Author Topic: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.  (Read 243608 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sadie

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1365 on: June 10, 2019, 10:38:39 PM »
Further if the abductor had been watching the group, as is postulated by the supporters, they would know that the group passed the window to get to their own apartments. Would they take the chance of one of the group seeing the window open and raising the alarm ?

That is not strictly correct, Faith and I suspect that after all the photos on here you must know this.  You have also visited the scene, haven't you?  Please try and not muddy the waters with incorrect statements

All the Tapas group members have to use the communal walkway.  Then apart from flat 5A, they have to turn off right into a communal hallway before reaching the window.  Furthermore the building wall has an angle in it, meaning that no-one (all the other Tapas members) entering that communal hallway would see Madeleines bedroom window. 

Not a single soul had reason to walk past Madeleines bedroom nor the FRONT DOOR.  It was the end of the cul de sac., totally isolated

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1366 on: June 10, 2019, 11:12:54 PM »
That is not strictly correct, Faith and I suspect that after all the photos on here you must know this.  You have also visited the scene, haven't you?  Please try and not muddy the waters with incorrect statements

All the Tapas group members have to use the communal walkway then apart from flat 5A, they have to turn off right into a communal hallway before reaching the window.  Furthermore the building wall has an angle in it, meaning that no-one (all the other Tapas members) entering that communal hallway would see Madeleines bedroom window. 

Not a single soul had reason to walk past Madeleines bedroom nor the FRONT DOOR.  It was the end of the cul de sac., totally isolated
Have you seen a photo of this communal walkway?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1367 on: June 10, 2019, 11:41:28 PM »

However, I will give it a go...

IN MY MOST HUMBLE OPINION.

With The evidence presented in its entirety. The real reason the supporters and the Parents of the  left alone every night children and babies, is; they would have been charged, which they should have been anyway. They would have been public hate figures for being cruel selfish parents, they would have received zero sympathy -and all that JAZZ that they so enjoyed while their child allegedly suffered at the hands of a ‘suspected paedo gang’ would NOT have been afforded to them.
  It was only after the initial ‘discussion’ with the press that the real version of what happened and could not have happened came to light.  They never mentioned unlocked doors or leaving the children alone every night or that was the decision made BEFORE they even left the UK.
The parents turned the attention from them -onto the lazy lousy PJ.  Greattttttt PR… Poor Maddie collateral damage?

It would be very interesting if the police do actually find someone to testify MBM was abducted from the street- How will the parents deal with THAT publicity I wonder.
This is such arrant nonsense.  Parents of children abducted and murdered by paedos do not get charged and do not get hated by the public at large, only by idiot trolls with zero empathy and a penchant for inflicting hurt and pain on the grieving.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1368 on: June 10, 2019, 11:51:58 PM »

However, I will give it a go...

IN MY MOST HUMBLE OPINION.

With The evidence presented in its entirety. The real reason the supporters and the Parents of the  left alone every night children and babies, is; they would have been charged, which they should have been anyway. They would have been public hate figures for being cruel selfish parents, they would have received zero sympathy -and all that JAZZ that they so enjoyed while their child allegedly suffered at the hands of a ‘suspected paedo gang’ would NOT have been afforded to them.
  It was only after the initial ‘discussion’ with the press that the real version of what happened and could not have happened came to light.  They never mentioned unlocked doors or leaving the children alone every night or that was the decision made BEFORE they even left the UK.
The parents turned the attention from them -onto the lazy lousy PJ.  Greattttttt PR… Poor Maddie collateral damage?

It would be very interesting if the police do actually find someone to testify MBM was abducted from the street- How will the parents deal with THAT publicity I wonder.
That would a great start to unravelling the case if that happened. 
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1369 on: June 11, 2019, 09:41:57 AM »
WARNING!

Some of the language that has been used recently towards members and moderators is totally unacceptable and has resulted in at least one temporary ban. Regular posters are very well aware of the forum rules so I shouldn't need to have to keep reminding of them. Everyone is entitled to voice their opinion here but it must be done respectfully, there can be no exceptions.

A challenge, let's try and get through today without the need for any moderation. TY   
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline sadie

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1370 on: June 11, 2019, 11:49:43 AM »
Have you seen a photo of this communal walkway?
Rob,

I thought that you knew that I had been there.

I walked the communal walled walkway right to the front door of 5A.  5A is the last door on that pathway.  Nobody goes past unless they wanted to make a sudden escape over the wall onto the street below.  A drop of maybe 12 feet but as a youngster i used to jump that easily enough.



I passed Madeleines window.  I touched nothing.  I looked into, but did not go into the building.


But I went into that walled communal walkway with an enquiring mind and noticed things.



Yes Rob, I have seen lots of photos, got some of my own somewhere, but there is nothing like testing things in real life.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1371 on: June 11, 2019, 12:45:38 PM »
Rob,

I thought that you knew that I had been there.

I walked the communal walled walkway right to the front door of 5A.  5A is the last door on that pathway.  Nobody goes past unless they wanted to make a sudden escape over the wall onto the street below.  A drop of maybe 12 feet but as a youngster i used to jump that easily enough.



I passed Madeleines window.  I touched nothing.  I looked into, but did not go into the building.


But I went into that walled communal walkway with an enquiring mind and noticed things.



