So if the abduction occurred at 9.15pm lets look at the movements.

[Rachel Granada]

Very true, Benice, but this is your work : in 805 posts there's not one in which you don't turn their behaviours superhuman ! You've convinced us..

Well Gerry certainly must be superhuman - after all he is able to be in two places at once!

[Benice]

Very true, Benice, but this is your work : in 805 posts there's not one in which you don't turn their behaviours superhuman ! You've convinced us..

So what's superhuman about people later remembering something which they hadn't recalled when they were first asked about it?   Have you never said anything like ..''Oh yes I do remember that now you come to mention it''.   

All I'm asking is that the McCanns and their friends are allowed to be as human as the rest of us.  Something which I have noticed the Sceptics are very loath to do.

[Albertini]

But that's the whole point.  The abductor and/or his accomplice were not to know that Gerry McCann would pause outside the apartment to chat or that Jane Tanner would choose that moment to visit her own apartment.  Sorry about the pun but the window of opportunity was never going to be ideal thus why they decided to go for it the moment Gerry left the apartment.

The alternative scenario of course is that the abductor was already in the apartment when Gerry arrived at about 9.12pm having chosen to make his move after observing Matthew do his rounds at 9pm.  Support for this comes in the form of the opened bedroom door which Gerry closed to within 10cm before leaving the apartment. 

So the bottom line is this, if the opened bedroom door signified the presence of an intruder and Gerry actually saw Madeleine in her bed then the abductor must have been there hiding.

But wouldn't the abductor have heard Gerry & Jez talking in the street? It would have been silent in the apartment.

Then when he got out of the apartment and heard voices on the road why did he decide to walk across the very road he would have heard the child's father talking on?

That makes no sense as the risk is massive to the abductor.

He'd have surely heard the talking and bailed the other way across the complex and behind the complex wall.

Also if he could get in and out so quick why would he need to get out within minutes of Gerry leaving? If they were being watched he would know the checks were being done every 20-30 minutes, he could have waited 10 minutes and then make a break for it.

It doesn't make sense that he set off whilst he heard people talking on the street and it makes no sense to walk across that very street and potentially be exposed to the child's father seeing him.

Unless of course, which makes more sense, given both Gerry and Jez are adamant they saw no one, and Jane said she walked past both men who were in fact on the other side of the road, there was no man walking across the road.

[Albertini]

She also says 5 to 10 mins in her statement of 10th May.

Quote
They ordered dinner and waited for the starters when, about 21h10, Gerald McCann left the restaurant having gone to the apartment to see his children. Five or ten minutes later the deponent left, having gone to her apartment to check that all was well with her girls. At that time she observed Gerald McCann talking to an English citizen called Jez that they had met on these holidays. He played tennis with them. She doesn't know if they saw her giving the assurance that, on her part, she did not start a conversation with either of them.
Unquote

I take it you've never heard anyone say ' ...you mentioning that just jogged my memory.....'' or ''....What you just said brought something back to me that I'd completely forgotten about''... etc etc. ?     

That's normal human behaviour, but once again I see the McCanns and their friends are denied the same human behaviours that everyone else is allowed to have without question.

First statements are always the best for describing actions and you cannot unremember an event.

We also can add's Russell's first statement which says:

He is no longer sure who went out first, but five minutes later, Gerry McCann and his own partner, Jane, went out, almost at the same time, to check the children. He thinks that Gerry must have gone out first because Jane saw him chatting with a person on holiday at the complex, a certain Jez. He thinks that Jane only checked their apartment, being worried about E**e.

It is a fact memories deteriorate over time certainly when describing actions.

So i take it you have never heard of witnesses colluding after the event to polish their statements?

Because it's either a medical miracle that their memories of what they did that night have got better over time or they have colluded together to make their statements come together in as polished a fashion as they could.

[Redblossom]

I have never understood why the Mccanns pushed Jane Tanners sighting as evidence de facto that that is when Madeleine was abducted, and given the high risk and the time limit involved, an abduction planned for days and meticulously and highly professional ala Don McIntyre, only to end up with bungleman walking across the road with a stolen child, unwrapped, visible to people and  then alledgedly back across that road 40 minutes later with child still in arms, in order to get to where the Smiths saw him. Not counting all the other square pegs that dont fit in the round hole with this.

