So what actual searching was there?

[mercury]

Another completely unwarranted personal attack.  Out of interest have I ever been as rude to you as you constantly are towards me?

If you dish it out expect it back, dont dish it out, you will get zero back, one cannot get fairer than that. discuss rationally and you should do ok. If you are annoyed at x y z you seem to take it out on anybody remotely not accepting the "script" and be in no doubt whatsoever there was a script. You have no right to do that.Thats your lot. My scales are as even as anubis's  dear.

[Alfie]

If you dish it out expect it back, dont dish it out, you will get zero back, one cannot get fairer than that. discuss rationally and you should do ok. If you are annoyed at x y z you seem to take it out on anybody remotely not accepting the "script" and be in no doubt whatsoever there was a script. You have no right to do that.Thats your lot. My scales are as even as anubis's  dear.

To repeat: have I ever been as rude to you as you are constantly towards me?  I usually discuss subjects in a very rational and logical manner, occasionally I will use sarcasm, humour (and god help me) facetiousness to make a point, but then, don't we all? 

A word about apologists which should help you to realise why I find your use of it to describe me and others here who think Madeleine was abducted offensive:

"Although some of us actually consider the role of a Christian apologist to be an honorable vocation and ministry, the term apologist is now largely used as a pejorative. The Jerusalem Post, for example, refers to Jimmy Carter as “Hamas’s apologist.” Similarly, Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch calls John Esposito, a Western scholar on Islam funded by Saudi royalty, an Islamic “apologist.” Salon.com refers to Holocaust denier David Irving as “Hitler’s apologist.” Various scholars and critics of groups commonly called “cults” have referred to those scholars whose treatment of these groups was more sympathetic or exculpatory as “cult apologists.”

The connotation of apologist in this usage is pretty clear: an apologist is someone who defends the indefensible, for whatever reason (prejudice, power, and money are among the most common accusations). In popular usage, apologists are not truth-seekers but rather truth-benders, sophisticates skilled at making the irrational seem reasonable, the immoral seem moral, and the false seem true. Their intention is simply to defend the position they have chosen to take, come what may, facts and evidence to the contrary notwithstanding."
Now, kindly stop your unwarranted attacks on me, or get added to my growing list of goaders to be ignored.  Your choice.

[mercury]

To repeat: have I ever been as rude to you as you are constantly towards me?  I usually discuss subjects in a very rational and logical manner, occasionally I will use sarcasm, humour (and god help me) facetiousness to make a point, but then, don't we all? 

A word about apologists which should help you to realise why I find your use of it to describe me and others here who think Madeleine was abducted offensive:

"Although some of us actually consider the role of a Christian apologist to be an honorable vocation and ministry, the term apologist is now largely used as a pejorative. The Jerusalem Post, for example, refers to Jimmy Carter as “Hamas’s apologist.” Similarly, Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch calls John Esposito, a Western scholar on Islam funded by Saudi royalty, an Islamic “apologist.” Salon.com refers to Holocaust denier David Irving as “Hitler’s apologist.” Various scholars and critics of groups commonly called “cults” have referred to those scholars whose treatment of these groups was more sympathetic or exculpatory as “cult apologists.”

The connotation of apologist in this usage is pretty clear: an apologist is someone who defends the indefensible, for whatever reason (prejudice, power, and money are among the most common accusations). In popular usage, apologists are not truth-seekers but rather truth-benders, sophisticates skilled at making the irrational seem reasonable, the immoral seem moral, and the false seem true. Their intention is simply to defend the position they have chosen to take, come what may, facts and evidence to the contrary notwithstanding."
Now, kindly stop your unwarranted attacks on me, or get added to my growing list of goaders to be ignored.  Your choice.

Interesting indeed...
Just click ignore,simples

[pegasus]

On 16 May 2007 (the day the Madeleine Fund was launched), the father and a priest were desperately searching an area of Praia Da Luz exactly 2808 square feet in size.

[Alfie]

Interesting indeed...
Just click ignore,simples

your wish is my command, bye bye.

[Lace]

Yet she never checked whether Jane had taken her to her apartment.

I would of thought that if Jane [for some reason or other] had taken Madeleine to her apartment,  she would have let the McCann's know what she had done,  by either going to the Tapas and telling them or leaving a note, you don't just take a child without letting the parents know.

[faithlilly]

I would of thought that if Jane [for some reason or other] had taken Madeleine to her apartment,  she would have let the McCann's know what she had done,  by either going to the Tapas and telling them or leaving a note, you don't just take a child without letting the parents know.

