Sadie's theory, the watcher and a getaway car.

[John]

Yep, they could have.  But to escape detection by the police mapping mobiles, it would have been safer to flicker a light imo.

Like lighting a cigarette. 

[Cariad]

Like lighting a cigarette. 

Well that is the most likely explanation for fag butts on a balcony. They needed to use the lighter to signal all clear, then smoke signals to show positions of Gerry, Jez, Jane and Innocentman.

Makes perfect sense to me. DCI Redwood needs to be told!

[pathfinder73]

The watcher signalled to tannerman or his assistant by torch or cigarette lighter .  Just a quick flicker on  then off.

They were almost immediately across the steet from each other when tannerman (bundleman) was near the front door.

ETA:  . Well at about 45* to each other and about 15 -16 yards apart.  They were elevated so could have signalled without anyone in the street seeing.

You think Tannerman was near the front door so who moved the bedroom door to half-open? The door moved before Gerry checked and saw Madeleine in bed asleep in the same sleeping position she was put to bed in i.e. she had not got up and moved the door. So who moved the bedroom door?

[icabodcrane]

You think Tannerman was near the front door so who moved the bedroom door to half-open? The door moved before Gerry checked and saw Madeleine in bed asleep in the same sleeping position she was put to bed in i.e. she had not got up and moved the door. So who moved the bedroom door?

I think this is where it gets a bit Graham Greene'ish  and  'the third man'  comes into it

He is  already  in the apartment,  you see,  chlorofming the children expertly,  having hidden there whilst Gerry did his check   ...  hence the open bedroom door  (  that Gerry sought no explanation for  ) 

Bundleman  ...   who is  not the  'innocent father'  Scotland Yard think he is ... ,  is  'the carrier'  Jane Tanner saw

The man who was already in  the apartment when Gerry checked,  is  'the lifter'   who passes a drugged  Madeleine   through the window to  'the carrier'

Meanwhile,  'the watcher'  has left the balcony where he was signalling  'the carrier'  to make his way to the getaway car

As he approaches   the spot where he is meant to rendezvous  with  'the lifter'   and 'the carrier'  though, he spots Jane and Gerry and Jeremy Wilkins in the street  ...   he didn't realise that Gerry and Jez were there all the time he was  'watching and signalling'  you see,  because they were standing in a  'blind-spot'  by the pathway

So 'the watcher'  was frightened off and never  did   make the planned rendezvous  with 'the lifter'  and  'the carrier' 

I think I have that right,  by sadie's imaginings 

I watched The Great Escape again this Easter holiday and I'm reminded of it now  ...  'the mole' , 'the scrounger',  'the forger'  et al 

[pathfinder73]

I think this is where it gets a bit Graham Greene'ish  and  'the third man'  comes into it

He is  already  in the apartment,  you see,  chlorofming the children expertly,  having hidden there whilst Gerry did his check   ...  hence the open bedroom door  (  that Gerry sought no explanation for  ) 

Bundleman  ...   who is  not the  'innocent father'  Scotland Yard think he is ... ,  is  'the carrier'  Jane Tanner saw

The man who was already in  the apartment when Gerry checked,  is  'the lifter'   who passes a drugged  Madeleine   through the window to  'the carrier'

Meanwhile,  'the watcher'  has left the balcony where he was signalling  'the carrier'  to make his way to the getaway car

As he approaches   the spot where he is meant to rendezvous  with  'the lifter'   and 'the carrier'  though, he spots Jane and Gerry and Jeremy Wilkins in the street  ...   he didn't realise that Gerry and Jez were there all the time he was  'watching and signalling'  you see,  because they were standing in a  'blind-spot'  by the pathway

So 'the watcher'  was frightened off and never  did   make the planned rendezvous  with 'the lifter'  and  'the carrier' 

I think I have that right,  by sadie's imaginings 

I watched The Great Escape again this Easter holiday and I'm reminded of it now  ...  'the mole' , 'the scrounger',  'the forger'  et al 

  The moving door always baffles them. How did it move 3 times  >@@(*&)

[icabodcrane]

The moving door always baffles them. How did it move 3 times  >@@(*&)

Well,  sadie has rejoined  'real life'  briefly,  so we'll have to guess

I suppose 'the lifter'  first opened the bedroom door when he went into the childrens' bedroom to  drug them