Computer says no.

[AnneGuedes]

Well Gerry certainly must be superhuman - after all he is able to be in two places at once!

Was Superman in two places at once ? I must have missed that part. Superman, for me, is the guy who managed to force time to go backwards in order to save the woman he loves.
Anyhow, Rachel, I see that Mr McCann is in your dreams...

[DCI]

Was Superman in two places at once ? I must have missed that part. Superman, for me, is the guy who managed to force time to go backwards in order to save the woman he loves.
Anyhow, Rachel, I see that Mr McCann is in your dreams...

Is Amaral in yours Anne?

[AnneGuedes]

I have never understood why the Mccanns pushed Jane Tanners sighting as evidence de facto that that is when Madeleine was abducted, and given the high risk and the time limit involved, an abduction planned for days and meticulously and highly professional ala Don McIntyre, only to end up with bungleman walking across the road with a stolen child, unwrapped, visible to people and  then alledgedly back across that road 40 minutes later with child still in arms, in order to get to where the Smiths saw him. Not counting all the other square pegs that dont fit in the round hole with this.

Computer says no.

You're forgetting the rehearsal, the most surrealistic hypothesis in this case ! Actually no, there's as surrealistic as the rehearsal, the errant body in quest of sepulchre.

[AnneGuedes]

Is Amaral in yours Anne?

He's certainly in your nightmares, DCI, my dreams are far away !

[Rachel Granada]

Was Superman in two places at once ? I must have missed that part. Superman, for me, is the guy who managed to force time to go backwards in order to save the woman he loves.
Anyhow, Rachel, I see that Mr McCann is in your dreams...

Gerry must be superhuman Anne.  After all, he managed to be both in the Tapas bar AND the man in the Smith sighting!

[AnneGuedes]

that would have given the abductor around 4 minutes.   That's a long time.

4 minutes, a long time ! Explain us, Benice, how he managed to sedate 3 kids, or even only Madeleine, in order to have her quiet during at least one hour ! This is a crucial detail, the kind Lucifer etc.

[AnneGuedes]

Gerry must be superhuman Anne.  After all, he managed to be both in the Tapas bar AND the man in the Smith sighting!

Dans vos rêves, Rachel, dans vos rêves !

[Rachel Granada]

Dans vos rêves, Rachel, dans vos rêves !

Non, non, non!!

[Benice]

First statements are always the best for describing actions and you cannot unremember an event.

We also can add's Russell's first statement which says:

He is no longer sure who went out first, but five minutes later, Gerry McCann and his own partner, Jane, went out, almost at the same time, to check the children. He thinks that Gerry must have gone out first because Jane saw him chatting with a person on holiday at the complex, a certain Jez. He thinks that Jane only checked their apartment, being worried about E**e.

It is a fact memories deteriorate over time certainly when describing actions.

So i take it you have never heard of witnesses colluding after the event to polish their statements?

Because it's either a medical miracle that their memories of what they did that night have got better over time or they have colluded together to make their statements come together in as polished a fashion as they could.

They had no reason to collude - they'd done nothing wrong.

Their very first statements were given while they were all in shock.  And it's not unusual for things to come back to people a while after a traumatic event had happened - when they've calmed down slightly and have time to really put their minds to thinking back and going over what happened.

I thought one of Amarals reasons for suspicion was because in his opinion there were too many discrepancies in their statements.  That doesn't sound like any 'polishing' had been done to me.

It's also a fact that people do not all remember the same events exactly the same as one-another as different people have vastly different powers of recall and also of assessing times and distances.   Russell's statement confirms that - because if Jane and Gerry had left 'almost at the same time'  she would not have still been at the table, when they started wondering where he'd got to because he'd been gone much longer than usual.  But she was. 


 

[AnneGuedes]

Non, non, non!!

Mais il n'est pas si mal que ça !