If Madeleine could have accidentally fallen in & been covered by soil, it is also seems possible that this could have been done deliberately.
If Madeleine could have accidentally fallen in & been covered by soil, it is also seems possible that this could have been done deliberately.
That is also possible but would have been very risky.
That is also possible but would have been very risky.
For whom?
In the Sky1 Documentary aired on 2/5/07 a local resident, who had taken some photographs of a section of roadworks in the OC area, can be seen expressing his concern that Madeleine may have fallen into an open trench and been buried by disturbed soil slipping from the sides.Junction of Helena do Nascimento Baptista and Direita.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5klkn3_searching-for-madeleine_tv
I have attached screenshots of the photographs shown in the programme & it may be helpful if someone could identify where these particular works were situated.
Junction of Helena do Nascimento Baptista and Direita.
It's in the PJ Files.
The person disposing. Daylight or under the cover of darkness? Prior or post search activity?
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00554/news-graphics-exclu_554235a.jpg)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1435222/Madeleine-McCann-timeline-The-case-so-far.html
That's a reasonable suggestion jassi. Possibly following a RTA too?
I don't think the RTA angle should be ruled out, it is a plausible explanation.
However it is not that far to fairly isolated spots, which are possibly better places to hide a body.
Except that 'woke and wandered' was ruled out by the shelved enquiry.
I think we might be drifting off-topic, but my response would be that I'm not wedded to the 'woke and wandered' theory, but as far as I know it was not ruled out. There was only a few lines of analysis with no reasons given as to why it was only a 'remote possibility'; I though the report was weak in this regard.
Jane Tanner seemed to believe it was a distinct possibility:
Reply “And the door, they couldn’t get out, we made sure they couldn’t, well from the point of Ella you know we made sure she couldn’t err not escape, because that sounds terrible, but you know she, the door was dead locked so she couldn’t have, she couldn’t have wandered off so I mean obviously there’s harm, you could say she could have done herself harm in the apartment anyway but from our own view of knowing Ella we thought you know she couldn’t, couldn’t come to any harm, and Evie was in her cot so couldn’t get out the cot, so.”
Implying if the door was not dead-locked then 'escape' was possible.
I don't think the RTA angle should be ruled out, it is a plausible explanation.
However it is not that far to fairly isolated spots, which are possibly better places to hide a body.
In my opinion a plausible explanation is one which might possibly be supported by evidence. We know of at least one vehicle driving past. That is evidence that there was at least one. Know of any others?
On the other hand there is evidence that the roads in Luz were quiet that night.
This is a quick response to a reasonable question. In my opinion it makes more sense to stick with the OG theory of abduction because they may have more information than is publicly known. But as a possibility an RTA is not out of the question, IMHO.One of the things I am ultra-cautious about is walking around after dark.
I think what you are asking me to do is some kind of frequency analysis on the traffic to justify how likely it is an unsupervised child could be hit by a car is sleepy Luz.
By extension the same argument could be levelled against a possible abductor: what is the frequency of potential abductors passing an unsupervised child in order to analyse the chance of a stranger abduction.
I prefer to analyse it in the following way (but obviously you are free to disagree):
1) Children go missing, for short periods, all the time.
2) In 99,999 out of 100,000 (or what ever the unknowable odds are) they are found safe and well
3) Therefore you only hear about the rare events.
4) By definition Madeleine was affected by a rare event, e.g. an abductor or possibly a car
The example of this is James Bulger. After his mother lost sight of him for a few minutes, what were the odds of him being abducted from a shopping center by two young boys? Extremely remote IMO, possibly even less than an unsupervised child being hit by a car in Luz.
In my opinion a plausible explanation is one which might possibly be supported by evidence. We know of at least one vehicle driving past. That is evidence that there was at least one. Know of any others?
On the other hand there is evidence that the roads in Luz were quiet that night.
The Smiths wandered up one in three separate groups. At least two individuals were carrying children with apparent small regard for traffic. Jez and Gerry didn't seem to be in too much of a rush to get off the road. Not a single witness recorded traffic concerns.