That's when Gerry comes in and spots that the door is open too far

'The lifter' successfully  hides behind  the bedroom door whilst Gerry makes his check in the room

Gerry goes out  and 'the lifter'  leaves his hiding place and goes about chloroforming the already sleeping children

Then he raises the shutters and opens the window in readiness for  'the carrier'   ...   who has been signalled by  'the watcher'   that the coast is clear   (  although he is mistaken because Gerry and Jez are still there standing in that  'blind-spot'   in the street  ) 

'The  carrier'  arrives,  having been wrongly signalled by 'the watcher's'  lighter,  and 'the lifter'  passes Madeleine through the window    ...   I might be wrong there though,  because sometimes sadie says  the window was only opened so  'the carrier'   could offer  encouragment   to  'the lifter'

Anyway,  at that point,  'the  lifter'  leaves the apartment  by way of the front door,  to which he has aquired a key  ...   and that explains the   second  time  the bedroom door was opened  (  gerry having pulled it back to being only slightly ajar on his check  ) 

'The lifter'  leaves the apartment   (  never to be seen again   )  whilst 'the carrier',  having been abandoned by  'the watcher' ,    who had been  scared off by the sight of Jane, Gerry,  and Wilkins all being there in the street   (  not much of a  'watcher'  was he  ?  ) is left to make his way on foot with a drugged Madeleine in his arms 

That's  when  Jane Tanner spots him  ...  because  'the carrier',  you see,  is much bolder than the car driving  'watcher',  and he chooses to walk straight across the street  without even peeping round the corner to see if the coast is clear

So back to the bedroom door you asked about 

It was opened for a second time time when  'the lifter'  exited the bedroom

And that's how Matthew Oldield found it when he checked at 9.30pm   ...  open wide enough for him to look into the room

He left it like that,  and Kate found it the same way  when she returned to the apartment at 10pm


I think that about sums up  'sadie's theory'   

It goes on a bit after that  ...  'the carrier'  hiding with Madeleine in the staff quarters for over half an hour   (  for some reason or another  )  before emerging again at just about the time Madeleine was found missing to make his way towards the beach   (  for some reason or another  )   ...  where he was spotted  by the Smiths 

From then on it goes deeper and deeper  into the realms of fantasy and is  just not worth repeating

[pathfinder73]

Well,  sadie has rejoined  'real life'  briefly,  so we'll have to guess

I suppose 'the lifter'  first opened the bedroom door when he went into the childrens' bedroom to  drug them

That's when Gerry comes in and spots that the door is open too far

'The lifter' successfully  hides behind  the bedroom door whilst Gerry makes his check in the room

Gerry goes out  and 'the lifter'  leaves his hiding place and goes about chloroforming the already sleeping children

Then he raises the shutters and opens the window in readiness for  'the carrier'   ...   who has been signalled by  'the watcher'   that the coast is clear   (  although he is mistaken because Gerry and Jez are still there standing in that  'blind-spot'   in the street  ) 

'The  carrier'  arrives,  having been wrongly signalled by 'the watcher's'  lighter,  and 'the lifter'  passes Madeleine through the window    ...   I might be wrong there though,  because sometimes sadie says  the window was only opened so  'the carrier'   could offer  encouragment   to  'the lifter'

Anyway,  at that point,  'the  lifter'  leaves the apartment  by way of the front door,  to which he has aquired a key  ...   and that explains the   second  time  the bedroom door was opened  (  gerry having pulled it back to being only slightly ajar on his check  ) 

'The lifter'  leaves the apartment   (  never to be seen again   )  whilst 'the carrier',  having been abandoned by  'the watcher' ,    who had been  scared off by the sight of Jane, Gerry,  and Wilkins all being there in the street   (  not much of a  'watcher'  was he  ?  ) is left to make his way on foot with a drugged Madeleine in his arms 

That's  when  Jane Tanner spots him  ...  because  'the carrier',  you see,  is much bolder than the car driving  'watcher',  and he chooses to walk straight across the street  without even peeping round the corner to see if the coast is clear

So back to the bedroom door you asked about 

It was opened for a second time time when  'the lifter'  exited the bedroom

And that's how Matthew Oldield found it when he checked at 9.30pm   ...  open wide enough for him to look into the room

