Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: sadie on November 23, 2016, 11:50:23 PM
Title: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 23, 2016, 11:50:23 PM
They were in the back garden of their apartments, 50 metres away from 5A and overlooking the well illuminated patio area /windows that could otherwise have provided safe entry. Amaral himself said that no intruder would consider entering that way when the Topas group were so close and overlooking the entrance.
The intruder almost certainly had a key and let himself or his accomplis in thru the totally hidden deeply recessede front door, which also was in almost total blackness ... no illumination and no-one passed by that door.
They left the front door locked. Altho not double locked it required a key to enter the flat. Since arricval, they had not touched the bedroom window and like most of us they thought that the shutter could NOT be opened from outside. They believed it locked closed.
89
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 24, 2016, 12:19:54 AM
They were in the back garden of their apartments, 50 metres away from 5A and overlooking the well illuminated patio area /windows that could otherwise have provided safe entry. Amaral himself said that no intruder would consider entering that way when the Topas group were so close and overlooking the entrance.
The intruder almost certainly had a key and let himself or his accomplis in thru the totally hidden deeply recessede front door, which also was in almost total blackness ... no illumination and no-one passed by that door.
They left the front door locked. Altho not double locked it required a key to enter the flat. Since arricval, they had not touched the bedroom window and like most of us they thought that the shutter could NOT be opened from outside. They believed it locked closed.
No Sadie, they left their babies alone in an unlocked apartment. If they could see so clearly why did they not see this rampaging key weilding gang you claim and frame? Could it be because you made that up?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 12:36:25 AM
No Sadie, they left their babies alone in an unlocked apartment. If they could see so clearly why did they not see this rampaging key weilding gang you claim and frame? Could it be because you made that up?
I have been there and eaten at the Tapas Restaurant ... and noticed the closeness of the distances (checked on GE) and observed at first hand how the Tapas area relates to 5A.
Have YOU been there and done the same?
If you had bothered to read reports properly, you would KNOW that the front door, which WAS LOCKED, was on the other side of the building to the Tapas Restaurant. As far as Kate and Gerry were concerned the front of the building was secure.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 24, 2016, 12:55:04 AM
I have been there and eaten at the Tapas Restaurant ... and noticed the closeness of the distances (checked on GE) and observed at first hand how the Tapas area relates to 5A.
Have YOU been there and done the same?
If you had bothered to read reports properly, you would KNOW that the front door, which WAS LOCKED, was on the other side of the building to the Tapas Restaurant. As far as Kate and Gerry were concerned the front of the building was secure.
NOBODY saw any key weilding gang grab Maddie and run.OR drive fast away from the apartments. End of abduction story right here. So no use me going over and nodding my head saying oh yeah it's quite close right enough. NEW POST: Missing child not found yet.
Sadie never saw the 'abductor'- doesn't know what happened to Maddie, unless she is involved in her disappearance, cannot solve the mystery by inventing theories and trying to pass them off as FACT.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 01:06:06 AM
NOBODY saw any key weilding gang grab Maddie and run.OR drive fast away from the apartments. End of abduction story right here. So no use me going over and nodding my head saying oh yeah it's quite close right enough. NEW POST: Missing child not found yet.
Agreed no one saw any key weilding gang grab Madeleine OR drive fast away from the apartments. But you are mistaken if you think that is the end of the abduction story. How come YOU know better than SY ?
Whether you like it or not, it was like being in their back garden (we had a 50 metre back garden when our kids were little). Whether you like it or not, they believed the front door to be locked and believed that the shutter could not be opened from outside ... so as far as they understood it, no-one could enter. The only non-locked door was the patio door in a well illuminated area, which they overlooked from approx 50 metres. Amaral said no-one would attempt to enter via the patio doors because of that.
Why do you keep on going over it ? Senseless, the facts are the facts. Like it or not.
Sadie never saw the 'abductor'- doesn't know what happened to Maddie, unless she is involved in her disappearance, cannot solve the mystery by inventing theories and trying to pass them off as FACT.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 24, 2016, 08:41:24 AM
Agreed no one saw any key weilding gang grab Madeleine OR drive fast away from the apartments. But you are mistaken if you think that is the end of the abduction story. How come YOU know better than SY ?
Whether you like it or not, it was like being in their back garden (we had a 50 metre back garden when our kids were little). Whether you like it or not, they believed the front door to be locked and believed that the shutter could not be opened from outside ... so as far as they understood it, no-one could enter. The only non-locked door was the patio door in a well illuminated area, which they overlooked from approx 50 metres. Amaral said no-one would attempt to enter via the patio doors because of that.
Why do you keep on going over it ? Senseless, the facts are the facts. Like it or not.
The fact is that's all incorrect. The top half of the patio door was all that could be seen from the Tapas. It wasn't bathed in light as the crime scene pictures show and they weren't looking anyway. You still haven't provided a cite for your Amaral quote.
As the prosecutors said;
In effect, this group of friends was enjoying a short holiday period, therefore perfectly relaxed and it would be normal that, having dinner, inclusively with an entertainment service available [25], they were not very concerned with anything that might happen to their children during that dinner period. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
How very true, with the exception of it being 'normal'. Most 'normal' parents would find it very difficult to relax and enjoy dinner if their kids were home alone.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 24, 2016, 09:16:38 AM
The fact is that's all incorrect. The top half of the patio door was all that could be seen from the Tapas. It wasn't bathed in light as the crime scene pictures show and they weren't looking anyway. You still haven't provided a cite for your Amaral quote.
As the prosecutors said;
In effect, this group of friends was enjoying a short holiday period, therefore perfectly relaxed and it would be normal that, having dinner, inclusively with an entertainment service available [25], they were not very concerned with anything that might happen to their children during that dinner period. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
How very true, with the exception of it being 'normal'. Most 'normal' parents would find it very difficult to relax and enjoy dinner if their kids were home alone.
There's nothing particularly relaxing about getting up every thirty minutes to go and check on your children.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 24, 2016, 09:37:37 AM
They were in the back garden of their apartments, 50 metres away from 5A and overlooking the well illuminated patio area /windows that could otherwise have provided safe entry. Amaral himself said that no intruder would consider entering that way when the Topas group were so close and overlooking the entrance.
The intruder almost certainly had a key and let himself or his accomplis in thru the totally hidden deeply recessede front door, which also was in almost total blackness ... no illumination and no-one passed by that door.
They left the front door locked. Altho not double locked it required a key to enter the flat. Since arricval, they had not touched the bedroom window and like most of us they thought that the shutter could NOT be opened from outside. They believed it locked closed.
Why do you persist in this fable of being in the 'back garden' ?
As I said yesterday, it is easy to make excuses and blame others for your foibles.
It wasn't and never was the 'back garden'.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Benice on November 24, 2016, 10:05:54 AM
The fact is that's all incorrect. The top half of the patio door was all that could be seen from the Tapas. It wasn't bathed in light as the crime scene pictures show and they weren't looking anyway. You still haven't provided a cite for your Amaral quote.
As the prosecutors said;
In effect, this group of friends was enjoying a short holiday period, therefore perfectly relaxed and it would be normal that, having dinner, inclusively with an entertainment service available [25], they were not very concerned with anything that might happen to their children during that dinner period. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
How very true, with the exception of it being 'normal'. Most 'normal' parents would find it very difficult to relax and enjoy dinner if their kids were home alone.
So do you think the hundreds of thousands of parents who, having left their children asleep in their rooms, have then relaxed and enjoyed their dinner whilst on holiday would agree with you that they are not normal parents?
IMO your efforts to isolate the McCanns from 'normal' parents - because of their method of childcare are untenable as they involve completely ignoring/denying the existence of those thousands of other parents who have been doing the same as the McCanns when on holiday for decades.
No matter how inconvenient it is to your attempts to single out the McCanns from other parents for the purpose of condemning them because of their childcare arrangements - the existence of the Baby Listening method of childcare, offered to and used by other parents when on holiday, is an established fact and has been for years.
The McCanns did not invent the Listening service and no amount of wishful thinking will change that.
AIMHO
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 24, 2016, 10:18:25 AM
The parents could have eaten and drink in the apartment.
The doors, could have been secured.
The could have hired a babysitter from the creche.
There was no need to leave the children by themselves.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 24, 2016, 10:21:21 AM
Why do you persist in this fable of being in the 'back garden' ?
As I said yesterday, it is easy to make excuses and blame others for your foibles.
It wasn't and never was the 'back garden'.
YOU haven't been there and I have. It was like a big back garden, with additional features to most.
Many families have back gardens in excess of 50 metres. Ours was precisely 50 metres, so I have an understanding of what that distance means both sight and sound wise.
Please do not persist in denying that it was effectively the back garden to the flats, cos it WAS. Go and have a look if you dont believe me.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 24, 2016, 10:55:13 AM
YOU haven't been there and I have. It was like a big back garden, with additional features to most.
Many families have back gardens in excess of 50 metres. Ours was precisely 50 metres, so I have an understanding of what that distance means both sight and sound wise.
Please do not persist in denying that it was effectively the back garden to the flats, cos it WAS. Go and have a look if you dont believe me.
It wasn't a back garden, and if you persist that it was, I can only seriously question your judgment.
Most people have back gardens in excess of 50 metres ?
Try to provide a cite for that.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on November 24, 2016, 11:00:46 AM
It wasn't a back garden, and if you persist that it was, I can only seriously question your judgment.
Most people have back gardens in excess of 50 metres ?
Try to provide a cite for that.
Dont twist my words Stephen. I said MANY people have gardens in excess of 50 metres.
From what you have said previously it seems likely that places where you have lived (cities) would have very limited back gardens. Country folk often have well in excess of 50 metres , as you must know.
At one stage in our lives, we were the poorest members of a wine tasting group of nine couples. Every home, but two, had in excess of 50 metres back garden. One house had a swimming pool and one house a tennis court. A very wealthy neighbour had a small lake (it was so big and completely natural that it could not be called a pool) and a tennis court, and it was all much bigger than the tapas area. All in a country village.
Many people have gardens in excess of 50 metres
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 11:23:36 AM
They don't usually have a garden with a high dividing wall with no gate running across it, either @)(++(*
As a boy, my husbands home was a terraced victorian house. It was small but it's garden was crossed by a pathway that the public could walk along and it had two fences (with gates) that prevented unwanted 'visitors' entering either the lower or the upper garden.
You are being pedantic ... as was stephen. There are so many varieties of garden that neither you nor I have ever seen ... may I suggest that you both open your minds.
I repeat : The Tapas area was like the back garden to the appartments.
I have been there, you haven't. May I politely suggest that you go and look before you make similar comments again.
Now forgive me, I must get on.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 24, 2016, 11:29:07 AM
As a boy, my husbands home was a terraced victorian house. It was small but it's garden was crossed by a pathway that the public could walk along and it had two fences (with gates) that prevented unwanted 'visitors' entering either the lower or the upper garden.
You are being pedantic ... as was stephen. There are so many varieties of garden that neither you nor I have ever seen ... may I suggest that you both open your minds.
I repeat : The Tapas area was like the back garden to the appartments.
I have been there, you haven't. May I politely suggest that you go and look before you make similar comments again.
Now forgive me, I must get on.
You can waffle until the end of time Sadie.
It wasn't in their back garden.
The question is, why do you persist in this falsehood ?
Is it as I said earlier, and yesterday, you are making excuses for the Mccanns, when there are no excuses for leaving children unnecessary danger ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on November 24, 2016, 12:02:39 PM
not only was it not their back garden .......
it was in a strange country..
a strange place.............
on a main road ........
with nothing familiar............or safe in that apartment ....
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 24, 2016, 12:05:26 PM
So do you think the hundreds of thousands of parents who, having left their children asleep in their rooms, have then relaxed and enjoyed their dinner whilst on holiday would agree with you that they are not normal parents?
IMO your efforts to isolate the McCanns from 'normal' parents - because of their method of childcare are untenable as they involve completely ignoring/denying the existence of those thousands of other parents who have been doing the same as the McCanns when on holiday for decades.
No matter how inconvenient it is to your attempts to single out the McCanns from other parents for the purpose of condemning them because of their childcare arrangements - the existence of the Baby Listening method of childcare, offered to and used by other parents when on holiday, is an established fact and has been for years.
The McCanns did not invent the Listening service and no amount of wishful thinking will change that.
AIMHO
I would like cites for these 'thousands of parents' but that's unlikely, so it's just a rumour.
The McCanns didn't invent the Listening service per se, but they invented it at the Ocean Club because it wasn't there until they arrived; in fact they invented it before they left the UK.
They thought that was OK because it was in use at other Mark Warner sites. Other ENCLOSED Mark Warner sites, just as most venues offering the service do so at sites with controllable boundaries.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 24, 2016, 02:12:42 PM
YOU haven't been there and I have. It was like a big back garden, with additional features to most.
Many families have back gardens in excess of 50 metres. Ours was precisely 50 metres, so I have an understanding of what that distance means both sight and sound wise.
Please do not persist in denying that it was effectively the back garden to the flats, cos it WAS. Go and have a look if you dont believe me.
Some do but its not that common. Lets chuck some numbers at it and see what happens. A typical building density of executive type houses is 5 to 10 per hectare*. In that case the typical plot for exec type housing would be ca 1500m2 => plots 38m x 38m or variations thereon probably 20m x 75m "being best fit" for roughing in. So with a 50m backyard that leaves 25m from the front curtilage to rear of the property ?
* The UK average is 42 per hectare. Therefore for most UK citizens it was not like dining in their own back garden. Myth busted.
Some do but its not that common. Lets chuck some numbers at it and see what happens. A typical building density of executive type houses is 5 to 10 per hectare*. In that case the typical plot for exec type housing would be ca 1500m2 => plots 38m x 38m or variations thereon probably 20m x 75m "being best fit" for roughing in. So with a 50m backyard that leaves 25m from the front curtilage to rear of the property ?
* The UK average is 42 per hectare. Therefore for most UK citizens it was not like dining in their own back garden. Myth busted.
You are talking modern, new housing estates. I am talking semi rural, or country properties ... and more established property, probably mainly pre-war when land was not at such a premium.
For example a goodly number of small properties here each with in excess of 79m metre back gardens.
Use Google Earth. Measure lengths using the stubby blue upright rule on the top band. Adjust calibration to metres.
1) Long Lane. Walsall at its eastern end, Small victorian cottages here with gardens of 80 metres 2) Broad Lane, Bloxwich, south of its junction with Long Lane. Small properties here with gardens over 100 metres long
There are probably millions of properties like these with gardens in excess of 50 metres.
Let's look at the posher end.
G.E. 1) Keepers Road, Little Aston ... again many properties with gardens longer than 50 metres .... the whole area has houses with long and really wide back gardens.
Again, the whole area has hundreds of houses with gardens in excess of 50 metres length.
Now kindly back off. I have proved that there are MANY houses with back gardens in excess of 50 metres ... and they are not all mansions.
I can understand some of you not knowing about these long back gardens, in excess of 50 metres, but NOW you KNOW
TBH, Alice, I am surprised at you, even saying what you did ... brecause it is very obvious from your posts that you have a great deal of knowledge of buildings and planning.
Putting it mildly, why were you trying to pull the wool over our eyes? WHY ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 24, 2016, 04:17:40 PM
Our garden's 120ft long -what's that in new money? I wouldn't dine there because it's on a slight slope with fruit trees all over the place. I would dine in our pergola which is about 60ft from the house. When we have "dos" we fill the whole garden with people and spill out onto the field at the back, music blaring, booze flowing, canapés flinging - where the kids are is anyone's guess @)(++(*
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on November 24, 2016, 04:22:49 PM
I had an uncle who had a garden of that sort of length but they never ate there because it was too far for the staff to carry all the food. 8(0(*
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 04:34:14 PM
You are talking modern, new housing estates. I am talking semi rural, or country properties ... and more established property, probably mainly pre-war when land was not at such a premium.
For example a goodly number of small properties here each with in excess of 79m metre back gardens.
Use Google Earth. Measure lengths using the stubby blue upright rule on the top band. Adjust calibration to metres.
1) Long Lane. Walsall at its eastern end, Small victorian cottages here with gardens of 80 metres 2) Broad Lane, Bloxwich, south of its junction with Long Lane. Small properties here with gardens over 100 metres long
There are probably millions of properties like these with gardens in excess of 50 metres.
Let's look at the posher end.
G.E. 1) Keepers Road, Little Aston ... again many properties with gardens longer than 50 metres .... the whole area has houses with long and really wide back gardens.
Again, the whole area has hundreds of houses with gardens in excess of 50 metres length.
Now kindly back off. I have proved that there are MANY houses with back gardens in excess of 50 metres ... and they are not all mansions.
I can understand some of you not knowing about these long back gardens, in excess of 50 metres, but NOW you KNOW
TBH, Alice, I am surprised at you, even saying what you did ... brecause it is very obvious from your posts that you have a great deal of knowledge of buildings and planning.
Putting it mildly, why were you trying to pull the wool over our eyes? WHY ?
Did you even bother to look at the cottages ? Use GE street scene.
There will be hundreds of thousands /millions of these small pre war cottage type homes around the UK with really long gardens over 50 metres long.
What is the matter with you that you are unable to accept the proof of GE ?
Frightened to admit that you are WRONG ?
As I said MANY houses have 50 metre gardens
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: slartibartfast on November 24, 2016, 05:01:43 PM
You are talking modern, new housing estates. I am talking semi rural, or country properties ... and more established property, probably mainly pre-war when land was not at such a premium.
For example a goodly number of small properties here each with in excess of 79m metre back gardens.
Use Google Earth. Measure lengths using the stubby blue upright rule on the top band. Adjust calibration to metres.
1) Long Lane. Walsall at its eastern end, Small victorian cottages here with gardens of 80 metres 2) Broad Lane, Bloxwich, south of its junction with Long Lane. Small properties here with gardens over 100 metres long
There are probably millions of properties like these with gardens in excess of 50 metres.
Let's look at the posher end.
G.E. 1) Keepers Road, Little Aston ... again many properties with gardens longer than 50 metres .... the whole area has houses with long and really wide back gardens.
Again, the whole area has hundreds of houses with gardens in excess of 50 metres length.
Now kindly back off. I have proved that there are MANY houses with back gardens in excess of 50 metres ... and they are not all mansions.
I can understand some of you not knowing about these long back gardens, in excess of 50 metres, but NOW you KNOW
TBH, Alice, I am surprised at you, even saying what you did ... brecause it is very obvious from your posts that you have a great deal of knowledge of buildings and planning.
Putting it mildly, why were you trying to pull the wool over our eyes? WHY ?
I could ask you the same question. If the average density of build throughout the UK is 42 to the hectare then most properties cannot have a back yard of 50m QED. Parts of Solihull notwithstanding. I can take you to some council houses built ca 1950 that have 50m back yards but the point is that is atypical and no amount of blether can cover the fact that the majority of houses do not have a plot larger than 650m2 or an eigth of an acre in Mickey Mouse money. It's not me saying that Sadie, it's a matter of record see the link I posted earlier.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 24, 2016, 05:33:55 PM
I could ask you the same question. If the average density of build throughout the UK is 42 to the hectare then most properties cannot have a back yard of 50m QED. Parts of Solihull notwithstanding. I can take you to some council houses built ca 1950 that have 50m back yards but the point is that is atypical and no amount of blether can cover the fact that the majority of houses do not have a plot larger than 650m2 or an eigth of an acre in Mickey Mouse money. It's not me saying that Sadie, it's a matter of record see the link I posted earlier.
Once again YOU are talking modern town estate v. existing mainly prewar rural housing. With YOUR specialist knowledge of buildings/housing, YOU KNOW that what I am saying is true.
I have NEVER said that MOST houses have 50 metre back gardens as both YOU and stephen wrongly claimed (he owes me an apology for causing me all this work!). I know that isn't correct.
BUT I stated that MANY houses have back gardens of 50 metres ... and I have proved it.
Now kindly accept that FACT and desist from harrassing me. An apology would be graciously accepted ... but I doubt you are capable.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 06:08:02 PM
Trouble is Luz is not a quiet rural area, it is a holiday resort.
We were likening the Tapas distances to those in a back garden ... any garden that British people might have lived in or had family / friends connections to.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Benice on November 24, 2016, 06:13:13 PM
I would like cites for these 'thousands of parents' but that's unlikely, so it's just a rumour.
The McCanns didn't invent the Listening service per se, but they invented it at the Ocean Club because it wasn't there until they arrived; in fact they invented it before they left the UK.
They thought that was OK because it was in use at other Mark Warner sites. Other ENCLOSED Mark Warner sites, just as most venues offering the service do so at sites with controllable boundaries.
If you want to believe that over the last 50 or 60 years or so in which the Listening Service has been operating - it has NOT been used by thousands of people and is just a rumour - then that's up to you. Common sense alone dictates otherwise. It's obvious that the reason for it's longevity is because it is popular with parents who have created an ongoing demand for it which has been responded to by tour operators/hoteliers who in turn have offered the service. It is also obvious that it is not illegal otherwise it would not be offered by the reputable tour operators/hoteliers etc etc both here and abroad who do offer it.
You can nitpick away re 'inventing the listening service' as much as you like. It doesn't change the undeniable fact that parents who use this service have all taken the same decision as the McCanns i.e. to leave their children asleep and alone in their rooms while they go out to dinner, knowing they will be regularly checked. If having taken that same decision makes the McCanns and their friends 'abnormal' parents - then so are those thousands of other parents. You can't have it both ways.
Then there are those parents, who have also taken the same decision as the McCanns to leave their children alone and asleep in their room while they go to dinner - but who use baby alarms as a babysitter - and then advertise that their children are alone by having the baby alarm in full view on the table! Not once have I read any criticism of those parents. Neither have I heard any criticism of parents, who in the full knowledge of what happened to Madeleine, STILL decide to use the listening service.
IMO people are perfectly entitled to disagree with the McCanns childcare arrangements, but to pretend they are the only parents on the planet to ever make those arrangements - in order to justify continually heaping blame on them ad nauseam - is both illogical and irrational IMO - because it is simply not true.
AIMHO
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Mr Moderator on November 24, 2016, 06:21:27 PM
Trouble is Luz is not a quiet rural area, it is a holiday resort.
Apt 5a bordered a public road and fronted directly onto a public car park. It was easily accessible on all three sides by anyone with mischievous or criminal intent, a prime target if there ever was one. Yet another case of leaving ones brains at passport control.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 06:22:28 PM
In May it would have been VERY quiet ... and it is quite village like.
Although there are a goodly number of properties, many and likely most would have been empty at that time of year.
When we were there in June/July 2010 we freely walked along the side roads, and not on the pavements mainly. Hardly any traffick and few people.
Last time we went there were more people about, but it still was NOT busy.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 06:29:00 PM
Apt 5a bordered a public road and fronted directly onto a public car park. It was easily accessible on all three sides by anyone with mischievous or criminal intent, a prime target if there ever was one. Yet another case of leaving ones brains at passport control.
5A bordered a public road that was so quiet that we walked along it in the middle of the road.
You are incorrect in stating that it fronted directly on to a public car park. It did NOT, the car park was private for residents in block 5.
And it was not easily accessible from all 3 sides.
Please get your facts right Mr M.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 24, 2016, 06:37:25 PM
8((()*/ In May it would have been VERY quiet ... and it is quite village like.
Although there are a goodly number of properties, many and likely most would have been empty at that time of year.
When we were there in June/July 2010 we freely walked along the side roads, and not on the pavements mainly. Hardly any traffick and few people.
Last time we went there were more people about, but it still was NOT busy.
I think Textusa came up with about 50% occupancy for the OC. Neither busy nor quiet.
Amaral states he criss-crossed Luz on the evening of the 4th around 8pm and it was 'closed'. And that the locals claimed it was like that on the 3rd as well.
We have the till receipts in Kelly's which show it was open, but doing little business.
We have info on the Dolphin, the Tapas, the Millennium, the Duke of Holland, the Mirage. All conducting business.
So which test are we to apply to Luz around 5A? How busy is busy? How quiet is quiet?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Mr Moderator on November 24, 2016, 06:38:54 PM
5A bordered a public road that was so quiet that we walked along it in the middle of the road.
You are incorrect in stating that it fronted directly on to a public car park. It did NOT, the car park was private for residents in block 5.
And it was not easily accessible from all 3 sides.
Please get your facts right Mr M.
The road past 5a is regularly trafficked most of the day. The car park is there for anyone to use which renders it public. The apartment could be accessed on three sides by anyone. Which part do you dispute?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 24, 2016, 07:59:31 PM
ORLY ? .... [sadie rolls eyes in despair] .... they were like in their own back garden, weren't they?
Their listening service was FAR superior to any provided by an hotel; they actually went into the apartments and checked. They didn't rely on an electronic device at an over burdened reception desk . Nor did they rely on a person listening at the front door / window
Far superior. Thay went in and checked .... NO remote listening stuff for them.
No, they were in a restaurant next door. As they admitted, they mostly listened inside without looking. How is that superior if you don't look?
It's a pity they neglected to take the minimum care that those using official listening services and that most people going out to dinner take by LOCKING the door. It's possible they weren't the only ones going in. Such a basic mistake.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 08:23:00 PM
The road past 5a is regularly trafficked most of the day. The car park is there for anyone to use which renders it public. The apartment could be accessed on three sides by anyone. Which part do you dispute?
I dispute your every sentence. Cant think where you got the misinformation from. And TBH, I can hardly believe that after the years you have been on the forum, you believe what you are saying. Who has been feeding you disinformation, Mr M ?
1) There was so little traffic along Rua Dr FGM that we walked along the middle of it. This was in June 2010. Rua Dr A de Silva was virtually the same.
2) The car park was within the garden walls of block 5. It was in the front garden in effect. It was most definitely NOT public. It was NOT for anyone to use.
3) The apartment could only be easily accessed from Rua Dr FGM and from Rua A de Silva. In other words from two sides.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 24, 2016, 08:57:47 PM
I dispute your every sentence. Cant think where you got the misinformation from. And TBH, I can hardly believe that after the years you have been on the forum, you believe what you are saying. Who has been feeding you disinformation, Mr M ?
