They were just 50m away, just like dining in ones back garden?

[G-Unit]

Photo of apartment 5a taken from across the street shortly after Madeleine dispappeared.  Although the outside of the building was well illuminated, the upper part of the steps and some of the patio area were still in shadow.

I think the top pic has added lights, it's much lighter than the bottom one.

[G-Unit]

Everyone who has children takes certain risks with their safety every day to a greater or lesser degree.  I have given examples on this thread of the risks taken by my parents with me and the risk I take with my kids' safety - we are not an unusual family, therefore it stands to reason that risk-taking exists on a daily basis for most people, whether it is letting kids go to the park to play by themselves, having a pet dog in the house with a child, buying a trampoline, installing a swimming pool, doing some gardening while the three year old plays in his bedroom, packing them off to boarding school aged 7 etc etc etc.  Most people = millions.  If you want millions of cites you may need to give me a few decades to compile them.  Before you start I am not claiming that millions of people leave their kids unattended to go to dinner 50 metres away, nor that it is sensible behaviour, but undoubtedly the McCanns were not the first to take such risks.  We know they did it, we know it was risky, they "gambled and lost" (thanks Alice) how many more times does this issue need to be discussed?  Why does it pose such enduring fascination to some and why do McCann critics seem solely fixated on the McCanns' "neglect" to the exclusion of anyone else's?  Rhetorical questions, no need to explain :-)

It will continue as long as some people continue to argue that their behaviour was that of caring, careful, sensible people. It clearly wasn't for so many reasons; none of which was the possibility of abduction.

Some of those reasons are;

Waking and crying for up to 30 minutes.
Waking and getting out of bed and into mischief.
Waking, finding the parents missing and going out onto that dangerous balcony.
Waking and leaving by the front door.
Then we have climbing and falling, being ill, etc. etc.

That's why people stay in or use baby sitters, because of the above very common possibilities, not 'abduction'. The McCanns seem to have ignored these very normal dangers which most parents are aware of and guard against on a daily basis.

[carlymichelle]

It will continue as long as some people continue to argue that their behaviour was that of caring, careful, sensible people. It clearly wasn't for so many reasons; none of which was the possibility of abduction.

Some of those reasons are;

Waking and crying for up to 30 minutes.
Waking and getting out of bed and into mischief.
Waking, finding the parents missing and going out onto that dangerous balcony.
Waking and leaving by the front door.
Then we have climbing and falling, being ill, etc. etc.

That's why people stay in or use baby sitters, because of the above very common possibilities, not 'abduction'. The McCanns seem to have ignored these very normal dangers which most parents are aware of and guard against on a daily basis.

why didnt they get  the grandparents to look after the kids if they  wanted a child free  holiday??

[Alfie]

It will continue as long as some people continue to argue that their behaviour was that of caring, careful, sensible people. It clearly wasn't for so many reasons; none of which was the possibility of abduction.

Some of those reasons are;

Waking and crying for up to 30 minutes.
Waking and getting out of bed and into mischief.
Waking, finding the parents missing and going out onto that dangerous balcony.
Waking and leaving by the front door.
Then we have climbing and falling, being ill, etc. etc.

That's why people stay in or use baby sitters, because of the above very common possibilities, not 'abduction'. The McCanns seem to have ignored these very normal dangers which most parents are aware of and guard against on a daily basis.

What you're saying then is that any parent who takes such risks is neither caring, careful or sensible.  That means I don't care about my kids, it means that my parents didn't care about me, it means Sara Payne, Ben Needham's grandparents, April Jones' mother, none of them cared about their kids because they "allowed" them to come to harm.  Any child who is abducted or has a serious accident must therefore have uncaring parents because their parents did not prevent the abduction or accident from happening.  Is that your belief?  If not, please explain why not.

[slartibartfast]

Or not if you look at some of the debates on the Jez Gerry and Jane threads.
More a sort of a "dark" rather than a light.

Usual shifting goalposts.

