There is one person who could possibly back up Kate's story. She passed the apartment at 10pm, noticed that Mrs Fenn had a light on and noticed the small grey car near Madeleine's window. The shutters weren't mentioned, pity the PJ didn't ask her.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA-M-M-DE-SILVA.htm
There is one person who could possibly back up Kate's story. She passed the apartment at 10pm, noticed that Mrs Fenn had a light on and noticed the small grey car near Madeleine's window. The shutters weren't mentioned, pity the PJ didn't ask her.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA-M-M-DE-SILVA.htm
States that she looked at the exit of the apartment and that from the flat above the McCanns, she saw light, and also in from of the apartment, but she could not define, concretely, where she saw the light when she passed the McCann apartment;
. Next to the tree, she did not detect any movement of people or vehicles, and nothing struck her as abnormal in that zone that would have raised her suspicions;
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
So this was before the alert, as it was quiet and no movement around 5A. She detected a light above and in of from 5A??….(Open shutter with light from lounge lamp, or a torch?) Surely there would be no light if the shutters were closed?
Alert must have been after 10pm as in statements as there was no movement around.
If the witness saw a light from the McCann apartment it could only have been from the open wooden door or the window where the shutters were open.
What on earth would be the point of the 'backing up' of Dr McCann's story? Although pivotal to the understanding of events all witness statements are now the stuff of history and have been forensically analysed as part of the review which allowed the re-opening of Madeleine's case.
I think that one of the major problems the 'doubters' may have with that is part and parcel of why their vitriol has continued against the McCann's.
The rest of the world has cottoned on to the fact that Madeleine McCann's parents are not the focus of police interest; they still have to come to terms with that fact and prefer denial.
I thought you would welcome the possibility of an independent sighting of the open shutters and fluttering curtains? No? Perhaps she didn't mention them because they weren't open, who knows? Not me and not you. Operation Grange said they weren't looking at the parents at a certain point in time. If that changed, would they tell us? I don't expect they would. I have no information about the Portuguese investigation except that it's been reopened. Have you? Please note no bitter criticism or malice.
If there was a light emanating from the McCann apartment as seen by the witness, who on earth would require an open window for access or egress ... they could just have walked through the hole in the wall ... because the light must have emanated from somewhere.
Were the shutters completely closed? when they are do they shut out all light? I don't know.
Were the shutters completely closed? when they are do they shut out all light? I don't know.
No they weren't completely shut so light could get in.
"The outside blinds were closed with only two or three slats open." (GM 10 May)
The curtains were closed
I'm talking about the shutters/blinds behind the curtains. The curtains were closed when Matt was there but this is how Kate found them.
"She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did." (KM 4 May)
And this is what happened next. Not a mention of looking out of the window or going into the car park to see if Maddy was close by. No this is what happened after finding a window open and her daughter gone.
"Faced with this situation,she verified that the twins were in their respective beds, unlike Madeleine, who had disappeared. The cover was pulled back and the toys were on the pillow as usual. After searching the whole apartment thoroughly, the interviewee went back, scared and shocked, to the restaurant, to alert her husband and the others to the disappearance." (KM 4 May)
I think, Pat, that we were discussing, how light could be seen from outside, coming from the area of 5A. If the curtains and blinds were closed
You can see the light on the shutters.
(http://i59.tinypic.com/2w24nya.jpg)
Not through the foliage on the trees which were there in 2007. Also you insist on posting misleading photographs to support your argument ... the bright lighting in your photograph is the upgraded lighting which replaced the street lighting of 2007 which casts a yellowish-orange.
See Heri's work on this at
http://espacioexterior.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/the-madeleine-mccann-abduction-janosch.html
You can see the light on the shutters.
(http://i59.tinypic.com/2w24nya.jpg)
DISGRACEFUL !
Putting out such dishonest disinformation
Is your name Pat Brown by any chance?
The heads of the trees fully blocked that light in 2007. No light fell on the doorway nor the window from that street lamp/ any street lamp. You KNOW full well that the trees were felled a few years after the event and YOUR photo is recent.
Why do you find it necessary to put out such disinformation, Pfinder? Are you unable to win any arguments without it?
Light can pass through trees. Nobody saw anything. No window open or shutters raised. Dianne couldn't lift them from the outside. This was the crime scene. Look at the shutters. It's time for you to see the light %£&)**#
Light can pass through trees. Nobody saw anything. No window open or shutters raised. Dianne couldn't lift them from the outside. This was the crime scene. Look at the shutters. It's time for you to see the light %£&)**#
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/000skynews9.jpg)
This image is illuminated by the police lamp set at a lkow level NOT by the street light opposite which would have cast a shadow of the exterior wall.
