Wandering Off Topic

[IndigoJ]

Sorry but you are listening to the wrong people and have consequently got it wrong yourself.  I have been there, eaten at that restaurant and seen for myself.

Amaral confirms that no intruder would go in via the patio door to the lounge because it was overlooked by the Tapas group at only 50 metres.   I am doubtful that he even noticed the patio door to the parents bedroom cos as far as I am aware, no forensics were done on that window.

Jeez, Unbelievable !!!  .... if my doubt is correct.

Did you go there specifically to check out the McCann disappearance?

[Carana]

Did you go there specifically to check out the McCann disappearance?

As opposed to which?

[Carana]

Too far.

Who is the arbiter what "too far" is?

[Robittybob1]

Too far.

Please use I think or IMO when something is said that may or may not be true but your own point of view.

[sadie]

You must have extremely good eyesight to make out any detail at that distance Sadie.  The photo below shows exactly what can be seen from the tapas restaurant.

McCann apartment patio shown circled.

The Mccann apartment has the illuminated arch

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/parismatchtapasrestauraxe3.jpg



Deleted.  Upon further examination, SIL is correct and I was wrong.  Apologies



3) The camera exposure time and also printing techniques can change the look of the photos.  I could see much more clearly than that.  Has someone fiddled with these things to give such a dull photo?  ( ETA, I see that the copy of that photo which I have found is MUCH clearer than the copy you posted, Angelo.  Try maginfying my photo for more detail including the patio windows )

After all Amaral too, postulated that the Tapas group were overlooking the Patio doors and no intruders would go in that way, so he thought that they had a good view.

Are you saying that Amaral was talking nonsense Angelo?

4)  What was the date of the photo ? 
It is amazing to British eyes just how quickly foliage grows in the western Algarve and can very quickly block off views.  I guess it is the westerly winds bringing in the rain from the adjoining Atlantic and the warm sunny weather that came just after Madeleine went missing

5)  This photo was taken from between the Tapas restaurant and the Tapas bar.  In other words it was several metres further west than where we have generally been led to believe the group sat.   Then the viewing angle changes, the foliage in line with the camera also changes from what is correct.


ETA, I see that after challenges from Carana, Angelo has now informed us that the photo was NOT taken from the Tapas table.

IMO, that information should be added whenever anyone uses it, because most people are likely to think that this is the correct viewing angle ... and it is not

[ShiningInLuz]

The Mccann apartment has the illuminated arch

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/parismatchtapasrestauraxe3.jpg



1)  anyone can see that the photo was taken from almost ground level.   

2)  I wonder why anyone would do that? ... so distort the better view that was being seen from head height.  Such an odd position to take a photo from, with the camera on/near the floor.  Must have been tricky to take from down there.  So much easier to take from waist height, shoulder height or even with the camera sitting on a table

Was it deliberately posed to give a false view?  With what intent? 

Is that photo deliberate disinformation?


3) The camera exposure time and also printing techniques can change the look of the photos.  I could see much more clearly than that.  Has someone fiddled with these things to give such a dull photo?  ( ETA, I see that the copy of that photo which I have found is MUCH clearer than the copy you posted, Angelo )

After all Amaral too, postulated that the Tapas group were overlooking the Patio doors and no intruders would go in that way, so he thought that they had a good view.

Are you saying that Amaral was talking nonsense Angelo?

4)  What was the date of the photo ?  It is amazing to British eyes just how quickly foliage grows in the western Algarve and can very quickly block off views.  I guess it is the westerly winds bringing in the rain from the adjoining Atlantic and the warm sunny weather that came just after Madeleine went missing

5)  Tghis photo was taken from between the Tapas restaurant and the Tapas bar.  In other words it was several metres further west than where we have generally been led to believe the group sat.   Then the viewing angle changes, the foliage in line with the camera also changes from what is correct.


This photo is clearly NOT FACT, it has too many errors



Having recently noticed all these anomolies, i confess to wondering if this photo was a deliberate ploy to try and make out that The Mccanns were lying about the friends view of 5A.

Since one can clearly see the top of the table nearest, the photo was obviously taken from above the level of table.

[sadie]

The photo I posted was taken from the best possible vantage point ie beyond the plastic sheeting.
The photo was taken by Jacques Lange for the Paris Match Magazine.


From Gonçalo Amaral's book, 'The Truth of the Lie', page 60:
 
'At night, with the existing vegetation, in a restaurant with a lateral opaque plastic cover and with the group of friends sat with their backs to the apartments, they weren't seeing anything and any person could easily have had access to the apartment without being detected, coming in and calmly and deceptively coming out.'

So Amaral picks his words differently for each situation does he?

One day he says that no intruder would have attempted to get in to 5A using the patio door as it were so closely overlooked by the parents and friends

..... and another day he says, "At night, with the existing vegetation, in a restaurant with a lateral opaque plastic cover and with the group of friends sat with their backs to the apartments, they weren't seeing anything and any person could easily have had access to the apartment without being detected, coming in and calmly and deceptively coming out."

