even if they were ever opened. Logic tells us that no abductor would take a child from inside an apartment when there are dozens of children playing on the street everyday. And much less would they take a child of that age when they had younger ones at hand on the exact same site.

I agree, Luz. Completely irrelevant.

[CPN]

Yes.  My original answer still stands:
"To be honest, I am not interested in how far away they were, be it whatever many metres - they were out of sight and hearing of three very young, vulnerable children  - that is enough for me"

Sadie on October 9th: "They have admitted that they were wrong; that they made a mistake. misjudgement .... call it what you wish."

But Kate, on Crimewatch - "It's not us who have done anything wrong"

[Wonderfulspam]

To admit to their wrong would be getting to close to them admitting their guilt.

[sadie]

Yes.  My original answer still stands:
"To be honest, I am not interested in how far away they were, be it whatever many metres - they were out of sight and hearing of three very young, vulnerable children  - that is enough for me"

Sadie on October 9th: "They have admitted that they were wrong; that they made a mistake. misjudgement .... call it what you wish."

But Kate, on Crimewatch - "It's not us who have done anything wrong"

Am sorry, am not so well atm and was not aware of this thread.

Kate and Gerry have admitted to making a misjudgement, many times.

I agree they were slow making it, but then maybe THEY, THEMSEVES, went to Butlins/ Pontins as kids and were left in their chalets .... as WAS the norm in those days at such places.  Also at a good many hotels worldwide.

If that were the case, they would initially not be able to accept that they erred in any way.

Since then they have expressed their remorse several times and it is pointtless keep pushing the issue CPN, because readers here will have seen them do that.


My words might be clumsy; I may have chosen the wrong word.  I am better with images and logic than words.   I accept that.  If you want to trash me, then go ahead.  I have suffered more than enough of that over the past 6 months, but my shoulders are fairly broad.  Nevertheless this forum has affected my health with all the bullying, I have suffered on a many times daily basis.

Pat yourselves on the back that you have significantly reduced at least one pros health and possibly others.


As Kate correctly expresses, they were NOT the wrongdoer.  The wrongdoer was the abductor.  Same as a girl in a mini skirt that gets raped is NOT the wrongdoer either.

It amazes me that you cant see the difference.

[C.Edwards]

Am sorry, am not so well atm and was not aware of this thread.

Kate and Gerry have admitted to making a misjudgement, many times.

I agree they were slow making it, but then maybe THEY, THEMSEVES, went to Butlins/ Pontins as kids and were left in their chalets .... as WAS the norm in those days at such places.  Also at a good many hotels worldwide.

If that were the case, they would initially not be able to accept that they erred in any way.

Since then they have expressed their remorse several times and it is pointtless keep pushing the issue CPN, because readers here will have seen them do that.


My words might be clumsy; I may have chosen the wrong word.  I am better with images and logic than words.   I accept that.  If you want to trash me, then go ahead.  I have suffered more than enough of that over the past 6 months, but my shoulders are fairly broad.  Nevertheless this forum has affected my health with all the bullying, I have suffered on a many times daily basis.

Pat yourselves on the back that you have significantly reduced at least one pros health and possibly others.


As Kate correctly expresses, they were NOT the wrongdoer.  The wrongdoer was the abductor.  Same as a girl in a mini skirt that gets raped is NOT the wrongdoer either.

It amazes me that you cant see the difference.

If you (and others) are capable of holding Amaral responsible for the actions of his men - i.e. trusting what they'd told him was true - and it turned out that it was!) then why are you not capable of holding Madeleine's parents responsible for her what happened to her - even if she was abducted?

The abductor - assuming there was one - could not have struck if the McCanns had not left Madeleine alone, agreed?  This is a simple point that bears repeating. The McCanns alone (with their children) decided to leave the kids alone. That others do it and may still do it is utterly irrelevant.  I'm talking about a chain of specific events here.  If you say that Madeleine was abducted, it was only because she was put in a position to be abducted by her parents, correct?

Whether they have subsequently accepted responsibility in an unequivocal manner since then is open to debate. I don't think they've come anywhere near it, preferring instead to shift the blame elsewhere or claim they were told it was "well within the bounds of responsible parenting".  (I didn't know there were set guidelines for responsible parenting!)

Likewise, whether they "could have expected" abduction as an outcome to their choice as Praia da Luz seemed such a lovely little safe place is also irrelevant. We're talking about a specific event.  Had Kate McCann said on crimewatch, "we know we were wrong to leave Madeleine," rather that the apparent reference of "we've done nothing wrong" that was broadcast prior to the programme then maybe they'd get a whole lot less criticism.

[Luz]

They have admitted that they were wrong; that they made a mistake. misjudgement .... call it what you wish.

Dont forget that they were only 50ish metres away and had a pretty good view of the patio windows.  I sat at that same tapas bar and I could see virtually the whole of the patio windows, top to almost bottom and side to side.

Their view would not be as good as mine cos they were a little furter west, but if you refer to photographs in other threads you will see what they could see, in a photo taken from right outside the patio windows back towards the tapas restaurant.  That photo did not have the clipped bushes as shown on tonights video.

http://news.sky.com/story/1152167/madeleine-mccann-police-probe-possible-suspect

The contemporary view of the bushes in Met Det Peter Kirkman interview @ 30 seconds will show how the bushes had JUST been cut back, so The Mccanns view would have been better than in the next photo.