GET IT RIGHT , pathfinder ... or just dont say it.
Can you see the light yet 8)--))
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/parismatchtapasrestauraxe3.jpg)
The image in the previous photos was of the FRONT of 5A./ The image you have just posted is of the REAR of 5A. NOT THE SAME PLACE.
FGS GET IT RIGHT Pfinder or just DO NOT POST IT.
Totally unfair to put out such DISinformation
The first photo you posted was a PAT BROWN photo ... such disinformation !
This a view from the other side of the outer wall. Do you see the dense trees next to the RH end of the building. That is the view from the opposite direction to PAT BROWNS original photo that YOU posted. No light or next to no light came thru those trees
http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/30OCT9/sun_7_10_9_a_small.JPG
(http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/30OCT9/sun_7_10_9_a_small.JPG)
This is what was being discussed, Pat. Not light outside, but from within.
Excerpt:-
States that she looked at the exit of the apartment and that from the flat above the McCanns, she saw light, and also in from of the apartment, but she could not define, concretely, where she saw the light when she passed the McCann apartment;
. Next to the tree, she did not detect any movement of people or vehicles, and nothing struck her as abnormal in that zone that would have raised her suspicions;
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA-M-M-DE-SILVA.htm
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
So this was before the alert, as it was quiet and no movement around 5A. She detected a light above and in of from 5A??….(Open shutter with light from lounge lamp, or a torch?) Surely there would be no light if the shutters were closed?
Alert must have been after 10pm as in statements as there was no movement around.
Anyway we are way off topic here, so I would appreciate the discussion returning too The heading of the topic. thanks.
Maybe we could have another topic on this subject.
She can't back anything up. Her wild theories and brainwashed opinions are wasting everybody's time. Light can't pass through a tree according to her
You might try looking at people who present photos that don't mirror the circumstances at the time.
a bit like the mcanns who showed older rphotos of maddie so no one knew how maddie looked exactly?
a bit like the mcanns who showed older photos of maddie so no one knew how maddie looked exactly?
You might try looking at people who present photos that don't mirror the circumstances at the time.
I always thought that the light source was the table lamp in the children's bedroom.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/18-Aug8/Sky-06-08-08-PICTURE-18.jpg
That lamp wasn't on in the bedroom. The standing lamp in the living room was close to where Matt was standing when he looked into the room. You can see it here in crime scene photos.
(http://i0.wp.com/radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/madeleine-mccann-4.jpg?fit=960%2C9999)
Why are the light images 2 different shapes in the photos you have posted?
IMO the crime scene photo shows the LAMP IN THE CHILDREN'S BEDROOM on - hence the round outline. Light from a distance casts a wider image.
Stop talking nonsense. No lights were on in the children's bedroom. That standing lamp was on in the living room.
Stop talking nonsense. No lights were on in the children's bedroom. That standing lamp was on in the living room.
Explain the different shapes of the light images, then,
I can see crime scene light comes from within the appt - note the lower centre of source - why can't you?
Have you actually seen where the table-lamp is positioned in the bedroom?
Explain the different shapes of the light images, then,
I can see crime scene light comes from within the appt - note the lower centre of source - why can't you?
Have you actually seen where the table-lamp is positioned in the bedroom?
When they left for the tapas bar no lights were on in the bedroom. That room was only used for sleeping. The only light left on was that standing lamp. Lights turned on after the fact is irrelevant.
"On our arrival we had lowered the blind-style shutters on the outside of the windows, which were controlled from the inside, and closed the curtains. We left them that way all week. This early in the season, the nights were not that warm, there was no need to open a window and we reasoned that having the shutters down and the curtains drawn would keep it cool during the day. Although it meant the room was very dark, the children weren’t going to be in there in the daytime, and at night we always left the door ajar to let in a little light." (Madeleine)
4078 'But you didn't touch the door''
Reply 'No'
4078 'You didn't need to because it was already open''
Reply 'It was already open. I mean, it must have been, it must have been sort of at that sort of angle, so it's just over forty-five degrees'. (MO)
Yes Misty. It looks like the light from the bedroom, in that photo.If it is a forensic photo, no doubt the light was put on by them.
There's no way the street light would reflect in that window though. The trees were too thick, and weren't cut down till later.
(http://news.images.itv.com/image/file/275638/image_update_00dfce65f2f97e58_1381783650_9j-4aaqsk.jpeg)
I think Heri might have a better photo, taken nearer the top of road.
An unusual street light which can penetrate thick foliage.
Perhaps the wind went whoosh & parted all the leaves just as the crime scene photo was taken, eh?