Yes Rob, I have seen lots of photos, got some of my own somewhere, but there is nothing like testing things in real life.
OK you called it a "communal walkway"  I hadn't read anyone else calling a walkway that so I wanted to know what you were referring to.

Matt Oldfield is in the apartment next door (5B) but do you see a photo showing his front door?  When he checked his child he had to go to his front door  to get in, so how far was this from Madeleine's window?

You said "All the Tapas group members have to use the communal walkway then apart from flat 5A, they have to turn off right into a communal hallway before reaching the window.  Furthermore the building wall has an angle in it, meaning that no-one (all the other Tapas members) entering that communal hallway would see Madeleines bedroom window. 

Not a single soul had reason to walk past Madeleines bedroom nor the FRONT DOOR.  It was the end of the cul de sac., totally isolated" 

I'd like to see a photo showing the layout you describe.  Does anyone have that?
« Last Edit: June 11, 2019, 12:56:36 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline sadie

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1372 on: June 11, 2019, 04:00:47 PM »
OK you called it a "communal walkway"  I hadn't read anyone else calling a walkway that so I wanted to know what you were referring to.

Matt Oldfield is in the apartment next door (5B) but do you see a photo showing his front door?  When he checked his child he had to go to his front door  to get in, so how far was this from Madeleine's window?

You said "All the Tapas group members have to use the communal walkway then apart from flat 5A, they have to turn off right into a communal hallway before reaching the window.  Furthermore the building wall has an angle in it, meaning that no-one (all the other Tapas members) entering that communal hallway would see Madeleines bedroom window. 

Not a single soul had reason to walk past Madeleines bedroom nor the FRONT DOOR.  It was the end of the cul de sac., totally isolated" 

I'd like to see a photo showing the layout you describe.  Does anyone have that?

Rob,

I used the word communal to stress that it was the walkway that they all had to walk at least the first part of if they wished to go to the front door of their flats.  All the front doors there opened onto this large hallway directly off the communal hallway.  There were stairs within the hallway so that who ever was upstairs could carry on within the building to their falt.  Have forgotten who was upstairs.

Kate and Gerry had to walk the whole length of the walkway to their flat and nobody could see them from their Hallway end of the walkway unless they went and stood by the walkway containing wall.

An abductor could be abducting with a watcher outside on thta pathway and any one coming from that hallway onto the walkway would not even see them!   The way building walls and the pathway  change direction is only a few degrees, but it is sufficient to hide someone a few yards along the pathway from the viewer coming from, or to, the hallway.


Rob, I am too tired to look things up ande I know that you are a whizz kid at finding photos etc.

There is a very good illustration of the path with Gerry walking along it, then showing the very wide entrance to the communal hallway enrance on the right then Gerry going around the bend in the pathway.  It is on one of the videos produced by various parties presenting the scenario independently of which side of the discussion they are.

My memory has been affected by my accident, or maybe by an unnoticed mini stroke.  I am sorry, but you will have to find it yourself, or maybe someone will kindly help you.


Then I would be grateful if you would post the video snip to remind, or inform others.

PS, I think that the buildings change in direction can be discerned from GEarth, but that needs checking.

Offline barrier

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1373 on: June 11, 2019, 04:14:01 PM »
That is not strictly correct, Faith and I suspect that after all the photos on here you must know this.  You have also visited the scene, haven't you?  Please try and not muddy the waters with incorrect statements

All the Tapas group members have to use the communal walkway.  Then apart from flat 5A, they have to turn off right into a communal hallway before reaching the window.  Furthermore the building wall has an angle in it, meaning that no-one (all the other Tapas members) entering that communal hallway would see Madeleines bedroom window. 

Not a single soul had reason to walk past Madeleines bedroom nor the FRONT DOOR.  It was the end of the cul de sac., totally isolated


Even less of a reason to choose this apartment,only one way out if some one came along.
This is my own private domicile and I shall not be harassed, biatch:Jesse Pinkman Character.

Online Eleanor

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1374 on: June 11, 2019, 04:15:54 PM »
 Sadie is correct, and anyone who has been at this for any length of time knows what The Walkway looks like.

5a is not immediately obvious to anyone walking across the car park.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1375 on: June 11, 2019, 05:42:08 PM »
Whichever way you look at it no normal abductor would raise them. [Rest off topic]
Maybe it was an abnormal abductor? What do normal abductors normally do then?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1376 on: June 11, 2019, 05:53:35 PM »
Sadie is correct, and anyone who has been at this for any length of time knows what The Walkway looks like.

5a is not immediately obvious to anyone walking across the car park.
I know what the walkway outside the McCann's apartment looks like, but I have yet to see a photo showing the position of the entrance to 5B  in relation to that walkway.
Where is the door that Matt entered to check his apartment?  Maybe it is on the dog video!
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1377 on: June 11, 2019, 05:54:02 PM »
Maybe it was an abnormal abductor? What do normal abductors normally do then?

.....Abduct?
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1378 on: June 11, 2019, 05:56:30 PM »
.....Abduct?
That goes without saying, I was looking for a clue as to in what ways normal abductors and abnormal abductors behave differently from each other.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1379 on: June 11, 2019, 05:57:06 PM »
.....Abduct?
They don't abduct on a daily basis that for sure.  The stats don't support that.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.