1) There was so little traffic along Rua Dr FGM that we walked along the middle of it. This was in June 2010. Rua Dr A de Silva was virtually the same. 2) The car park was within the garden walls of block 5. It was in the front garden in effect. It was most definitely NOT public. It was NOT for anyone to use. 3) The apartment could only be easily accessed from Rua Dr FGM and from Rua A de Silva. In other words from two sides.
So their 'front garden' wasn't public? Their 'Tapas back garden' was, of course. I believe from SIL that 'no gate' allows entry. Their were no gates on the car park.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 24, 2016, 09:42:58 PM
So their 'front garden' wasn't public? Their 'Tapas back garden' was, of course. I believe from SIL that 'no gate' allows entry. Their were no gates on the car park.
From memory the car parks of 4 5 and 6 have a 'privado' sign up, which is meant to imply that the public should keep their cars out. And quite possibly their persons.
The trouble is, unless you secure everything, you cannot keep people off with a 'privado' sign. Let me see what I've had. The villa cleaner. The pool cleaner. The owners. Some guy who fixed the pool before we rented it, showing off his handiwork to prospective clients. Taxis aplenty. And a very genial visit from the GNR. And of course the ambulance.
If we kept the drive gates closed, then all of these people should stop at the gates and bing the bell, but we keep the gates open, and Tom, Dick and Harry can wander in. The neighbours' dog takes the opportunity to wander in and have a c**p about once a fortnight.
The ownership of areas like the parking zones in the Ocean Club is something I'm not sure about. I would assume Greentrust owned it and charged the apartment owners some annual fee.
The only person I can definitively place within the parking zone of 5A is the gardener who was in it on 2 May 2007
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 09:54:41 PM
No, they were in a restaurant next door. As they admitted, they mostly listened inside without looking. How is that superior if you don't look?
It's a pity they neglected to take the minimum care that those using official listening services and that most people going out to dinner take by LOCKING the door. It's possible they weren't the only ones going in. Such a basic mistake.
They were in the restaurant in the garden - NOT next door.
They DID LOOK Gerry visually checked, Matt visually checked the twins, and altho Madeleine lay around the corner he saw the bottom end of her bed. Kate visually checked. So why are you twisting facts and trying to make out things that are not true?
That is sinister Gunit and I wonder why you would promote such untruths.
They also Locked the front door, but did not double lock it. It still needed a key to get in. For anyone outside, it was LOCKED. They didn't understand the shutters and thought that if they were down then they were secure from the outside. As far as they were concerned the front of the building was secure.
The only bit that was not locked was the patio door which they kept closed and which would have looked locked to anyone passing by. That door was only a tiny bit over 50 metres away and virtually the whole patio area was illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite.
Time YOU got YOUR facts right Gunit. You have gone over it time and again ... and yet you are denying yourself and readers the TRUTH.
WHY ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 09:58:22 PM
Only one door was not locked and that patio entry area was well lit and looked over at a distance of about 50 metres by the tapas group.
Why dont you believe Amaral when he says that NO intruder would go in that way? I thought that you were an admireer of his?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 24, 2016, 10:02:09 PM
They were in the restaurant in the garden - NOT next door.
They DID LOOK Gerry visually checked, Matt visually checked the twins, and altho Madeleine lay around the corner he saw the bottom end of her bed. Kate visually checked. So why are you twisting facts and trying to make out things that are not true?
That is sinister Gunit and I wonder why you would promote such untruths.
They also Locked the front door, but did not double lock it. It still needed a key to get in. For anyone outside, it was LOCKED. They didn't understand the shutters and thought that if they were down then they were secure from the outside. As far as they were concerned the front of the building was secure.
The only bit that was not locked was the patio door which they kept closed and which would have looked locked to anyone passing by. That door was only a tiny bit over 50 metres away and virtually the whole patio area was illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite.
Time YOU got YOUR facts right Gunit. You have gone over it time and again ... and yet you are denying yourself and readers the TRUTH.
WHY ?
It was not in the garden.
You can type being in the garden again and again, but it will never be the truth.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 10:13:04 PM
So their 'front garden' wasn't public? Their 'Tapas back garden' was, of course. I believe from SIL that 'no gate' allows entry. Their were no gates on the car park.
Do YOU park in someone elses walled front garden Gunit? If you have a walled or well designated front garden, do you tolerate the 'public' parking there?
It was private parking just for the apartments in block 5
The route thru the walkway was not closed to the public, but there was no advantage walking thru it, so people would carry on in the direction they were walking along the public roadway footpaths.
The actual tapas (block 5) back gardens were again private and generally manned, altho when we tried no-one was on duty in the Tapas reception.
As we were eating at the Tapas restaurant, I think that had someone been on duty at the Tapas reception, we would have been allowed thru. However, it was NOT generally open to the public to wander in and use the facilities as desired. The gardens were essentially private.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 10:18:29 PM
They were in the restaurant in the garden - NOT next door.
They DID LOOK Gerry visually checked, Matt visually checked the twins, and altho Madeleine lay around the corner he saw the bottom end of her bed. Kate visually checked. So why are you twisting facts and trying to make out things that are not true?
That is sinister Gunit and I wonder why you would promote such untruths.
They also Locked the front door, but did not double lock it. It still needed a key to get in. For anyone outside, it was LOCKED. They didn't understand the shutters and thought that if they were down then they were secure from the outside. As far as they were concerned the front of the building was secure.
The only bit that was not locked was the patio door which they kept closed and which would have looked locked to anyone passing by. That door was only a tiny bit over 50 metres away and virtually the whole patio area was illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite.
Time YOU got YOUR facts right Gunit. You have gone over it time and again ... and yet you are denying yourself and readers the TRUTH.
WHY ?
Why do you insist there was some sort of house-garden connection between 5A and the Tapas area when there clearly wasn't?
How many people leave their apartment, GO OUT of their garden gate onto a public road, walk 50 feet, GO INTO another gate into a walled 'garden' open to many other people containing two swimming pools, a bar, a restaurant and a kids playground? Any such person saying they were going 'into the garden' would have their head read.
Gerry only looked because 'the door had moved' Matt only saw the twins because the door was open wide enough to see them. Kate only looked in the room because the door was closed by the wind as she pulled it back to it's normal position.
The area was not illuminated by the street lamp, the street was very dark at the bottom of the steps if you look at the crime scene photos.
I find it strange that you can't debate without personal attacks on others, and I won't respond to such tactics. I expect any readers who care will decide for themselves what the truth is.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 24, 2016, 10:40:18 PM
From memory the car parks of 4 5 and 6 have a 'privado' sign up, which is meant to imply that the public should keep their cars out. And quite possibly their persons.
The trouble is, unless you secure everything, you cannot keep people off with a 'privado' sign. Let me see what I've had. The villa cleaner. The pool cleaner. The owners. Some guy who fixed the pool before we rented it, showing off his handiwork to prospective clients. Taxis aplenty. And a very genial visit from the GNR. And of course the ambulance.
If we kept the drive gates closed, then all of these people should stop at the gates and bing the bell, but we keep the gates open, and Tom, Dick and Harry can wander in. The neighbours' dog takes the opportunity to wander in and have a c**p about once a fortnight.
The ownership of areas like the parking zones in the Ocean Club is something I'm not sure about. I would assume Greentrust owned it and charged the apartment owners some annual fee.
The only person I can definitively place within the parking zone of 5A is the gardener who was in it on 2 May 2007
Thank you SIL. The entrances had Privado signs up.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 24, 2016, 10:41:09 PM
I'm afraid this continued typing of 'being in the garden' will lead readers to this forum of an inevitable conclusion Sadie.
Sarcastic devil.
It is so obvious that the garden is effectively the garden to the apartments.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 24, 2016, 11:16:33 PM
Garden; a piece of land next to and belonging to a house, where flowers and other plants are grown, and often containing an area of grass.
They can be seen below, one next to each ground floor apartment, clearly belonging to them because they're enclosed by walls and they have individual gates.
where flowers and other plants are grown, and often containing an area of grass. They can be seen below, next to the apartments, enclosed by walls and with gates.
yep, I agree.
But remember my hubbies garden as a child? His garden was divided into two with a walkway, fences and gates between. The main garden was at the far end, divided away ...just as the main Tapas garden is divided away.
Try and loosen up up about it . You are too set in your ideas of what constitutes their garden like you were too uptight about people having gardens of 50 metres length. You were wrong, same as you are wrong this time.
Posh hotels, very posh ones, have rooms/ suites with their own little gardens and sometimes even little pools within them, but the main area of gardens is their back garden too effectively.
And this is the case with the Apartments in block 5. they have small private individual gardens but the Tapas area is their main back garden.
Our garden's 120ft long -what's that in new money? I wouldn't dine there because it's on a slight slope with fruit trees all over the place. I would dine in our pergola which is about 60ft from the house. When we have "dos" we fill the whole garden with people and spill out onto the field at the back, music blaring, booze flowing, canapés flinging - where the kids are is anyone's guess @)(++(*
Sounds great. Can I come?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 25, 2016, 12:10:42 AM
Garden; a piece of land next to and belonging to a house, where flowers and other plants are grown, and often containing an area of grass.
They can be seen below, one next to each ground floor apartment, clearly belonging to them because they're enclosed by walls and they have individual gates.
I suppose the whole issue could be answered by who has title to the relevant bits of land. Maybe SiL could check for us at the Portuguese equivalent of Land Registry................. ?{)(**
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 25, 2016, 12:25:25 AM
I suppose the whole issue could be answered by who has title to the relevant bits of land. Maybe SiL could check for us at the Portuguese equivalent of Land Registry................. ?{)(**
With all due respect that aint important to a temporary tenant .. now is it Alice ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 25, 2016, 12:26:13 AM
I suppose the whole issue could be answered by who has title to the relevant bits of land. Maybe SiL could check for us at the Portuguese equivalent of Land Registry................. ?{)(**
Try thinking about what MW got for €1.85 million in 2007. The last price I heard on 5A, now sold, was 1/4 million.
My working theory is they (MW) got the common bits, plus the rights to contracts with apartment owners.
And if you want me to try checking the land registry out with a bunch of Portuguese bureaucrats, I do hope you are going to pony up the euros. It's going to take a lot of custard tarts.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 25, 2016, 09:01:48 AM
Try thinking about what MW got for €1.85 million in 2007. The last price I heard on 5A, now sold, was 1/4 million.
My working theory is they (MW) got the common bits, plus the rights to contracts with apartment owners.
And if you want me to try checking the land registry out with a bunch of Portuguese bureaucrats, I do hope you are going to pony up the euros. It's going to take a lot of custard tarts.
They got;
Luz Oceano II - Exploração Turística Lda, this company being the owner of the administrative rights of the different factions that make up the resort.
Luz Oceano - Administração de Condominios SA which managed the assets
A rental contract being celebrated for ten years of 27 apartments owned by George Propiedades. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBIN_CROSSLAND.htm
The first two companies were owned by the three partners. Crossland doesn't say if they owned George Propiedades. It wasn't sold anyway, just a contract renting 27 apartments.
I would expect 'the assets' to include the Tapas complex, the reception building, the indoor swimming pool etc. They didn't include any apartments, their car parks and gardens. The apartments were owned by George Popiedades, private owners who rented them out or private owners who lived in them, it appears.
Only those occupying apartments in Block 5 who had an arrangement with Green Trust SA to use OC facilities would be allowed to use the Tapas complex, so it wasn't connected to block 5 in the 'garden' sense. It was connected as a facility only to those guests who possessed entry cards.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on November 25, 2016, 09:15:12 AM
I fancy this has been discussed before, but was there any formal entry mechanism to the Tapas part of the complex with these cards, or was it more a case of carry and produce if asked to do so?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 25, 2016, 10:15:06 AM
I fancy this has been discussed before, but was there any formal entry mechanism to the Tapas part of the complex with these cards, or was it more a case of carry and produce if asked to do so?
The cards were issued to each guest, children included.
an access card which allows for access to all the services of the OC. This card too, is treated as is the keys (above) and is handed out one per person. Mark Warner hands these cards to its clients.
These access cards are given to each client (including babies and children), and besides permitting access to services offered by the Ocean Club, is equally used for buying drinks and food. Later, these charges are added to the respective apartment. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RITA_SILVA.htm
The Tapas reception seems only to have been 'manned' until 7pm, however.
Her working hours were between 09H00 and 19H00, and she was never present when the group had dinner. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ELISA.htm
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 25, 2016, 11:23:30 AM
Try thinking about what MW got for €1.85 million in 2007. The last price I heard on 5A, now sold, was 1/4 million.
My working theory is they (MW) got the common bits, plus the rights to contracts with apartment owners.
And if you want me to try checking the land registry out with a bunch of Portuguese bureaucrats, I do hope you are going to pony up the euros. It's going to take a lot of custard tarts.
Blimey! over here we can check for a fiver on line using that tinternet and have an almost instant answer.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 25, 2016, 11:25:56 AM
I fancy this has been discussed before, but was there any formal entry mechanism to the Tapas part of the complex with these cards, or was it more a case of carry and produce if asked to do so?
Oddly enough I read this after I had just returned from peering at the Tapas reception area on my trip to the supermarket.
I was interested in the idea that the club attended by Amelie and Sean was above this, given that this reception is a 1-storey building.
Anyway, I will stack up a squiz at the locks on my next supermarket trip.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 25, 2016, 02:43:01 PM
Oddly enough I read this after I had just returned from peering at the Tapas reception area on my trip to the supermarket.
I was interested in the idea that the club attended by Amelie and Sean was above this, given that this reception is a 1-storey building.
Anyway, I will stack up a squiz at the locks on my next supermarket trip.
Weren't the childcare facilities in the building next the the tennis courts with the tent shaped roof? The Tapas receptionist seems to think all three children were looked after in the Tapas complexl no mention of nannies bringing them to high tea holding onto a snake, no mention of bringing just the twins to the creche, no mention of taking just Madeleine anywhere else;
The deponent clarifies that she worked at the reception of the Garden Club on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, including lunch time. She recalls seeing the couple and their three children leaving the premises, because they had to go through the reception area to do this. They went in the direction of the apartment where the deponent presumes they had lunch. She thinks that they always left between 12H30 and 13HOO.---Around 14H00 the couple returned; indeed it was what almost everyone having children did, and delivered the three children to the care of the nannies. She does not know if the three were together, or if they were separated due to the difference in their ages.
The deponent recalls that the parents then spent most of the time at the Garden Club, at activities such as tennis, and although they were part of a group of four couples (the reservation was always made for 9 adults), they only got together at dinner time.
The couple only left the Garden Club after the children had finished their dinner, which was served by the nannies inside this facility, and which began around 17H00/18H00. It was afterwards that they again left with the children for their respective apartments. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ELISA.htm
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on November 25, 2016, 07:38:28 PM
It felt like dining in a garden. They were on holiday, in an holiday complex, children friendly, everyone had been friendly and happy all week. They were in a holiday atmosphere. It seems that the fact that the complex also held houses which were not holiday lets, has been overlooked when holidaying in a lovely peaceful child friendly complex. Just as people in tents or caravans leave their children alone to have a B-B-Q they are on holiday and once this relaxing feeling takes over their usual on guard feeling they have when living in their usual surroundings goes out of the window. They were very close to the apartment, it took a minute or so to get to it, just as people have a street party and leave children in the house asleep to carry on partying into the evening.
This sort of behaviour was different to how the McCann's behaved at home, at home they had a baby sitter when they went out. If they were the type to not look after their children properly, then why have a baby sitter when at home, why not just nip down to the pub for a drink and leave the children alone?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 25, 2016, 08:54:31 PM
It felt like dining in a garden. .....snip ... This sort of behaviour was different to how the McCann's behaved at home, at home they had a baby sitter when they went out. If they were the type to not look after their children properly, then why have a baby sitter when at home, why not just nip down to the pub for a drink and leave the children alone?
You are forgetting about needing to return home every half hour to listen to the kids.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 25, 2016, 09:06:13 PM
It felt like dining in a garden. They were on holiday, in an holiday complex, children friendly, everyone had been friendly and happy all week. They were in a holiday atmosphere. It seems that the fact that the complex also held houses which were not holiday lets, has been overlooked when holidaying in a lovely peaceful child friendly complex. Just as people in tents or caravans leave their children alone to have a B-B-Q they are on holiday and once this relaxing feeling takes over their usual on guard feeling they have when living in their usual surroundings goes out of the window. They were very close to the apartment, it took a minute or so to get to it, just as people have a street party and leave children in the house asleep to carry on partying into the evening.
This sort of behaviour was different to how the McCann's behaved at home, at home they had a baby sitter when they went out. If they were the type to not look after their children properly, then why have a baby sitter when at home, why not just nip down to the pub for a drink and leave the children alone?
It felt like dining in a garden? But it wasn't a garden and they knew that; it was a facility with a restaurant, a bar, two swimming pools and a playground and it was full of strangers.
Were they happy and relaxed? They were certainly busy but it was cold, the kids didn't enjoy the one attempt at a family outing, one couple seemed to be isolated; breakfasting alone, lunching alone, being left out of the beach trip, sleeping apart due to boorish behaviour, worrying about the unlocked door. Not very relaxing.
Were the evenings better? Well, not exactly relaxing either. It was too cold so they needed all their warmest clothes and they had to keep going backwards and forwards to check the kids.
All in all it sounds anything but relaxing imo.
PS How do you know they always had a baby sitter at home? Because they said so?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: slartibartfast on November 25, 2016, 09:20:54 PM
Just as people in tents or caravans leave their children alone to have a B-B-Q they are on holiday and once this relaxing feeling takes over their usual on guard feeling they have when living in their usual surroundings goes out of the window.
Sorry, where do you get this from?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on November 25, 2016, 09:42:33 PM
It felt like dining in a garden? But it wasn't a garden and they knew that; it was a facility with a restaurant, a bar, two swimming pools and a playground and it was full of strangers.
Were they happy and relaxed? They were certainly busy but it was cold, the kids didn't enjoy the one attempt at a family outing, one couple seemed to be isolated; breakfasting alone, lunching alone, being left out of the beach trip, sleeping apart due to boorish behaviour, worrying about the unlocked door. Not very relaxing.
Were the evenings better? Well, not exactly relaxing either. It was too cold so they needed all their warmest clothes and they had to keep going backwards and forwards to check the kids.
All in all it sounds anything but relaxing imo.
PS How do you know they always had a baby sitter at home? Because they said so?
EXACTLY
8@??)( 8((()*/
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: mrswah on November 25, 2016, 09:54:32 PM
I think the McCanns and their friends felt relaxed because they were on holiday, and, because they were in a group, they assumed they could leave their kids and go to dinner, while taking it in turns to check on them.
I would imagine lots of people on holiday with a group of friends would have felt the same way.
Kate and Gerry were tragically unlucky, and their friends were not.
They have paid for their "mistake" for nearly ten years now, and they go on paying.
I feel so sorry for them.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 25, 2016, 10:09:27 PM
I think the McCanns and their friends felt relaxed because they were on holiday, and, because they were in a group, they assumed they could leave their kids and go to dinner, while taking it in turns to check on them.
I would imagine lots of people on holiday with a group of friends would have felt the same way.
Kate and Gerry were tragically unlucky, and their friends were not.
They have paid for their "mistake" for nearly ten years now, and they go on paying.
I feel so sorry for them.
Quite right. Nice empathetic point of view.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 25, 2016, 10:33:46 PM
The fact is that's all incorrect. The top half of the patio door was all that could be seen from the Tapas. It wasn't bathed in light as the crime scene pictures show and they weren't looking anyway. You still haven't provided a cite for your Amaral quote.
As the prosecutors said;
In effect, this group of friends was enjoying a short holiday period, therefore perfectly relaxed and it would be normal that, having dinner, inclusively with an entertainment service available [25], they were not very concerned with anything that might happen to their children during that dinner period. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
How very true, with the exception of it being 'normal'. Most 'normal' parents would find it very difficult to relax and enjoy dinner if their kids were home alone.
On ths thread you have argued both that the McCanns were perfectly relaxed and enjoying themselves on holiday, and that they were have a miserable, cold unrelaxed holiday. So which was it?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on November 25, 2016, 11:59:36 PM
On ths thread you have argued both that the McCanns were perfectly relaxed and enjoying themselves on holiday, and that they were have a miserable, cold unrelaxed holiday. So which was it?
It was the prosecutors who said they were relaxed, not me. They thought that was why they weren't worried about their kids. I agree they weren't bothered about their kids but I don't think it was a relaxing holiday.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: carlymichelle on November 26, 2016, 10:36:04 AM
It was the prosecutors who said they were relaxed, not me. They thought that was why they weren't worried about their kids. I agree they weren't bothered about their kids but I don't think it was a relaxing holiday.
well their 3 year old asked them why they didnt come when she and her younger brother cried and they brushed it off as a passing remark and did it again
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on November 26, 2016, 10:44:11 AM
I think the McCanns and their friends felt relaxed because they were on holiday, and, because they were in a group, they assumed they could leave their kids and go to dinner, while taking it in turns to check on them.
I would imagine lots of people on holiday with a group of friends would have felt the same way.
Kate and Gerry were tragically unlucky, and their friends were not.
They have paid for their "mistake" for nearly ten years now, and they go on paying.
I feel so sorry for them.
try feeling sorry for maddie....
it was maddie that....... payed............ for there so called mistake
maddie is the one who was ...tragically unlucky
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: mrswah on November 26, 2016, 12:36:17 PM
They were all unlucky: Maddie, her parents, her siblings, her relatives and friends.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 26, 2016, 12:54:16 PM
We will see how lucky they are if she is found. 49.4 metres on google according to Kate.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on November 26, 2016, 12:57:18 PM
They were all unlucky: Maddie, her parents, her siblings, her relatives and friends.
Luck has no place in childcare. That's why parents buy electric plug guards, stair gates and cupboard door locking devices. It's why bleach and pill bottles are difficult to open. It's why parents use babysitters if they go out. The aim is to minimise risk and not rely on luck.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: John on November 26, 2016, 02:00:06 PM
It was the prosecutors who said they were relaxed, not me. They thought that was why they weren't worried about their kids. I agree they weren't bothered about their kids but I don't think it was a relaxing holiday.
So they weren't bothered about their kids but decided not to have a relaxing meal by getting up from the table every 30 minutes to check on them. Yes that makes sense- not!
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 26, 2016, 02:30:42 PM
Luck has no place in childcare. That's why parents buy electric plug guards, stair gates and cupboard door locking devices. It's why bleach and pill bottles are difficult to open. It's why parents use babysitters if they go out. The aim is to minimise risk and not rely on luck.
The only way you can ensure your child never comes to harm is to hold them in your arms 24/7. Once you let go of them, or take your eyes off them accidents can and do happen, no matter how careful you think you are being. Ask Denise Bulger, ask Ben Needham's granpaents. The McCanns and their group of friends checked on their kids regularly, far more regularly than we ever used to check on our kids when they were asleep upstairs.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 26, 2016, 02:33:26 PM
So they weren't bothered about their kids but decided not to have a relaxing meal by getting up from the table every 30 minutes to check on them. Yes that makes sense- not!
They said they checked every 30 minutes. Is that the same as they did check every 30 minutes?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on November 26, 2016, 02:51:04 PM
tragic ...........when a child's safety ......depends on luck
Luck from not having a nasty slimy creep come and take her from her bed, no child wherever they are should have that happen to them, blame the evil @@@@@'' who took her.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 26, 2016, 02:53:54 PM
They said they checked every 30 minutes. Is that the same as they did check every 30 minutes?
lol no of course not. Because they didn't. Mrs Fenn claimed a child was crying for more than 30 mins and didn't stop until the parents came home. There was absolutely no drawn up schedule to verify this claim. In fact they were so sure that is what they did they had to re write the 'checking'they did. It became so absured to read to make any sense of it.
Sitting in the garden? I don't think so. The garden is adjoined to a home, usually overlooked by neighbours, it would be unlikely if sitting in the patio, that the patio would be 50 meters from the house, assuming there was a front and back door the parents, if felt so inclined would surely use the back door, not the front locked door to check the children in their house. Madeline and her siblings were in a strange country, the parents could not see any comings and goings to the apartment from where they were sitting, they could not hear if the children were awake and crying from where they were sitting HENCE why they had to go and listen at the doors. There was a main road and a swimming pool to manover to get to the doors to listen in.
But it does look good for defensive purposes, if one was so inclined to try and explain why they left the children alone every night.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on November 26, 2016, 03:03:28 PM
lol no of course not. Because they didn't. Mrs Fenn claimed a child was crying for more than 30 mins and didn't stop until the parents came home. There was absolutely no drawn up schedule to verify this claim. In fact they were so sure that is what they did they had to re write the 'checking'they did. It became so absured to read to make any sense of it.
Sitting in the garden? I don't think so. The garden is adjoined to a home, usually overlooked by neighbours, it would be unlikely if sitting in the patio, that the patio would be 50 meters from the house, assuming there was a front and back door the parents, if felt so inclined would surely use the back door, not the front locked door to check the children in their house. Madeline and her siblings were in a strange country, the parents could not see any comings and goings to the apartment from where they were sitting, they could not hear if the children were awake and crying from where they were sitting HENCE why they had to go and listen at the doors. There was a main road and a swimming pool to manover to get to the doors to listen in.
But it does look good for defensive purposes, if one was so inclined to try and explain why they left the children alone every night.
So you don't believe the McCann's checked every 30 minutes? When I said I didn't believe what Amaral wrote in his book SIL said I couldn't say that that the McCann's, Grime and Amaral must be treated with respect. Wonder if SIL with say the same to you and G Unit?
Mrs. Fenn can't be mistaken can she, oh no, what Mrs Fenn said must be correct.
Strange how the McCann's said Madeleine came into their bedroom to say that Amelie woke her up isn't it, it is more than likely that is what Madeleine was talking about, 'why didn't you come when Sean and me were crying'.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on November 26, 2016, 03:04:05 PM
Luck from not having a nasty slimy creep come and take her from her bed, no child wherever they are should have that happen to them, blame the evil @@@@@'' who took her.