Still, the clever policemen didn't need to put the bedroom light on at all, did they?
Super-visual, the PJ.
Is that photo you posted definitely of Block 5?
5a exterior 2.jpg
8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
Well put. My feelings exactly
And I have to wonder why some of them are so determined to put out such lies and disinformation.
Propaganda .... WHY?
Back to planet earth. The evidence has been shown by me. These are actual crime scene photos so you are wrong! All you McCann supporters have been proven wrong. And it proves Matt was telling the truth! Matt did that check and the door was half-open not ajar as what has been claimed. See my theory - no door moved.
PJ Forensic photos. So the light was from the bedroom, not the living room. Or did the forensics work in the dark? They might well have done.
Lights were turned on in the bedroom and in the apartment after the fact. No lights were on in that bedroom when they claimed the actual crime happened. So what? The light shining on the shutters outside is from the street light which Matt saw on his check. That proves he did it.
Lights were turned on in the bedroom and in the apartment after the fact. No lights were on in that bedroom when they claimed the actual crime happened. So what? The light shining on the shutters outside is from the street light which Matt saw on his check. That proves he did it and the door was half-open not ajar.
Yes.
Was she a passenger in that car? If so, I don't see how someone in a passenger seat (on the right-hand side of the vehicle) would notice where a light may have been on behind that tree. On the other hand, according to the original PT statement, she did say a light somewhere in front of the McCanns' BUILDING. It might have been any light.
An unusual street light which can penetrate thick foliage.
Perhaps the wind went whoosh & parted all the leaves just as the crime scene photo was taken, eh?
Still, the clever policemen didn't need to put the bedroom light on at all, did they?
Super-visual, the PJ.
imo all this is meanless why does lighting etc matter?
That's the pic I was looking for, Misty.
Look where the street light is. The reflection would not be in the bedroom window. The reflection shape in the window is round. The street light reflection shot is rectangle. Unless that clever PJ waited for the trees to move.
(http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=6129.0;attach=4955)
I think we are at cross purposes here. I posted pictures of the trees between 5a bedroom window & the street light beside block 6 to prove to P/F that the lighting image on the blinds in the Crime Scene photo came from inside the room.
I've proved it is so. Those are crime scene photos taken on the night showing the light source on the shutters. Your photos of trees are meaningless. Those trees were there on the night but they didn't stop that light from getting through.
sadie believes she knows eveything about this case and that the police etc have told her stuff &%+((£ @)(++(*You are quite wrong Carly.
I've proved it is so. Those are crime scene photos taken on the night showing the light source on the shutters. Your photos of trees are meaningless. Those trees were there on the night but they didn't stop that light from getting through..
This is a good picture of the streetlight
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/fl/4927488044_85cbe99687_b_small.jpg
didnt the mcanns havea nanny at home why didn tthey take her and why isnt that nanny in any of the mcanns photos etc on other holidays?
I've proved it is so. Those are crime scene photos taken on the night showing the light source on the shutters. Your photos of trees are meaningless. Those trees were there on the night but they didn't stop that light from getting through.They are crime scene photos perhaps but the light comes from the PJ lights. Not from the street lights
Thanks G U.
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/fl/4927488044_85cbe99687_b_small.jpg)
They are crime scene photos perhaps but the light comes from the PJ lights. Not from the street lights
A picture taken from another angle.
(http://i.imgur.com/kkyBSAZ.jpg?1)
Thanks, John. Where was that taken from and when?
I've shown two photos.
The crime scene
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/000skynews9.jpg)
And another showing the light source
(http://i59.tinypic.com/2w24nya.jpg)
I would hazard a guess that those two reflections are actually from the camera light.
Thanks G U.I would point out as well that the 5A is built on sloping land, artificially levelled within the outer wall you see in the image above.
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/fl/4927488044_85cbe99687_b_small.jpg)
This one isn't an official crime scene photo Sadie. No trees!According to the website it shows on, it is one of Pat Browns photos.
(http://i59.tinypic.com/2w24nya.jpg)
I agree, Brietta. And I have had enough of insults directed at Sadie. Or anyone else.
But at least Sadie has been there and done some on the ground research. Disagree with her if you wish. Just cut the insults. No one has the right to insult another poster on this Forum.
It was taken in June 2010 from a second storey stairwell in the adjacent block 6. The position is in front of and set back from the light source in Pathfinders earlier photo.
(http://i.imgur.com/4FmQ0ca.jpg)
It was taken in June 2010 from a second storey stairwell in the adjacent block 6. The position is in front of and set back from the light source in Pathfinders earlier photo.
