The Tapas Note.

[G-Unit]

I have just explained the probable reason for this in another thread.   But briefly:

All the tapas group except the Mccanns chose to use their front doors to check their children.  to get to their front doors they all had to walk along a walled pathway which had Madeleines bedroom [and the front door to 5A] at its end.  To check / listen at Madeleines bedroom involved just about three steps beyond the window where the checker had to listen at the Oldfields flat.  A ten second job.


The Mccanns, on the other hand, could enter by a well lit and close Patio door rather than negotiate the darkness of the rear alleyway, back gardens and steps up ... that the others would have had to have done.  Who amongst them would have left their patio door unlocked in such a dark position anyway, so the friends were forced to make the longer walk.

So The M<ccanns had this shorter walk and unlike the others never passed along the walled walkway at the front to check for crying at the windows of the friends children.  Plenty were checking, so it semed they were well covered anyway


All IMO,, but it makes sense.

Of course it makes sense. Why should the McCanns inconvenience themselves by going round to the front door like everyone else? Not only was it quicker to use the patio doors it meant they got extra checks done on their kids without them having to do the same for others.

It seems to fit in perfectly with the attitude pervading the group from the beginning. They insisted on being housed together, on having a block booking at the Tapas, on the tennis starting at a time to suit them and on inventing their own childcare system.

[sadie]

John were you measuring from Russell's front door? You are right in that it is longer to take the alleyway rather than the car park and the footpaths.

I did the measuring Rob.  I am a big fan of Google Earth.   

The measirements only needed to give a rough indication of distance rather than be perfect.  I didn't know how deeply Russells front door was set back into the hallway / building so I actually measured from the the place where the pathway started  adjacent to the front car park.   

For both the normal route and the route via the pathway between block 4 and block 5, Matt would have had to walk several metres further if you measure back to Russells front door.   This, of course, makes the route via Russells back garden and the dark rear pathway an even better saver of distance.


The short route seems to have definitely been via Russells back garden and the dark rear pathway.  IMO

[Benice]

Of course it makes sense. Why should the McCanns inconvenience themselves by going round to the front door like everyone else? Not only was it quicker to use the patio doors it meant they got extra checks done on their kids without them having to do the same for others.

It seems to fit in perfectly with the attitude pervading the group from the beginning. They insisted on being housed together, on having a block booking at the Tapas, on the tennis starting at a time to suit them and on inventing their own childcare system.

I'm struggling to understand why it's wrong - or even unusual - for a group of people who decide to go on holiday together to try to make arrangements so that they can be accommodated close to one another and have their evening meal together if possible.    It turns out it was possible.   It all sounds pretty normal to me.

Your 'tennis' comment is too petty for words and they did not 'invent' their method of childcare, they mirrored a long established existing one.

Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel in order to find fault.   Jeez.

AIMHO

[Benice]

It's all very simple really, all the parent's claimed initially that they used the front door to access the apartments and kept the patio doors locked.  You see it wouldn't have looked terribly good if any of them had admitted to leaving their apartments unsecured especially when a child had disappeared. Unfortunately for one set of parent's however they forgot to mention that they had left their keys to the front door on the kitchen counter so it was impossible that they used the front door.  Oops, a mere oversight allegedly and not the big whopping lie that some suspect.

A credible cite please for Kate or Gerry claiming to have left the keys on the kitchen counter when they went out.

The fact that the keys were seen on the counter after the police arrived  in no way proves when they were put there.


IMO

[Brietta]

I'm struggling to understand why it's wrong - or even unusual - for a group of people who decide to go on holiday together to try to make arrangements so that they can be accommodated close to one another and have their evening meal together if possible.    It turns out it was possible.   It all sounds pretty normal to me.

Your 'tennis' comment is too petty for words and they did not 'invent' their method of childcare, they mirrored a long established existing one.

Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel in order to find fault.   Jeez.

AIMHO

I used to holiday with other families many years ago.  Nowhere as exotic as Portugal ... a British Rail card and student accommodation did the trick.
It was a prerequisite that our families ... who were in effect holidaying as a group ... had adjoining accommodation sometimes semi detached as in St Andrew's and York sometimes in flats as in Exeter.