Absolutely. Parents usually do their very best to make sure that sort of thing doesn't happen.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 26, 2016, 03:06:47 PM
Someone (Gunit?) commented that being in the Tapas area/gardens could not be thought of as like being in their back gardens, becausec they had to walk a very short distance along the road.
Take a look at this GE image and street scene
"fly" to .... Victoria Terrace, Walsall
Here you have homes that have back gardens but additional "back" gardens across the road opposite the front of their houses. so if the family want to enjoy themselves, children play, then they have to cross a public road to get to their main "back" gardens
Many decades ago we had particuklars of a country house we liked the look of. We went to look at the outside , but soon drove away. The house had a good front garden , a small bit at the back and its main back garden was about 100yards away around the bend on the other side of the lane !
- No matter that they had a tiny private garden, - No matter that they were 50 metres away. Hundreds of thousands of homes have back gardens longer than that with families asleep in the house and parents in the garden. - No matter that there was a walled walkway in between. The apartment was raised up a flight of steps, visually above the walls from the restaurant .... and in 2007 with the bushes just clipped back they could see most of the patio windows and patio area which was illuminated by the street lamp opposite - No matter that they had to walk along the pavement, that is unimportant ...they were very close, it felt like they were in the back garden to their apartments.
In fact they WERE in their back gardens; it was Ocean Club as were their apartments. Just as in an hotel, these gardens were their back gardens
All I am trying to get across to you is that it seemed like their back garden .... and it effectively was.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on November 26, 2016, 03:08:35 PM
So they weren't bothered about their kids but decided not to have a relaxing meal by getting up from the table every 30 minutes to check on them. Yes that makes sense- not!
don't forget the flowing wine
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on November 26, 2016, 03:15:43 PM
So you don't believe the McCann's checked every 30 minutes? When I said I didn't believe what Amaral wrote in his book SIL said I couldn't say that that the McCann's, Grime and Amaral must be treated with respect. Wonder if SIL with say the same to you and G Unit?
Mrs. Fenn can't be mistaken can she, oh no, what Mrs Fenn said must be correct.
Strange how the McCann's said Madeleine came into their bedroom to say that Amelie woke her up isn't it, it is more than likely that is what Madeleine was talking about, 'why didn't you come when Sean and me were crying'.
not beliveing some one is not disrespectful so either SIL is following their own agenda and slapping a gagging order on you then that should be reported to John. If SIL is not happy with me not beliveing the family and thinking this as a form of disrespect then SIL has no place being a mod, because their opinions is no better than mine. But I suspect this is not the case. There is NO independant witness account of a 30 minute check taking place. That is a fact so what I believe is irrelevent.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on November 26, 2016, 03:28:49 PM
Another stupid response. How have the McCanns used and abused others' empathy? Do tell.
The most glaring example is the money given by well wishers in the misguided belief that all of it would be used to help find a lost little girl they obviously cared about. Perhaps if they had known that a great chunk of their money would be spent on libel lawyers they may have been less keen to have their heartstrings pulled?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on November 26, 2016, 03:40:07 PM
The most glaring example is the money given by well wishers in the misguided belief that all of it would be used to help find a lost little girl they obviously cared about. Perhaps if they had known that a great chunk of their money would be spent on libel lawyers they may have been less keen to have their heartstrings pulled?
The thing is the fund was there to help the family and if the McCann's felt strongly enough the need to gag an ex cop who was saying their daughter was dead and that they had faked an abduction, then suing was the only way. People thinking Madeleine was dead wouldn't bother giving any information they may have to the police.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on November 26, 2016, 03:43:06 PM
not beliveing some one is not disrespectful so either SIL is following their own agenda and slapping a gagging order on you then that should be reported to John. If SIL is not happy with me not beliveing the family and thinking this as a form of disrespect then SIL has no place being a mod, because their opinions is no better than mine. But I suspect this is not the case. There is NO independant witness account of a 30 minute check taking place. That is a fact so what I believe is irrelevent.
The thing is the McCann's said they checked every 30 minutes, the waiter said people were leaving the table. If there has to be an independent witness to everything then who is to say they even went to the Tapas Bar?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 26, 2016, 03:47:53 PM
not believing some one is not disrespectful so either SIL is following their own agenda and slapping a gagging order on you then that should be reported to John. If SIL is not happy with me not believing the family and thinking this as a form of disrespect then SIL has no place being a mod, because their opinion is no better than mine. But I suspect this is not the case. There is NO independent witness account of a 30 minute check taking place. That is a fact so what I believe is irrelevant.
I do believe I have been misrepresented again, so let me try to clarify. And no this response is not directed to MTI.
Slagging anyone off, whether that is Kate and Gerry, Amaral, Grime, Harrison, Murat, Malinka or the citizens of Luz (and other folks), is not going to happen unless one can provide the evidence to support one's view, or alternatively label it with a clear IMO. It's not a difficult idea.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 26, 2016, 03:53:31 PM
The most glaring example is the money given by well wishers in the misguided belief that all of it would be used to help find a lost little girl they obviously cared about. Perhaps if they had known that a great chunk of their money would be spent on libel lawyers they may have been less keen to have their heartstrings pulled?
Perhaps. Then again, perhaps not. What was it you said on another post? "Perhaps you would look less foolish if you simply did not make these unprovable claims in the first place".
Every supporter I know (and I know a few) has donated to the fund (more than once in most cases), not to mention plenty of empathy and emotional support when required, without feeling remotely used and abused. How do you fathom that one out? I expect we're all mentally deranged, or members of the Child Neglect Supporters Club or something, eh Faithlilly?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on November 26, 2016, 03:54:54 PM
I do believe I have been misrepresented again, so let me try to clarify. And no this response is not directed to MTI.
Slagging anyone off, whether that is Kate and Gerry, Amaral, Grime, Harrison, Murat, Malinka or the citizens of Luz (and other folks), is not going to happen unless one can provide the evidence to support one's view, or alternatively label it with a clear IMO. It's not a difficult idea.
Directed at me I expect.
You said nothing about putting IMO on my posts you deleted them, so why haven't you deleted MTI and G-Units?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on November 26, 2016, 04:57:13 PM
So they were baso all getting up regularly to go to the lav, righto.
Well we don't know where they went when they left the table due to the fact the waiters/staff didn't follow them. So, therefore the waiters /staff are only witness to the comings and goings without knowing exact times and who left and returned at what time and where they went. Deep sigh... hmmm
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 26, 2016, 04:58:58 PM
Well we don't know where they went when they left the table due to the fact the waiters/staff didn't follow them. So, therefore the waiters /staff are only witness to the comings and goings without knowing exact times and who left and returned at what time and where they went. Deep sigh... hmmm
So, where might they have been going that wasn't back to their own apartments do you think?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 26, 2016, 05:47:56 PM
I believe there was one out near the reception area. Jez reputedly visited as well so it sounds popular.
Sadie is likely to know as she's done site visits.
So we're back to the notion that the Tapas group are all liars are we? I see. What was Gerry doing outside his apartment when Jez bumped into him then? Taking the scenic route back from the "lavie" I suppose... &%+((£
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on November 26, 2016, 06:02:30 PM
So we're back to the notion that the Tapas group are all liars are we? I see. What was Gerry doing outside his apartment when Jez bumped into him then? Taking the scenic route back from the "lavie" I suppose... &%+((£
He had his own private loo, him being a consultant and all that @)(++(*
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 26, 2016, 06:04:52 PM
I do believe I have been misrepresented again, so let me try to clarify. And no this response is not directed to MTI.
Slagging anyone off, whether that is Kate and Gerry, Amaral, Grime, Harrison, Murat, Malinka or the citizens of Luz (and other folks), is not going to happen unless one can provide the evidence to support one's view, or alternatively label it with a clear IMO. It's not a difficult idea.
Agreed, there is a big difference between saying Joe Bloggs is lying and saying I don't believe Joe Bloggs. The first is saying something about Joe Bloggs the second about your view of Joe Bloggs.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 26, 2016, 07:31:59 PM
Agreed, there is a big difference between saying Joe Bloggs is lying and saying I don't believe Joe Bloggs. The first is saying something about Joe Bloggs the second about your view of Joe Bloggs.
Semantics.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: slartibartfast on November 26, 2016, 07:35:26 PM
I believe there was one out near the reception area. Jez reputedly visited as well so it sounds popular.
Sadie is likely to know as she's done site visits.
I think that's where it was too. Jez? He seemed unsure where he went and when;
1. He told us that yesterday, between 8.30 and 9pm, while he was in the "TAPAS" restaurant,
2. I left about 8:15 to 8:30 pm. I was pushing the pram around the complex and went to the toilet near the bar. I could not see inside the restaurant.
3. He walked around the main area of the resort and eventually ended up in the Tapas bar where he used the toilet facility. He was unable to state what time this was.
4. When I arrived, I headed to the WC near the pool area.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ferryman on November 26, 2016, 08:15:03 PM
Here, from chapter 16 of The Book of Many Lies is a classic example of libel:
Quote
More recently, it's Eddie who helps to find a body buried under a flagstone at the former orphanage, Haut-de-la-Garenne, in Jersey, setting for a terrible case of paedophilia and child murder.
Eddie alerted to an exhibit given the nomenclature for the investigation, jar/6, that was established by laboratory analysis to be a piece of wood or a piece of coconut.
And no evidence of murder was ever uncovered.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on November 26, 2016, 10:23:27 PM
Perhaps. Then again, perhaps not. What was it you said on another post? "Perhaps you would look less foolish if you simply did not make these unprovable claims in the first place".
Every supporter I know (and I know a few) has donated to the fund (more than once in most cases), not to mention plenty of empathy and emotional support when required, without feeling remotely used and abused. How do you fathom that one out? I expect we're all mentally deranged, or members of the Child Neglect Supporters Club or something, eh Faithlilly?
I'm not talking about 'supporters' Alfie, I'm talking about members of the general public who's only link with the case was giving money because they thought it might help find the child.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 26, 2016, 10:37:00 PM
I'm not talking about 'supporters' Alfie, I'm talking about members of the general public who's only link with the case was giving money because they thought it might help find the child.
I'm a member of the public who, back in 2007, gave money to help find the child. I didn't feel taken advantage of then or now. How is this possible? Am I unique? I really don't think so.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on November 26, 2016, 10:49:41 PM
Excellency Dr. Guilhermino Encarnação Faro's Director of the Judiciary Police
Faro, 23/12/2007
Dear Sir:
As you know I'm the wife of the Coordinator of Criminal Investigation Gonçalo Amaral, with whom I have a daughter minor of age, with 4 years old, named Inês Sofia. You know also that Inês Sofia is living temporarily with her father. By the present way I want to expose to you:
1. As agreed with my husband, Inês Sofia should spend Christmas with me, since last Thursday, day 20th. In that day, I contacted Gonçalo by mobile phone, and I was informed that Inês was with him, in trip to Coimbra and would only return on the following day;
2. On Friday 21st, I called again my husband, around lunch time. He informed me they were still on trip and at soon he arrive to Faro he will give me Inês. I waited until 8 PM without any news and Gonçalo never answered my phone calls. I then decided to go to a pub where I encountered Gonçalo and other colleagues of him consuming alcoholic beverages, asking him by Inês Sofia, he answered, visible drunken, that “she was resting” and that he will give me the child the following day. Then he departed, driving an Audi car from the police.
3. On Saturday 22nd , and after many attempts, my husband finally answered the phone in the middle of the afternoon, and asked me to get Inês in home. I rushed to the residence, but nobody was there. After a while, Gonçalo appeared driving the same car, and again in a notorious state of drunkenness. Having asked him for Inês Sofia, he ordered me to go inside the house, where he insulted me and threatened me of death. I abandoned the place.
4.Today, Sunday 23rd, and after numerous attempts, Gonçalo never answered his phone and he is not at home.
Unfortunately, this situation is not a unique and isolated act, and you Sir well know about other times in the past where I've also asked for your help. Once more, I ask again for your help, in order to guarantee Inês Sofia integrity, and in order to localize her.
Excellency Dr. Guilhermino Encarnação Faro's Director of the Judiciary Police
Faro, 23/12/2007
Dear Sir:
As you know I'm the wife of the Coordinator of Criminal Investigation Gonçalo Amaral, with whom I have a daughter minor of age, with 4 years old, named Inês Sofia. You know also that Inês Sofia is living temporarily with her father. By the present way I want to expose to you:
1. As agreed with my husband, Inês Sofia should spend Christmas with me, since last Thursday, day 20th. In that day, I contacted Gonçalo by mobile phone, and I was informed that Inês was with him, in trip to Coimbra and would only return on the following day;
2. On Friday 21st, I called again my husband, around lunch time. He informed me they were still on trip and at soon he arrive to Faro he will give me Inês. I waited until 8 PM without any news and Gonçalo never answered my phone calls. I then decided to go to a pub where I encountered Gonçalo and other colleagues of him consuming alcoholic beverages, asking him by Inês Sofia, he answered, visible drunken, that “she was resting” and that he will give me the child the following day. Then he departed, driving an Audi car from the police.
3. On Saturday 22nd , and after many attempts, my husband finally answered the phone in the middle of the afternoon, and asked me to get Inês in home. I rushed to the residence, but nobody was there. After a while, Gonçalo appeared driving the same car, and again in a notorious state of drunkenness. Having asked him for Inês Sofia, he ordered me to go inside the house, where he insulted me and threatened me of death. I abandoned the place.
4.Today, Sunday 23rd, and after numerous attempts, Gonçalo never answered his phone and he is not at home.
Unfortunately, this situation is not a unique and isolated act, and you Sir well know about other times in the past where I've also asked for your help. Once more, I ask again for your help, in order to guarantee Inês Sofia integrity, and in order to localize her.
The problem is that "people in glass houses ..." ... "sauce for the goose ..." etc; etc;
Xtina did ask the pertinent question about wine consumption ... which I think I have answered fairly. As well as in the context of the thread. The McCanns were dining thirty seconds distance from their children and constantly checking. Where was the Amaral child and who was looking after her as her mother tried in vain to make contact?
The forum has dealt with this question before, not in quite as much detail as the McCanns have been probed ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1665.msg50164#msg50164 but as the internet gets more and more sanitised, it is something worth bearing in mind.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 10:37:48 AM
The problem is that "people in glass houses ..." ... "sauce for the goose ..." etc; etc;
Xtina did ask the pertinent question about wine consumption ... which I think I have answered fairly. As well as in the context of the thread. The McCanns were dining thirty seconds distance from their children and constantly checking. Where was the Amaral child and who was looking after her as her mother tried in vain to make contact?
The forum has dealt with this question before, not in quite as much detail as the McCanns have been probed ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1665.msg50164#msg50164 but as the internet gets more and more sanitised, it is something worth bearing in mind.
This case has nothing to do with Amaral's drinking or other habits. he was the case coordinator for a few months.
The McCann's and the rest of the group are the ones pertinent to this case.
...and by the way, and for the umpteenth time, they weren't in the back garden.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2016, 10:59:10 AM
This case has nothing to do with Amaral's drinking or other habits. he was the case coordinator for a few months.
The McCann's and the rest of the group are the ones pertinent to this case.
...and by the way, and for the umpteenth time, they weren't in the back garden.
The ones pertinent to this case are the ones responsible for abducting Madeleine McCann from her family ...
Everyone contributing to this thread is aware the McCann party was dining in the tapas restaurant which was thirty five seconds removed from the McCann apartment (similar to dining in the garden at home); everyone is aware a moderate amount of alcohol was consumed;the obsession that the parents dunnit certainly gave the get out of jail free card to whoever did do it.
As far as the relevance of the drunken and threatening behaviour of the man in charge of the case is concerned, it has all been said before and put more succinctly than I could ...
Quote: Not to the specifics of the disappearance but it could well have a very significant relationship to the way in which the man at the centre of the allegations of disgraceful behaviour conducted himself as co-ordinator of the search for the child. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1665.msg50850#msg50850
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2016, 11:11:23 AM
The ones pertinent to this case are the ones responsible for abducting Madeleine McCann from her family ...
Everyone contributing to this thread is aware the McCann party was dining in the tapas restaurant which was thirty five seconds removed from the McCann apartment (similar to dining in the garden at home); everyone is aware a moderate amount of alcohol was consumed;the obsession that the parents dunnit certainly gave the get out of jail free card to whoever did do it.
As far as the relevance of the drunken and threatening behaviour of the man in charge of the case is concerned, it has all been said before and put more succinctly than I could ...
Quote: Not to the specifics of the disappearance but it could well have a very significant relationship to the way in which the man at the centre of the allegations of disgraceful behaviour conducted himself as co-ordinator of the search for the child. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1665.msg50850#msg50850
Same old mantra.
It hasn't been determined what happened to Madeleine, as you well know.
Beliefs don't count.
As to your opinion of Amaral, well nowhere near my opinion of the Mccanns.
Everyone is aware of a moderate amount of alcohol having been consumed. they consumed every night.
Who by the way, said the Mccanns dunnit on here ?
By the way, it was 35 seconds too far away...................
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on November 27, 2016, 11:22:14 AM
Luck from not having a nasty slimy creep come and take her from her bed, no child wherever they are should have that happen to them, blame the evil @@@@@'' who took her.
listen.......you don't know yet who the nasty slimy evil creep/creeps is...
there is still..no evidence of abduction or anyone entering the apartment...............
repeat no evidence of abduction or anyone entering the apartment.......
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on November 27, 2016, 11:22:44 AM
The problem is that "people in glass houses ..." ... "sauce for the goose ..." etc; etc;
Xtina did ask the pertinent question about wine consumption ... which I think I have answered fairly. As well as in the context of the thread. The McCanns were dining thirty seconds distance from their children and constantly checking. Where was the Amaral child and who was looking after her as her mother tried in vain to make contact?
The forum has dealt with this question before, not in quite as much detail as the McCanns have been probed ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1665.msg50164#msg50164 but as the internet gets more and more sanitised, it is something worth bearing in mind.
its the mccs behaviour i am on about .....and the defence you have decided to take seems i'm not far wrong
as for the thirty second thing....if that were the case ....
why did k mcc have to run to the tapas bar ....leaving the children .again
why didn't she just shout from the balcony....
as for the pertinent bit ......who do you think you are ....get over yourself...
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 27, 2016, 12:08:32 PM
The ones pertinent to this case are the ones responsible for abducting Madeleine McCann from her family ...
Everyone contributing to this thread is aware the McCann party was dining in the tapas restaurant which was thirty five seconds removed from the McCann apartment (similar to dining in the garden at home); everyone is aware a moderate amount of alcohol was consumed; the obsession that the parents dunnit certainly gave the get out of jail free card to whoever did do it.
As far as the relevance of the drunken and threatening behaviour of the man in charge of the case is concerned, it has all been said before and put more succinctly than I could ...
Quote: Not to the specifics of the disappearance but it could well have a very significant relationship to the way in which the man at the centre of the allegations of disgraceful behaviour conducted himself as co-ordinator of the search for the child. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1665.msg50850#msg50850
To be clear, I do not support the bits I have bolded. My best estimate of the transit time is 60 seconds and IMO the scenario is nothing like being in one's back garden. Both of these points may be significant in increasing the likelihood of an abduction so IMO it is important to get these facts accurate.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: John on November 27, 2016, 01:22:58 PM
"They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?"
Who was it invented this claim in the first place?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on November 27, 2016, 01:31:02 PM
The ones pertinent to this case are the ones responsible for abducting Madeleine McCann from her family ...
Everyone contributing to this thread is aware the McCann party was dining in the tapas restaurant which was thirty five seconds removed from the McCann apartment (similar to dining in the garden at home); everyone is aware a moderate amount of alcohol was consumed;the obsession that the parents dunnit certainly gave the get out of jail free card to whoever did do it.
As far as the relevance of the drunken and threatening behaviour of the man in charge of the case is concerned, it has all been said before and put more succinctly than I could ...
Quote: Not to the specifics of the disappearance but it could well have a very significant relationship to the way in which the man at the centre of the allegations of disgraceful behaviour conducted himself as co-ordinator of the search for the child. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1665.msg50850#msg50850
And how do you explain Rebelo's request for a reconstitution ? He obviously didn't believe the parents and their friends either.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 27, 2016, 03:14:37 PM
"They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?"
Who was it invented this claim in the first place?
KATE MCCANN: I think it`s quite similar to, on a summer`s evening at home, eating in your garden while the children are in their bed. You know, it`s that close. Jane Hill interview 25 May 2007
7:20
Gerry McCann: We did what we thought was best….If you’re children are asleep upstairs in a bedroom and you’re dining (outside) in the garden, you can’t hear them. And that’s the similar thing to me.
Piers Morgan interview
"For us it just felt like we were dining in the garden," said Gerry.
To be clear, I do not support the bits I have bolded. My best estimate of the transit time is 60 seconds and IMO the scenario is nothing like being in one's back garden. Both of these points may be significant in increasing the likelihood of an abduction so IMO it is important to get these facts accurate.
It is the dilemma for supporters, do we believe 5a was distant and remote thus making abduction more feasible or close and accessible thus reducing the blame attached to leaving the kids.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 03:43:16 PM
It is the dilemma for supporters, do we believe 5a was distant and remote thus making abduction more feasible or close and accessible thus reducing the blame attached to leaving the kids.
Rubbish. No supporter has ever maintained that the apartment was distant and remote. It was close by and part of a holiday complex. It's why the McCanns felt it was safe to dine at a distance from it of 50 metres.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: slartibartfast on November 27, 2016, 03:48:32 PM
Rubbish. No supporter has ever maintained that the apartment was distant and remote. It was close by and part of a holiday complex. It's why the McCanns felt it was safe to dine at a distance from it of 50 metres.
So making abduction less feasible...
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 03:52:03 PM
Children have been abducted from houses in which their parents slept. The Met have confirmed that it is quite feasible that Madeleine was abducted from Apartment 5a while her parents dined 50 metres away. You're just trying to goad supporters and failing.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on November 27, 2016, 03:55:36 PM
Children have been abducted from houses in which their parents slept. The Met have confirmed that it is quite feasible that Madeleine was abducted from Apartment 5a while her parents dined 50 metres away. You're just trying to goad supporters and failing.
Why would Slartibartfast and I want to goad you? What would be possibility have to gain?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 03:57:16 PM
Children have been abducted from houses in which their parents slept. The Met have confirmed that it is quite feasible that Madeleine was abducted from Apartment 5a while her parents dined 50 metres away. You're just trying to goad supporters and failing.
No, just trying to understand why minimising the distance is important.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on November 27, 2016, 04:00:34 PM
No, just trying to understand why minimising the distance is important.
The distance was not far, the apartment was 50 metres away from the dining area. It was less than a minute's walk away. That's not minimizing anything, it's stating a fact.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 04:13:38 PM
The distance was not far, the apartment was 50 metres away from the dining area. It was less than a minute's walk away. That's not minimizing anything, it's stating a fact.
I make it 55 metres from where the meal took place to the south patio of the McCanns apartment. That distance is only important if we are haggling about eye-ball distance. As per the crow flies (though I have never seen a crow in my time in Portugal).
I'm happy with 'it was less than a minutes walk away'. I make it 54 seconds, for the distance, plus another 3 or 4 seconds for the stairs. A minute to get there, a minute to get back.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 04:34:59 PM
I make it 55 metres from where the meal took place to the south patio of the McCanns apartment. That distance is only important if we are haggling about eye-ball distance. As per the crow flies (though I have never seen a crow in my time in Portugal).
I'm happy with 'it was less than a minutes walk away'. I make it 54 seconds, for the distance, plus another 3 or 4 seconds for the stairs. A minute to get there, a minute to get back.
I'm happy you're happy, but have you made allowances for age - the Tapas group were fit 30 somethings. You (presumably) are not in your thirties, though you may be quite healthy. I'd subtract a second or two from your calcs to take this into account if I were you... 8(0(*
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2016, 04:38:48 PM
To be clear, I do not support the bits I have bolded. My best estimate of the transit time is 60 seconds and IMO the scenario is nothing like being in one's back garden. Both of these points may be significant in increasing the likelihood of an abduction so IMO it is important to get these facts accurate.
A short time ago I came across a very short video clip which showed a holidaymaker in flip flops running the distance between the tapas entrance and the side gate of apartment five.
It took seconds.
With no disrespect to the lady making the demonstration ... she was hardly in the same league as young, fit athletic parents covering the same distance in the type of emergency they had assessed.
Unfortunately I did not bookmark the video, as I find that often a picture is worth a thousand words.
We are talking a distance of fifty metres here. Not the far side of the moon or halfway on the road to Lagos. How long does it take an Olympic athlete to run one hundred metres? ... I believe it is under 10 seconds. Therefore fifty metres could be achieved in approximately 5 seconds. The McCanns were not Olympians ... but they were runners ... so I think it would be safe to assume they would have been capable of covering the distance in about 7 or 8 seconds.
That, in my opinion is one of the reasons they felt the children were secure.
That there was a man at large in the environs of Luz who was capable of entering homes and assaulting children while the parents were on the premises is now irrefutable, although it was and probably still is being denied in some quarters ... In my opinion the waffle looking away from that fact and concentrating on gardens, booze, swinging and whatever else enters peoples' minds is a deflection from what happened to Madeleine and the total botch of the initial investigation into it.
I see that on consideration I am going to have to amend my time estimate from 35 seconds to 10 seconds as the crow flies ... 20 to include obstacles.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 27, 2016, 04:52:17 PM
I'm happy you're happy, but have you made allowances for age - the Tapas group were fit 30 somethings. You (presumably) are not in your thirties, though you may be quite healthy. I'd subtract a second or two from your calcs to take this into account if I were you... 8(0(*
I have taken the bog standard approximation of average walking speed into account.
I have no doubt runners Kate and Gerry could have jogged it in under that time. But since both seem to have been facing backward to 5A, it would have required seeing out of the back of their heads.
Nobody talks about a speedier than normal trip up the street that night.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 27, 2016, 05:00:41 PM
A short time ago I came across a very short video clip which showed a holidaymaker in flip flops running the distance between the tapas entrance and the side gate of apartment five.
It took seconds.