(http://i.imgur.com/4FmQ0ca.jpg)
(http://i59.tinypic.com/2w24nya.jpg)
A picture taken from another angle some years after the incident.
(http://i.imgur.com/kkyBSAZ.jpg?1)
This photograph was taken from an elevated position in Block 6. From the size of the trees, I would guestimate that it was about the time of the abduction. Depends, of course, just how much pollarding had gone on.This shot is taken from an elevated position, but shows an elevated view of what the girl , (was she named Baptista?) had as she was driven out. Please bear in mind that the wall in front of her was the wall we saw "Jane tanner" walk along in the Cutting Edge Video. And all the length of wall in front of her is higher than she is.
At this stage there shows a gap between the trees and 5A, but as youcan see the trees stop the light. There is a tree shaped shadow on the wall of 5A from the streetlamp.
I can assure you that when I first visited 5A, the depth of the shadow over 5A front door was intense, like the black hole of calcutta, ... and very dark over the bedroom window as well.
It was upon seeing that the deeply recessed door was not overlooked from anywhere, was not passed by any walkers etc. that i decided that the only sensible way in was through the front door. IIRC the porch light fitting was broken too.
This shot is taken from an elevated position, but shows an elevated view of what the girl , (was she named Baptista?) had as she was driven out. Please bear in mind that the wall in front of her was the wall we saw "Jane tanner" walk along in the Cutting Edge Video. And all the length of wall in front of her is higher than she is.
Did she see the grey car where she thought she did? Cos she certainly didn't see it from there. I fear she misremembered, unless she had reason to look back into the darkness as they drove past the entrance to block 5 car park around the corner. Most people look forward rather than back and towards the light rather than into the gloom and blackness.
As long as she starts providing some cites for her claims and stops pretending to know things no one else does. How can any of her theories be discussed without any substance.Slarti, my friend
The only reason I could think of for a backward look is that something subconsciously caught her attention.That is possible, Brietta.
John, thank you for your photograph, but I think you are mistaken. Without referring back, I can tell you that you have the wrong streetlamp.
Using your image, the streetlamp in PF's photo is the one just to the right and behind the woman walking.
This photograph was taken from an elevated position in Block 6. From the size of the trees, I would guestimate that it was about the time of the abduction. Depends, of course, just how much pollarding had gone on.
At this stage there shows a gap between the trees and 5A, but as youcan see the trees stop the light. There is a tree shaped shadow on the wall of 5A from the streetlamp.
I can assure you that when I first visited 5A, the depth of the shadow over 5A front door was intense, like the black hole of calcutta, ... and very dark over the bedroom window as well.
It was upon seeing that the deeply recessed door was not overlooked from anywhere, was not passed by any walkers etc. that i decided that the only sensible way in was through the front door. IIRC the porch light fitting was broken too.
Definitely not Sadie, the lamp in Pathfinders photo is just in front of block 6 and not up at the top of the road.
John, my mistake. You were right. I should have referred back to the originals, but didn't .... My apologies
The street lamp in the treeless photo was the one you show, but what a long exposure to get such a massive glow! That treeless photo was taken after June 2010 and before Pat Browns visit
I have shown where the picture was taken from. Mike Teskowski took it in June 2010 being some 4 years after the disappearance. My only point in posting it is to show that even then the trees hadn't been cut down.
(http://i.imgur.com/4FmQ0ca.jpg)
John has found the correct standing light source but this photo is taken outside the shutters at apartment 5A.
(http://i.imgur.com/fNm0nIi.jpg)
PHOTO BY PAT BROWN - FEBRUARY 2012
How do you explain both the wall surfaces outside 5a which are not facing the street light being illuminated?
Thanks Sadie and good to see you back. Hope you are well?
You quite rightly point out that the glow from the street lamp is excessive, easily done on a digital photo.
I posted earlier that no light would have got through the trees but in hindsight I retract that comment. Some light from the three street lights would have penetrated the trees and especially so if it was the windy night we are led to believe it was.
Something else I noticed tonight while reviewing the photographs taken in the vicinity of block 5 is that there actually is a street light adjacent to the car park entrance.
Yep, I noticed that a couple of years ago, but you know what.
It's lamp is bang in the middle of a full headed tree. Not much light came through there.
John I visited, albeit, in 2010 and not 2007 ... and the front door area was pitch black. It is recessed, of course.
The window area was also very gloomy. No big lamp shining like in the Pat Brown photos. That is new.
I am very old these days John with a lot of family worries and have been unwell with a string of things, but hey one expects it when they get as ancient as me. Thanks for enquiring.
