The Evidence Madeleine Was Taken In A Criminal Act By A Stranger.

[G-Unit]

The back entrance to Block 6, meaning almost opposite the OC Tapas reception? I believe SIL posted pictures, amongst others, showing the small gates leading to Block 6 apartments, from the back (?)

Yes that's right, but could anyone use them or just those in the attached apartments as in Block 5?

[sadie]

Yes that's right, but could anyone use them or just those in the attached apartments as in Block 5?

We can't be sure of that Gunit, but we do know that in block 6 there is a connecting area between the front and the back joining the stairs and balcony areas to the rear garden and garden gate.   This joining area might only be at ground level though.   So someone on the first or second floor balcony might have to go downstairs before going thru'to the rear garden

The flats in block 5 are rather different, I think, maybe that is because there is a large difference in ground level between the fronts and backs of these flats.  Kate and gerry were ground level at the front but first floor level at the back, with a void underneath at the rear.   We do know from Mrs Fenns burglary that hat anyone cheeky enough could go up the stairs to the front doors of each flat.


I think that Block 5 is a symetrical building  and the stairs appear to go up the middle.  We know that Mrs Fenn had quite a walk along a balcony walkway to her flat.   Presumably there is likewise a long walk at upper levels to opposite end of Block 5.

I am tired and am struggling to work out the exits at the rear, but each of the elevated ground floor flats appears to have its own steps down to their own garden and gateway.   I am feeling that there is a common exit /entrance to the rear from the staircase, which is in the middle of the front of Block 5, I think.   THere would be a passageway through at ground level at least. but would ask if someone would check the situation out please.

Block 5 situation is not as important as that in block 6, I think.

[G-Unit]

We can't be sure of that Gunit, but we do know that in block 6 there is a connecting area between the front and the back joining the stairs and balcony areas to the rear garden and garden gate. [/b]]we do know that in block 6 there is a connecting area between the front and the back joining the stairs and balcony areas to the rear garden and garden gate.   This joining area might only be at ground level though.   So someone on the first or second floor balcony might have to go downstairs before going thru'to the rear garden

The flats in block 5 are rather different, I think, maybe that is because there is a large difference in ground level between the fronts and backs of these flats.  Kate and gerry were ground level at the front but first floor level at the back, with a void underneath at the rear.   We do know from Mrs Fenns burglary that hat anyone cheeky enough could go up the stairs to the front doors of each flat.


I think that Block 5 is a symetrical building  and the stairs appear to go up the middle.  We know that Mrs Fenn had quite a walk along a balcony walkway to her flat.   Presumably there is likewise a long walk at upper levels to opposite end of Block 5.

I am tired and am struggling to work out the exits at the rear, but each of the elevated ground floor flats appears to have its own steps down to their own garden and gateway.   I am feeling that there is a common exit /entrance to the rear from the staircase, which is in the middle of the front of Block 5, I think.   THere would be a passageway through at ground level at least. but would ask if someone would check the situation out please.

Block 5 situation is not as important as that in block 6, I think.

I don't know if it's possible for a non-resident to enter at the front of Block 6 and exit at the back. What makes you think it can be done?

[sadie]

I don't know if it's possible for a non-resident to enter at the front of Block 6 and exit at the back. What makes you think it can be done?

Short cut to the Tapas area  and Baptistas etc.for residents of th eupper flats would be desirable.   If there is any interest in this perhaps someone else can count the gates andsee if there is an extra gate to those of tghe ground floor flats.

Perhaps you can do it Gunit.       You seem the only one interested.

[G-Unit]

Short cut to the Tapas area  and Baptistas etc.for residents of th eupper flats would be desirable.   If there is any interest in this perhaps someone else can count the gates andsee if there is an extra gate to those of tghe ground floor flats.

Perhaps you can do it Gunit.       You seem the only one interested.

Short cuts may be desirable but it doesn't mean they exist.

My interest lies in showing that there's no evidence that a watcher exited Block 6 at the back. If he couldn't then he couldn't carry out the actions ascribed to him.

[Eleanor]

Short cuts may be desirable but it doesn't mean they exist.