With no disrespect to the lady making the demonstration ... she was hardly in the same league as young, fit athletic parents covering the same distance in the type of emergency they had assessed.
Unfortunately I did not bookmark the video, as I find that often a picture is worth a thousand words.
We are talking a distance of fifty metres here. Not the far side of the moon or halfway on the road to Lagos. How long does it take an Olympic athlete to run one hundred metres? ... I believe it is under 10 seconds. Therefore fifty metres could be achieved in approximately 5 seconds. The McCanns were not Olympians ... but they were runners ... so I think it would be safe to assume they would have been capable of covering the distance in about 7 or 8 seconds.
That, in my opinion is one of the reasons they felt the children were secure.
That there was a man at large in the environs of Luz who was capable of entering homes and assaulting children while the parents were on the premises is now irrefutable, although it was and probably still is being denied in some quarters ... In my opinion the waffle looking away from that fact and concentrating on gardens, booze, swinging and whatever else enters peoples' minds is a deflection from what happened to Madeleine and the total botch of the initial investigation into it.
I see that on consideration I am going to have to amend my time estimate from 35 seconds to 10 seconds as the crow flies ... 20 to include obstacles.
Brietta, are you being serious?
Of what relevance is the time it takes for an Olympic sprinter to cover 100m?
Are you really saying the McCanns had it nailed down to 10 seconds? Thus abduction by the open patio door is impossible?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 05:31:21 PM
I have taken the bog standard approximation of average walking speed into account.
I have no doubt runners Kate and Gerry could have jogged it in under that time. But since both seem to have been facing backward to 5A, it would have required seeing out of the back of their heads.
Nobody talks about a speedier than normal trip up the street that night.
What's normal speed to you may be a snail's pace to them,, you just don't know. It could have taken them 55 seconds or it could have taken 30 seconds or 40 seconds. However many seconds it was, it wasn't many and they could get to their kids in less than a minute. In most people's book the apartment was not far away.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 27, 2016, 06:00:15 PM
What's normal speed to you may be a snail's pace to them,, you just don't know. It could have taken them 55 seconds or it could have taken 30 seconds or 40 seconds. However many seconds it was, it wasn't many and they could get to their kids in less than a minute. In most people's book the apartment was not far away.
I can either go at the McCann's stated pace, which I have not ever seen stated, or I can go with normal.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on November 27, 2016, 06:09:40 PM
Minimum time doesn't really matter. It actually took Kate 30 minutes to get there since Mat's check.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 06:10:19 PM
A short time ago I came across a very short video clip which showed a holidaymaker in flip flops running the distance between the tapas entrance and the side gate of apartment five.
It took seconds.
With no disrespect to the lady making the demonstration ... she was hardly in the same league as young, fit athletic parents covering the same distance in the type of emergency they had assessed.
Unfortunately I did not bookmark the video, as I find that often a picture is worth a thousand words.
We are talking a distance of fifty metres here. Not the far side of the moon or halfway on the road to Lagos. How long does it take an Olympic athlete to run one hundred metres? ... I believe it is under 10 seconds. Therefore fifty metres could be achieved in approximately 5 seconds. The McCanns were not Olympians ... but they were runners ... so I think it would be safe to assume they would have been capable of covering the distance in about 7 or 8 seconds.
That, in my opinion is one of the reasons they felt the children were secure.
That there was a man at large in the environs of Luz who was capable of entering homes and assaulting children while the parents were on the premises is now irrefutable, although it was and probably still is being denied in some quarters ... In my opinion the waffle looking away from that fact and concentrating on gardens, booze, swinging and whatever else enters peoples' minds is a deflection from what happened to Madeleine and the total botch of the initial investigation into it.
I see that on consideration I am going to have to amend my time estimate from 35 seconds to 10 seconds as the crow flies ... 20 to include obstacles.
It would have been more like a steeplechase than a sprint. The distance to the apartment was more like 80m unless one could levitate. The McCanns were joggers in their mid 30s. Define "environs" then tell us how far away this "man at large" was ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: misty on November 27, 2016, 06:42:03 PM
Here's a useful video where someone paces out the distance from the Tapas entrance door to the side gate of 5a. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drR76h4oy7Q
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 06:54:16 PM
Here's a useful video where someone paces out the distance from the Tapas entrance door to the side gate of 5a. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drR76h4oy7Q
Ah, who can forget Ellibean, a leading "sceptic" in her day, who stalked Kate McCann into her local supermarketand felt moved to give her a hug, and then decided she wasn't so bad after all...
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 27, 2016, 07:00:25 PM
Here's a useful video where someone paces out the distance from the Tapas entrance door to the side gate of 5a. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drR76h4oy7Q
It might have been more useful had she done the full trip using a laser measure or even a tape.. ?{)(** Still we can fall back on Google Maps or Satellite.... 8(0(*
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: misty on November 27, 2016, 07:02:29 PM
Ah, who can forget Ellibean, a leading "sceptic" in her day, who stalked Kate McCann into her local supermarketand felt moved to give her a hug, and then decided she wasn't so bad after all...
I didn't know her history, just thought the video was useful to help with timing.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2016, 07:13:49 PM
Here's a useful video where someone paces out the distance from the Tapas entrance door to the side gate of 5a. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drR76h4oy7Q
Trouble is that her paces are only a little over 2 feet long. Measured on Google Earth what she paces, Tapas reception to side gate, is 25 metres max.
She also is confused about which is the front of block 5 and which is the back. She got it wrong.
Restaurant seat to Patio doors, in a rush, so cutting corners is 75 -78 metres. Measured on GE.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 07:14:18 PM
I didn't know her history, just thought the video was useful to help with timing.
Yes, I think Ellibean went on her own personal ghouls tour and was somewhat shocked herself to realise how close the apartment is to the Tapas restaurant. She then went all wobbly on the 3 Arguidos and got hounded out of town for showing glimmers of compassion and understanding.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 27, 2016, 07:15:00 PM
The problem is that "people in glass houses ..." ... "sauce for the goose ..." etc; etc;
Xtina did ask the pertinent question about wine consumption ... which I think I have answered fairly. As well as in the context of the thread. The McCanns were dining thirty seconds distance from their children and constantly checking. Where was the Amaral child and who was looking after her as her mother tried in vain to make contact?
The forum has dealt with this question before, not in quite as much detail as the McCanns have been probed ... http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1665.msg50164#msg50164 but as the internet gets more and more sanitised, it is something worth bearing in mind.
Thank you. So the letter was 'made public' by Dr. Marcos Aragão, Leonor Cipriano's lawyer and Amaral's wife denied all knowledge of it and said it was a forgery? Not necessarily true then, it seems.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2016, 07:20:27 PM
Trouble is that her paces are only a little over 2 feet long. Measured on Google Earth what she paces, Tapas reception to side gate, is 25 metres max.
She also is confused about which is the front of block 5 and which is the back. She got it wrong.
Restaurant seat to Patio doors, in a rush, so cutting corners is 75 -78 metres. Measured on GE.
The important thing is how long would it take in an emergency.
Despite being uphill and having steps and gates, Kate and Gerry who are both incredibly fit would do that in 25 seconds, less than 30 seconds anyway.
Only people who know just how high and just how steep it is up to the Geographical triangle at the eastern end of Luz, will appreciate just HOW fit they truly are. Incredibly.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 27, 2016, 07:21:30 PM
Thank you. So the letter was 'made public' by Dr. Marcos Aragão, Leonor Cipriano's lawyer and Amaral's wife denied all knowledge of it and said it was a forgery? Not necessarily true then, it seems.
No necessarily a forgery either.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2016, 07:21:38 PM
Thank you. So the letter was 'made public' by Dr. Marcos Aragão, Leonor Cipriano's lawyer and Amaral's wife denied all knowledge of it and said it was a forgery? Not necessarily true then, it seems.
Are you calling a lawyer a liar?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2016, 07:26:17 PM
The important thing is how long would it take in an emergency.
Despite being uphill and having steps and gates, Kate and Gerry who are both incredibly fit would do that in 25 seconds, less than 30 seconds anyway.
Only people who know just how high and just how steep it is up to the Geographical triangle at the eastern end of Luz, will appreciate just HOW fit they truly are. Incredibly.
It doesn't matter how fast they were, they wouldn't respond unless they saw or heard something and they didn't.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2016, 08:16:59 PM
Of what relevance is the time it takes for an Olympic sprinter to cover 100m?
Are you really saying the McCanns had it nailed down to 10 seconds? Thus abduction by the open patio door is impossible?
It is merely an illustration of time and distance.
The time taken to travel between the tapas table and the McCann apartment was not thirty minutes. Madeleine's parents were seconds away.
Unfortunately it seems the man on whom the Amaral investigation should have spared a passing thought was closer still. How disgraceful is it that it was known that a sexual predator was active very close to Praia da Luz and yet concentrate all resources on the victims of the crime?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on November 27, 2016, 08:30:05 PM
It is merely an illustration of time and distance.
The time taken to travel between the tapas table and the McCann apartment was not thirty minutes. Madeleine's parents were seconds away.
Unfortunately it seems the man on whom the Amaral investigation should have spared a passing thought was closer still. How disgraceful is it that it was known that a sexual predator was active very close to Praia da Luz and yet concentrate all resources on the victims of the crime?
That's not the issue. When Mat returned at 9.30, Kate was then 30 minutes away from visiting her children. She could have left at any moment and got there in X seconds, but she had no intention of doing so and remained at the table until around 10 pm
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2016, 08:32:38 PM
Thank you. So the letter was 'made public' by Dr. Marcos Aragão, Leonor Cipriano's lawyer and Amaral's wife denied all knowledge of it and said it was a forgery? Not necessarily true then, it seems.
The links I provided should set your mind at rest regarding the veracity of the content of my post. Do please read them as I have taken the trouble to cite to prevent any ambiguity.
If the links do not meet with your requirements please provide links in support of your opinions ... or just accept that yet again, you have got it entirely wrong.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2016, 08:46:06 PM
It is merely an illustration of time and distance.
The time taken to travel between the tapas table and the McCann apartment was not thirty minutes. Madeleine's parents were seconds away.
Unfortunately it seems the man on whom the Amaral investigation should have spared a passing thought was closer still. How disgraceful is it that it was known that a sexual predator was active very close to Praia da Luz and yet concentrate all resources on the victims of the crime?
You have no evidence whatsoever, a sexual predator was involved in this case.
The 'fact' that the Mccanns locked their apartment during the daytime, merely magnifies their stupidity in leaving it unlocked at night time.
Likewise, they were not in the apartment to protect their children, it was night time, so how would they know if their children were safe ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2016, 09:04:17 PM
You have no evidence whatsoever, a sexual predator was involved in this case.
The 'fact' that the Mccanns locked their apartment during the daytime, merely magnifies their stupidity in leaving it unlocked at night time.
Likewise, they were not in the apartment to protect their children, it was night time, so how would they know if their children were safe ?
Stephen ... Stephen ... Stephen.
You said ... "You have no evidence whatsoever, a sexual predator was involved in this case."
Can't you see?
That is precisely the point I am making.
Of course there is "no evidence". There is "no evidence" in part because the police under Amaral incompetently took the wrong path and didn't check out the home invasions involving assaults on little girls.
Elementary, my dear Stephen. But if the case can be solved tout suite by pinning all on the mother who needs to bother with the obvious getting in the way?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2016, 09:26:47 PM
You said ... "You have no evidence whatsoever, a sexual predator was involved in this case."
Can't you see?
That is precisely the point I am making.
Of course there is "no evidence". There is "no evidence" in part because the police under Amaral incompetently took the wrong path and didn't check out the home invasions involving assaults on little girls.
Elementary, my dear Stephen. But if the case can be solved tout suite by pinning all on the mother who needs to bother with the obvious getting in the way?
I'm afraid Holmesian phraseology won't help you.
You cannot find evidence if doesn't exist.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 27, 2016, 09:49:27 PM
The links I provided should set your mind at rest regarding the veracity of the content of my post. Do please read them as I have taken the trouble to cite to prevent any ambiguity.
If the links do not meet with your requirements please provide links in support of your opinions ... or just accept that yet again, you have got it entirely wrong.
One of the links showed a transcript of an interview with Amaral's wife in which she says it's a forgery.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2016, 10:20:36 PM
You certainly will find nothing if you do not bother to look for it. It is a basic tool in the armoury of investigators to think outside the box with an open mind.
Unfortunately propaganda leaked directly to the Portuguese press and picked up immediately and reiterated by media worldwide ... appears to have been the sharpest tool available to the Amaral investigation.
Which is why ... all this time after the event ... we are still discussing fourteen bottles of wine and umbrellas obscuring a sight line from a tapas table to a balcony.
A total irrelevance.
The only important thing here is Madeleine McCann and the failure of the Amaral investigation to give her the respect she deserved by investigating her case with a modicum of competence.
A start in doing that would have been to investigate home invasions involving children and remove that line of inquiry firmly from the equation.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 27, 2016, 10:27:17 PM
Well the Portuguese Courts preferred Marcos Aragao Correias his imput to Amarals. Twice his word stood against Amarals. In fact Amaral was found a perjurer on the one occasion. On the second occasion he lost his case directly against Correia.
I wonder why the Courts preferred Corrieas word to Amarals? Looks like you giot the wrong end of the stick stephen.
Now Sophia Leal is NOT Amaral, but she WAS bullied by him and divorced him.
Think it out stephen.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on November 27, 2016, 11:16:57 PM
It is merely an illustration of time and distance.
The time taken to travel between the tapas table and the McCann apartment was not thirty minutes. Madeleine's parents were seconds away.
Unfortunately it seems the man on whom the Amaral investigation should have spared a passing thought was closer still. How disgraceful is it that it was known that a sexual predator was active very close to Praia da Luz and yet concentrate all resources on the victims of the crime?
Who said it was 30 minutes away?
What known sexual predator?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2016, 11:42:09 PM
Police investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a Portuguese holiday resort nearly seven years ago say a lone intruder sexually assaulted five girls aged between seven and 10 in the Algarve between 2004 and 2006.
The four incidents – one involving two girls – were among 12 over six years up to 2010 being examined by officers in which a man entered holiday accommodation, mainly villas occupied by British families.
In six of those incidents, the man, said to be dark-haired and tanned, sat on the victims' beds. In nine of the 12 incidents there was no evidence of forced entry or property taken. In three others there was "low-level" theft involving cash or phones. Police said he appeared to have "a very, very, unhealthy interest" in young white girls. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 28, 2016, 12:02:59 AM
You may not have been around SIL in the early days when the internet was full of lies and disinformation about the distance the Tapas group were dining away from 5A
Several PdL restaurants were mentioned and distances of 200, 250 metres were falsely given.
It was pure bile and proopaganda against The Mccanns. It damaged their reputations.
There have been several sexual attacks against holidaying children in their villas, apartments in the close area.
There were also two girls that went. One was in the process of being abducted when the parents saw the man walking their little girl off. That was pretty blond haired Caroline Santos aged only 3 ... and from nearby Silves, just 5 months before Madeleine was taken. Thankfully she was rescued.
Then Joana Cipriano
There is absolutely NO proof that she died as Amaral claimed along with his mate Paulo Periera Cristavao. - Cristavao is a proven Criminal on several very nasty charges. - John has told me that I am not allowed to call Amaral a criminal ... so shall we just say that he was found guilty in a Portuguese Court of perjury (lying) and sentenced to 18 months.
Reach your own conclusions as to whether she was abducted, or not. I know what I think especially as there was a caravanette which had been hanging around for days, which vanished after Joana vanished ... and also a black limousine cruising around.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2016, 07:44:54 AM
You certainly will find nothing if you do not bother to look for it. It is a basic tool in the armoury of investigators to think outside the box with an open mind.
Unfortunately propaganda leaked directly to the Portuguese press and picked up immediately and reiterated by media worldwide ... appears to have been the sharpest tool available to the Amaral investigation.
Which is why ... all this time after the event ... we are still discussing fourteen bottles of wine and umbrellas obscuring a sight line from a tapas table to a balcony.
A total irrelevance.
The only important thing here is Madeleine McCann and the failure of the Amaral investigation to give her the respect she deserved by investigating her case with a modicum of competence.
A start in doing that would have been to investigate home invasions involving children and remove that line of inquiry firmly from the equation.
'The only important thing here is Madeleine McCann and the failure of the Amaral investigation to give her the respect she deserved by investigating her case with a modicum of competence.'
That is of course your opinion and well known mantra.
In reality, the truth is somewhat different. It was her parents who let her and her siblings down, with their arrogance and stupidity.
Who was discussing 14 bottles of wine ?
There was an open mind. You need reminding yet again, it was the UK police who advised the PJ to investigate the parents.
It is also standard pratice to investigate parents in missing children cases.
Also, YET AGAIN, Madeleine was searched for, extensively, with no results, which continues to be the case.
There was no evidence of a break in to the apartment, and as you know, even Mitchell, admitted that.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 28, 2016, 07:52:56 AM
Well the Portuguese Courts preferred Marcos Aragao Correias his imput to Amarals. Twice his word stood against Amarals. In fact Amaral was found a perjurer on the one occasion. On the second occasion he lost his case directly against Correia.
I wonder why the Courts preferred Corrieas word to Amarals? Looks like you giot the wrong end of the stick stephen.
Now Sophia Leal is NOT Amaral, but she WAS bullied by him and divorced him.
Think it out stephen.
Correia, as you have failed to mention yet again, was hired by Metodo3 to go for Amaral, and the Mccanns employed Metodo3. 8)--))
Correia also thought Madeleine's body had been dumped in a lake.
He claims to be a psychic. *&*%£
By the way, where is he these days. Has he returned from Brazil , a la Charley's Aunt ? 8)--))
Or is he now in hiding in Madeleira ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on November 28, 2016, 08:47:46 AM
Police investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a Portuguese holiday resort nearly seven years ago say a lone intruder sexually assaulted five girls aged between seven and 10 in the Algarve between 2004 and 2006.
The four incidents – one involving two girls – were among 12 over six years up to 2010 being examined by officers in which a man entered holiday accommodation, mainly villas occupied by British families.
In six of those incidents, the man, said to be dark-haired and tanned, sat on the victims' beds. In nine of the 12 incidents there was no evidence of forced entry or property taken. In three others there was "low-level" theft involving cash or phones. Police said he appeared to have "a very, very, unhealthy interest" in young white girls. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve
I wonder how he got into the apartments?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 29, 2016, 12:50:40 AM
didn't not answering the 48 questions .do that .she knew it ...and agreed
it wasn't only G A who thought ...they were involved....so did a lot more colleagues etc etc.....
they would have been better off ignoring the book.
like they have all the others.......not to mention R D H vids
the garden by the way also .how many 50 mtr gardens have a swimming pool as big as that
There was no direct route. It may have been 50 meters visually but it took over 85 meters to walk there. So is it the walking distance or the looking distance in the OP?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on November 29, 2016, 02:50:04 PM
There was no direct route. It may have been 50 meters visually but it took over 85 meters to walk there. So is it the walking distance or the looking distance in the OP?
good point but best ask sadi.............
after saying that looking out my garden i can see a house around 40 mtr away..............
but to get to it i would have to walk over 150 mtr...........
so it wasn't like dining in your garden .50 mtr away ...was it.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 29, 2016, 04:56:42 PM
With apologies to Gus Elen:
Oh! it really is a wery pretty garden And Chingford to the Eastward could be seen Wiv a ladder and some glasses You could see to 'Ackney Marshes If it wasn't for the 'ouses in between
Oh! it really is a wery pretty garden And 'Endon to the westward could be seen And by clinging to the chimbley You could see across to Wembley If it wasn't for the 'ouses in between
Oh! it really is a wery pretty garden And soapworks from the 'ousetops could be seen If I got a rope and pulley I'd enjoy the breeze more fully If it wasn't for the 'ouses in between
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 30, 2016, 12:32:26 AM
after saying that looking out my garden i can see a house around 40 mtr away..............
but to get to it i would have to walk over 150 mtr...........
so it wasn't like dining in your garden .50 mtr away ...was it.
Yep it was like dining in your garden visually and sound wise. Only 50 metres away from the patio door.
Have never tried to claim that the walking distance was only 50 metres, but having measured it as carefully as I am able on GE, it is about 77 metres.
A fit couple like Kate and Gerry would do that in a matter of a very few seconds in emergency.
Believe me, when I tell you that the run up to the triangle on the top of the eastern hills would floor many of us, even walking it. Kate and Gerry are extra-ordinarily fit.
No one has attempted to claim that the distance walked was 50 metres
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 30, 2016, 08:24:19 AM
The group's proximity to the apartment and their fitness levels were irrelevant because Madeleine still disappeared. If someone took her they were able to do it because no adult was on the premises to guard those children.
All the excuses in the world will never change that.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 08:30:08 AM
The group's proximity to the apartment and their fitness levels were irrelevant because Madeleine still disappeared. If someone took her they were able to do it because no adult was on the premises to guard those children.
All the excuses in the world will never change that.
That may be true or it may have made no difference - children have been stolen from their beds while their parents have been present at the time. And you could use the same argument for every child who ever had an accident. If the parents had been more vigilant and held their child close to them at all times then the chances of them coming to harm would be greatly reduced. But children have accidents all the time so must we beat up the parents every time? Is there any point at which you would be prepared to forgive the parents of a child who came to harm because they hadn't been there to prevent it happening?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 30, 2016, 09:21:03 AM
That may be true or it may have made no difference - children have been stolen from their beds while their parents have been present at the time. And you could use the same argument for every child who ever had an accident. If the parents had been more vigilant and held their child close to them at all times then the chances of them coming to harm would be greatly reduced. But children have accidents all the time so must we beat up the parents every time? Is there any point at which you would be prepared to forgive the parents of a child who came to harm because they hadn't been there to prevent it happening?
So parents decide to leave their kids home alone and check every 30 minutes. Did they assume their kids wouldn't wake and cry for, possibly, 25 minutes or didn't they care? Did they assume no child would get out of bed and get into mischief or didn't they care? These are not unusual occurrences where small children are concerned.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 10:53:37 AM
So parents decide to leave their kids home alone and check every 30 minutes. Did they assume their kids wouldn't wake and cry for, possibly, 25 minutes or didn't they care? Did they assume no child would get out of bed and get into mischief or didn't they care? These are not unusual occurrences where small children are concerned.
As I'm not them I'm afraid I can't answer for them. Children can and do cry and get into mischief even with parents around that much I do know. Speaking for my own situation my children almost never woke and cried in the night once they were about a year old, in fact I don't recall them ever doing so unless they had a fever or a bug. If it were me and my kids I would have assumed that once they were asleep they would stay asleep until morning as going on past behaviour and experience there would have been no reason to assume otherwise.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 30, 2016, 10:55:11 AM
As I'm not them I'm afraid I can't answer for them. Children can and do cry and get into mischief even with parents around that much I do know. Speaking for my own situation my children almost never woke and cried in the night once they were about a year old, in fact I don't recall them ever doing so unless they had a fever or a bug. If it were me and my kids I would have assumed that once they were asleep they would stay asleep until morning as going on past behaviour and experience there would have been no reason to assume otherwise.
You were lucky.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Benice on November 30, 2016, 10:59:11 AM
So parents decide to leave their kids home alone and check every 30 minutes. Did they assume their kids wouldn't wake and cry for, possibly, 25 minutes or didn't they care? Did they assume no child would get out of bed and get into mischief or didn't they care? These are not unusual occurrences where small children are concerned.
They knew their own children's sleeping habits and based their decision on them. The twins were in cots and were very good sleepers and if Madeleine did wake up it was only ever late into the night. They were sitting less than 60 seconds walk away and checking regularly. If that had not been the established sleeping pattern and any of the children had difficulty getting off to sleep - or were in the habit of waking up in the first few hours then IMO they would not have made those arrangements.
Obviously nothing is guaranteed never to change - as 5yr old April Jones parents found out when she was abducted from outside her home, even though her parents had confidently allowed her to play out there '100's of times before' because nothing had happened on any of those occasion to make them feel they were putting her in danger. Other neighbouring parents allowed their children to do the same - but not any more.
Any expectation that parents should be able to foresee every possible danger in a child's life is never going to happen. There is no such thing as a perfect parent. Fortunately the decisions parents make for their children do not usually end in tragedy - but on rare occasions they do. As far as I am concerned - what happened to Madeleine and also to April are examples of those rare occasions.
There is not a scrap of evidence that the McCanns (or the Jones family) did not care about their children.
AIMHO
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 30, 2016, 11:04:40 AM
The group's proximity to the apartment and their fitness levels were irrelevant because Madeleine still disappeared. If someone took her they were able to do it because no adult was on the premises to guard those children.
All the excuses in the world will never change that.
The Willington Quay child abduction was a case of the abduction and rape of a 6-year-old girl in Willington Quay, North Tyneside, England, on 27 December 2005, when she was taken while in the bath. A local man, Peter Voisey, a known sex offender, was later convicted of the crime and sentenced to life in prison. The brazen nature of the crime sparked widespread media interest and a Crimewatch appeal. It also sparked the largest ever man-hunt by Northumbria Police. Assertions by the police that the crime had been a case of opportunistic abduction from the home by a stranger were initially met with scepticism, given the seemingly unbelievable nature of the crime.[1] Voisey's conviction also sparked a review of the multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA), which govern the monitoring of past offenders. The girl was abducted from her ground-floor bath as her mother was in the next-door room. She was driven around the local area for 20 minutes, before being found naked in a snow-covered back alley.
-snip-
The mother was on the premises in the next door room .... yet her little girl was taken. How do you square your comment up with that Gunit ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 30, 2016, 12:14:52 PM
There was no reason why they would expect an abductor to enter the apartment and take one of their children and there's no evidence that it happened either, so bringing abduction cases into the mix is irrelevant.
If the McCanns thought their children wouldn't wake up as Benice argues, she needs to explain why Gerry's first thought was that Madeleine may have moved the bedroom door so as to go into her parent's bed to avoid the noise made by her siblings. (10th May statement)
That doesn't suggest that waking and crying were ruled out when the decision to leave the children was made.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 12:17:57 PM
You could say the same for anyone who hasn't either been the victim of an accident or the parent of a child that hasn't had a serious accident. But yes, I am lucky, in very many ways.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 12:23:13 PM
There was no reason why they would expect an abductor to enter the apartment and take one of their children and there's no evidence that it happened either, so bringing abduction cases into the mix is irrelevant.