Am off to bed now
Nigh night all
x
They do not appear to be like venetian blinds, they are either raised or closed. When closed the small ventilation holes would let light through but the curtains would block that ... and I doubt it would be particularly noticeable to a person passing in a vehicle.
IMO if she saw a light it was from the open door or a raised shutter with the curtain either pulled or blown back.
I'm sure Shining would know offhand what can be seen when these shutters are down.
I am sure that 50 or so posts down I will find out what you are rabbiting about (not you Brietta, just folks in general).
Shutters of the type on 5A can be put in 3 main positions.
First, completely open. Not relevant?
Second, nearly closed. You can let a little bit of air through. You can let a little bit of light through.
Third, fully closed. No light and no breeze.
As to what they were that night, I have no opinion.
John has found the correct standing light source but this photo is taken outside the shutters at apartment 5A.
(http://i.imgur.com/fNm0nIi.jpg)
PHOTO BY PAT BROWN - FEBRUARY 2012
That is possible, Brietta.
But the wind was blowing a good bit and the way the tree fonds are is rather like a weeping willow. THey are long and suple and move with the wind .. rather distracting, I would have thought
Even more likely, if she is not imagining it, is thta as they drove along, and the eastern corner of identical Block 4 appeared in their lights. Was the grey car in front of the identical appartment to 5A in block 4 ?[now named Casa Maria by the owners]
I certainly cannot imagine how she could have seen a car in front of 5A as they left block 6 car park. Wall far too high and that's apart from the dense tree heads.
Dunno
I am sure that 50 or so posts down I will find out what you are rabbiting about (not you Brietta, just folks in general).
Shutters of the type on 5A can be put in 3 main positions.
First, completely open. Not relevant?
Second, nearly closed. You can let a little bit of air through. You can let a little bit of light through.
Third, fully closed. No light and no breeze.
As to what they were that night, I have no opinion.
"The outside blinds were closed with only two or three slats open." (GM 10 May)
"4078 'You weren't conscious of light coming through that window but the room was light enough for you to see into it''
Reply 'Yeah. I mean, the difficult thing about that is, when we talked about it afterwards, I agonised for whether it seemed as though there was light coming through the room. And I have to say my answer then was probably more accurate, in that, the room was lighter than I expected but I definitely didn't see the shutters up, the curtains were definitely not disturbed and the shutters would have had to have been completely up, I presume, not to get that sort of, because they were shutters that went solid but when you lifted them they had gaps of light, and I wasn't aware of that and it may well be that the light was just the source from behind'." (MO)
As in every British village the locals take note of anything unusual such as cars parked where they normally wouldn't be. This applies to holiday villages abroad and especially when there aren't many tourists around. People tend to forget that bustling holiday villages are also someone's home and they have excellent local knowledge of who is coming and going normally.
I am not surprised that this lady noticed the car parked in the gloom of the car park.
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/05/07/article-1384421-008627AB000004B0-279_468x307.jpg)
The grey car the next morning can be seen parked in the corner nearest apartment 5a.
See John's reply #83 with photo showing streetlight beside car-park entrance.
See John's reply #83 with photo showing streetlight beside car-park entrance.
So what attracted her attention, the grey car or the light?
I take the point about locals taking in unusual events ... but how unusual would it be to take particular note of a vehicle in a car park which was in use by residents and visitors?
I agree. A car parked there wouldn't been unusual. Neither would a vague glow in a window have been unusual. I can't think of any reason why her attention would have been attracted really. So why did she turn her head back and to the left to look into the car park when passing the entrance to block 5?
To answer that question you have to have lived in such a resort. Locals are always looking to see who is in residence and if there are any signs of residency. Looking into the car park would not have been an odd thing to do.
Thanks to Heriberto for this excellent photo taken in 2012 from just outside Mrs Fenn's apartment. Snapped from a position immediately above 5a it clearly shows the two lamp standards to the east of the block. Missing of course are the poor trees which would have created an almost impenetrable barrier to light for anything on the ground floor.
(http://i.imgur.com/tPoxFyN.jpg?1)
We have no way of knowing which of the several street lights were in fact lit on the night Madeleine vanished so I agree that arguing over it is academic. There appears to be a consensus among members however to the effect that lighting levels were extremely poor in the corner of the car park adjacent to the front door of apartment 5a. This factor alone would have compromised security and could have allowed an intruder to lurk in the shadows.
No doubt this is the reason Ocean Club Estates decided to remove the trees and fit a powerful floodlight above the front door of 5a.
We have no way of knowing which of the several street lights were in fact lit on the night Madeleine vanished so I agree that arguing over it is academic. There appears to be a consensus among members however to the effect that lighting levels were extremely poor in the corner of the car park adjacent to the front door of apartment 5a. This factor alone would have compromised security and could have allowed an intruder to lurk in the shadows.