[slartibartfast]

What you're saying then is that any parent who takes such risks is neither caring, careful or sensible.  That means I don't care about my kids, it means that my parents didn't care about me, it means Sara Payne, Ben Needham's grandparents, April Jones' mother, none of them cared about their kids because they "allowed" them to come to harm.  Any child who is abducted or has a serious accident must therefore have uncaring parents because their parents did not prevent the abduction or accident from happening.  Is that your belief?  If not, please explain why not.

You always try to equate the McCann's behaviour with normal parental activity and fail to differentiate between allowing children more freedom as part of their development and leaving children because of a preference to do something else.

[carlymichelle]

You always try to equate the McCann's behaviour with normal parental activity and fail to differentiate between allowing children more freedom as part of their development and leaving children because of a preference to do something else.

exactly to put it bluntly   if the mcanns were not  drs would they defend them ie if the  family  were on welfare etc? and left their  kids  home alone  like the mcanns and went to the pub ? i doubt  it

[G-Unit]

What you're saying then is that any parent who takes such risks is neither caring, careful or sensible.  That means I don't care about my kids, it means that my parents didn't care about me, it means Sara Payne, Ben Needham's grandparents, April Jones' mother, none of them cared about their kids because they "allowed" them to come to harm.  Any child who is abducted or has a serious accident must therefore have uncaring parents because their parents did not prevent the abduction or accident from happening.  Is that your belief?  If not, please explain why not.

You seem unable to comprehend the difference between age and context appropriate risks and age and context inappropriate risks. A bit like Kate McCann comparing the risk of putting your child in the car with the risk of leaving them home alone. One is a socially acceptable risk and the other isn't. Parent's aren't advised to keep their kids out of cars but they are advised not to leave them home alone.

[Alfie]

You seem unable to comprehend the difference between age and context appropriate risks and age and context inappropriate risks. A bit like Kate McCann comparing the risk of putting your child in the car with the risk of leaving them home alone. One is a socially acceptable risk and the other isn't. Parent's aren't advised to keep their kids out of cars but they are advised not to leave them home alone.

So-called appropriate risks often are far more risky to the child's health and well-being than the supposedly inappropriate risk of leaving your sleeping children unattended for 30 minutes at a time, whilst sitting 50 metres away.  To say that the McCanns are uncaring parents because the did this is to ignore this fact and to ignore their parenting record as a whole.  If you truly believed that they were uncaring parents then would you not have been campaigning to have their other children taken into care?  Perhaps you have been!  Can one not make a mistake or have a lapse of judgement but still be a caring parent at the same time?  I think most normal people would agree that one can be and that in fact most people would fall into that category.

[Alfie]

You always try to equate the McCann's behaviour with normal parental activity and fail to differentiate between allowing children more freedom as part of their development and leaving children because of a preference to do something else.

And you (collectively) always try to make out that the McCanns are abnormal, uncaring demons of parents which they clearly are not.

[slartibartfast]

And you (collectively) always try to make out that the McCanns are abnormal, uncaring demons of parents which they clearly are not.

Please provide a cite.

[Benice]

It will continue as long as some people continue to argue that their behaviour was that of caring, careful, sensible people. It clearly wasn't for so many reasons; none of which was the possibility of abduction.

Some of those reasons are;

Waking and crying for up to 30 minutes.
Waking and getting out of bed and into mischief.
Waking, finding the parents missing and going out onto that dangerous balcony.
Waking and leaving by the front door.
Then we have climbing and falling, being ill, etc. etc.

That's why people stay in or use baby sitters, because of the above very common possibilities, not 'abduction'. The McCanns seem to have ignored these very normal dangers which most parents are aware of and guard against on a daily basis.

IMO if every parent sat down and weighed up each and every single thing that could go wrong during every minute of every day - they would be permanently attached to their child - and wouldn't even let them sleep on their own unsupervised .

I'm surprised that you condone the use of babysitters G..  Plenty of cases of them neglecting or abusing the children in their care.  Shouldn't they be on your list?