My interest lies in showing that there's no evidence that a watcher exited Block 6 at the back. If he couldn't then he couldn't carry out the actions ascribed to him.

And this amounts to what exactly?

[Brietta]

Short cuts may be desirable but it doesn't mean they exist.

My interest lies in showing that there's no evidence that a watcher exited Block 6 at the back. If he couldn't then he couldn't carry out the actions ascribed to him.

As far as I can make out from your posts your interest appears to lie in rehashing Amaral's long ago discredited theories.

If Amaral gave a passing thought to 'a criminal act by a passing stranger' it was as a precursor to getting it out of the way to allow him and his like minded team to pin the crime on his target.
Despite all the evidence to the contrary he not only remains obsessed with his obsession to the extent of writing another book centred on it.  Totally weird.

Your interest in what might have happened to Madeleine appears to be constrained within the parameters of Amaral's thesis which remains unproven after fifteen years.  And if not why the concentration on events and individuals who were Amaral's 2007 targets instead of strangers apparently ignored by investigators but whose CV would raise the hairs on the back of one's neck if they decided to move into the neighbourhood,

[G-Unit]

As far as I can make out from your posts your interest appears to lie in rehashing Amaral's long ago discredited theories.

If Amaral gave a passing thought to 'a criminal act by a passing stranger' it was as a precursor to getting it out of the way to allow him and his like minded team to pin the crime on his target.
Despite all the evidence to the contrary he not only remains obsessed with his obsession to the extent of writing another book centred on it.  Totally weird.

Your interest in what might have happened to Madeleine appears to be constrained within the parameters of Amaral's thesis which remains unproven after fifteen years.  And if not why the concentration on events and individuals who were Amaral's 2007 targets instead of strangers apparently ignored by investigators but whose CV would raise the hairs on the back of one's neck if they decided to move into the neighbourhood,

Really? I don't share your obsession with Amaral, sorry.

[Brietta]

Really? I don't share your obsession with Amaral, sorry.

Right having got that off your chest ~ is there anything at all you would care to share regarding "The Evidence Madeleine Was Taken In A Criminal Act By A Stranger."

[sadie]

I don't know if it's possible for a non-resident to enter at the front of Block 6 and exit at the back. What makes you think it can be done?

Observation of the stair positions and the rear exit positions.   An understanding of architecture; I draw plans for major extensions to present to the planning Depts,.+ common sense.

[G-Unit]

Observation of the stair positions and the rear exit positions.   An understanding of architecture; I draw plans for major extensions to present to the planning Depts,.+ common sense.

None of which means it was possible for anyone to exit into the gardens behind Block 6. If it was possible then Berry would have used that route.

[Wonderfulspam]

Where did we get to on the possibilities for TEMWTIACABAS?


1) The McCanns claim Madeleine was abducted.

2) An allegedly open window, that had Kate's prints on it.

3) Jane Tanner's sighting of a man, whom the police are almost certain was not Madeleine's abductor.


Please feel free to add to the list of what possible evidence the police could have, that MWTIACABAS.

[G-Unit]

Where did we get to on the possibilities for TEMWTIACABAS?


1) The McCanns claim Madeleine was abducted.

2) An allegedly open window, that had Kate's prints on it.

3) Jane Tanner's sighting of a man, whom the police are almost certain was not Madeleine's abductor.


Please feel free to add to the list of what possible evidence the police could have, that MWTIACABAS.

It sounds to me as if you have no faith in the Metropolitan Police. All you have to do is accept that they have the expertise and the evidence even if they won't share it. 

[Venturi Swirl]

It sounds to me as if you have no faith in the Metropolitan Police. All you have to do is accept that they have the expertise and the evidence even if they won't share it. 

Or you can keep on making cheap, snidey posts on a backwater forum - let me guess which course of action you and the troll are going to choose.... 

[Wonderfulspam]

Or you can keep on making cheap, snidey posts on a backwater forum - let me guess which course of action you and the troll are going to choose.... 

Why not just give an example of what possible EMWTIACABAS the police could have?
I mean, they must have something, right?