No doubt this is the reason Ocean Club Estates decided to remove the trees and fit a powerful floodlight above the front door of 5a.
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/fl/4927488044_85cbe99687_b_small.jpg)You have the street light on the West corner of block 6, then on the other side the trees around block 5 car park, then a bright white light coming out of block 5 car park entrance (which I guess came from the floodlight that was installed after the incident), then a tree the other side of the car park entrance, then the streetlight, mainly blocked by the trees.
Not sure when this photo G U posted was taken, but no light lit by car park entrance, on it! The trees are still there.
You have the street light on the West corner of block 6, then on the other side the trees around block 5 car park, then a bright white light coming out of block 5 car park entrance (which I guess came from the floodlight that was installed after the incident), then a tree the other side of the car park entrance, then the streetlight, mainly blocked by the trees.
Go back to the 4 Mai 2007 photo and the streetlight is there. However, the tree foliage is much less than in the image above.
Sorry Luz, I should have said, no light on outside 5A car park, across the road from the corner light. The night this photo was taken seems there wasn't a street light on. No reflection on the road or path. Perhaps the light was added when new one was put up at the back of the apartment.Sorry, you've lost me.
Sorry, you've lost me.
Looking as per the photo view, then on the ground all of the lights in that direction are on the left aka the south of the street. You need to turn round to get a light on the north of the street.
If by new light you mean floodlight, it is on the front of the house, the car park side.
Am I getting confused?
The street light was upgraded at the back near the steps of the apartment. If you cross the road from the street light in the photo, you reach the wall of 5A, further along you can see the car park entrance. This is where John thought there was a street light, that might not have been there in 2007.
I think Sadie had some info and photos of new lighting at the back. Hope she will confirm, if she comes on later.
That other light is on behind the tree past the car park entrance. What do you think that orange glow is?
In fact, this picture previously posted by Pathfinder (I missed it earlier) depicted the scene on 4th May 2007 (day after Madeleine's disappearance) and though and behold there is a streetlight pole but with a round globe on it!
The tree branches are not at all dense so if this lamp was lit on the 3rd May there is no doubt that it would have been the primary light source on the shutters of 5a. But was it lit???
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/221apartment.JPG)
Are they shutters in question directly below the red circle? I think you would have to assume the light was lit unless you knew otherwise...
Its hard to judge the distance from that light to the shutters... photo has fisheye distortion...
As far as I am aware only the streetlight lanterns were upgraded some time after Madeleine disappeared and not the poles.
Ergo this lamppost was extant in May 2007 but possibly not lit. The question which one can rightly ask is, was this lamppost not lit by design or by chance?
(http://i.imgur.com/Mj3u0Mc.jpg)
Grabbed this from google earth. If the light was on I guess this would be an accurate depiction of the situation:Interesting image Lord P, but see how the light of the street lamp is seriously reduced thanks to the actual lamp being in, or on the other side of the tree heads.
(http://i.imgur.com/Fes2gdR.jpg?1)
Interesting image Lord P, but see how the light of the street lamp is seriously reduced thanks to the actual lamp being in, or on the other side of the tree heads.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/221apartment.JPG
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/221apartment.JPG)
[dated 4th May 2007. The lamp itself is difficult to see, it is within the tree head it seems.]
http://i.imgur.com/Mj3u0Mc.jpg
(http://i.imgur.com/Mj3u0Mc.jpg)
These sodium lamps were pretty inferior into the bargain and this was positioned about 55 feet away from the window in 5A., Not much light I think.
Just came across this image which illustrates just how high that wall really is.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00704/a681cc74-e1de-11e3-_704221c.jpg
(http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00704/a681cc74-e1de-11e3-_704221c.jpg)
The above shows just how high that wall opposite the drive out exit from block 6 is, even as it goes around the corner. The land behind the wall is substantially raised but I truly do not think that the Baptista girl could have seen a car in the parking area as she left the driveway. Impossible, even with no trees.
As the wall carries on around the cornerand up the street it does diminish in height, but remains well over the eye level (from Memory) until well around the corner and going towards 5A drive in entrance.
All that i am saying is that i think the Baptista girl is unlikely to have noticed anything about parked cars (especially grey in the gloom) because she had to be looking backwards or at right angles to the way the car was moving. Most people look forward after dark and towards the light.
I think she confused the first flat of block 5 with the first flat of block 4, which, given suitable breaks in the trees, she may well have seen whilst looking in a near forward direction.
