Can patio door be clearly seen from the tapas bar?

[sadie]

The tapas outdoor restaurant at dusk



Even in the half light, the plastic windows give a decent image thru them.  If you can see that detail when looking in, then you would see similar detail looking out, especially at a lit spot as 5A clearly was, thanks to the street light.

Amaral was right on this one.  No-one would risk going into 5A when it was so close, so well illuminated and the parents were so near.

Almost 100%, bundleman neither entered, nor left via the patio doors.

[Lyall]

I suggest you take it up with KM then, because in the book she says it's possible.

Maybe you need to read it again? >@@(*&)

[sadie]

It's the most crucial detail, but nobody mentions it? Nah. Not credible. Their view wasn't good enough to see anything.

It is in the various statements that they could see Apartment 5A at about 50 metres away.  Sorry, I am not wading thru them for you.  You either believe me ... or you dont

Tis up to you.

But I will tell you something Lyall.  Almost all the images you see of 5A supposedly from where Gerry and Kate sat ... are from nowhere near where Kate and Gerrry sat.  They are pure misinformation and some might even be disinformation.

They should not be allowed to stay up on the internet, putting out false information.

[Lyall]

You keep dodging my point. Their book doesn't support what you are claiming.

Why are you insisting you know better than Madeleine's parents?

[Lyall]

Mr Oldfield's May 10th statement:

"Nevertheless, he admits that it was a tenuous sight considering the distance to the apartments (estimated as about 50 to 100 metres), and further, due to their vision being impaired by a transparent oilcloth [tarpaulin] that covered the area in which the tables were located.
 
Consequently, he admits it being possible for someone to have entered the ground-floor apartments without being detected, through [by way of] the patios that were round the back of the residential block."

[faithlilly]

Mr Oldfield's May 10th statement:

"Nevertheless, he admits that it was a tenuous sight considering the distance to the apartments (estimated as about 50 to 100 metres), and further, due to their vision being impaired by a transparent oilcloth [tarpaulin] that covered the area in which the tables were located.
 
Consequently, he admits it being possible for someone to have entered the ground-floor apartments without being detected, through [by way of] the patios that were round the back of the residential block."

Thank you Lyall, that's what I was looking for.

[sadie]

You keep dodging my point. Their book doesn't support what you are claiming.

Why are you insisting you know better than Madeleine's parents?

Lyall. I know that the patio doors and steps could be seen from where Kate and Gerry sat.  The evidence is in the photo of the view from the patio doors.  Better still, I have been there.

I also knw that kate, in her efforts to be totally fair has made at least one mistake in her book.  Seems she has listened to other people and has taken on board what other peeps were saying about the distance of 5A from the tapas restaurant.

We who can use Google Earth know that it is only abouit 50 metres crow flies and less than 80 metres walking, yet she has used a much higher figure for the disatnce.  I cant remember the exact distance she said but seems she listened to all the [ censored word] and took their distance on board.

Kate Mccann is absolutely honest.  There is no doubt about it.

If she hasn't analysed the situation as I have ... and in her desperately destraught state it is quite possible she hasn't, then once again she might have taken on board what others are saying.


Now,
How do you account for Amaral saying that no abductor would have gone in via the patio doors cos the tapas group were too close and it was so overlooked by them, he wouldn't dare risk it ?

Dont you believe Amarals words ?  Do you think that you know more than Amaral ? 

Have you even been there or is this just an attack on me for fun ?

[Lyall]

It's discussion, not attack. If you want to be free to publish your theories in isolation, better do it on a blog or in a book - but if you do it on a forum people will challenge you.

Where does Mr Amaral say this? It doesn't sound likely.

Do you have an explanation for the words of Mr Oldfield, which conflict with your own?

[Lyall]

No I've never been to Portugal.

[sadie]

No I've never been to Portugal.

I thought not.  Thanks for your honesty 

[Lyall]

Mr Oldfield was there though, and he clearly also doesn't agree with you. Is he wrong too?

[sadie]

It's discussion, not attack. If you want to be free to publish your theories in isolation, better do it on a blog or in a book - but if you do it on a forum people will challenge you.

Where does Mr Amaral say this? It doesn't sound likely.

Do you have an explanation for the words of Mr Oldfield, which conflict with your own?

This isn't my theory Lyall.  This is fact.  You can see the visibility yourself.  You can see the bushes cut back.  You can see what happens when looking thru the transparent window of the tapas outdoor restaurant.  It is not as clear as glass but it ain't at all bad.
 
You KNOW the distances.  Obviously Matt didn't and had little comprehension of distances ... same as Kate. 

The other apartments were more vulnerable than 5A because they didn't have a street light immediately outside.  Now they were at risk of break in via the patio doors at the back, cos unlike 5A, they were in darkness.

And that is the main reason probably why none of them used the shorter route via the back gate as Kate and Gerry did.  The risk of burglars to their darkened property.  Also, the dark alleyway to walk along .... not nice at night especially for the women.

Amarals piece, that you are asking for, was in his statement when he was trying to prove that no abductor could have got in, so therefor Madeleine died in 5A.  It was much publicised at the time, but once a few of us had analysed it and proved him wrong, he dropped it ... and seems it has now been whooshed.

Would be glad if anyone could dig it out.

[Lyall]

That doesn't deal with what Mr Oldfield said in his statement. He is the witness, not yourself - he was there on the night.

"a tenuous sight"

And would nine people enjoying a relaxing meal and conversation together really keep their eyes constantly on whatever they could see of their apartments in any case? Unlikely.

[sadie]

That doesn't deal with what Mr Oldfield said in his statement. He is the witness, not yourself - he was there on the night.

"a tenuous sight"

And would nine people enjoying a relaxing meal and conversation together really keep their eyes constantly on whatever they could see of their apartments in any case? Unlikely.

My thoughts are in blue.  Lyalls words in black.

The evidence of what can be seen through that plastic sheeting is shown again below


Asked, he relates that, from where that table was positioned the group would have sight of the apartments they were occupying.   [ie. he is talking about the Tapas groups apartments generally.  Not the Mccanns apartment in particular.   Most of the apartments were on an unlit alleyway; the Mccanns was fairly well lit, so was different]

#Nevertheless, he admits that it was a tenuous sight [yep, most were unlit so they would have presented a tenuous sight] considering the distance to the apartments (estimated as about 50 to 100 metres)  [Well we all know that it was about 50 metres and not 100 metres] and further, due to their vision being impaired by a transparent oilcloth [tarpaulin] that covered the area in which the tables were located.

[We have all seen just how much the plastic windows obstructed vision ... and in the case of a lit appartment, like 5A, the group would have been able to see anyone going in or out.  Maybe not so with the unlit apartments ... dunno]


Now Lyall, you will have to excuse me.  I am going to bed

Good night.

[Sherlock Holmes]

What is the point of this thread?

Hasn't it long been established that it is extremely unlikely for the abductor to have entered through the patio doors?

We can argue about the varying degrees of bad visibility from the tapas, but the bottom line is that the abductor would not have wanted to take the risk, however small it may have been, of being seen.

We all agree that the McCann's made a mistake in leaving their children. The kind of mistake that many parents used to make - once upon a time in a safer world - and one which, thanks to this situation, few make now.