Can patio door be clearly seen from the tapas bar?

[sadie]

Admin, I would be very happy for you to lock this thread if you wish.  A lot of time and effort has gone into finding and reporting on various facts and photos.

Please do not delete it.  THanks

[stephen25000]

The proverbial bottom line remains undiluted.

The Mccanns were inexcusable in what they did.

It was nighttime, visibility was poor, and anyone looking in that direction could see jack.

The group were intent on socializing with irregular, unsubstantiated independently verified checks on the children.

Interesting that some trust Amaral on some things, not on others.

Hypocrisy or what ?

[John]

Sadie's contention that the street lamp adjacent to the McCann's apartment somehow shed light on the 5a patio is wrong and has been shown to be wrong in at least two other threads.  The street light is not directly opposite the patio gate and steps, it only shines light on the first two lower steps, the upper steps and the patio itself are always shrouded in darkness.  An intruder could at any time slip up those steps unseen from anyone watching from the Ocean Club gardens and tapas bar/restaurant.

[sadie]

The proverbial bottom line remains undiluted.

The Mccanns were inexcusable in what they did.

It was nighttime, visibility was poor, and anyone looking in that direction could see jack.

The group were intent on socializing with irregular, unsubstantiated independently verified checks on the children.

Interesting that some trust Amaral on some things, not on others.

Hypocrisy or what ?

Good morning Stephen

The facts are lain out in the previous posts.   Take them or leave them. 

I am prepared to take the thoughts of Amaral, the man you worship, cos I know you will believe them ... as you believe everything that he says.

Also his words, in this instance, confirm the status quo


Are you now saying that Amaral is not telling the truth?  Are you saying that he is a liar?


Now I would be very grateful if you would allow me to get on.  Have much to do.

[stephen25000]

Good morning Stephen

The facts are lain out in the previous posts.   Take them or leave them. 

I am prepared to take the thoughts of Amaral, the man you worship, cos I know you will believe them ... as you believe everything that he says.

Also his words, in this instance, confirm the status quo


Are you now saying that Amaral is not telling the truth?  Are you saying that he is a liar?


Now I would be very grateful if you would allow me to get on.  Have much to do.

Sorry to disappoint you.

I don't worship Amaral.

He was a bit player in this case, just remember his views on the case were shared by most of the PJ.

As for the rest, read John's comments above.

[faithlilly]

I thought not.  Thanks for your honesty 

But I have sadie and to the OC and I absolutely dispute your claims, as Matt Oldfield himself does, that all but the very top of the patio doors can be seen from the tapas.

[sadie]

Sadie's contention that the street lamp adjacent to the McCann's apartment somehow shed light on the 5a patio is wrong and has been shown to be wrong in at least two other threads.  The street light is not directly opposite the patio gate and steps, it only shines light on the first two lower steps, the upper steps and the patio itself are always shrouded in darkness.  An intruder could at any time slip up those steps unseen from anyone watching from the Ocean Club gardens and tapas bar/restaurant.

John, having re-examined the photos, I agree that only the lower steps are fully lit and as the steps are ascended the lighting reduces with shadow appearing on the apartment side.  The Tapas side at the top still has some light acording to lines I have drawn on GE.   I suggest you check it yourself

We also have to consider the arched hedging over the gate.  It is not very deep when freshly trimmed but it will create a shadow over a small part of the steps.   It looks like it is about 15" =18" deep / tall (height).  I think you will understand what I am trying to explain by looking at the photo below

Photo: Thanks to Gerry mccanns blogs
As for the patio

There are pictures illustrating that the street lamp very well lit the patio area of 5A.  The light streams in through the arched  window from the lamp, which is directly opposite that window.  This illuminates virtually the full patio area to 5A as can be seen from the photo
The previous lamp was less powerful than the current one.  I dont know when this photo was taken. (upper photo), but it seems that it must have been soon after the abduction cos it is attributed to Amarals book. 

Bundleman would have had to walk thru this lit area.


Photo:Thanks to Goncalo Amarals book

I am sorry the images are so small.  I dont know how to make them bigger



I must also apologise.  I truly do not have the time to keep finding things to try and illustrate my point.  Lots going on at home at present.  Will pop in when I can.

[Angelo222]

There is a picture somewhere on the forum showing the few steps lit at the bottom.  I will try and find it.

There is no guarantee the street light was even working on the 3/4 May 2007.

No problem for Bundleman in any event as he just walked in the dark shaded front door.

[sadie]

But I have sadie and to the OC and I absolutely dispute your claims, as Matt Oldfield himself does, that all but the very top of the patio doors can be seen from the tapas.

No, he doesn't.  Read it again.  He is talking about the apartments in general which were NOT lit by a street lamp.

The evidence of the clarity of vision thru the plastic windows is posted in sadie post about 6 or 7 posts back.  I will repeat it especially for you.