But there was the slight chance, no matter how slight, that she had. If your child was missing wouldn't  you explore any scenario before you had, inevitably, to face the truth ?

[Alfie]

I would of thought that if Jane [for some reason or other] had taken Madeleine to her apartment,  she would have let the McCann's know what she had done,  by either going to the Tapas and telling them or leaving a note, you don't just take a child without letting the parents know.

I doubt it would have crossed my mind, in any case Kate would have been blasted for going to Jane's apartment and leaving the twins unattended.  She did the most obvious thing after a few minutes of searching - started shouting and attracting as many people's attention as possible.  If it had transpired that Madeleine had been taken by Jane it would all have been done and dusted in 10 minutes anyway and we would not be here discussing this. 

[Benice]

But there was the slight chance, no matter how slight, that she had. If your child was missing wouldn't  you explore any scenario before you had, inevitably, to face the truth ?

There is no reason at all for it to occur to Kate that Jayne had taken Madeleine from 5A as JT was not involved in their checking routine in any way.     So why would it even enter her head?   

In any case - the only time JT could have done that is on her way back to her own apartment to take over from Russell so that he could go and have his meal - and she didn't return herself.        In that case Russell would have known about it and he would have told K&G when he got back to the table.

The whole idea is a non-starter IMO.

[faithlilly]

There is no reason at all for it to occur to Kate that Jayne had taken Madeleine from 5A as JT was not involved in their checking routine in any way.     So why would it even enter her head?   

In any case - the only time JT could have done that is on her way back to her own apartment to take over from Russell so that he could go and have his meal - and she didn't return herself.        In that case Russell would have known about it and he would have told K&G when he got back to the table.

The whole idea is a non-starter IMO.

But according to supporters Kate was traumatised and not thinking rationallyso why on ear the do you think she'd be capable of rationally going through your reasoning above ?

[Alfie]

But according to supporters Kate was traumatised and not thinking rationallyso why on ear the do you think she'd be capable of rationally going through your reasoning above ?

Why do you think she was not traumatised and capable of rational thought to enable her to come to the conclusion JT might have her child?

[Benice]

But according to supporters Kate was traumatised and not thinking rationallyso why on ear the do you think she'd be capable of rationally going through your reasoning above ?

Because whatever thoughts were racing through her mind - Jayne Tanner would not be one of them - as there is not a single reason why Kate should think about Jayne at that terrible  time.     Just as no matter how panicked she was  - alien abduction would not have entered her head either IMO. 

[faithlilly]

Because whatever thoughts were racing through her mind - Jayne Tanner would not be one of them - as there is not a single reason why Kate should think about Jayne at that terrible  time.     Just as no matter how panicked she was  - alien abduction would not have entered her head either IMO.

Madeleine was not in the apartment but Jane, as Kate knew, was in her's. Kate knew Madeleine was able to leave the apartment, she said as much to Fiona, so why wouldn't she hope, in her traumatised state, that Madeleine  just may have gone to the other flats of the group to see if her parents were there and Jane had taken her in? What is so unbelievable about that? If I had been in Kate's position that's exactly the kind of hope I'd cling to until I'd seen Jane and had to face the awful truth.

[Alfie]

Madeleine was not in the apartment but Jane, as Kate knew, was in her's. Kate knew Madeleine was able to leave the apartment, she said as much to Fiona, so why wouldn't she hope, in her traumatised state, that Madeleine  just may have gone to the other flats of the group to see if her parents were there and Jane had taken her in? What is so unbelievable about that? If I had been in Kate's position that's exactly the kind of hope I'd cling to until I'd seen Jane and had to face the awful truth.

How much time elapsed between Kate searching the apartment and realising Madeleine was missing and her being in the company of Russell and/ or Jane?  What possible reason could JT have had for removing Madeleine from her bedroom and taking her to her own apartment without informing her parents first?  Is that the kind of thing you would do?

[Brietta]

Madeleine was not in the apartment but Jane, as Kate knew, was in her's. Kate knew Madeleine was able to leave the apartment, she said as much to Fiona, so why wouldn't she hope, in her traumatised state, that Madeleine  just may have gone to the other flats of the group to see if her parents were there and Jane had taken her in? What is so unbelievable about that? If I had been in Kate's position that's exactly the kind of hope I'd cling to until I'd seen Jane and had to face the awful truth.

She would have known that Jane Tanner would not have exited the apartment via the open window. 

Once she had looked out of the window and checked that Madeleine was neither outside nor was she in the apartment the logical and most efficient approach to finding her was to raise the alarm as quickly as possible and have as many people as possible mobilised to look for her in the immediate vicinity.

That is what she did.