Sadie's theory.

[stephen25000]

That is roundly dishonest ....

Quote......

'where is the child' ?

[G-Unit]

This may or may not clarify things re light conditions re the Tanner sighting.

I have visited the scene on a 3 May to get my head round something that was intriguing me.  I was outside 5A at 9.10 to 9.15pm.

The darkness was increasing.  The last elements of my normal colour vision were dropping, reverting to a near total B&W mode.

I did not check cloud cover, or how much starlight or moonlight there was.

The dominant light was from street lamps.  As these are sodium, there was still some colour, predominantly yellow.

I don't know the precise date the old street lamps were replaced by new ones, but the new ones were in situ on my visit.

Compared to my eyesight, Jane Tanner's vision may the same, better or worse.

I have no doubt whatsoever that Jane Tanner would be able to see a man carrying a child, at that time of night, using the man's position and Jane's position.

Whether Jane could see enough to give the details she did depends on wobble factors.  The eyesight comparison.  The lighting conditions.  The weather conditions.  And precise timing.  Just a few minutes earlier I still had enough colour vision to correct for the street lamps.  Just a few minutes later, and I couldn't.

I have been wondering what time the street lights come on in May, now I know. Thank you. I have seen pictures at night with the new street lights which were installed pretty quickly, I understand. They certainly bathed the patio in light, but I don't think the old ones did; look how dark it is at the bottom of the steps where the flash of the camera doesn't reach. I haven't been able to find a street photo taken when the original street lights were still there;

[Mr Gray]

Let's be honest Sadie, there is no actual evidence consistent with an abduction is there?

Of course there is
Think about it

[slartibartfast]

Of course there is
Think about it

Go on, without reference to SY, OG or Redwood, spill the beans.

[Mr Gray]

Go on, without reference to SY, OG or Redwood, spill the beans.

Angelo said there is no evidence CONSISTENT with abduction
There obviously is if you understand what consistent means

[ferryman]

Go on, without reference to SY, OG or Redwood, spill the beans.

Let's face it, it's only Slartibarfast (and one or two others of similar ilk) who know better than any of them ....

[stephen25000]

Go on, without reference to SY, OG or Redwood, spill the beans.

Indeed, let's the substance to evidence of abduction, not blind rhetoric.

[stephen25000]

Let's face it, it's only Slartibarfast (and one or two others of similar ilk) who know better than any of them ....

and you say only abduction, and no abductor or abductors have been found, and there is no forensic evidence to prove there was a third party in the apartment that night.

[ferryman]

Martin Smith is convinced he saw Madeleine's abductor; equally convinced the McCanns are innocent.

We've had the verbatim quote somewhere upstream on this forum.

Evidence of abduction.

Much else besides ....

[Jean-Pierre]

Indeed, let's the substance to evidence of abduction, not blind rhetoric.

What IS there evidence of, Stephen?

[stephen25000]

Martin Smith is convinced he saw Madeleine's abductor; equally convinced the McCanns are innocent.

We've had the verbatim quote somewhere upstream on this forum.

Evidence of abduction.

Much else besides ....

Not necessarily an abductor, was it ferryman ?

[stephen25000]

What IS there evidence of, Stephen?

Nothing to take to court.

[G-Unit]

Martin Smith is convinced he saw Madeleine's abductor; equally convinced the McCanns are innocent.

We've had the verbatim quote somewhere upstream on this forum.

Evidence of abduction.

Much else besides ....

I have seen no verbatim quote by Martin Smith saying the McCanns are innocent.

[G-Unit]

@SIL.  The gardens in Block 5 seem to 'belong' to the ground floor apartments and to be accessed from their balconies. Is there a way for those in the upper apartments to enter and exit through the gardens, do you know? I'd like to know if it applies to Block 6 also. Sorry to keep asking questions of you, but you're nearer than me ha ha.

[Angelo222]

Martin Smith is convinced he saw Madeleine's abductor; equally convinced the McCanns are innocent.

We've had the verbatim quote somewhere upstream on this forum.

Evidence of abduction.

Much else besides ....

There is absolutely nothing to connect Smithman or Tannerman with an abductor, it is purely conjecture.  Similarly, there is no physical evidence which connects an open shutter and window with an abduction, not an iota.  And since the only prints found on the window glass belonged to Kate McCann and a policeman, we can rule out the latter.