Please dont twist the evidence Faith ... as given in Matts statement and this image.

[sadie]

There is a picture somewhere on the forum showing the few steps lit at the bottom.  I will try and find it.

That would be good.  Thankyou Angelo.

[Lyall]

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.

The point, and thread, matters because Sadie (and yourself also in the above post) continue to make claims that Madeleine's parents and their supporters do not make themselves.

The fact she doesn't recognise that reduces or even destroys any credibility her other theories may have.

[faithlilly]

No, he doesn't.  Read it again.  He is talking about the apartments in general which were NOT lit by a street lamp.

The evidence of the clarity of vision thru the plastic windows is posted in sadie post about 6 or 7 posts back.  I will repeat it especially for you.




Please dont twist the evidence Faith ... as given in Matts statement and this image.

And this sadie :

'
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."'

How am I twisting that evidence ? Please have the grace to admit you are wrong sadie.

[sadie]

And this sadie :

'
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."'

How am I twisting that evidence ? Please have the grace to admit you are wrong sadie.

You haven't read what has been covered before.  He was generalising.  He was talking about all the apartments taken by the Tapas group.  They were not lit by a street light and wouild have been very difficult to see.

THe Mccanns apartment, on the other hand, was bathed in light from the street lamp opposite.

A different scenario Faith.

Matts 10th May statement

Extract from Matts statement

Matts statement in blue.  My comments in black

The question asked, he relates that, due to the large size of the whole group, comprising nine adults (four couple and FP's mother), the deponent and the others always occupied the same table because it was the only one that could handle so many people.


Asked, he relates that, from where that table was positioned the group would have sight of the apartments they were occupying.  <<< a generalization

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. <<< Again a generalization.  We know that the distances were about 50 metres from G.Earth.  On the photograph, we can see how much the plastic window affects the clarity of vision

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. <<< Very obviously a generalization again.  With the flats of most of the group, in the blackness of night with no artificial light to help, it would have been very easy IMO.  But flat 5A was a duifferent cuppa tea, cos it was quite well lit.

Even Amaral said that nobody would go in that way with the parents being so close and overlooking it.
It is very clear that Matt is generalizing.  No doubt it was because of this dark alleyway adjoining the back of their apartments, that none of the others in the group used their back patio doors.  It would have been a burglars paradise, especially if had they left their patio door unlocked. 

On the other hand, the Mccanns rear entrance was quite well lit ... and mainly in view

[faithlilly]

You haven't read what has been covered before.  He was generalising.  He was talking about all the apartments taken by the Tapas group.  They were not lit by a street light and wouild have been very difficult to see.

THe Mccanns apartment, on the other hand, was bathed in light from the street lamp opposite.

A different scenario Faith.

Matts 10th May statement

Extract from Matts statement

Matts statement in blue.  My comments in black

The question asked, he relates that, due to the large size of the whole group, comprising nine adults (four couple and FP's mother), the deponent and the others always occupied the same table because it was the only one that could handle so many people.


Asked, he relates that, from where that table was positioned the group would have sight of the apartments they were occupying.  <<< a generalization

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. <<< Again a generalization.  We know that the distances were about 50 metres from G.Earth.  On the photograph, we can see how much the plastic window affects the clarity of vision

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. <<< Very obviously a generalization again.  With the flats of most of the group, in the blackness of night with no artificial light to help, it would have been very easy IMO.  But flat 5A was a duifferent cuppa tea, cos it was quite well lit.

Even Amaral said that nobody would go in that way with the parents being so close and overlooking it.
It is very clear that Matt is generalizing.  No doubt it was because of this dark alleyway adjoining the back of their apartments, that none of the others in the group used their back patio doors.  It would have been a burglars paradise, especially if had they left their patio door unlocked. 

On the other hand, the Mccanns rear entrance was quite well lit ... and mainly in view

If 5a had been a 'different cuppa tea' he would have said so. He didn't so we must take him at his word.

As to your faith in the word of Amaral, while refreshing that you put such store on his honesty and judgement, you seem to have nothing to prove he said any such thing about accessing the apartment.

Sadie to put it bluntly you can believe whatever makes you the most happy but to anyone looking at the evidence dispassionately, rather than shoehorning it in to suit a theory, it is obvious that the patio area of 5a could not be seen from the tapas.

BTW about that foliage having just been trimmed back at the time of Madeleine's disappearance, have you any other evidence apart from Gerry's word that this was the case ?

[John]

Sadie, those plastic sheeted walls reflect the light and distort images so I can't see how anyone could possibly see anything through them from inside let alone a distance of 50 metres away?

I am processing some additional images taken from several videos at the moment so if you bear with me I will be posting the relevant ones which show the various locations being discussed on this thread at night and before the new brighter street lamp was fitted.