We travelled together ... we lodged in close proximity and enjoyed the university facilities which were included in the price of the holiday ... although self catering we even ate together on occasion.

Why would what the McCann party did on holiday be a target for criticism, any more than what I did and many thousands of others may have done while on holiday?

[G-Unit]

I'm struggling to understand why it's wrong - or even unusual - for a group of people who decide to go on holiday together to try to make arrangements so that they can be accommodated close to one another and have their evening meal together if possible.    It turns out it was possible.   It all sounds pretty normal to me.

Your 'tennis' comment is too petty for words and they did not 'invent' their method of childcare, they mirrored a long established existing one.

Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel in order to find fault.   Jeez.

AIMHO

There was no need for them to be housed close to each other in order to dine together every evening. Child care was on offer and was used by other parents.

In my opinion they invented their system of child care, because neither the type of resort or the method existed anywhere else.

Did someone rein in their desire to have the social tennis brought forward to five thirty by reminding them that their preferences weren't necessarily paramount? It seems the unfairness wasn't obvious at all until it was pointed out to them.


we actually asked them whether they could move the tennis forward so they could go to the social tennis, because it was actually later and it would have gone across bath time so at least half of us wouldn't have been able to, erm, wouldn't have been able to go, so they actually moved it forward and I think they moved it to six o'clock from either seven or six thirty, I think we'd asked for it to actually be moved to five thirty but it wasn't obviously fair on everybody else, in terms of guests, so they didn't move it completely forward, but they certainly moved it forward by at least half an hour'.
 http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

[sadie]

Of course it makes sense. Why should the McCanns inconvenience themselves by going round to the front door like everyone else? Not only was it quicker to use the patio doors it meant they got extra checks done on their kids without them having to do the same for others.

It seems to fit in perfectly with the attitude pervading the group from the beginning. They insisted on being housed together, on having a block booking at the Tapas, on the tennis starting at a time to suit them and on inventing their own childcare system.

They are not in the Army and regimented, as your family was.

As both Benice and Brietta have beautifully pointed out, what was wrong with being near their friends?


First thing we did when we holidayed, was ensure that we liked the positiion of our room and its layout .... AND that it was close to our friends.

On one occasion we looked at several rooms before we settled in.  But once in and happy we were no more trouble to the receptionists.

We aimed to eat together at dinner time and spend the evenings together, but otherwise apart from maybe one day in a fortnight, we preferred to go our own ways .... bumping into each other, or casually searching each other out, as the need and desire occured.


Every one is different Gunit, but we certainly were not going to be pushed into accomodation for a fortnight that was unsuitable.   We had paid the money and we wanted a good holiday ... those minutes at the start of the holiday making sure all was right made such a difference to the quality of our holiday.


In the case of OC., the place was almost empty.  So easy to fit them all in close to each other. So easy to adjust the time of tennis to suit the needs of the families etc.


I cant see why you are griping about it, except it is an obsession a hobby of yours to always try and find fault with The Mccanns.       
Now why is that ?  £5%4%

[sadie]

There was no need for them to be housed close to each other in order to dine together every evening. Child care was on offer and was used by other parents.

In my opinion they invented their system of child care, because neither the type of resort or the method existed anywhere else.

Did someone rein in their desire to have the social tennis brought forward to five thirty by reminding them that their preferences weren't necessarily paramount? It seems the unfairness wasn't obvious at all until it was pointed out to them.


we actually asked them whether they could move the tennis forward so they could go to the social tennis, because it was actually later and it would have gone across bath time so at least half of us wouldn't have been able to, erm, wouldn't have been able to go, so they actually moved it forward and I think they moved it to six o'clock from either seven or six thirty, I think we'd asked for it to actually be moved to five thirty but it wasn't obviously fair on everybody else, in terms of guests, so they didn't move it completely forward, but they certainly moved it forward by at least half an hour'.
 http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

Fiddlesticks Gunit

Are you saying that  there are no other places like Ocean Club around the world ?


No harm in asking for the tennis being retimed.  If it was very inconvenient to the organisers, they had the option to refuse.   At most places i have visited, mainly hotels I admit, the tennis courts are hardly used.