If the McCanns thought their children wouldn't wake up as Benice argues, she needs to explain why Gerry's first thought was that Madeleine may have moved the bedroom door so as to go into her parent's bed to avoid the noise made by her siblings. (10th May statement)
That doesn't suggest that waking and crying were ruled out when the decision to leave the children was made.
It's a simple explanation. In such a circumstance it's likely that your first thought would be to look for the simplest most plausible explanation. Madeleine waking up and moving beds (even if it wasn't a habitual occurrence) is way more likely than Madeleine being abducted in the night by a stranger. Once you'd quickly established that she hadn't moved to another room then your mind might shift to more sinister reasons for your child's absence.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 30, 2016, 01:14:24 PM
It's a simple explanation. In such a circumstance it's likely that your first thought would be to look for the simplest most plausible explanation. Madeleine waking up and moving beds (even if it wasn't a habitual occurrence) is way more likely than Madeleine being abducted in the night by a stranger. Once you'd quickly established that she hadn't moved to another room then your mind might shift to more sinister reasons for your child's absence.
Well he did quickly establish that she hadn't moved, but he thought no more about it and left them again.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 01:41:20 PM
My point is the same as it was in the beginning. Leaving small children home alone for 30 minutes means they may wake and cry for 25 minutes or leave their beds and hurt themselves. That's why people don't do it.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 02:59:25 PM
My point is the same as it was in the beginning. Leaving small children home alone for 30 minutes means they may wake and cry for 25 minutes or leave their beds and hurt themselves. That's why people don't do it.
As Gerry had established that she and her brother and sister were sleeping soundly as usual he saw no reason to suppose the situation would be any different on the next check. How many minutes did you leave between checks on your sleeping children when they were two or three years old? After all, even if you were downstairs and 5 seconds away you'd be none the wiser if they'd woken up and climbed out the window, stuck their fingers in a plug socket, got their head caught in the blind cord and hung themselves etc etc etc. Or maybe you never left them unattended at all and slept in the same bedroom as them every night with your arms wrapped tightly around them?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 03:04:58 PM
As Gerry had established that she and her brother and sister were sleeping soundly as usual he saw no reason to suppose the situation would be any different on the next check. How many minutes did you leave between checks on your sleeping children when they were two or three years old? After all, even if you were downstairs and 5 seconds away you'd be none the wiser if they'd woken up and climbed out the window, stuck their fingers in a plug socket, got their head caught in the blind cord and hung themselves etc etc etc. Or maybe you never left them unattended at all and slept in the same bedroom as them every night with your arms wrapped tightly around them?
Most of us could hear if our kids got out of bed, even from downstairs. Especially with a listener.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 30, 2016, 04:48:05 PM
As Gerry had established that she and her brother and sister were sleeping soundly as usual he saw no reason to suppose the situation would be any different on the next check. How many minutes did you leave between checks on your sleeping children when they were two or three years old? After all, even if you were downstairs and 5 seconds away you'd be none the wiser if they'd woken up and climbed out the window, stuck their fingers in a plug socket, got their head caught in the blind cord and hung themselves etc etc etc. Or maybe you never left them unattended at all and slept in the same bedroom as them every night with your arms wrapped tightly around them?
Who or what moved the door? He seems to have given up on that question quite quickly.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 30, 2016, 05:06:41 PM
Who or what moved the door? He seems to have given up on that question quite quickly.
The reason he gave didn't have much logic to it, but we can't say if it was true or not. He thought Madeleine had moved it herself and put herself back to bed. That is possible. But personally I think it shows they had visitor(s) after they left to go to the Tapas Restaurant.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 30, 2016, 05:29:21 PM
The reason he gave didn't have much logic to it, but we can't say if it was true or not. He thought Madeleine had moved it herself and put herself back to bed. That is possible. But personally I think it shows they had visitor(s) after they left to go to the Tapas Restaurant.
The point isn't whether it was logical or true, the point is that he believed it was possible. If it was possible at 9.05 or whenever it was possible at 8 pm too.
Therefore the decision to leave the children was made despite knowing that there was a risk of waking, crying and wandering about.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 30, 2016, 05:41:48 PM
The point isn't whether it was logical or true, the point is that he believed it was possible. If it was possible at 9.05 or whenever it was possible at 8 pm too.
Therefore the decision to leave the children was made despite knowing that there was a risk of waking, crying and wandering about.
That happens even when the parents are home. They could be asleep and the child goes "waking, crying and wandering about". At 8:00 PM they were still in their apartment.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 30, 2016, 05:56:04 PM
That happens even when the parents are home. They could be asleep and the child goes "waking, crying and wandering about". At 8:00 PM they were still in their apartment.
A DECISION was made to leave the children alone DESPITE the parents being aware of the possibility of the children waking, crying and wandering with no-one there to comfort them or put them back to bed for up to 25 minutes.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 30, 2016, 06:45:33 PM
A DECISION was made to leave the children alone DESPITE the parents being aware of the possibility of the children waking, crying and wandering with no-one there to comfort them or put them back to bed for up to 25 minutes.
No different to the decision millions of parents have made over the centuries ... and the Mccanns were like in their back garden only 50 metres away ... the only unlocked entrance to the apartment that they were aware of was well illuminated and over looked by the tapas group ... and they did regularly checking in a manner far better than hotel checks.
Why keep picking on the Mccanns? Does it make you feel good ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 30, 2016, 06:53:28 PM
Most of us could hear if our kids got out of bed, even from downstairs. Especially with a listener.
You have a listener for your two to three year olds?! What age do they have to be before you stop listening in on them? Without one, and being downstairs watching telly, listening to music, entertaining, being on the phone, cooking, whatever it would be very easy for a child to get up and get into trouble without you knowing. So, how often would you go and check on them of an evening?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on November 30, 2016, 06:55:03 PM
No different to the decision millions of parents have made over the centuries ... and the Mccanns were like in their back garden only 50 metres away ... the only open way in that they were aware of well lit and over looked by the tapas group ... and regularly checking in a manner far better than hotel checks.
Why keep picking on the Mccanns? Does it make you feel good ?
&%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 06:55:25 PM
Because I'd either doubt my own memory, put it down to a breeze moving the door when I entered the apartment, or just one of those things that doesn't have an immediate explanation. I wouldn't have thought "oh dear there must be an intruder", it just wouldn't have occurred to me.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 06:59:09 PM
Because I'd either doubt my own memory, put it down to a breeze moving the door when I entered the apartment, or just one of those things that doesn't have an immediate explanation. I wouldn't have thought "oh dear there must be an intruder", it just wouldn't have occurred to me.
May I ask what sort of occupation you had? My guess is you wouldn't make a good doctor, veterinarian farmer or a detective with such an easy going nature. I'm always looking for clues.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 07:17:12 PM
May I ask what sort of occupation you had? My guess is you wouldn't make a good doctor, veterinarian farmer or a detective with such an easy going nature. I'm always looking for clues.
I still work, and no you may not. But you're right I'm not a doctor but Gerry is, so your point is moot. Unless you're saying that because he didn't pay more attention to the door which have moved that it means he's a bad doctor...? &%+((£
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 30, 2016, 07:22:09 PM
No different to the decision millions of parents have made over the centuries ... and the Mccanns were like in their back garden only 50 metres away ... the only open way in that they were aware of well lit and over looked by the tapas group ... and regularly checking in a manner far better than hotel checks.
Why keep picking on the Mccanns? Does it make you feel good ?
Why is it 'picking on' someone to point out that they were content to leave their small children to their own devices for up to 30 minutes at a time? A decision that millions of parents have not made over the centuries.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on November 30, 2016, 07:24:01 PM
I still work, and no you may not. But you're right I'm not a doctor but Gerry is, so your point is moot. Unless you're saying that because he didn't pay more attention to the door which have moved that it means he's a bad doctor...? &%+((£
He made a diagnosis (He thought mm woke up and put herself back to bed). We don't know if he was right or not, but the father in me says he was wrong.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 08:00:39 PM
Why is it 'picking on' someone to point out that they were content to leave their small children to their own devices for up to 30 minutes at a time? A decision that millions of parents have not made over the centuries.
And millions have.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 30, 2016, 08:52:26 PM
Well if you think it was a sensible decision what can I say? According to their friends and family they weren't the type of parents to take risks with their children. It seems they didn't really know them.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on November 30, 2016, 08:58:08 PM
Well if you think it was a sensible decision what can I say? According to their friends and family they weren't the type of parents to take risks with their children. It seems they didn't really know them.
I didn't say it was sensible, but we have all taken risks with our children at one time or another and anyone who claims otherwise is lying IMO.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on November 30, 2016, 10:45:04 PM
Of course. My parents let me play out from morning till night, roaming the neighbourhood sometimes with friends, sometimes alone, in a country bursting at the seams with poisonous snakes, spiders, insects, not to mention some locals who would view a white child as a potential meal ticket, or worse, no phone, no rules about when I had to be home, I was totally free during school holidays from the age of about 8. I travelled thousands of miles from home to school and back again alone from the age of 12. My childhood was completely typical of most expats I knew. I was at far greater risk of coming to serious harm from being allowed to roam the neighbourhood or travelling unaccompanied than I would have been left alone aged 3 asleep in my bed and checked on every thirty minutes.
There are millions upon millions of examples of parents deliberately giving their kids free rein, despite the fact that bad things could happen and cause them to suffer. It's only when something goes wrong that the parent questions their judgement and we berate them for their stupidity, but mercifully most times nothing does go wrong. Don't pretend the McCanns are seriously abnormal - they are not.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 30, 2016, 11:21:13 PM
I didn't say it was sensible, but we have all taken risks with our children at one time or another and anyone who claims otherwise is lying IMO.
Of course we have but that is not the full story. It pays to understand the impact uncertainties and hazards will have together with the rate of exposure to them while taking the risk.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on November 30, 2016, 11:22:56 PM
Why is it 'picking on' someone to point out that they were content to leave their small children to their own devices for up to 30 minutes at a time? A decision that millions of parents have not made over the centuries.
Likewise a decision that millions of parents have made over the years, with their children sleeping deeply ... to eat in the garden of the apartments / hotel overlooking their flat from about 50 metres.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Mr Gray on November 30, 2016, 11:24:33 PM
Of course we have but that is not the full story. It pays to understand the impact uncertainties and hazards will have together with the rate of exposure to them while taking the risk.
I'm sure from what the McCanns said that's exactly what they did Hindsight is a wonderful thing
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 30, 2016, 11:35:54 PM
I'm sure from what the McCanns said that's exactly what they did Hindsight is a wonderful thing
Risk assessment is not based on hindsight. Like it or not they gambled and lost. That's the bare fact. What anyone else feels about it is of no relevance.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Mr Gray on November 30, 2016, 11:40:57 PM
Risk assessment is not based on hindsight. Like it or not they gambled and lost. That's the bare fact. What anyone else feels about it is of no relevance.
They will be fully aware as doctors re risk assessment Gambling is an emotive word .....but like most gamblers they were extremely unlucky Like it or not
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 01, 2016, 08:11:48 AM
Of course we have but that is not the full story. It pays to understand the impact uncertainties and hazards will have together with the rate of exposure to them while taking the risk.
Both my kids have just walked out the front door to take the 15 minute walk to school, a walk they've been doing for years and which involves crossing two busy roads. One of their classmates was knocked down and seriously injured crossing one of those roads. I understand the hazards and the rate of exposure is approx 10 times a week x 2 kids. Should I be locked up for neglect?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 01, 2016, 08:37:08 AM
Both my kids have just walked out the front door to take the 15 minute walk to school, a walk they've been doing for years and which involves crossing two busy roads. One of their classmates was knocked down and seriously injured crossing one of those roads. I understand the hazards and the rate of exposure is approx 10 times a week x 2 kids. Should I be locked up for neglect?
I think you'e OK as long as they're older than 2 or 3 years, when, as we all know, they need full-time supervision.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 01, 2016, 09:01:19 AM
The mother was on the premises in the next door room .... yet her little girl was taken. How do you square your comment up with that Gunit ?
the little girl was found although tragic circumstances......what do you think would have happened if she hadn't been there...if she had been checking every half hour ....but the mother was there
not in a tapas bar drinking wine ......maddie was left with twins .....it was not safe...
they were alone................
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on December 01, 2016, 02:05:58 PM
the little girl was found although tragic circumstances......what do you think would have happened if she hadn't been there...if she had been checking every half hour ....but the mother was there
not in a tapas bar drinking wine ......maddie was left with twins .....it was not safe...
they were alone................
Xtina
You are spreading disinformation there.
The McCanns WERE NOT IN A BAR . They were in a restaurant which was the next building to the bar BUT NOT THE BAR.
They were having their evening meal and wine was served with the meal, which is quite normal for most people.
THe wine waiter confirmed that they were only drinking moderately.
Please make sure you get your information right in future ... and I would suggerst that you try to make ammends by removing the DISinformation that you have posted ... and pronto
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on December 01, 2016, 02:10:44 PM
the little girl was found although tragic circumstances......what do you think would have happened if she hadn't been there...if she had been checking every half hour ....but the mother was there
The mother was there, yes, but the little girl was taken DESPITE THAT. It happened when she was there ... so what are you suggesting would have happened had she not been there, but checking every half hour?
Suggest you put your thinking cap on. All answers on a postage stamp please
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 01, 2016, 02:14:08 PM
The mother was there, yes, but the little girl was taken DESPITE THAT. It happened when she was there ... so what are you suggesting would have happened had she not been there, but checking every half hour?
Suggest you put your thinking cap on. All answers on a postage stamp please
Yet the McCann's weren't there.
No system is perfect and you can't say zero risk, but you can minimize the possibilities.
So Sadie, why couldn't the McCann's have dined and wined in the apartment ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 01, 2016, 02:53:52 PM
I think you'e OK as long as they're older than 2 or 3 years, when, as we all know, they need full-time supervision.
Why though? Allowing your 10 year old kids to cross dangerous roads unsupervised is surely much more likely to result in their injury or death than leaving them aged 3 tucked up in bed asleep for 30 minutes at a time.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on December 01, 2016, 03:07:24 PM
The McCanns WERE NOT IN A BAR . They were in a restaurant which was the next building to the bar BUT NOT THE BAR.
They were having their evening meal and wine was served with the meal, which is quite normal for most people.
THe wine waiter confirmed that they were only drinking moderately.
Please make sure you get your information right in future ... and I would suggerst that you try to make ammends by removing the DISinformation that you have posted ... and pronto
how am i spreading disinformation...............
they were in a tapas bar....eating/drinking..
how do you know what they drank ..was you there.....the waiter doesn't seem to remember much .....
why should he ...he was a barman serving drinks...not..there to remember who drank what....
I I R C ....they had wine before they went out ......with there meal .....and a wine bill on top...
as for making amends............ you take too much on yourself
if the post is not removed by mods.....
mind your own business sweetie..pronto...
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on December 01, 2016, 03:28:15 PM
The Mccanns were like in their back garden. ... only a tiny bit over 50 metres away. Many people have back gardens of 50 metres, or more, stephen.
You can't equate the situations Sadie. Most people have a back garden which is enclosed by a fence or a hedge offering security and privacy. What we had at the Ocean Club Garden facility was an apartment sandwiched between a public laneway and a car park, situated immediately adjacent to a public road and separated from the tapas restaurant by gardens and a pool which were open to the public. Completely different situations imo.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 01, 2016, 03:43:19 PM
You can't equate the situations Sadie. Most people have a back garden which is enclosed by a fence or a hedge offering security and privacy. What we had at the Ocean Club Garden facility was an apartment sandwiched between a public laneway and a car park, situated immediately adjacent to a public road and separated from the tapas restaurant by gardens and a pool which were open to the public.
You can equate When dining in the back garden the front of the house is not visible and open to the street
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: John on December 01, 2016, 03:57:35 PM
They will be fully aware as doctors re risk assessment Gambling is an emotive word .....but like most gamblers they were extremely unlucky Like it or not
Gamble can be a verb or a noun. No emotive connotations whatever.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 01, 2016, 05:44:12 PM
Both my kids have just walked out the front door to take the 15 minute walk to school, a walk they've been doing for years and which involves crossing two busy roads. One of their classmates was knocked down and seriously injured crossing one of those roads. I understand the hazards and the rate of exposure is approx 10 times a week x 2 kids. Should I be locked up for neglect?
What relevance does that have to what I posted. You should perhaps be locked up for appalling comprehension but we have done that bit before 8(0(*
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2016, 06:00:35 PM
it wasn't ...their back garden though was it .....
they were in a foreign country ..........
in a strange room...
what would they have seen/heard ......a so called 50 mtr away ...sadie ....they saw nothing did they
so it was just the thirty minute check .to see if all was well...and it wasn't ...was it...
Praia da Luz is not a place one would expect a child kidnap.
The village may be in Portugal, just under four miles from Lagos on the Algarve's south-western coast, but it could just as easily be South-east England in the 1950s.
The retired English middle classes have migrated here to re-create an image of a Britain that no longer exists, with its narrow cobbled streets, jammed with whitewashed apartments and quaint tea shops and boutiques.
The pensioners have re-created a courteous and close community based on solid values and antiquated customs rarely observed now in the land they have left behind.
Indeed, its tourism brochures boast of it as a sleepy fishing village imbued with the "charm and character of yesteryear".
One rarely sees the olive complexion of the Portuguese, save for the cleaners and groundsmen of the genteel holiday resorts dotted across the coastal village.
There is, too, an absent generation. There are few teenagers, no groups of giggling twenty-something girls in bikinis: Praia da Luz is the preserve of the more solid, matronly figure. There are no groups of young men in baseball caps propping up the bars.
Here, there are the elderly retired, many of whom have bought properties, and couples with young children. Families much like the McCanns. Indeed, the gentle pace and child-friendly reputation of Praia da Luz convinced the couple that it was the ideal spot for a holiday. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1551438/The-burden-of-loss.html
Criminality of any type whether burglaries, drugs or home invasions which resulted in assaults of children while their parents slept in the next room were probably things which never crossed the minds of most holidaymakers to Portugal prior to 2007.
There was no publicity about the activities of criminals ... which is probably why the McCanns didn't factor dangers from home invaders into their decision to take their evening meal less than a minute away from their children.
The ambience of Luz almost certainly lulled them into the false sense of security which permitted them to think that Luz more resembled the holiday brochures than the dock area of a town in the lawless foreign country your post suggests it was.
I think the McCanns learned their lesson round about 10pm on the 3rd May 2007. I find it quite mystifying that there are those who appear to have a mission in life never to miss the opportunity to berate them for it.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 01, 2016, 06:02:43 PM
What relevance does that have to what I posted. You should perhaps be locked up for appalling comprehension but we have done that bit before 8(0(*
Would you stop insulting me and my comprehension skills? I understood your post perfectly. We are on a forum discussing Madeleine McCann, in particular the issue of the so-called neglect perpetrated by Messrs McCann on their children when they left them alone for intervals of 30 minutes. I stated that we all take risks with your kids, and anyone who claims they don't is lying. You burbled on about risk assessments and rates of exposure, to which I gave an example of how we allow our kids to be exposed to specific hazards on a frequent basis. I asked the question - does that make us guilty of neglect? It was a perfectly reasonable question to ask as that is the underlying question being asked throughout this thread.
I sometimes wonder really who has the comprehension issues around here when I have to spell out and explain everything I write to you. Perhaps putting you back on ignore would save me a lot of time.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on December 01, 2016, 06:27:52 PM
Praia da Luz is not a place one would expect a child kidnap.
The village may be in Portugal, just under four miles from Lagos on the Algarve's south-western coast, but it could just as easily be South-east England in the 1950s.
The retired English middle classes have migrated here to re-create an image of a Britain that no longer exists, with its narrow cobbled streets, jammed with whitewashed apartments and quaint tea shops and boutiques.
The pensioners have re-created a courteous and close community based on solid values and antiquated customs rarely observed now in the land they have left behind.
Indeed, its tourism brochures boast of it as a sleepy fishing village imbued with the "charm and character of yesteryear".
One rarely sees the olive complexion of the Portuguese, save for the cleaners and groundsmen of the genteel holiday resorts dotted across the coastal village.
There is, too, an absent generation. There are few teenagers, no groups of giggling twenty-something girls in bikinis: Praia da Luz is the preserve of the more solid, matronly figure. There are no groups of young men in baseball caps propping up the bars.
Here, there are the elderly retired, many of whom have bought properties, and couples with young children. Families much like the McCanns. Indeed, the gentle pace and child-friendly reputation of Praia da Luz convinced the couple that it was the ideal spot for a holiday. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1551438/The-burden-of-loss.html
Criminality of any type whether burglaries, drugs or home invasions which resulted in assaults of children while their parents slept in the next room were probably things which never crossed the minds of most holidaymakers to Portugal prior to 2007.
There was no publicity about the activities of criminals ... which is probably why the McCanns didn't factor dangers from home invaders into their decision to take their evening meal less than a minute away from their children.
The ambience of Luz almost certainly lulled them into the false sense of security which permitted them to think that Luz more resembled the holiday brochures than the dock area of a town in the lawless foreign country your post suggests it was.
I think the McCanns learned their lesson round about 10pm on the 3rd May 2007. I find it quite mystifying that there are those who appear to have a mission in life never to miss the opportunity to berate them for it.
they get what they deserve ........maddie didn't...she deserved to be protected....and wasn't was she
as for what you have shown that was said about the place ....maybe it was a child friendly safe place ...
because there is no proof of an abduction ....is there....
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 01, 2016, 06:31:17 PM
Praia da Luz is not a place one would expect a child kidnap.
The village may be in Portugal, just under four miles from Lagos on the Algarve's south-western coast, but it could just as easily be South-east England in the 1950s.
The retired English middle classes have migrated here to re-create an image of a Britain that no longer exists, with its narrow cobbled streets, jammed with whitewashed apartments and quaint tea shops and boutiques.
The pensioners have re-created a courteous and close community based on solid values and antiquated customs rarely observed now in the land they have left behind.
Indeed, its tourism brochures boast of it as a sleepy fishing village imbued with the "charm and character of yesteryear".
One rarely sees the olive complexion of the Portuguese, save for the cleaners and groundsmen of the genteel holiday resorts dotted across the coastal village.
There is, too, an absent generation. There are few teenagers, no groups of giggling twenty-something girls in bikinis: Praia da Luz is the preserve of the more solid, matronly figure. There are no groups of young men in baseball caps propping up the bars.
Here, there are the elderly retired, many of whom have bought properties, and couples with young children. Families much like the McCanns. Indeed, the gentle pace and child-friendly reputation of Praia da Luz convinced the couple that it was the ideal spot for a holiday. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1551438/The-burden-of-loss.html
Criminality of any type whether burglaries, drugs or home invasions which resulted in assaults of children while their parents slept in the next room were probably things which never crossed the minds of most holidaymakers to Portugal prior to 2007.
There was no publicity about the activities of criminals ... which is probably why the McCanns didn't factor dangers from home invaders into their decision to take their evening meal less than a minute away from their children.
The ambience of Luz almost certainly lulled them into the false sense of security which permitted them to think that Luz more resembled the holiday brochures than the dock area of a town in the lawless foreign country your post suggests it was.
I think the McCanns learned their lesson round about 10pm on the 3rd May 2007. I find it quite mystifying that there are those who appear to have a mission in life never to miss the opportunity to berate them for it.
'There was no publicity about the activities of criminals ... which is probably why the McCanns didn't factor dangers from home invaders into their decision to take their evening meal less than a minute away from their children.'
That statement fails at the first hurdle, as they locked the apartment during the day.
Ipso facto, they anticipated they could get burgled. 8)-)))
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 01, 2016, 07:06:55 PM
Would you stop insulting me and my comprehension skills? I understood your post perfectly. We are on a forum discussing Madeleine McCann, in particular the issue of the so-called neglect perpetrated by Messrs McCann on their children when they left them alone for intervals of 30 minutes. I stated that we all take risks with your kids, and anyone who claims they don't is lying. You burbled on about risk assessments and rates of exposure, to which I gave an example of how we allow our kids to be exposed to specific hazards on a frequent basis. I asked the question - does that make us guilty of neglect? It was a perfectly reasonable question to ask as that is the underlying question being asked throughout this thread.
I sometimes wonder really who has the comprehension issues around here when I have to spell out and explain everything I write to you. Perhaps putting you back on ignore would save me a lot of time.
As I see it the underlying questions are: "are you prepared to pay the price your actions may demand" and "what are you going to do to mitigate the possibilty of paying that price should it be unacceptable to you". Simple enough.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 01, 2016, 07:29:02 PM
As I see it the underlying questions are: "are you prepared to pay the price your actions may demand" and "what are you going to do to mitigate the possibilty of paying that price should it be unacceptable to you". Simple enough.
It wasn't the actions of the McCanns that have caused this situation but the actions of the criminal who abducted Maddie Don't blame the victim of the crime Blame the criminal Simple
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on December 01, 2016, 07:33:39 PM
It wasn't the actions of the McCanns that have caused this situation but the actions of the criminal who abducted Maddie Don't blame the victim of the crime Blame the criminal Simple
I don't think anyone blame Madeleine.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 01, 2016, 07:49:43 PM
'There was no publicity about the activities of criminals ... which is probably why the McCanns didn't factor dangers from home invaders into their decision to take their evening meal less than a minute away from their children.'
That statement fails at the first hurdle, as they locked the apartment during the day.
Ipso facto, they anticipated they could get burgled. 8)-)))
But at night, they could see the only entrance they believed open and at only 50 metres. Furthermore it was illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Brietta on December 01, 2016, 09:17:05 PM
50 mtr .....50 mile it makes no difference ....they saw nothing did they .........
The parents of the children who were assaulted in their beds were not dining fifty metres/forty seconds away; in some cases they must have been less than a metre away from their children.