What some parents will see as safe - others won't.   This is apparent  from the fact that some parents have been signing up for the listening service for decades and leaving their children alone in their rooms -  whilst other parents would not dream of doing that.   I have often watched  (You've Been Framed)  in horror as parents film their toddlers climbing on tables etc etc -  quite oblivious apparently to the danger that I think they are in.  .

IMO people have a completely different attitude on holiday to what they may have at home.  They relax, they lighten up and they are surrounded by other people who are all doing the same - i.e. enjoying their holiday.  In this holiday atmosphere I can see how easy it is  to be lulled into a false sense of security that would not be part of their daily lives at home.   

I don't know of anyone who goes on holiday intending to spend their time looking for danger round every corner.   The opposite happens IMO and people are more likely to drop their guard and relax their vigilance, which is why holiday resorts have 'Lost Children posts'  and also sadly why children drown in pools on holiday every year.

We don't condemn and villify any of these parents and so why the McCanns are singled out day in and day out for such vicious condemnation for being no different to other parents on holiday is inexplicable to me.

AIMHO.   

[John]

I think the top pic has added lights, it's much lighter than the bottom one.

I remember looking at this photo previously and came to the conclusion that it was digitally enhanced.  I have toned down the image shown attached which reveals white light directed at 5a so you are probably correct.

[Lace]

IMO if every parent sat down and weighed up each and every single thing that could go wrong during every minute of every day - they would be permanently attached to their child - and wouldn't even let them sleep on their own unsupervised .

I'm surprised that you condone the use of babysitters G..  Plenty of cases of them neglecting or abusing the children in their care.  Shouldn't they be on your list?

What some parents will see as safe - others won't.   This is apparent  from the fact that some parents have been signing up for the listening service for decades and leaving their children alone in their rooms -  whilst other parents would not dream of doing that.   I have often watched  (You've Been Framed)  in horror as parents film their toddlers climbing on tables etc etc -  quite oblivious apparently to the danger that I think they are in.  .

IMO people have a completely different attitude on holiday to what they may have at home.  They relax, they lighten up and they are surrounded by other people who are all doing the same - i.e. enjoying their holiday.  In this holiday atmosphere I can see how easy it is  to be lulled into a false sense of security that would not be part of their daily lives at home.   

I don't know of anyone who goes on holiday intending to spend their time looking for danger round every corner.   The opposite happens IMO and people are more likely to drop their guard and relax their vigilance, which is why holiday resorts have 'Lost Children posts'  and also sadly why children drown in pools on holiday every year.

We don't condemn and villify any of these parents and so why the McCanns are singled out day in and day out for such vicious condemnation for being no different to other parents on holiday is inexplicable to me.

AIMHO.

I must admit I am one parent who wouldn't have left my children alone.   Having said that the McCann's have acknowledged what they did and are carrying the weight of that guilt every day.

The reason I believe that people like to bring this up a lot is that they can't find anything else to beat the McCann's with.    They know the McCann's wish they hadn't done it,  and it is their way of getting at them.

The people who bring it up constantly are probably unable to explain how the McCann's are meant to have cleared up and hidden Madeleine so quickly and professionally so that no one could find her, and did it all in such a remarkably short time.

Some who cannot explain how the McCann's could have done this have even come up with the ludicrous idea that Madeleine must have died the Sunday before!!

 

[G-Unit]

So-called appropriate risks often are far more risky to the child's health and well-being than the supposedly inappropriate risk of leaving your sleeping children unattended for 30 minutes at a time, whilst sitting 50 metres away.  To say that the McCanns are uncaring parents because the did this is to ignore this fact and to ignore their parenting record as a whole.  If you truly believed that they were uncaring parents then would you not have been campaigning to have their other children taken into care?  Perhaps you have been!  Can one not make a mistake or have a lapse of judgement but still be a caring parent at the same time?  I think most normal people would agree that one can be and that in fact most people would fall into that category.

It doesn't matter if other risks are riskier (whatever risks you are referring to) because they're not the subject of the discussion. The subject of the discussion is the apparent lack of knowledge of the dangers involved in leaving small children home alone. We all know there are dangers and we all know what they are, why didn't they?