I can assure you that even with the newer lighting, the area in front of the window is very gloomy, and in front of the recessed front door almost none ... In any case even if looking in that general area, the eye goes towards the light. The light is at the centre of block 5 ... and also there is lighting in the lobby which serves most of the apartments.
I dont understand your inference. The witness could have observed the car at any time that evening including as she passed the car park entrance.Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding that she is on record as having said that as her boyfriend drove out of block 6 car park she saw a grey car parked in front of 5A.
Off topic I know but for the sake of clarity. Window roller shutters as the name suggests roll up vertically into a box housing located above the window. When one attempts to push them up by lifting them from the bottom they only lift as far as the horizontal slats will allow them. This is because the shutter is not being rolled up into its housing. As Heriberto demonstrated in his video, they can be pushed up quite easily as long as even force is applied to the bottom of the shutters at both sides of the window. If uneven force is used the shutter will jam at an angle. If lifted, a shutter will rise approximately half the height of the window which is more than sufficient space to be able to reach in and pull the strap which will raise them to their full height.Thank you John.
Most British holidaymakers haven't a clue about these shutters so little wonder the terms forced and jemmied were used.
What Maria da Silva could see, or could not see, strikes me as important.
As far as I am aware, she is the one and only witness to describe the surroundings to the front of block 5 around the time Madeleine disappeared. (Please correct me if I am wrong because, trust me, I would like to have more info on what was going on in this area at that time.)
The watchers from the T9 come and go. What do I learn from this? Pretty much close to zero. Matthew says he checked 5B around 9:30. Whether the shutter on 5A was up or down is critical, and what we get is .... zip. He checked inside 5A. His info says the shutter might have been up. Or then again it might have been down. The others do their checks, and what I know about what was happening in the car park of 5A, and around the sole entrance point to 5A is ....... zip.
Let me move on to Kate's book. When she checked around 10, Madeleine was gone, and Kate came to a rapid conclusion that the child had been abducted, with the open bedroom window a likely point of entry, exit or something else. So she went to the window and looked out, thus explaining her fingerprints on it.
Fine so far, but what did she see? Given that, at this point, she was thinking along the lines of an abductor to the front of 5A? At this point her statements and the book give us ........ zip.
There is no tale of an empty car park, a deserted street, an absence of movement or ....... anything. That view has to be ultra-important, yet I have no idea what Kate saw, or did not see. Because it is not described.
Now I have to role-play a mother who thinks her child has been snatched and is somewhere to the front of 5A. What route does my acting take me? Out of the front of 5A, probably into the car park, quite possibly to the car park entrance for a quick look left and right on that street to find out if Madeleine is still there.
Please do not get too hooked-up on my role-play. Kate did do, or didn't do, that which she did, or didn't, so my role-play is trivial.
HOWEVER, the facts of the matter are these.
From the point on the graphic that I posted earlier, Kate could see people walking on the street in front of 5A. She could see cars moving in front of 5A. And as she went up the hill to enter 5A for her 10:00 check, she could see the rest of the vicinity.
There were checkers a-plenty criss-crossing the front of 5A (and the rear).
What do I know about the front of 5A around the time when the alarm was raised? Maria da Silva reckons there was light from the block above the level of the McCanns, but she does not know where, and there was a small grey car in the car park.
This is not a lot really, given the number of statements. And the books.
What Maria da Silva could see, or could not see, strikes me as important.
As far as I am aware, she is the one and only witness to describe the surroundings to the front of block 5 around the time Madeleine disappeared. (Please correct me if I am wrong because, trust me, I would like to have more info on what was going on in this area at that time.)
The watchers from the T9 come and go. What do I learn from this? Pretty much close to zero. Matthew says he checked 5B around 9:30. Whether the shutter on 5A was up or down is critical, and what we get is .... zip. He checked inside 5A. His info says the shutter might have been up. Or then again it might have been down. The others do their checks, and what I know about what was happening in the car park of 5A, and around the sole entrance point to 5A is ....... zip.
Let me move on to Kate's book. When she checked around 10, Madeleine was gone, and Kate came to a rapid conclusion that the child had been abducted, with the open bedroom window a likely point of entry, exit or something else. So she went to the window and looked out, thus explaining her fingerprints on it.
Fine so far, but what did she see? Given that, at this point, she was thinking along the lines of an abductor to the front of 5A? At this point her statements and the book give us ........ zip.
There is no tale of an empty car park, a deserted street, an absence of movement or ....... anything. That view has to be ultra-important, yet I have no idea what Kate saw, or did not see. Because it is not described.
Now I have to role-play a mother who thinks her child has been snatched and is somewhere to the front of 5A. What route does my acting take me? Out of the front of 5A, probably into the car park, quite possibly to the car park entrance for a quick look left and right on that street to find out if Madeleine is still there.