By your logic the thing is that they must have been at fault in some way. If not, how was it possible for an intruder to assault their children without them having the foresight to prevent it?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on December 01, 2016, 09:20:13 PM
The parents of the children who were assaulted in their beds were not dining fifty metres/forty seconds away; in some cases they must have been less than a metre away from their children.
By your logic the thing is that they must have been at fault in some way. If not, how was it possible for an intruder to assault their children without them having the foresight to prevent it?
don't you think that is well off topic
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 01, 2016, 09:21:12 PM
"The McCanns took a gamble and lost" is something you have stated a few times on this board, it's very kind of you to keep mentioning it, I'm sure we're all most grateful for your insight.
Glad to hear it old chap. Anytime. Maybe you also have a response to the basic proposition ? Like whether you believe that to be the case and if not why not?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 01, 2016, 09:25:26 PM
But at night, they could see the only entrance they believed open and at only 50 metres. Furthermore it was illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite
Or not if you look at some of the debates on the Jez Gerry and Jane threads. More a sort of a "dark" rather than a light.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 01, 2016, 09:29:10 PM
But at night, they could see the only entrance they believed open and at only 50 metres. Furthermore it was illuminated by the street lamp immediately opposite
Irrelevant.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on December 01, 2016, 09:31:14 PM
...and to briefly remind you, the Mccanns weren't in a garden.
They were at the Tapas; eating, drinking and talking.
The Mccanns WERE in the gardens to the apartments. The Tapas restaurant is ONLY called Tapas because it is close to the only Tapas bar in the complex. It could equally be called the pool restaurant or the Tennis Court Restaurant. It had NOTHING to do with the Tapas Bar apart from being situated near it.
Some friends of ours in the country had a massive markquee erected in their equally massive garden. It was to house the wedding reception of their daughter.
The so called 'Tapas' Restaurant is rather like a marquee, if a bit more permanent.
As the marquee was in a garden, so the restaurant is in a garden; the garden to the apartments adjoining.
The 'Tapas' Restaurant was in the garden to the apartments
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Eleanor on December 01, 2016, 09:36:07 PM
The Mccanns WERE in the gardens to the apartments. The Tapas restaurant is ONLY called Tapas because it is close to the only Tapas bar in the complex. It could equally be called the pool restaurant or the Tennis Court Restaurant. It had NOTHING to do with the Tapas Bar apart from being situated near it.
Some friends of ours in the country had a massive markquee erected in their equally massive garden. It was to house the wedding reception of their daughter.
The so called 'Tapas' Restaurant is rather like a marquee, if a bit more permanent.
As the marquee was in a garden, so the restaurant is in a garden; the garden to the apartments adjoining.
The 'Tapas' Restaurant was in the garden to the apartments
they were still drinking..wine.....and as i said ......they may as well have been 50 mile away...they saw nothing ...zilch
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on December 01, 2016, 09:38:33 PM
Nothing irrelevant about being only 50 metres away from the only apartment that was illuminated.
Madeleine was targetted. No other reason why they would chose that flat apart, I suppose, for the deeply recessed front door which was in blackness .... and nobody walked past.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: misty on December 01, 2016, 09:50:34 PM
they were still drinking..wine.....and as i said ......they may as well have been 50 mile away...they saw nothing ...zilch
They had wine with their meal, Yes, but not in excess.
Same as anyone at home in their back garden if someone got in thru the front. They might as wel be 50 miles away, cos they would see nothing either. The Mccanns believed the front to be locked.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 01, 2016, 09:56:52 PM
The Mccanns WERE in the gardens to the apartments. The Tapas restaurant is ONLY called Tapas because it is close to the only Tapas bar in the complex. It could equally be called the pool restaurant or the Tennis Court Restaurant. It had NOTHING to do with the Tapas Bar apart from being situated near it.
Some friends of ours in the country had a massive markquee erected in their equally massive garden. It was to house the wedding reception of their daughter.
The so called 'Tapas' Restaurant is rather like a marquee, if a bit more permanent.
As the marquee was in a garden, so the restaurant is in a garden; the garden to the apartments adjoining.
The 'Tapas' Restaurant was in the garden to the apartments
Bridget O'Donnell wasn't convinced, she didn't see it as her garden;
One morning, I saw Gerry and his wife Kate on their balcony, chatting to their friends on the path below. Privately I was glad we didn't get their apartment. It was on a corner by the road and people could see in. They were exposed...... He told us they were leaving theirs sleeping in the apartments. While they chatted on, I ruminated on the pro s and cons of this. I admired them, in a way, for not being paranoid parents, but I decided that our apartment was too far off even to contemplate it. Our baby was too young and I would worry about them waking up. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on December 01, 2016, 09:57:03 PM
Are you trying to tell us that YOU dont see the relevance of children being stolen from their homes when their parents were there?
I think you are trying to pull the wool over our eyes, because I am absolutely sure that you are not that dull.
How can those cases be relevant? No-one has demonstrated yet that Madeleine was abducted. I thought this thread was aimed at discussing whether it was appropriate to decide to leave three small children alone every night in an unlocked apartment. The possibility of a child being abducted didn't come into it. Other more obvious dangers existed which should have led to the parents deciding not to take the risk. .
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 01, 2016, 10:17:54 PM
Glad to hear it old chap. Anytime. Maybe you also have a response to the basic proposition ? Like whether you believe that to be the case and if not why not?
They took a risk, but then we all take risks, sometimes we lose, I've already said it, how many more times would you like me to say so? Daily?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 01, 2016, 10:18:23 PM
How can those cases be relevant? No-one has demonstrated yet that Madeleine was abducted. I thought this thread was aimed at discussing whether it was appropriate to decide to leave three small children alone every night in an unlocked apartment. The possibility of a child being abducted didn't come into it. Other more obvious dangers existed which should have led to the parents deciding not to take the risk. .
on the balance of probabilities maddie was abducted.....SY agree...you need to get over it
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 01, 2016, 10:22:08 PM
the mccs were not in the apartment was they ......so why go on about children who's mothers/parent were
We know the McCanns were eating their evening meal less than a minute from their children and carrying out constant checks. But as you yourself constantly keep reminding, that was inadvisable such was the state of lawlessness and dangers to children in Portugal of which holidaymakers were in ignorance. No-one booking their holiday knew that in close proximity to Luz and in at least one case within Luz itself that holidaymakers' children were not safe in their own homes centimetres - not metres from their parents.
If the McCanns had been aware of the true state of affairs would they have left their children even for a second? ... but the fact of the matter may well be that given full information on the facts of the matter ... the more responsible thing for people with children to do would be not to set foot in Portugal at all.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on December 01, 2016, 10:26:25 PM
We know the McCanns were eating their evening meal less than a minute from their children and carrying out constant checks. But as you yourself constantly keep reminding, that was inadvisable such was the state of lawlessness and dangers to children in Portugal of which holidaymakers were in ignorance. No-one booking their holiday knew that in close proximity to Luz and in at least one case within Luz itself that holidaymakers' children were not safe in their own homes centimetres - not metres from their parents.
If the McCanns had been aware of the true state of affairs would they have left their children even for a second? ... but the fact of the matter may well be that given full information on the facts of the matter ... the more responsible thing for people with children to do would be not to set foot in Portugal at all.
Oh dear, if in doubt do a bit of Portugal-bashing.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 01, 2016, 10:31:48 PM
G A .....who was the officer at the time [plus others on team]..say maddie wasn't abducted.....
or it was like being in a garden ..............
Portugal's leading child psychologist, Luis Vilas Boas, who runs a refuge for abused children, insists that few paedophiles operate in the country. "There is no paedophile problem in Portugal," he says. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1551438/The-burden-of-loss.html
Did no one mention anything at all about Casa Pia to him?
Seems leading cops and leading child psychologists in Portugal ... sometimes fail to show any evidence of being aware of what is going on around them.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 01, 2016, 10:34:03 PM
Nothing irrelevant about being only 50 metres away from the only apartment that was illuminated.
Madeleine was targetted. No other reason why they would chose that flat apart, I suppose, for the deeply recessed front door which was in blackness .... and nobody walked past.
That is your belief, but without facts to back it up, it remains a fairy story.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 01, 2016, 10:35:45 PM
Portugal's leading child psychologist, Luis Vilas Boas, who runs a refuge for abused children, insists that few paedophiles operate in the country. "There is no paedophile problem in Portugal," he says. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1551438/The-burden-of-loss.html
Did no one mention anything at all about Casa Pia to him?
Seems leading cops and leading child psychologists in Portugal ... sometimes fail to show any evidence of being aware of what is going on around them.
Was there a 50m garden in Casa Pia they all dined in then?.............. ?{)(**
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on December 01, 2016, 10:35:53 PM
Good enough for me. Who else took or takes risks is irrelevant in this instance.
NOt really. The McCanns have been and continue to be demonised for taking this risk despite the fact that millions of other parents, if not Most parents, take risks with their own children's safety at one time or another. Any idea why you think it's necessary to harp on about this aspect of the case regularly even 10years after the event?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 01, 2016, 10:38:03 PM
NOt really. The McCanns have been and continue to be demonised for taking this risk despite the fact that millions of other parents, if not Most parents, take risks with their own children's safety at one time or another. Any idea why you think it's necessary to harp on about this aspect of the case regularly even 10years after the event?
You say millions.
Then provide cites to back it up please.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Mr Gray on December 01, 2016, 10:39:44 PM
Was there a 50m garden in Casa Pia they all dined in then?.............. ?{)(**
I could not possibly know that ... however the children removed from what should have been their places of safety to the large houses to which they were taken to be abused -- note~ I have not used the word alleged because this was proved in court -- might have held onto their terror for a few minutes and paced the length of the gardens out. You would have to ask them.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: misty on December 01, 2016, 10:42:41 PM
Portugal's leading child psychologist, Luis Vilas Boas, who runs a refuge for abused children, insists that few paedophiles operate in the country. "There is no paedophile problem in Portugal," he says. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1551438/The-burden-of-loss.html
Did no one mention anything at all about Casa Pia to him?
Seems leading cops and leading child psychologists in Portugal ... sometimes fail to show any evidence of being aware of what is going on around them.
A total of 5,739 names are included in Portugal’s new child sex offenders register, which next week will turn a year old.
Those on the list face seeing their name there for the next 20 years, the Ministry of Justice told Lusa news agency.
In August, the register was slammed by Marco Paulino, a forensic psychologist who told Jornal de Notícias that it “hasn’t really helped anyone on the field” and may even lead police and parents to let their guard down regarding a potential child abuser if their name is not on the list.
Just my lighthearted manner. If you prefer we can do it this way picking up on other's methodologies: OI CHIEF THAT'S WELL OUT OF ORDER IT'S OFF BLEEDIN' TOPIC.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 01, 2016, 10:44:38 PM
Portugal's leading child psychologist, Luis Vilas Boas, who runs a refuge for abused children, insists that few paedophiles operate in the country. "There is no paedophile problem in Portugal," he says. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1551438/The-burden-of-loss.html
Did no one mention anything at all about Casa Pia to him?
Seems leading cops and leading child psychologists in Portugal ... sometimes fail to show any evidence of being aware of what is going on around them.
It has probably been discussed before. But it is the first time I have seen it with a date on it.
Amelie reported on 13 May 2007, the day after Madeleine's 4th birthday, 10 days after she disappeared. Maddie's jammies.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on December 01, 2016, 11:44:26 PM
Everyone who has children takes certain risks with their safety every day to a greater or lesser degree. I have given examples on this thread of the risks taken by my parents with me and the risk I take with my kids' safety - we are not an unusual family, therefore it stands to reason that risk-taking exists on a daily basis for most people, whether it is letting kids go to the park to play by themselves, having a pet dog in the house with a child, buying a trampoline, installing a swimming pool, doing some gardening while the three year old plays in his bedroom, packing them off to boarding school aged 7 etc etc etc. Most people = millions. If you want millions of cites you may need to give me a few decades to compile them. Before you start I am not claiming that millions of people leave their kids unattended to go to dinner 50 metres away, nor that it is sensible behaviour, but undoubtedly the McCanns were not the first to take such risks. We know they did it, we know it was risky, they "gambled and lost" (thanks Alice) how many more times does this issue need to be discussed? Why does it pose such enduring fascination to some and why do McCann critics seem solely fixated on the McCanns' "neglect" to the exclusion of anyone else's? Rhetorical questions, no need to explain :-)
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on December 02, 2016, 12:10:15 AM
Was there a 50m garden in Casa Pia they all dined in then?.............. ?{)(**
THey didn't need that at Casa pia.
Why Portugal is a haven for paedophiles - the disturbing backcloth to the Madeleine case By ANDREW MALONE and VANESSA ALLEN Last updated at 11:06 20 October 2007
A ferrari engine makes a deep, distinctive sound. When the children at Portugal's most famous orphanage heard the sports car roaring down the driveway, fear swept through the dormitories.
The noise could mean only one thing: the man known as The Doctor was coming to call.
Yet this medical practitioner had no intention of adhering to the ancient Hippocratic Oath.
Madeleine McCann in hat Instead, arriving at Casa Pia (House of the Pious), a 17th century Lisbon orphanage where more than 4,000 children are cared for each year behind high stone walls, the doctor would summon selected boys and girls from their beds for examinations one night each week.
Where possible, he chose deaf-mutes.
After checking that the children were not suffering from any sexual infections, the doctor was joined by the orphanage caretaker, known as Bibi, who ushered the unfortunate children outside to a waiting van.
With the doctor following in his red Ferrari, Bibi drove the van to the prestigious homes of some of the leading members of Lisbon society - ranging from Portuguese government ministers and high-ranking diplomats, to famous television stars and members of the judiciary.
McCann family There, the children were repeatedly sexually abused. Some were allegedly drugged to make them compliant; others were plied with alcohol.
This continued for years. Assaults were filmed; pictures of one attack were subsequently found at the home of a suspected paedophile in Paris.
According to medical records, the victims' injuries were horrific - and consistent with serious sexual assault and rape. In witness statements, many were able to describe in minute detail the homes where they were taken and identifying marks on the bodies of their abusers.
The existence of this so-called "magic circle" of the Portuguese establishment, allegedly involved in an international paedophile ring using boys and girls from Casa Pia, was last week likened to an earthquake waiting to shake Portugal to its foundations.
New allegations about the scale of the network will be put before the country's highest court within the next few weeks.
Amid rumours of links to other paedophile gangs across Europe and the U.S., international experts on child sex crimes and murders are expected to be in court when the case re-opens, four years after a group of victims broke a silence lasting more than 30 years.
But what relevance does this have to the disappearance 170 days ago of four-year-old Madeleine McCann in Praia da Luz, about 280km from Lisbon?
And what does it mean for Kate and Gerry McCann, who have not only had to cope with losing their child, but have also been subjects of a vicious campaign in the Portuguese press to smear them?
It is crucial for two reasons; first because it proves what international crime agencies have long suspected: that Portugal has become a magnet for predatory paedophiles from around the world, using the country's lax laws and preying on the high numbers of poor, abandoned children.
And second, because Paulo Rebelo, an urbane, methodical detective who led the Casa Pia paedophile inquiry, was last night finishing his first week as the new chief of the investigation into the disappearance of the British child.
Rebelo has replaced Goncalo Amaral, the "oafish" local police chief out of his depth in a case that has captured unprecedented world attention, with millions fascinated by the story of the girl snatched from her bed on holiday while her parents ate with friends 200 yards away.
The sight of the sweaty, corpulent Amaral in restaurants and cafes near the Portimao police headquarters had become commonplace since Madeleine disappeared.
While the McCanns were warned repeatedly they faced jail for speaking about the case, he was been overheard, during his daily three-hour lunches of wine and shellfish, accusing the couple of killing their daughter.
In one conversation with Portugal's ex-Formula One racing driver Pedro Lamy, Amaral revealed he was convinced the McCanns drugged their daughter and accidentally killed her. "The police case is we are sure the parents killed Madeleine. They are both doctors and know about drugs.
"We are confident in our case," he said.
In an effort to make up for lost time following Amaral's dismissal, Rebelo has recruited his own men from Lisbon. To the fury of the original officers, he has lost little time in sidelining them, bringing in two child sex experts from the Casa Pia case as well as homicide specialists and computer analysts - known as "the cleaners" due to their reputation for leaving no stone unturned.
According to senior police sources, he also launched a furious private attack on the 100 officers involved in the original inquiry, which he has now cut back to 40.
At a meeting, he accused some officers of having "closed minds" about who was guilty, saying that "pre-conceptions should be challenged".
In addition, he oversaw Operation Predator - raids on more than 70 suspected paedophiles, whose computers were searched last week for images of Madeleine or other evidence of criminal sexual acts. Although by last night Rebelo had failed to make a breakthrough, sources say it is a clear sign, along with reports that Russian child traffickers may be involved, of a strand of his current thinking.
In a Lisbon café, an associate of Rebelo told the Mail: "The Casa Pia case had a deep affect on Paulo. You come across things that are appalling and cruel. But you get a feeling that there are some seriously bad people in the world, and some of them are here. He does not rule anything out."
So, after enduring months of soul-destroying leaks from the Portuguese police - from claims that they drugged Madeleine and then disposed of her body, to allegations that Gerry was not even her real father - the McCanns are no longer the sole focus of the Portuguese police investigation.
But the nightmare goes on. A group of officers loyal to Amaral are still leaking smears to the Portuguese press.
The latest?
That bodily fluids from Madeleine's corpse were found in the boot of the couple's hire care and that "background checks" were to be carried out on Gerry McCann's laptop. And then the police "sources" claimed that Kate killed Madeleine without telling Gerry, and that the body was "refrigerated" before being dumped up to 25 days later.
His career in tatters and now back on desk duties in Faro, Amaral faces a criminal hearing in the case of another missing child, Joana Cipriano, after being accused of concealing evidence that the girl's mother was tortured into confessing to her murder.
Amaral and his colleagues face countless unanswered questions about mistakes in the original police investigation into Maddie's disappearance, such as failing to ensure the McCanns' apartment was sealed off for forensics. (This did not happen until the next day, by which time the McCanns, their friends, resort staff and detectives had traipsed through, destroying potentially vital evidence.)
They also failed to seal off the Mark Warner Ocean Club resort. No roadblocks were set up and police on the Spanish border - two hours' drive away - were not alerted for 12 hours. Staff were only quizzed 60 hours later. And the CCTV footage from a busy main road was never studied. The list of mistakes goes on.
While the shift in the investigation may ease the intolerable pressure on the McCanns, it will do little to console them.
As well as growing fears that Madeleine was abducted by a paedophile ring, they can have little hope of justice when leading Portuguese figures are allegedly involved in covering-up their own child sex scandal.
Both cases - the two highestprofile criminal investigations in the country since the end of the Portuguese military dictatorship in 1974 - have been riven by allegations of compromised police officers, high-level interference and vicious, virulent attacks on key witnesses.
Pedro Namora, a former Casa Pia orphan who witnessed 11 rapes on fellow orphans, during which they were tied to their beds, sympathises with the McCanns. He believes elements in the force have conspired to suppress both scandals, fearing damage to the country's reputation.
"Portugal is a paedophiles' paradise," said Mr Namora, now a lawyer campaigning on behalf of the Casa Pia victims. "If all the names come out, this will be an earthquake in Portugal. There is a massive, sophisticated network at play here - stretching from the government to the judiciary and the police.
"The network is enormous and extremely powerful. There are magistrates, ambassadors, police, politicians - all have procured children from Casa Pia. It is extremely difficult to break this down. These people cover for each other, because if one is arrested, they all are arrested. They don't want anyone to know."
Now 44, Mr Namora watched as friends sank into alcoholism, drug addiction and death after their traumatic childhood experiences at Casa Pia. "I was the only one who made it," he said. "What could I do? I couldn't keep silent."
He has received death threats and warnings about what will happen to his own children, after taking up the case when an orphan called "Joel" approached him, saying prominent paedophiles were using Casa Pia as a "supermarket for children".
Mr Namora has been threatened after fighting on behalf of the abused children he grew up with.
After being telephoned by a stranger offering to pay off his mortgage, he was told the exact movements of his own three children, and warned that they and their father would come to a grisly end unless he shut up.
An open, warm man, Mr Namora makes an unlikely conspiracytheorist-But he believes the case, which he brought to light in 2003, will underscore Portugal's growing attraction for paedophiles, which has seen six children disappear in recent years.
One reason for this attraction is that the law was quietly relaxed last year, ahead of the forthcoming trial, meaning that repeat offences against the same child would merit only a single charge - and a lesser sentence.
In echoes of the McCanns' ordeal, the initial investigation was badly handled when allegations of abuse were first made at Casa Pia in 1982. Carlos Silvino, the man known as Bibi, was linked to rapes and assaults, but police "lost" pictures showing prominent Lisbon politicians with him and the children.
He was only charged after dozens of children came forward in 2003. They also accused Jorge Ritto, a former Portuguese ambassador, of child abuse. Ritto, it transpired, had also once been sent home in disgrace from a posting in Germany after an incident involving a young boy in a park.
The conspiracy did not end there. Teresa Costa Macedo, a former secretary of state for the family, has revealed that she knew about the attacks in the early Eighties - and that she had alerted General Antonio Ramalho Eanes, the then Portuguese president, about the allegations.
Mrs Costa Macedo, who remained silent for two decades after being warned she would be killed if she spoke, now says that the caretaker "was just one element in a huge paedophile network that involved important people in our country. It wasn't just him [the caretaker]. He was a procurer of children for well-known people who range from diplomats and politicians to people linked to the media".
While still a government minister, Costa Macedo handed police "photographs, an account of the methods used to spirit children out of the orphanage and testimonies of a number of children". Many of the photographs were found at ex-ambassador Jorge Ritto's house. Police reportedly found four children locked up who had been missing from Casa Pia.
Under armed guard at a safe house last week, Bibi could count himself a lucky man. He originally faced allegations that he had sexually assaulted more than 600 children. That has since been reduced to 30. Silvino has hinted at the high-level of the conspiracy, saying: "They can't touch me - there are too many people involved."
Following Ritto's arrest, the police questioned Carloz Cruz, known as Portugal's "Mr Television", and Joao Diniz, a high- society doctor and driver of the red Ferrari. The network allegedly went further. Paulo Pedroso, a government minister, was arrested and quizzed about 15 cases of child sexual abuse.
Amid allegations that paedophile networks have become endemic in Portugal - the European police force Interpol has named the country as one of the worst offenders in Europe - there are fears that the Casa Pia scandal will come to eclipse Belgium's notorious Marc Dutroux case, in which the arrest of a notorious paedophile and child murderer revealed a sordid picture of judicial and political corruption.
Of course, the Casa Pia case may have no direct link to the disappearance of Madeleine, but the culture in which such a serious child abuse network was allowed to operate is the same culture that pervades the whole of Portugal. Was it this attitude that led to the bungled initial investigation in the McCann case?
Perhaps the appointment of the man who exposed the Casa Pia scandal will give the parents of Maddie hope that a proper investigation will now discover the truth.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488654/Why-Portugal-haven-paedophiles--disturbing-backcloth-Madeleine-case.html#ixzz4RdNIKFtr Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: John on December 02, 2016, 01:42:38 AM
they were still drinking..wine.....and as i said ......they may as well have been 50 mile away...they saw nothing ...zilch
A good point. A child can choke on their vomit so being 50 metres away might as well have been 50 miles. No wonder Mrs Healey reportedly wanted to slap someones face when she heard what they had done!
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: John on December 02, 2016, 01:55:25 AM
Photo of apartment 5a taken from across the street shortly after Madeleine dispappeared. Although the outside of the building was well illuminated, the upper part of the steps and some of the patio area were still in shadow.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 02, 2016, 02:08:51 AM
Photo of apartment 5a taken from across the street shortly after Madeleine dispappeared. Although the outside of the building was well illuminated, the upper part of the steps and some of the patio area were still in shadow.
Actually, this photo gives wealth of information, so much so that one could probably base an entire thread round it.
Let's kick off with Mrs Fenn was probably home at the time, unless she was in the habit of leaving her lights on when she went out.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 02, 2016, 02:18:06 AM
Photo of apartment 5a taken from across the street shortly after Madeleine dispappeared. Although the outside of the building was well illuminated, the upper part of the steps and some of the patio area were still in shadow.
John do you know what date (year) these photos were taken?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: misty on December 02, 2016, 02:23:28 AM
Actually, this photo gives wealth of information, so much so that one could probably base an entire thread round it.
Let's kick off with Mrs Fenn was probably home at the time, unless she was in the habit of leaving her lights on when she went out.
Mrs Fenn had suffered a break-in just a few weeks prior to Madeleine's disappearance. Isn't leaving a light on when you leave your property empty during the evening a big deterrent to a prospective intruder? We know Mrs Fenn was definitely at home around 10,30 due to the balcony conversation. It struck me as odd that, despite Mrs Fenn's niece, CT, providing a statement almost immediately to the UK police about the strange event she witnessed, no-one at the Portuguese end bothered to follow up matters with Mrs Fenn immediately.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: John on December 02, 2016, 02:29:23 AM
If you are still unable to measure distances on GE then that is tuff titty. Time you learned.
I have gone over the method at least twice over the years that you have been here. Others have taken the trouble to learn. Why cant you?
I am quite aware of the distance involved.
Your constant repetition of it being in the back garden is beyond peurile and is quite frankly appalling. The McCann's and others had left their children alone , with occasional and short checks. It beggars belief and logic that is was a safe thing to do.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2016, 07:44:15 AM
Photo of apartment 5a taken from across the street shortly after Madeleine dispappeared. Although the outside of the building was well illuminated, the upper part of the steps and some of the patio area were still in shadow.