Both statements can't be true

Or perchance, he had visited some time after and the vegetation had spurted ?


And what about his claim that the group sat with their backs to the Apartment.  The table was round with the group spaced around it.   Who is being deceptive there ?

[sadie]

Since one can clearly see the top of the table nearest, the photo was obviously taken from above the level of table.

You are quite correct SIL.  Thank you for that.    I had been looking at the chair seats thinking that they were horizontal or worse on the photos.

I have amended my post.

[Robittybob1]

So Amaral picks his words differently for each situation does he?

One day he says that no intruder would have attempted to get in to 5A using the patio door as it were so closely overlooked by the parents and friends

..... and another day he says, "At night, with the existing vegetation, in a restaurant with a lateral opaque plastic cover and with the group of friends sat with their backs to the apartments, they weren't seeing anything and any person could easily have had access to the apartment without being detected, coming in and calmly and deceptively coming out."

The expression * L..., L..., pants on fire * comes to mind.   Both statements can't be true

Or perchance, he had visited some time after and the vegetation had spurted ?


And what about his claim that the group sat with their backs to the Apartment.  The table was round with the group spaced around it.   Who is being deceptive there ?

I think the difference is a matter of knowledge.    Someone not knowing what they could see from the Tapas won't go there.  Someone knowing what was possible to see could attempt it.

[IndigoJ]

As opposed to which?

you mean as opposed to what? as opposed to simply going there for a holiday without the intention to check out the site , did she go with that purpose is what i was asking

[Angelo222]

I think the difference is a matter of knowledge.    Someone not knowing what they could see from the Tapas won't go there.  Someone knowing what was possible to see could attempt it.

It's laughable for anyone to suggest that the parents spent their night peering constantly at the patio of 5a.

[faithlilly]

It's laughable for anyone to suggest that the parents spent their night peering constantly at the patio of 5a.

Even if they had Angelo the children’s bedroom was on the other side of the building. Fire would have been a far more common danger than abduction.

[Brietta]

Even if they had Angelo the children’s bedroom was on the other side of the building. Fire would have been a far more common danger than abduction.

The front of the building was thought to be secured by a dropped shutter and a solid locked front door.
They didn't know it was possible to raise the shutter from outside. 
Nor did they know about burglaries taking place in the resort with entry via a window or with the use of a key ... two of which had taken place in apartment block A.

Why on earth would the thought of someone entering their apartment and abducting a child even enter their heads?  At that time they were totally unaware that a sexual predator was gaining entry to holiday apartments in the near vicinity and in Luz itself.

No holidaymaker snuggling down in bed at night was aware of the potential danger of someone entering while they slept and either or robbing them and carrying out an  assault on their children.

[G-Unit]

The front of the building was thought to be secured by a dropped shutter and a solid locked front door.
They didn't know it was possible to raise the shutter from outside. 
Nor did they know about burglaries taking place in the resort with entry via a window or with the use of a key ... two of which had taken place in apartment block A.

Why on earth would the thought of someone entering their apartment and abducting a child even enter their heads?  At that time they were totally unaware that a sexual predator was gaining entry to holiday apartments in the near vicinity and in Luz itself.

No holidaymaker snuggling down in bed at night was aware of the potential danger of someone entering while they slept and either or robbing them and carrying out an  assault on their children.

A lot of emphasis is placed on these rumours of burglaries and assaults. Was the Ocean Club supposed to gather crime statistics and warn their guests that their apartments might be entered illegally? They offered safe deposit boxes at reception; there's a clue. They offered a baby-sitting service; there's another. Otherwise they are entitled to assume their guests know about everyday dangers such as fire and accidents. I thought we all knew how quickly small children can get into difficulties when unsupervised and that it's risky to leave doors open and go out.

[Brietta]

A lot of emphasis is placed on these rumours of burglaries and assaults. Was the Ocean Club supposed to gather crime statistics and warn their guests that their apartments might be entered illegally? They offered safe deposit boxes at reception; there's a clue. They offered a baby-sitting service; there's another. Otherwise they are entitled to assume their guests know about everyday dangers such as fire and accidents. I thought we all knew how quickly small children can get into difficulties when unsupervised and that it's risky to leave doors open and go out.

Unfortunately the 'everyday dangers' in the Algarve at that time included the danger of intrusion to one's home for the purpose of burglary and the intrusion to one's home for the purpose of burglary and or to assault children.

The block of flats the McCann family occupied had suffered two burglaries in the previous weeks and other nearby premises had also been entered.

They had weighed the risks of fire or accident ... there was no evidence of fire or accident taking place ... but there was evidence of intrusion and evidence of a missing child, both of which must now be factored into any risk assessment when visiting the Algarve.