The timings posted are just that, timings so that people know what is available.  Little trouble, I would have thought to adjust them by half an hour.    Hotels are there for the clients convenience and are usually happy to adjust to make the holiday makers happy.


I can understand annoyance about not being able to get into the Tapas restaurant, but to moan, as you say some did, about such a tweeny thing as half an hour when on holiday is TWEE in the extreme.  IMO


When most people are on holiday, they are not in the Army you know ... with all its rules and regimentation.


Maybe you should learn to relax and enjoy yourself ... and ask for things politely if you specially want them?

[stephen25000]

They are not in the Army and regimented, as your family was.

As both Benice and Brietta have beautifully pointed out, what was wrong with being near their friends?


First thing we did when we holidayed, was ensure that we liked the positiion of our room and its layout .... AND that it was close to our friends.

On one occasion we looked at several rooms before we settled in.  But once in and happy we were no more trouble to the receptionists.

We aimed to eat together at dinner time and spend the evenings together, but otherwise apart from maybe one day in a fortnight, we preferred to go our own ways .... bumping into each other, or casually searching each other out, as the need and desire occured.


Every one is different Gunit, but we certainly were not going to be pushed into accomodation for a fortnight that was unsuitable.   We had paid the money and we wanted a good holiday ... those minutes at the start of the holiday making sure all was right made such a difference to the quality of our holiday.


In the case of OC., the place was almost empty.  So easy to fit them all in close to each other. So easy to adjust the time of tennis to suit the needs of the families etc.


I cant see why you are griping about it, except it is an obsession a hobby of yours to always try and find fault with The Mccanns.       
Now why is that ?  £5%4%

Why are you happy Sadie to find fault in anyone who doubts the McCann's version of events ? &%+((£

[sadie]

Why are you happy Sadie to find fault in anyone who doubnts the mccanns version of events ? &%+((£

I am all for justice stephen ... and it sickens me to see the way that The Mccanns are torn apart for trvia and behaving in a way that most of us do.   Quite often on here they have had situations foisted on them with no proof or even indications.

Anyone who has read on here for a few weeks will know what i mean.

[stephen25000]

I am all for justice stephen ... and it sickens me to see the way that The Mccanns are torn apart for trvia and behaving in a way that most of us do.   Quite often on here they have had situations foisted on them with no proof or even indications.

Anyone who has read on here for a few weeks will know what i mean.

You seem to forget Sadie that other people will have different views to you.

I would suggest that people will blame the Mccanns for what happened, as no other party had been found to be involved, to date.

[John]

A credible cite please for Kate or Gerry claiming to have left the keys on the kitchen counter when they went out.

The fact that the keys were seen on the counter after the police arrived  in no way proves when they were put there.


IMO

The parents admitted to having used the patio door.  Ergo, why on earth would anyone carry keys with them which served no possible purpose?

I go with the Control Risks interview.

[sadie]

You seem to forget Sadie that other people will have different views to you.

I would suggest that people will blame the Mccanns for what happened, as no other party had been found to be involved, to date.

Not by this forum, I agree


but who knows what SY and the PJ up in Porto have found?

 &8#£%

[stephen25000]

Not by this forum, I agree


but who knows what SY and the PJ up in Porto have found?

 &8#£%

Not just on this forum Sadie.

As to the investigation..............

[misty]

Of course it makes sense. Why should the McCanns inconvenience themselves by going round to the front door like everyone else? Not only was it quicker to use the patio doors it meant they got extra checks done on their kids without them having to do the same for others.

It seems to fit in perfectly with the attitude pervading the group from the beginning. They insisted on being housed together, on having a block booking at the Tapas, on the tennis starting at a time to suit them and on inventing their own childcare system.

I am of the opinion that the McCanns did use the front door for access in the early part of the holiday, as noted in GM's statement. However, they stated that his reason for not continuing to use the front door was not the distance issue but the noise issue. That suggests to me that the noise of the front door being opened/closed had woken the children - possibly on the Tuesday when the prolonged crying was heard for "Daddy" and maybe Daddy just told the child(ren) to go back to sleep & left them to it.
I assume that both the Oldfields & ROB/JT had an equally noisy front door but neither couple opted for the shorter route to their respective apartments via an unlocked patio door.
All IMHO.