He left it like that,  and Kate found it the same way  when she returned to the apartment at 10pm


I think that about sums up  'sadie's theory'   

It goes on a bit after that  ...  'the carrier'  hiding with Madeleine in the staff quarters for over half an hour   (  for some reason or another  )  before emerging again at just about the time Madeleine was found missing to make his way towards the beach   (  for some reason or another  )   ...  where he was spotted  by the Smiths 

From then on it goes deeper and deeper  into the realms of fantasy and is  just not worth repeating

  Yes there's an easy explanation in my theory. A lot of firsts that day - kids routine change, first visual check by Gerry who was the last person to see her, Kate sleeping in spare bed, Madeleine asking why didn't you come last night when we were crying, Kate washing brown stain etc.

[icabodcrane]

Yes there's an easy explanation in my theory. A lot of firsts that day - kids routine change, first visual check by Gerry who was the last person to see her, Kate sleeping in spare bed, Madeleine asking why didn't you come last night when we were crying, Kate washing brown stain etc.

I think if you are drawing together all the 'little things'  that were   different  about that last day  (   which have been pretty much dismissed as irrelevant  )   whilst sticking closely  to what is 'known'   rather than  entirely imaginery 'possibilities',  then your theory might have legs pathfinder

[faithlilly]

If an abduction, the abductor would have to have carried Madeleine, whether alive or dead, openingly in the same way and if it was, as suggested, someone local they would have run the awful risk of being recognised.

[pegasus]

If an abduction, the abductor would have to have carried Madeleine, whether alive or dead, openingly in the same way and if it was, as suggested, someone local they would have run the awful risk of being recognised.

It applies to abduction cases as well as occultation cases.

Please can someone post an occultation case anywhere in europe or north america where the perp carried the victim unconcealed along streets in his/her arms?

Also please can someone post an abduction case anywhere in europe or north america where the perp carried the victim unconcealed along streets in his/her arms?

Then we can discuss the similarities with the Smith sighting like what carrying style the perp used in the abduction or occultation cases you post.

[sadie]

If an abduction, the abductor would have to have carried Madeleine, whether alive or dead, openingly in the same way and if it was, as suggested, someone local they would have run the awful risk of being recognised.

And this points, Faith, to a getaway car / van, with driver, being parked in the little car park opposite the Tapas Bar.  The car / van was probably supposed to pick up at the entrance to 5A's car park, [or at JT's corner].  The abductor carrying Madeleine, and in fear, couldn't wait and he ventured to JT corner.

But because of Gerry and Jez being in the way chatting AND Jane having witnessed the abductor carrying, the driver took fright and scarpered in the opposite direction with the car


Leaving Tannerman in the lurch

As per Sadies Theory.

[faithlilly]

[quote removed]

There is no point in 'opening your mind' sadie if your theory has nothing concrete to sustain it. Wishful thinking rather than hard facts does not a believable theory make !

[sadie]

There is no point in 'opening your mind' sadie if your theory has nothing concrete to sustain it. Wishful thinking rather than hard facts does not a believable theory make !

A theory is not absolute Faith. 

That is why it is called a theory, rather than a fact



But there are indicators that my theory or  parts of it  are quite likely correct.  Does that trouble you?

[stephen25000]

A theory is not absolute Faith. 

That is why it is called a theory, rather than a fact



But there are indicators that my theory or  parts of it  are quite likely correct.  Does that trouble you?

Then give them.

[Brietta]

A theory is not absolute Faith. 

That is why it is called a theory, rather than a fact



But there are indicators that my theory or  parts of it  are quite likely correct.  Does that trouble you?

That is the problem with it all, Sadie, as far as some are concerned the theory outlined in Dr Amaral’s book and documentary is writ in tablets of stone and cannot be contradicted.

They are stuck in a time warp and are incapable of assimilating and taking other facts and the statements from witnesses on the ground at the time which don’t fit that theory into consideration to think things through for themselves.

Many questions remain for me with the Smith sighting … based on the activities noted prior to and in the aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance … and I keep changing my mind about the actual value of it when and if other suggestions are made.

I agree with your thoughts on what may have happened on the night Madeleine vanished and if anything new presents no doubt we will be capable of thinking about that too.

I find it regrettable that those who cannot challenge your theories choose instead to personalise their criticism.