I think the top pic has added lights, it's much lighter than the bottom one.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2016, 08:09:58 AM
Everyone who has children takes certain risks with their safety every day to a greater or lesser degree. I have given examples on this thread of the risks taken by my parents with me and the risk I take with my kids' safety - we are not an unusual family, therefore it stands to reason that risk-taking exists on a daily basis for most people, whether it is letting kids go to the park to play by themselves, having a pet dog in the house with a child, buying a trampoline, installing a swimming pool, doing some gardening while the three year old plays in his bedroom, packing them off to boarding school aged 7 etc etc etc. Most people = millions. If you want millions of cites you may need to give me a few decades to compile them. Before you start I am not claiming that millions of people leave their kids unattended to go to dinner 50 metres away, nor that it is sensible behaviour, but undoubtedly the McCanns were not the first to take such risks. We know they did it, we know it was risky, they "gambled and lost" (thanks Alice) how many more times does this issue need to be discussed? Why does it pose such enduring fascination to some and why do McCann critics seem solely fixated on the McCanns' "neglect" to the exclusion of anyone else's? Rhetorical questions, no need to explain :-)
It will continue as long as some people continue to argue that their behaviour was that of caring, careful, sensible people. It clearly wasn't for so many reasons; none of which was the possibility of abduction.
Some of those reasons are;
Waking and crying for up to 30 minutes. Waking and getting out of bed and into mischief. Waking, finding the parents missing and going out onto that dangerous balcony. Waking and leaving by the front door. Then we have climbing and falling, being ill, etc. etc.
That's why people stay in or use baby sitters, because of the above very common possibilities, not 'abduction'. The McCanns seem to have ignored these very normal dangers which most parents are aware of and guard against on a daily basis.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: carlymichelle on December 02, 2016, 08:13:19 AM
It will continue as long as some people continue to argue that their behaviour was that of caring, careful, sensible people. It clearly wasn't for so many reasons; none of which was the possibility of abduction.
Some of those reasons are;
Waking and crying for up to 30 minutes. Waking and getting out of bed and into mischief. Waking, finding the parents missing and going out onto that dangerous balcony. Waking and leaving by the front door. Then we have climbing and falling, being ill, etc. etc.
That's why people stay in or use baby sitters, because of the above very common possibilities, not 'abduction'. The McCanns seem to have ignored these very normal dangers which most parents are aware of and guard against on a daily basis.
why didnt they get the grandparents to look after the kids if they wanted a child free holiday??
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 08:20:29 AM
It will continue as long as some people continue to argue that their behaviour was that of caring, careful, sensible people. It clearly wasn't for so many reasons; none of which was the possibility of abduction.
Some of those reasons are;
Waking and crying for up to 30 minutes. Waking and getting out of bed and into mischief. Waking, finding the parents missing and going out onto that dangerous balcony. Waking and leaving by the front door. Then we have climbing and falling, being ill, etc. etc.
That's why people stay in or use baby sitters, because of the above very common possibilities, not 'abduction'. The McCanns seem to have ignored these very normal dangers which most parents are aware of and guard against on a daily basis.
What you're saying then is that any parent who takes such risks is neither caring, careful or sensible. That means I don't care about my kids, it means that my parents didn't care about me, it means Sara Payne, Ben Needham's grandparents, April Jones' mother, none of them cared about their kids because they "allowed" them to come to harm. Any child who is abducted or has a serious accident must therefore have uncaring parents because their parents did not prevent the abduction or accident from happening. Is that your belief? If not, please explain why not.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 02, 2016, 08:50:35 AM
What you're saying then is that any parent who takes such risks is neither caring, careful or sensible. That means I don't care about my kids, it means that my parents didn't care about me, it means Sara Payne, Ben Needham's grandparents, April Jones' mother, none of them cared about their kids because they "allowed" them to come to harm. Any child who is abducted or has a serious accident must therefore have uncaring parents because their parents did not prevent the abduction or accident from happening. Is that your belief? If not, please explain why not.
You always try to equate the McCann's behaviour with normal parental activity and fail to differentiate between allowing children more freedom as part of their development and leaving children because of a preference to do something else.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: carlymichelle on December 02, 2016, 09:21:29 AM
You always try to equate the McCann's behaviour with normal parental activity and fail to differentiate between allowing children more freedom as part of their development and leaving children because of a preference to do something else.
exactly to put it bluntly if the mcanns were not drs would they defend them ie if the family were on welfare etc? and left their kids home alone like the mcanns and went to the pub ? i doubt it
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2016, 09:31:20 AM
What you're saying then is that any parent who takes such risks is neither caring, careful or sensible. That means I don't care about my kids, it means that my parents didn't care about me, it means Sara Payne, Ben Needham's grandparents, April Jones' mother, none of them cared about their kids because they "allowed" them to come to harm. Any child who is abducted or has a serious accident must therefore have uncaring parents because their parents did not prevent the abduction or accident from happening. Is that your belief? If not, please explain why not.
You seem unable to comprehend the difference between age and context appropriate risks and age and context inappropriate risks. A bit like Kate McCann comparing the risk of putting your child in the car with the risk of leaving them home alone. One is a socially acceptable risk and the other isn't. Parent's aren't advised to keep their kids out of cars but they are advised not to leave them home alone.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 11:43:55 AM
You seem unable to comprehend the difference between age and context appropriate risks and age and context inappropriate risks. A bit like Kate McCann comparing the risk of putting your child in the car with the risk of leaving them home alone. One is a socially acceptable risk and the other isn't. Parent's aren't advised to keep their kids out of cars but they are advised not to leave them home alone.
So-called appropriate risks often are far more risky to the child's health and well-being than the supposedly inappropriate risk of leaving your sleeping children unattended for 30 minutes at a time, whilst sitting 50 metres away. To say that the McCanns are uncaring parents because the did this is to ignore this fact and to ignore their parenting record as a whole. If you truly believed that they were uncaring parents then would you not have been campaigning to have their other children taken into care? Perhaps you have been! Can one not make a mistake or have a lapse of judgement but still be a caring parent at the same time? I think most normal people would agree that one can be and that in fact most people would fall into that category.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 11:44:54 AM
You always try to equate the McCann's behaviour with normal parental activity and fail to differentiate between allowing children more freedom as part of their development and leaving children because of a preference to do something else.
And you (collectively) always try to make out that the McCanns are abnormal, uncaring demons of parents which they clearly are not.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 02, 2016, 11:46:29 AM
It will continue as long as some people continue to argue that their behaviour was that of caring, careful, sensible people. It clearly wasn't for so many reasons; none of which was the possibility of abduction.
Some of those reasons are;
Waking and crying for up to 30 minutes. Waking and getting out of bed and into mischief. Waking, finding the parents missing and going out onto that dangerous balcony. Waking and leaving by the front door. Then we have climbing and falling, being ill, etc. etc.
That's why people stay in or use baby sitters, because of the above very common possibilities, not 'abduction'. The McCanns seem to have ignored these very normal dangers which most parents are aware of and guard against on a daily basis.
IMO if every parent sat down and weighed up each and every single thing that could go wrong during every minute of every day - they would be permanently attached to their child - and wouldn't even let them sleep on their own unsupervised .
I'm surprised that you condone the use of babysitters G.. Plenty of cases of them neglecting or abusing the children in their care. Shouldn't they be on your list?
What some parents will see as safe - others won't. This is apparent from the fact that some parents have been signing up for the listening service for decades and leaving their children alone in their rooms - whilst other parents would not dream of doing that. I have often watched (You've Been Framed) in horror as parents film their toddlers climbing on tables etc etc - quite oblivious apparently to the danger that I think they are in. .
IMO people have a completely different attitude on holiday to what they may have at home. They relax, they lighten up and they are surrounded by other people who are all doing the same - i.e. enjoying their holiday. In this holiday atmosphere I can see how easy it is to be lulled into a false sense of security that would not be part of their daily lives at home.
I don't know of anyone who goes on holiday intending to spend their time looking for danger round every corner. The opposite happens IMO and people are more likely to drop their guard and relax their vigilance, which is why holiday resorts have 'Lost Children posts' and also sadly why children drown in pools on holiday every year.
We don't condemn and villify any of these parents and so why the McCanns are singled out day in and day out for such vicious condemnation for being no different to other parents on holiday is inexplicable to me.
AIMHO.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: John on December 02, 2016, 11:54:48 AM
I think the top pic has added lights, it's much lighter than the bottom one.
I remember looking at this photo previously and came to the conclusion that it was digitally enhanced. I have toned down the image shown attached which reveals white light directed at 5a so you are probably correct.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on December 02, 2016, 12:02:04 PM
IMO if every parent sat down and weighed up each and every single thing that could go wrong during every minute of every day - they would be permanently attached to their child - and wouldn't even let them sleep on their own unsupervised .
I'm surprised that you condone the use of babysitters G.. Plenty of cases of them neglecting or abusing the children in their care. Shouldn't they be on your list?
What some parents will see as safe - others won't. This is apparent from the fact that some parents have been signing up for the listening service for decades and leaving their children alone in their rooms - whilst other parents would not dream of doing that. I have often watched (You've Been Framed) in horror as parents film their toddlers climbing on tables etc etc - quite oblivious apparently to the danger that I think they are in. .
IMO people have a completely different attitude on holiday to what they may have at home. They relax, they lighten up and they are surrounded by other people who are all doing the same - i.e. enjoying their holiday. In this holiday atmosphere I can see how easy it is to be lulled into a false sense of security that would not be part of their daily lives at home.
I don't know of anyone who goes on holiday intending to spend their time looking for danger round every corner. The opposite happens IMO and people are more likely to drop their guard and relax their vigilance, which is why holiday resorts have 'Lost Children posts' and also sadly why children drown in pools on holiday every year.
We don't condemn and villify any of these parents and so why the McCanns are singled out day in and day out for such vicious condemnation for being no different to other parents on holiday is inexplicable to me.
AIMHO.
I must admit I am one parent who wouldn't have left my children alone. Having said that the McCann's have acknowledged what they did and are carrying the weight of that guilt every day.
The reason I believe that people like to bring this up a lot is that they can't find anything else to beat the McCann's with. They know the McCann's wish they hadn't done it, and it is their way of getting at them.
The people who bring it up constantly are probably unable to explain how the McCann's are meant to have cleared up and hidden Madeleine so quickly and professionally so that no one could find her, and did it all in such a remarkably short time.
Some who cannot explain how the McCann's could have done this have even come up with the ludicrous idea that Madeleine must have died the Sunday before!!
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2016, 12:42:18 PM
So-called appropriate risks often are far more risky to the child's health and well-being than the supposedly inappropriate risk of leaving your sleeping children unattended for 30 minutes at a time, whilst sitting 50 metres away. To say that the McCanns are uncaring parents because the did this is to ignore this fact and to ignore their parenting record as a whole. If you truly believed that they were uncaring parents then would you not have been campaigning to have their other children taken into care? Perhaps you have been! Can one not make a mistake or have a lapse of judgement but still be a caring parent at the same time? I think most normal people would agree that one can be and that in fact most people would fall into that category.
It doesn't matter if other risks are riskier (whatever risks you are referring to) because they're not the subject of the discussion. The subject of the discussion is the apparent lack of knowledge of the dangers involved in leaving small children home alone. We all know there are dangers and we all know what they are, why didn't they?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Benice on December 02, 2016, 01:26:07 PM
It doesn't matter if other risks are riskier (whatever risks you are referring to) because they're not the subject of the discussion. The subject of the discussion is the apparent lack of knowledge of the dangers involved in leaving small children home alone. We all know there are dangers and we all know what they are, why didn't they?
Because based on their knowledge of their own children's sleeping habits and their belief that PdL was a child friendly, safe environment, and knowing they were only 60 seconds away from then - they trusted that all would be well. Something which IIRC the AG said they were entitled to do.
''Hindsight is a wonderful thing'' and ''It is easy to be wise after the event'' are both common sayings. That's because humans make mistakes all the time on a regular basis. Why the McCanns have been excluded from the rest of the human race by some - when it comes to getting things wrong - is totally inexplicable IMO.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2016, 01:31:54 PM
I remember looking at this photo previously and came to the conclusion that it was digitally enhanced. I have toned down the image shown attached which reveals white light directed at 5a so you are probably correct.
It never looked right to me because other photos and videos have shown just how dark that street was, No way did the street light have that effect.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2016, 01:48:01 PM
Because based on their knowledge of their own children's sleeping habits and their belief that PdL was a child friendly, safe environment, and knowing they were only 60 seconds away from then - they trusted that all would be well. Something which IIRC the AG said they were entitled to do.
''Hindsight is a wonderful thing'' and ''It is easy to be wise after the event'' are both common sayings. That's because humans make mistakes all the time on a regular basis. Why the McCanns have been excluded from the rest of the human race by some - when it comes to getting things wrong - is totally inexplicable IMO.
Gerry's knowledge of his daughter's sleeping habits led him to believe that she may have left her bed as early as 9.05 pm, so that's no defence, it's a good reason NOT to leave her home alone.
PdL has never been shown as anything but a child-friendly safe environment. The dangers I'm talking about were linked to kids being home alone; crying, getting out of bed, falling etc. Nothing to do with the location.
We all make mistakes but few parents make such basic mistakes, especially those who are described as careful, loving and protective by family and friends.
None of it has anything to do with hindsight, foresight is what was lacking.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 02, 2016, 01:50:22 PM
Because based on their knowledge of their own children's sleeping habits and their belief that PdL was a child friendly, safe environment, and knowing they were only 60 seconds away from then - they trusted that all would be well. Something which IIRC the AG said they were entitled to do.
''Hindsight is a wonderful thing'' and ''It is easy to be wise after the event'' are both common sayings. That's because humans make mistakes all the time on a regular basis. Why the McCanns have been excluded from the rest of the human race by some - when it comes to getting things wrong - is totally inexplicable IMO.
So why if there was nothing to worry about, did they lock the apartment during the day ? 8)-)))
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on December 02, 2016, 01:53:46 PM
Because based on their knowledge of their own children's sleeping habits and their belief that PdL was a child friendly, safe environment, and knowing they were only 60 seconds away from then - they trusted that all would be well. Something which IIRC the AG said they were entitled to do.
''Hindsight is a wonderful thing'' and ''It is easy to be wise after the event'' are both common sayings. That's because humans make mistakes all the time on a regular basis. Why the McCanns have been excluded from the rest of the human race by some - when it comes to getting things wrong - is totally inexplicable IMO.
A few months back, I was trying to assist a family member in learning a new skill. Very early on things went wrong and there was a minor accident. No one got hurt but some economic damage was inflicted.
The young-ish family member gets the bulk of the blame for this damage. However, given I was the instructor and supervisor, I have to hold my hand up and say quite simply that I got things wrong, and moreover it is correct to blame me for getting these things wrong. And the passage of ten years will not make my contribution to this incident any less wrong.
The McCanns cannot keep Madeleine's disappearance high in the public profile and simultaneously expect the issue of their childcare arrangements to vanish.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: carlymichelle on December 02, 2016, 01:57:57 PM
FFS. Are you for real? G-Unit has already referred to their behaviour as abnormal and uncaring, on this very thread I believe. Are you seriously suggesting that the sceptics on this forum believe the McCanns to be normal caring parents - do you for example?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 03:07:18 PM
It doesn't matter if other risks are riskier (whatever risks you are referring to) because they're not the subject of the discussion. The subject of the discussion is the apparent lack of knowledge of the dangers involved in leaving small children home alone. We all know there are dangers and we all know what they are, why didn't they?
Because they knew their kids, knew the younger two were in cots, knew that all three were asleep, knew that the dangers in the apartment were minimal, knew that they would be checked on regularly.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 03:14:20 PM
Gerry's knowledge of his daughter's sleeping habits led him to believe that she may have left her bed as early as 9.05 pm, so that's no defence, it's a good reason NOT to leave her home alone.
PdL has never been shown as anything but a child-friendly safe environment. The dangers I'm talking about were linked to kids being home alone; crying, getting out of bed, falling etc. Nothing to do with the location.
We all make mistakes but few parents make such basic mistakes, especially those who are described as careful, loving and protective by family and friends.
None of it has anything to do with hindsight, foresight is what was lacking.
Can you explain why you are a better judge of the McCanns' parenting skills and capacity for love and caring for their kids than their family and friends? Do you think it is right and proper to judge them solely on their actions whilst on holiday (despite the fact you weren't even there to witness their behaviour and actions) and do you think it is right and proper to constantly condemn them as abnormal, uncaring parents ad nauseam?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on December 02, 2016, 03:15:26 PM
Because they knew their kids, knew the younger two were in cots, knew that all three were asleep, knew that the dangers in the apartment were minimal, knew that they would be checked on regularly.
Sadly for Madeleine, they got it horribly wrong.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 04:59:38 PM
A few months back, I was trying to assist a family member in learning a new skill. Very early on things went wrong and there was a minor accident. No one got hurt but some economic damage was inflicted.
The young-ish family member gets the bulk of the blame for this damage. However, given I was the instructor and supervisor, I have to hold my hand up and say quite simply that I got things wrong, and moreover it is correct to blame me for getting these things wrong. And the passage of ten years will not make my contribution to this incident any less wrong.
The McCanns cannot keep Madeleine's disappearance high in the public profile and simultaneously expect the issue of their childcare arrangements to vanish.
Will you expect to be reminded that you got things wrong every day for the next 10 years?
In my experience there are two types of reaction when things go wrong.
1. People who are only interested in who is to blame, and want to concentrate on that.
2. People who say - 'What's done is done' and look for ways of putting it right.
IMO people who don't want to drop the blame game, do it because it makes themselves feel 'superior' to the person(s) who made the mistake.
Other people don't have that problem.
AIMHO
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2016, 05:57:39 PM
Because they knew their kids, knew the younger two were in cots, knew that all three were asleep, knew that the dangers in the apartment were minimal, knew that they would be checked on regularly.
So you believe they thought it all through and made a reasoned decision? How do you account for the fact that the decision was made before they reached PdL then?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 06:01:10 PM
So you believe they thought it all through and made a reasoned decision? How do you account for the fact that the decision was made before they reached PdL then?
Question 1 - yes, I do believe that. Question 2 - could you provide me a cite for that?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2016, 06:43:17 PM
Question 1 - yes, I do believe that. Question 2 - could you provide me a cite for that?
Answer 1. Then could you exolain why they did what they did knowing that Madeleine was likely to leave he bed and that she was perfectly capable of opening the patio door?
Answer 2.
As far as he [MO] is concerned, he wishes at this time to add that, in conversation with DP on a date he does not recall with certainty but likely to have been on 7 or 8 May, he [DP] confided in him that that, at that time, KH had been particularly reluctant about coming to Portugal because she had had a bad feeling [presentiment] about the children of the group and the non-existence of the 'baby sitting' service.
Nevertheless, he relates that, they had discussed this problem resolving to make the trip since the operator had assured them accommodation sufficiently close together that, collectively, they had managed to assure the checking and supervision of their respective progeny. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-10MAY.htm
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 06:59:43 PM
Answer 1. Then could you exolain why they did what they did knowing that Madeleine was likely to leave he bed and that she was perfectly capable of opening the patio door?
Answer 2.
As far as he [MO] is concerned, he wishes at this time to add that, in conversation with .... ...... on a date he does not recall with certainty but likely to have been on 7 or 8 May, he [.... ......] confided in him that that, at that time, KH had been particularly reluctant about coming to Portugal because she had had a bad feeling [presentiment] about the children of the group and the non-existence of the 'baby sitting' service.
Nevertheless, he relates that, they had discussed this problem resolving to make the trip since the operator had assured them accommodation sufficiently close together that, collectively, they had managed to assure the checking and supervision of their respective progeny. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-10MAY.htm
Answer 1 - can you provide a cite for them "knowing that Madeleine was likely to leave the bed" and "that she was perfectly capable of opening the patio door"? Incidentally were Madeleine;s finger prints found on the patio door out of interest?
Answer 2 - thanks, but I'm not sure what this is supposed to prove. Did they decide in advance that, no matter what they found when they got there, they would collectively jeopardise their children's safety in order to go on the piss? Or is there any possibility that they may have appraised the situation when they got there and had they not believed it was perfectly safe to do so?
is Kate McCann lying in your opinion when she writes: "Speaking for myself, I can say, hand on heart, that it never once crossed my mind that this might not be a safe option. If I'd had any doubts whatsoever, I would simply never have entertained it".
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on December 02, 2016, 07:28:18 PM
Answer 1 - can you provide a cite for them "knowing that Madeleine was likely to leave the bed" and "that she was perfectly capable of opening the patio door"? Incidentally were Madeleine;s finger prints found on the patio door out of interest?
Answer 2 - thanks, but I'm not sure what this is supposed to prove. Did they decide in advance that, no matter what they found when they got there, they would collectively jeopardise their children's safety in order to go on the piss? Or is there any possibility that they may have appraised the situation when they got there and had they not believed it was perfectly safe to do so?
is Kate McCann lying in your opinion when she writes: "Speaking for myself, I can say, hand on heart, that it never once crossed my mind that this might not be a safe option. If I'd had any doubts whatsoever, I would simply never have entertained it".
But we know from Kate's friends that she certainly had reservations, especially whether it was safe to leave the patio doors open.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 02, 2016, 07:40:32 PM
Answer 1 - can you provide a cite for them "knowing that Madeleine was likely to leave the bed" and "that she was perfectly capable of opening the patio door"? Incidentally were Madeleine;s finger prints found on the patio door out of interest?
Answer 2 - thanks, but I'm not sure what this is supposed to prove. Did they decide in advance that, no matter what they found when they got there, they would collectively jeopardise their children's safety in order to go on the piss? Or is there any possibility that they may have appraised the situation when they got there and had they not believed it was perfectly safe to do so?
is Kate McCann lying in your opinion when she writes: "Speaking for myself, I can say, hand on heart, that it never once crossed my mind that this might not be a safe option. If I'd had any doubts whatsoever, I would simply never have entertained it".
Madeleine was known for waking and leaving her bed. Of course she could open the patio door. Fingerprints? No-one said she did open the patio door, so that's irrelevant. Kate may have appraised the situation; she seems to have seen the balcony as safe, for example. The problem is that her assessment seems to have been faulty.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 08:29:30 PM
I've scanned this article and it looks like a very pertinent (if rather log) read indeed: http://www.collabra.org/articles/10.1525/collabra.58/
"We hypothesize that a similar process may be at work when people imagine the harm likely to befall unsupervised children. That is, people may overestimate the danger to unsupervised children in order to justify their moral condemnation of the parents who allow the children to be alone. Thus, exaggerated fears of harm and increasing moral prohibitions form a sort of self-reinforcing feedback loop. We will ultimately suggest that much of the recent hysteria concerning danger to unsupervised children is the product of this feedback loop, in which inflated estimates of risk lead to a new moral norm against leaving children alone, and then the need to justify moral condemnation of parents who violate this norm leads in turn to even more inflated estimates of risk, generating even stronger moral condemnation of parents who violate the norm, and so on".
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 08:35:24 PM
Madeleine was known for waking and leaving her bed. Of course she could open the patio door. Fingerprints? No-one said she did open the patio door, so that's irrelevant. Kate may have appraised the situation; she seems to have seen the balcony as safe, for example. The problem is that her assessment seems to have been faulty.
Was Madeleine waking and leaving bed every night habitually? "Of course she could open the patio door" - of course? Why "of course"? No one said she opened the patio door but you think maybe she did and fell to her death don't you? Based on no evidence whatsoever of course!
Have you ever used the phrase "what was I thinking?!" when chastising yourself for poor judgement? I don't suppose you ever have because it strikes me you think you're practically perfect in every possible way.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 08:36:11 PM
Firstly, how about a cite for "nothing of value was taken".
Trisha Cameron 5/5/07 Guardian
Quote
Mrs Cameron said: "Nothing had been touched in the apartment, no valuables taken, no passports. They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her."
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 02, 2016, 10:10:19 PM
Police hunt three-year-old believed abducted from holiday apartment Sandra Laville, Martin Wainwright, Dale Fuchs in Faro Saturday 5 May 2007 00.16 BST The telephone rang at around 11pm at Trish Cameron's home near Glasgow. She picked it up to hear the voice of her younger brother. "He was distraught, breaking his heart," Mrs Cameron said. "He said: 'Madeleine's been abducted, she's been abducted.'" Hundreds of miles away in Portugal's western Algarve Gerald McCann, whose job as a heart surgeon demands a calm, steady nerve, had lost any semblance of control and was crying down the telephone to his older sister. Just an hour earlier he and his wife Kate had returned to their ground floor apartment in the Ocean Club holiday resort to find that three-year-old Madeleine, the little girl they had left asleep in her white pyjamas, had disappeared.
Their two-year-old twins, Sean and Amelie, lay undisturbed in their cots beside the bed, making the absence of the child they call Maddy all the more haunting. Nothing appeared to have been stolen from the room, but the shutters seemed to have been forced, the window was open and the main door unlocked, according to the family.
It was Mrs McCann who walked in first. Minutes later she ran out screaming, according to her sister in law. In the confusion and melee that followed, the police were called and other holidaymakers woken to carry out a search for the three-year-old, amid hopes that she was merely sleepwalking.
But by the time Mr McCann picked up the phone to his sister in Dumbarton the thread of hope that Maddy had simply climbed out of the window and wandered off had been eclipsed by the growing certainty that she had been snatched while he and his wife ate tapas just 100 yards away within the holiday complex.
The luxury resort in Praia de la Luz, where Moorish-style villas sit amid sub-tropical gardens overlooking a beach of white sand, was transformed into a crime scene yesterday.
Portuguese police used a sniffer dog to check around the complex. The five storey block where the McCanns were staying was sealed off and forensic experts were dusting the shutters and windows of their two bedroomed apartment for fingerprints. Those holidaymakers who were not taking part in the continuing search for any sign of the child were handing out photographs of her in the hope that someone either within the resort or outside in the small village of Praia de la Luz would have spotted her.
"She is an absolutely beautiful wee blonde girl with blue green eyes," said Mrs Cameron. "Her one distinguishing features is that one of her pupils runs down into the iris of her eye, her right eye."
The Foreign Office said a liaison officer from the Serious and Organised Crime Unit was in touch with the Portuguese chief of police. Two officials from the British Consulate in nearby Portimao were with the family to help them as they dealt with the police, a spokesman said.
The couple were being interviewed yesterday afternoon by Portuguese detectives, who took them through their movements on Thursday night in detail.
