I don't see any distance here. Mr McCann has been asked many times why they left the children alone and he had to provide an answer. Stricto senso, because of the ellipse on "resulting in Madeleine's abduction", his answer that he did nothing wrong is right. He never imagined that abduction could happen and nobody would have.
The reasons why they should never ever have left the children alone are far more serious and real than an abduction from bed risk with a quasi null probability. Then, logically, why should he feel guilty if none of the awful likely events occurred?
Mr McCann is taking no distance here, he rightly says he did nothing wrong on the topic of abduction, his feeling of guilt being limited to not being a superfather gifted with omnivision and omnihearing.
Though Mr McCann claimed he was surprised by the door that moved by itself, he never said he felt guilty not to have checked behind the door. There he had a very good opportunity to express guilt. But he never caught it. Was he taking a distance ? Or did he just lack of imagination ?
Nice terminologies!
But seriously, stricto senso, he was slightly at fault for leaving the children, not because of the (miniscule) risk of abduction, but because of the much greater risk of accidents.
So what was a minor mistake, snowballed, through events beyond Gerry's control, into a much greater 'mistake'.
Another point I would make, Anne, is that when using the word guilt, I am speaking obviously of
feelings of guilt. These are quite separate things, and could even run contradictory to, questions of moral responsibility or legal culpability. Important distinctions to bear in mind.