This photo shows where the Mccanns sat .  It was taken from right in front of the patio windows of 5A.  See the pool, well the two linked structures with the large picture windows immediately behind the pool show where we sat for our meal and also where The Mccanns sat.  We sat in the LH section and the Mccanns sat in the RH section.

Our view was perfect and theirs pretty good.  The Tapas area was very much cozier than appears in these photos.  I was surprised how close everything was.  The 50 metre distance can easily be checked on GE.  The bushes need clipping here.  They were severely clipped back at the time of the abduction as you will see from the contemporary video above.

Why do you keep bringing that here. If you wish that it is 50 meters (UK meters are larger than portuguese, I get it), so be it. It could be 20 m. It's across a pool, a garden and several walls to the back door of the apartment. But the children's room was, allegedly in the front of the apartment. If there was an accident do you believe they could be heard or helped?!

It doesn't matter how far away they were, what matters is that if it is true they were away, there were no adults in the  house when probably an accident happened. Or, maybe there were adults in the house when an accident happened, since they made so many checkings...

One way or another, there is no proof of abduction other than the McCann word.

[CPN]

Pat yourselves on the back that you have significantly reduced at least one pros health and possibly others.

That is most unfair, Sadie.  You appear to be accusing me of being pleased if someone who is not well is upset by my posting.  This is a discussion forum and people will say what they feel without expecting sideways accusations like that - if you do not feel well enough to post here, maybe you should not.  No, I do not take delight in "significantly reducing your health" and I object to that accusation very strongly.

We had discussed earlier whether the McCanns had admitted that they were wrong to leave the children and I had said I had heard them say they regretted their actions but never admit to being in the wrong; then Kate made this comment in the preview of the CW programme and in my mind it was a very unwise comment to make, repeating that they had done no wrong.  To my mind both were wrong - the McCanns and, obviously, the abductor if there was one.  The one does not preclude the other.

And I have to agree with the last two posts - they say much what I have previously said.

You do NOT have not answer this, Sadie; indeed if you are going to accuse me of making your illness worse, I would rather you do not

[Cariad]

  If you want to trash me, then go ahead.  I have suffered more than enough of that over the past 6 months, but my shoulders are fairly broad.  Nevertheless this forum has affected my health with all the bullying, I have suffered on a many times daily basis.

Pat yourselves on the back that you have significantly reduced at least one pros health and possibly others.


As Kate correctly expresses, they were NOT the wrongdoer.  The wrongdoer was the abductor.  Same as a girl in a mini skirt that gets raped is NOT the wrongdoer either.

It amazes me that you cant see the difference.

I'm sorry that you're not feeling well Sadie and am saddened to hear that you've felt bullied. I haven't been here for six months, so can't comment in full, but I've always had the impression that you can give at least as good as you get. I personally have felt on times as though you've been quite rude to me with no provocation at all. I'm fine with that, I haven't felt bullied and simply put it down to feelings running high when people don't see eye to eye, but the point is that maybe if you were a little less quick to snap at people, they may treat you with more courtesy in return.

Any disagreement I have with your opinions is not a disagreement with you, the person behind the screen. Any slight against the Mccanns, either real or perceived, is not a slight against you.

To address your point about blaming the Mccanns being like blaming a rape victim for wearing a short skirt, firstly, shouldn't that be 'like blaming a rape victims parents for letting her go out in a short skirt'? Madeleine was the victim of a crime, not her parents.

Secondly, although the language that is used does some times sound like blame, I think 'shoulder some responsibility' is a better way of describing it.

I disagree that they have accepted any responsibility for their part in Madeleine's disappearance. The children shouldn't have been alone. They shouldn't have been out of ear shot. They were.

If there was indeed an abductor, they are to blame for their actions. S/he is not absolved from responsibility because the parents failed in their duty of care.


I hope you're feeling better soon Sadie and look forward to seeing your posts and picking your brains about PDL in the very near future x

[icabodcrane]

My words might be clumsy; I may have chosen the wrong word.  I am better with images and logic than words.   I accept that.  If you want to trash me, then go ahead.  I have suffered more than enough of that over the past 6 months, but my shoulders are fairly broad.  Nevertheless this forum has affected my health with all the bullying, I have suffered on a many times daily basis.

Pat yourselves on the back that you have significantly reduced at least one pros health and possibly others.


As Kate correctly expresses, they were NOT the wrongdoer.  The wrongdoer was the abductor.  Same as a girl in a mini skirt that gets raped is NOT the wrongdoer either.

It amazes me that you cant see the difference.

Sorry you're not  feeling well sadie,  but it is not fair of you to blame your illness on forum members here

Perhaps it is  the fact that  Scotland Yard appear to have scotched your much vaunted and long cherished  'theory'  that has affected your health,  rather than being  'bullied'  here ?

[AnneGuedes]

Logic tells us that no stupid abductor would take a child through the back doors, even if they were ever opened. Logic tells us that no abductor would take a child from inside an apartment when there are dozens of children playing on the street everyday. And much less would they take a child of that age when they had younger ones at hand on the exact same site.

Logic unfortunately goes on being assassinated... now by half a dozen e-fits that all look like aliens.

[jassi]

Redwood must be following the mantra 'confusion is good'

[Benice]

Redwood must be following the mantra 'confusion is good'

I've seen that mentioned before - can you put the comment in context Jassi - as IIRC this is an example of a few words being taken out of context to give them a different meaning to the one that was intended?