Mrs McCann, a GP in Leicester and her husband, who works in the world renowned cardiac unit of Glenfield Hospital, in the city, flew out to the Algarve with eight friends last Saturday for the week-long break.
Maddy, their eldest child, was going to be four next week and was due to start school in September. Family friend Jill Renwick said it was the first time they had been away somewhere with the children and that they had chosen the resort with care. "This is the first time they have done this. They are very, very anxious parents and very careful and they chose [the resort] because it is family-friendly," she said.
Throughout the week the family enjoyed the facilities in the resort, which boasts four swimming pools, the beach and childcare from 7.30pm to 11.30pm for those parents who want it.
On Thursday night the McCanns went out after 8pm, having put their three children into their pyjamas and seen them fall asleep in their bedroom in the apartment. "They weren't out for long, and they could see the apartment from the restaurant" said Brian Healy, Madeleine's maternal grandfather.
Mrs Cameron said the couple checked on the children every half hour; the last check was made after 9pm by Mr McCann. Some time between then and around 10pm when his wife walked into the room to find Madeleine missing, the family believes an intruder broke in and snatched the girl.
Mrs Cameron said: "Nothing had been touched in the apartment, no valuables taken, no passports. They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her."
Paul Moyes, 47, from Cheshire and his wife Susan, who own a holiday apartment in the same block as the McCanns, said they were woken at 11.30pm by a knock on the door and asked to join in a search for a missing girl.
"We went down to the beach with scores of other people to look for her," said Mr Moyes. "The police arrived at around midnight and by that stage we were already out looking. There were uniformed police, plain clothes and even off duty local officers who joined in.
"The search went on all night, people were using torches, and in the morning police sniffer dogs arrived."
By 4.30am exhausted holidaymakers began drifting away, having found no sign of Madeleine. Back home in Dumbarton, Mrs Cameron spoke to her brother again at 10am yesterday.
"It was frustrating for him then because between 5am and 7am the police seemed to do nothing, they were standing about," she said.
But the manager of the resort, John Hill, said everything was being done to try to trace Madeleine. "It was a very emotional and very frantic night and everyone did a fantastic job of getting involved and trying to search the area," he said.
Throughout yesterday the search continued for Madeleine. Mrs McCann's parents, Brian and Sandra, flew out in the afternoon from Liverpool to join their daughter and son-in-law, who met as young doctors in Glasgow and married nine years ago in Liverpool. Mrs Cameron also packed a bag to fly out to help her younger brother.
At the McCanns' family home in the village of Rothley, Leicestershire, neighbours and friends were praying that Madeleine would be found alive and well. "We are absolutely devastated," said Penny Noble. "They are a really nice family and good neighbours. They are delightful. We see them take their bikes up and down and going for walks. Madeleine is a very happy-go-lucky little girl".
Another neighbour, Tracey Horsefield, said that the family "idolised" Maddy and the twins. She said: "They were really protective of the children. I'm just praying that she's not been abducted. Let's hope that for some reason she just wandered off."
At the cardiac unit in Glenfield Hospital, staff were at work yesterday with one eye on the phone - hoping to receive the call which would tell them their colleague's child had been found safe and well.
Doug Skehan, a consultant cardiologist who works with Mr McCann, said: "The mood in the hospital is one of great concern and we hope that Kate and Gerry will have their daughter back very soon."
To emphasise that the purpose of the intrusion (of unwelcome intruders) had nothing to do with burglary.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 02, 2016, 10:30:53 PM
It is implied, if his sister repeats what she has been told by Gerry.
The fact is we don't know what he said, how he said it or in response to what exactly yet we have this enduring myth that Gerry said (cheerfully, in the minds of sceptics no doubt) "no valuables were taken", implying he didn't value Madeleine. It's extraordinarily tiresome and entirely predictable.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on December 02, 2016, 11:48:41 PM
It really doesn't matter but unlocked if you are being pedantic. So it's not true she wasn't worried was it ?
Well let's see. If she was worried then that demonstrates she cared about the welfare of her children, yet there are some here claiming that she was an uncaring mother, so we can't have it both ways. So - either she worried about it and is therefore caring and loving or she didn't worry about it and is uncaring and neglectful - so which is it to be?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 03, 2016, 12:21:56 AM
Well let's see. If she was worried then that demonstrates she cared about the welfare of her children, yet there are some here claiming that she was an uncaring mother, so we can't have it both ways. So - either she worried about it and is therefore caring and loving or she didn't worry about it and is uncaring and neglectful - so which is it to be?
What if the objection is nothing to do with whether or not she was a caring mother but more to do with behaving in a more appropriate manner considering she would sit in judgement over others behaving in a similar manner in her professional capacity? Just to spell it out GPs have influence on who is put on the children at risk register and reasons for being put on that list number being left alone.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 12:27:15 AM
Well let's see. If she was worried then that demonstrates she cared about the welfare of her children, yet there are some here claiming that she was an uncaring mother, so we can't have it both ways. So - either she worried about it and is therefore caring and loving or she didn't worry about it and is uncaring and neglectful - so which is it to be?
No wriggling Alfie.
You posted " is Kate McCann lying in your opinion when she writes: "Speaking for myself, I can say, hand on heart, that it never once crossed my mind that this might not be a safe option. If I'd had any doubts whatsoever, I would simply never have entertained it".
The answer must be yes because her best friend said in her statement :
" 'She did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'."
Don't you agree?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Eleanor on December 03, 2016, 12:34:41 AM
Madeleine was known for waking and leaving her bed. Of course she could open the patio door. Fingerprints? No-one said she did open the patio door, so that's irrelevant. Kate may have appraised the situation; she seems to have seen the balcony as safe, for example. The problem is that her assessment seems to have been faulty.
Could she open the patio door? Are you sure? She was quite petite for her age.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: sadie on December 03, 2016, 02:48:44 AM
But it is still implied. Secondhand story though and I'll agree she (Trish Cameron) still might have misunderstood his (Gerry McCann) message. Look it didn't matter for even if we had a direct quote of Gerry saying it himself most would still say it was a lie.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 05:37:07 AM
So what do you think Madeleine was worth since you did ask?
I have just been watching the news on TV and there were stories of kids dying by the thousands in Nigeria from the effects of Boko Haram and in Syria with the retaking of Aleppo, and I've done nothing to help them, yet I have endured 7 months of hard slog trying to understand what happened to Madeleine McCann. I must admit I have my doubts that I'm being fair when I think about it.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: slartibartfast on December 03, 2016, 07:09:24 AM
So what would your reply be in the same situation?
Knowing that Madeleine was missing and that the officer meant, valuables such as watches, phones, camera's etc. I would have said 'no' I wouldn't class Madeleine as being in the same category as watches etc. she would be much too precious.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: G-Unit on December 03, 2016, 09:48:36 AM
I have just been watching the news on TV and there were stories of kids dying by the thousands in Nigeria from the effects of Boko Haram and in Syria with the retaking of Aleppo, and I've done nothing to help them, yet I have endured 7 months of hard slog trying to understand what happened to Madeleine McCann. I must admit I have my doubts that I'm being fair when I think about it.
In one way Madeleine can be seen as just another child who was unlucky. But we know her by name, we have pictures and videos of her. That makes it more real and personal than the fate of thousands of anonymous kids. Man's inhumanity to man takes many forms.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Eleanor on December 03, 2016, 09:58:40 AM
In one way Madeleine can be seen as just another child who was unlucky. But we know her by name, we have pictures and videos of her. That makes it more real and personal than the fate of thousands of anonymous kids. Man's inhumanity to man takes many forms.
It certainly does.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 10:10:55 AM
I must admit I am one parent who wouldn't have left my children alone. Having said that the McCann's have acknowledged what they did and are carrying the weight of that guilt every day.
The reason I believe that people like to bring this up a lot is that they can't find anything else to beat the McCann's with. They know the McCann's wish they hadn't done it, and it is their way of getting at them.
The people who bring it up constantly are probably unable to explain how the McCann's are meant to have cleared up and hidden Madeleine so quickly and professionally so that no one could find her, and did it all in such a remarkably short time.
Some who cannot explain how the McCann's could have done this have even come up with the ludicrous idea that Madeleine must have died the Sunday before!!
Having said that the McCann's have acknowledged what they did and are carrying the weight of that guilt every day.
yes indeed no doubt about that................
but as yet ...we don't know what that guilt is do we ............
depending on what version you believe......
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 11:30:52 AM
There's a constant barrage of belief being posted as if it were fact on this forum. I don't see it as 'jabbing' to remind people that the crime hasn't been identified and neither has the perpetrator (s).
Those who are convinced that certain people are innocent may be wrong. Those who are convinced that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger may be wrong.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 01:46:08 PM
You posted " is Kate McCann lying in your opinion when she writes: "Speaking for myself, I can say, hand on heart, that it never once crossed my mind that this might not be a safe option. If I'd had any doubts whatsoever, I would simply never have entertained it".
The answer must be yes because her best friend said in her statement :
" 'She did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'."
Don't you agree?
No I don't agree - her friend reports on something she supposedly said on the 3rd of May, after days of obviously not having any concerns about the safety of the children when they left them. Clearly she raised the issue of whether or not to lock the patio door not because she was afraid of someone (a burglar or abductor)getting in, but more concerned about Madeleine if she awoke again (as she had done the night before) and wanted to try and get out to come to them. So - no lies from Kate as you have (libellously) claimed.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 03, 2016, 01:46:45 PM
I've scanned this article and it looks like a very pertinent (if rather log) read indeed: http://www.collabra.org/articles/10.1525/collabra.58/
"We hypothesize that a similar process may be at work when people imagine the harm likely to befall unsupervised children. That is, people may overestimate the danger to unsupervised children in order to justify their moral condemnation of the parents who allow the children to be alone. Thus, exaggerated fears of harm and increasing moral prohibitions form a sort of self-reinforcing feedback loop. We will ultimately suggest that much of the recent hysteria concerning danger to unsupervised children is the product of this feedback loop, in which inflated estimates of risk lead to a new moral norm against leaving children alone, and then the need to justify moral condemnation of parents who violate this norm leads in turn to even more inflated estimates of risk, generating even stronger moral condemnation of parents who violate the norm, and so on".
Yeah nice paper !. Kris Kristofferson covered the subject in song in 1972. He was a bit less long winded whilst simultaneously cutting off the route, some might wish to take, to the moral high ground. " 'Cause everybody's gotta have somebody to look down on Who they can feel better than at any time they please Someone doin' somethin' dirty decent folks can frown on If you can't find nobody else, then help yourself to me"
I am sure if we are honest with ourselves we can all identify with this.... 8(>((
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 01:47:03 PM
There's a constant barrage of belief being posted as if it were fact on this forum. I don't see it as 'jabbing' to remind people that the crime hasn't been identified and neither has the perpetrator (s).
Those who are convinced that certain people are innocent may be wrong. Those who are convinced that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger may be wrong.
Based on the evidence I think it is true to say that abduction by a stranger is by far the most likely
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: jassi on December 03, 2016, 04:19:43 PM
I think there is a strong possibility that we may never know what happened to Madeleine.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2016, 05:33:44 PM
If that is truly the principle to which you subscribe rest assured we shall remind you of it as appropriate.
I know I can count on you not to miss any possible opportunity to pull me up on any forum transgression I may perform whether it be large or small. I do thank you in advance for your vigilance.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 05:52:53 PM
Knowing that Madeleine was missing and that the officer meant, valuables such as watches, phones, camera's etc. I would have said 'no' I wouldn't class Madeleine as being in the same category as watches etc. she would be much too precious.
yes much too precious to be left in the first place .....
probably all the valuables .etc ..will have been safely locked in the safe ............
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Lace on December 03, 2016, 06:07:59 PM
I think there is a strong possibility that we may never know what happened to Madeleine.
I feel the opposite. The work is beginning to show who was involved initially. Some other theory must come into play later for I can't account for what happens days later.
No I don't agree - her friend reports on something she supposedly said on the 3rd of May, after days of obviously not having any concerns about the safety of the children when they left them. Clearly she raised the issue of whether or not to lock the patio door not because she was afraid of someone (a burglar or abductor)getting in, but more concerned about Madeleine if she awoke again (as she had done the night before) and wanted to try and get out to come to them. So - no lies from Kate as you have (libellously) claimed.
She had worried about leaving the children alone with the patio doors open, Tanner and FP both reported that she voiced her concern on the 3rd of May. Therefore when she claimed she would never have thought twice about leaving the children alone she is most certainly lying.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Benice on December 03, 2016, 06:56:45 PM
Are you saying it's a fact that they didn't stage an abduction?
If they did - they didn't make a very good job of it.
You devise a plan to have an open window and shutters as your only evidence of an intruder - and then close them before the police arrive - and don't even make sure that other independent witnesses see them wide open before you do close them.
A couple of 10 year olds could have made a better job of it.
IMO
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 06:58:56 PM
She had worried about leaving the children alone with the patio doors open, Tanner and FP both reported that she voiced her concern on the 3rd of May. Therefore when she claimed she would never have thought twice about leaving the children alone she is most certainly lying.
Citations and context please. I'm not saying you are wrong in fact but where did these reports come from?
If they did - they didn't make a very good job of it.
You devise a plan to have an open window and shutters as your only evidence of an intruder - and then close them before the police arrive - and don't even make sure that other independent witnesses see them wide open before you do close them.
A couple of 10 year olds could have made a better job of it.
IMO
Who closed them before the police arrived?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: stephen25000 on December 03, 2016, 06:59:40 PM
If they did - they didn't make a very good job of it.
You devise a plan to have an open window and shutters as your only evidence of an intruder - and then close them before the police arrive - and don't even make sure that other independent witnesses see them wide open before you do close them.
A couple of 10 year olds could have made a better job of it.
IMO
A pair of 10 year olds would also show more sense than the McCann's did in caring of younger children.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on December 03, 2016, 07:00:23 PM
If they did - they didn't make a very good job of it.
You devise a plan to have an open window and shutters as your only evidence of an intruder - and then close them before the police arrive - and don't even make sure that other independent witnesses see them wide open before you do close them.
A couple of 10 year olds could have made a better job of it.
IMO
Or a pair of terrified 30 somethings?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 07:01:11 PM
She had worried about leaving the children alone with the patio doors open, Tanner and FP both reported that she voiced her concern on the 3rd of May. Therefore when she claimed she would never have thought twice about leaving the children alone she is most certainly lying.
Can you please tell me what her friend reported she was worried about, specifically about leaving the door unlocked?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 07:03:07 PM
In your version of events Gerry already knows M is dead and is hatching his plan prior to meeting Jes. Jes reports that his behavious was absolutely normal and chatty. Doesn't sound to me like a terrified person.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 07:06:49 PM
In your version of events Gerry already knows M is dead and is hatching his plan prior to meeting Jes. Jes reports that his behaviour was absolutely normal and chatty. Doesn't sound to me like a terrified person.
Wouldn't they just think Gerry is a good actor?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 07:08:54 PM
who or what couple are you referring to? there were 5 couples (or parts of couples) asked to attend the reconstruction. Wouldn't they just think Gerry is a good actor?
Hmm. So terrified that they can't even stage a remotely convincing break in but not that terrified that they can act perfectly normal and chatty before the alarm is raised. Very likely I'm sure.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 07:11:42 PM
Hmm. So terrified that they can't even stage a remotely convincing break in but not that terrified that they can act perfectly normal and chatty before the alarm is raised. Very likely I'm sure.
They deserve an Oscar for that.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on December 03, 2016, 07:13:29 PM
If they did - they didn't make a very good job of it.
You devise a plan to have an open window and shutters as your only evidence of an intruder - and then close them before the police arrive - and don't even make sure that other independent witnesses see them wide open before you do close them.
A couple of 10 year olds could have made a better job of it.
IMO
the mccs are the one's who said the window was open.............................so who are you saying closed them
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 07:16:14 PM
In your version of events Gerry already knows M is dead and is hatching his plan prior to meeting Jes. Jes reports that his behavious was absolutely normal and chatty. Doesn't sound to me like a terrified person.
Not true but hey knock yourself out asking specious questions.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 07:31:04 PM
no it was said as a devised plan[by benice]..............
no one closed them they were still open
even k mcc didn't when she ran ....the so called 50 mtr .to get help...she still left them open
like you would think .if like dining in garden...and so close she would have called for help ......
not leave the apartment again .with twins inside ....and open window....
I can't understand you really. The windows were not open when the GNR and the PJ arrived so someone had closed them by then. So how can you say "no one closed them they were still open"? It is really important to define the time you are talking about.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 10:02:07 PM
That would matter if Kate had been specific about which part of leaving the children she wouldn't have thought about again. She wasn't.
You don't seem to have grasped the difference between concern for the children's safety (if she thought it was unsafe she would never have left them) and concern that Madeleine might wake and want to make them know she was awake (should. they leave the door unlocked so she can come find them). At no point did her friend say that Kate was concerned about the kids' saftey so please stop calling her a liar, it's not her fault you can't understand the difference!
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 10:02:51 PM
You don't seem to have grasped the difference between concern for the children's safety (if she thought it was unsafe she would never have left them) and concern that Madeleine might wake and want to make them know she was awake (should. they leave the door unlocked so she can come find them). At no point did her friend say that Kate was concerned about the kids' saftey so please stop calling her a liar, it's not her fault you can't understand the difference!
I do understand the difference, it's you I'm afraid who doesn't. Kate said that if she had to think for one moment it wasn't safe...........then expressed concern that it may not be safe to leave the patio doors open. So she obviously did think for more than a moment that it may not be safe to leave her children in the apartment with the doors unlocked. In fact so concerned was she about it that she sought advice from her friends.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 10:36:04 PM
I do understand the difference, it's you I'm afraid who doesn't. Kate said that if she had to think for one moment it wasn't safe...........then expressed concern that it may not be safe to leave the patio doors open. So she obviously did think for more than a moment that it may not be safe to leave her children in the apartment with the doors unlocked. In fact so concerned was she about it that she sought advice from her friends.
Can you give me the specific quote where Kate expresses concern that it would not be safe to leave the patio doors unlocked then?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on December 03, 2016, 10:42:11 PM
Can you give me the specific quote where Kate expresses concern that it would not be safe to leave the patio doors unlocked then?
At least two of her friends mention it in their rogatory statements. Or are they again another couple of witnesses who 'misremebered' the same thing simply because it did not correspond with the McCann's claims?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 03, 2016, 10:48:21 PM
At least two of her friends mention it in their rogatory statements. Or are they again another couple of witnesses who 'misremebered' the same thing simply because it did not correspond with the McCann's claims?
In which case you should be able to find the cites. You've already quoted one on this thread which makes no mention of Kate's alleged fears for the children's safety re: leaving the door unlocked.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 03, 2016, 11:10:07 PM
I feel the opposite. The work is beginning to show who was involved initially. Some other theory must come into play later for I can't account for what happens days later. Jab, jab and twist.....
The only work of any relevance is that carried out by The Met and PJ. Are you saying you have the inside track on what they are doing ?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on December 03, 2016, 11:16:02 PM
Another of your rather now obvious tactics Alfie. You, I and everyone on this forum has seen the cites several times.
Is this the cite?
" 'She did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'."
Can you underline the bit where she is claiming fears for her children's safety? Her concern seems to be with Madeleine waking and not being able to reach them if the door is locked, which is not a concern about safety is it?
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 03, 2016, 11:24:55 PM
The only work of any relevance is that carried out by The Met and PJ. Are you saying you have the inside track on what they are doing ?
No, just from my own analysis, I feel I can tell who were involved. But that is only one point in time and hence it doesn't tell us where Madeleine is now.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on December 03, 2016, 11:30:21 PM
No, just from my own analysis, I feel I can tell who were involved. But that is only one point in time and hence it doesn't tell us where Madeleine is now.
Pretty much the same place she was 72 hours after she disappeared, I shouldn't wonder.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Robittybob1 on December 04, 2016, 02:33:39 AM
" 'She did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'."
Can you underline the bit where she is claiming fears for her children's safety? Her concern seems to be with Madeleine waking and not being able to reach them if the door is locked, which is not a concern about safety is it?
It certainly isn't as it suggests that Kate McCann left the door unlocked so that her three year old daughter could leave their apartment and wander the streets in her pyjamas searching for her parents. She seems to be overestimating the capabilities of her daughter and showing her disregard for the child's feelings and safety. Madeleine had allegedly woken before but she didn't leave the apartment through the unlocked door in search of her parents, she cried as would most children her age.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 04, 2016, 10:49:31 AM
It certainly isn't as it suggests that Kate McCann left the door unlocked so that her three year old daughter could leave their apartment and wander the streets in her pyjamas searching for her parents. She seems to be overestimating the capabilities of her daughter and showing her disregard for the child's feelings and safety. Madeleine had allegedly woken before but she didn't leave the apartment through the unlocked door in search of her parents, she cried as would most children her age.
Right, so we have established that Faithlilly is wrong to claim that Kate is a liar when she says in her books that she had no qualms about the security of the resort, but I'm afraid you too are wrong for claiming that Kate disregarded her children's feelings and safety because if that was true she would never have said a word to her friends about it in the first place. Clearly she was concerned about it, it had been playing on her mind but she allowed herself to be jollied out of her worry by a husband and friend who said it would be fine. She has explained in her book how devastated she feels about this decision which was clearly the wrong one in her view and everyone else's. But please carry on accusing her of not caring about her kids, I'm sure you are in amuch better position to know about her feelings and relationship with her children than her mere friends and family who all describe her as a devoted mother.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: faithlilly on December 04, 2016, 11:01:17 AM
Right, so we have established that Faithlilly is wrong to claim that Kate is a liar when she says in her books that she had no qualms about the security of the resort, but I'm afraid you too are wrong for claiming that Kate disregarded her children's feelings and safety because if that was true she would never have said a word to her friends about it in the first place. Clearly she was concerned about it, it had been playing on her mind but she allowed herself to be jollied out of her worry by a husband and friend who said it would be fine. She has explained in her book how devastated she feels about this decision which was clearly the wrong one in her view and everyone else's. But please carry on accusing her of not caring about her kids, I'm sure you are in amuch better position to know about her feelings and relationship with her children than her mere friends and family who all describe her as a devoted mother.
Kate claimed she had not a moment's thought that leaving the children in an insecure apartment wasn't safe and you have just conceded that she was concerned so I really don't see your issue.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: xtina on December 04, 2016, 12:17:17 PM
I can't understand you really. The windows were not open when the GNR and the PJ arrived so someone had closed them by then. So how can you say "no one closed them they were still open"? It is really important to define the time you are talking about.
Don't worry about it .....cos a lot of the time i don't understand you either
especially when you often go back .and then add to your post
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 04, 2016, 02:21:16 PM
Kate claimed she had not a moment's thought that leaving the children in an insecure apartment wasn't safe and you have just conceded that she was concerned so I really don't see your issue.
Either you're not very bright, or you've managed to convince yourself that you're right despite the glaringly obvious fact that you're not. Let's try again, in bite sized chunks, then you can tell us which statement you disagree with.
1)Kate voiced concerns to her friends on the evening of 3rd May. YES/NO/DON'T KNOW 2) Kate's concern was NOT with the security of the resort or the apartment. YES/NO/DON'T KNOW 3) Kate stated in her book that if she had had any concerns about the safety of the resort or the apartment she would have not left the kids. YES/NO/DON'T KNOW 4) Kate's concern on the evening of 3rd May was about Madeleine waking and finding them not there and wanting to call out or come to find them. YES/NO/DON'T KNOW 5) Kate voiced this concern on the 3rd May (towards the end of the holiday) because Madeleine told her that she (Madeleine) had awoken the previous night and wanted to know why they (her parents) didn't come to them. YES/NO/DON'T KNOW 6) A child who wakes and cries in the night is not necessarily a child in danger from her surroundings. YES/NO/DON'T KNOW
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on December 05, 2016, 07:29:07 PM
Right, so we have established that Faithlilly is wrong to claim that Kate is a liar when she says in her books that she had no qualms about the security of the resort, but I'm afraid you too are wrong for claiming that Kate disregarded her children's feelings and safety because if that was true she would never have said a word to her friends about it in the first place. Clearly she was concerned about it, it had been playing on her mind but she allowed herself to be jollied out of her worry by a husband and friend who said it would be fine. She has explained in her book how devastated she feels about this decision which was clearly the wrong one in her view and everyone else's. But please carry on accusing her of not caring about her kids, I'm sure you are in amuch better position to know about her feelings and relationship with her children than her mere friends and family who all describe her as a devoted mother.
No we haven't established any such thing Alfie. The evidence is She left her daughter alone, disregarding her safety, failing to risk assess is a major failing as a parent.
being concerned after the fact isn't quite the same thing.. you know 'with hinddsight ' and all that.
"Clearly she was concerned about it, it had been playing on her mind but she allowed herself to be jollied out of her worry by a husband and friend who said it would be fine." so that was an easy descision was it? it just shows how none of those parents showed any concern for theirs or other tapas children.
Of course they were all devoted, loving parents... after the fact?
On another point of your post to Faith...
Calling people names or questioning their level of 'brightness' IQ is a childish thing to do, and it does confirm when people resort to it they have either lost the argument or have nothing of value to bring to the debate.
Title: Re: They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?
Post by: Alfie on December 05, 2016, 11:31:07 PM
No we haven't established any such thing Alfie. The evidence is She left her daughter alone, disregarding her safety, failing to risk assess is a major failing as a parent.
being concerned after the fact isn't quite the same thing.. you know 'with hinddsight ' and all that.
"Clearly she was concerned about it, it had been playing on her mind but she allowed herself to be jollied out of her worry by a husband and friend who said it would be fine." so that was an easy descision was it? it just shows how none of those parents showed any concern for theirs or other tapas children.
Of course they were all devoted, loving parents... after the fact?
On another point of your post to Faith...
Calling people names or questioning their level of 'brightness' IQ is a childish thing to do, and it does confirm when people resort to it they have either lost the argument or have nothing of value to bring to the debate.
I speak as I find, and Faithlilly was quite simply wrong to say that Kate was lying when she said in her book that she had no concerns about the safety of the resort , prior to Madeleine's disappearance. Nothing you have written above contradicts that fact.