Please do not get too hooked-up on my role-play. Kate did do, or didn't do, that which she did, or didn't, so my role-play is trivial.
HOWEVER, the facts of the matter are these.
From the point on the graphic that I posted earlier, Kate could see people walking on the street in front of 5A. She could see cars moving in front of 5A. And as she went up the hill to enter 5A for her 10:00 check, she could see the rest of the vicinity.
There were checkers a-plenty criss-crossing the front of 5A (and the rear).
What do I know about the front of 5A around the time when the alarm was raised? Maria da Silva reckons there was light from the block above the level of the McCanns, but she does not know where, and there was a small grey car in the car park.
This is not a lot really, given the number of statements. And the books.
Also looking out of the window wasn't mentioned at all until the book. Can I ask about shutters? I've used shutters in Germany, wooden ones. If they broke they stayed down because the raising mechanism was what broke. Are these ones the same or is there another possible result if they break? If you wanted to break in from outside would a crowbar be of any use to open the shutters? Thanks!We have various people who raised the 5A shutters from the outside (without a crowbar) and at least one instance on file of somebody jamming the shutters up from the outside.
Here we have a photo of the street lighting outside apartment 5a, which was taken shortly after Maddie went missing. The second photo is a more recent photo and you can clearly see the street light has been moved. In fact if you look at the pavement further down the road you can just about make out where the street light originally was.
,
They changed the light head but the pole is still in its original position.
Look again John, the street light has moved.
Apologies, you are right, I never noticed that previously. It has moved to the southern side of the bush which overhangs the wall.
Here is a better photo.
What are we supposed to gather from this?
I think we can gather from this that the light source on the May 3rd 2007 would be far weaker in the children's bedroom than it is today, the street light was further away from the apartment, which would mean, very little light entered that room, if any at all.
I think we can gather from this that the light source on the May 3rd 2007 would be far weaker in the children's bedroom than it is today, the street light was further away from the apartment, which would mean, very little light entered that room, if any at all.
No John, click on the picture itself for the whole picture. The street lamp has moved up the road, you can see where it used to be on the pavement further down the road.
Actually below is a better photo taken of the lamppost opposite the McCann apartment as it appeared in May 2007.
(https://images.static.press.net/v2/image/webpreview/823cdb79a48041cacbdd2d3d32cca8de/2.31171876.jpg)
No I don't think so John. In my picture I showed you where the original street lamp was, I've done my homework, stop trying to pull the wool over my eyes, it's not working and others know of this.
No I don't think so John. In my picture I showed you where the original street lamp was, I've done my homework, stop trying to pull the wool over my eyes, it's not working and others know of this.They say the camera never lies Robin, but this is an example illustrating that it does. If you ignore the view we have of block five and use block six as a reference point you will see that John is right. That lamp post never moved. It remains in alignment with the corner and windows of block six in both photos.
They say the camera never lies Robin, but this is an example illustrating that it does. If you ignore the view we have of block five and use block six as a reference point you will see that John is right. That lamp post never moved. It remains in alignment with the corner and windows of block six in both photos.
It begs the question as to who put a photo shopped image on the internet and for what reason?
No I don't think so John. In my picture I showed you where the original street lamp was, I've done my homework, stop trying to pull the wool over my eyes, it's not working and others know of this.
There are two lamps - one opposite the apartment and one at the top (also another opposite the secondary reception). There is also a lamp post near to the car park entrance in front of the apartments.
You can see all 3 lamp posts in this image:
(https://bilder3.n-tv.de/img/incoming/origs19814918/1322539623-w1280-h960/1ad15a9d3fcb2ef8141054761aa08949.jpg)
Are these the 3 street lights?Of these 3 street lamps only 2 IMO would have lit up Madeleine's bedroom
1. one opposite the apartment
2. and one at the top of the road (at the corner?).
3. There is also a lamp post near to the car park entrance in front of the apartments.
Your are not counting "(also another opposite the secondary reception)".
Of these 3 street lamps only 2 IMO would have lit up Madeleine's bedroom
Namely"
2. and one at the top of the road (at the corner?).
3. There is also a lamp post near to the car park entrance in front of the apartments.
The effectiveness would depend on how much vegetation got in the way.
Neither seem very close (20 meters?) and a lot of foliage in the way. Can't see either providing a lot of light.That seems right.
Neither seem very close (20 meters?) and a lot of foliage in the way. Can't see either providing a lot of light.
Neither seem very close (20 meters?) and a lot of foliage in the way. Can't see either providing a lot of light.As Pfinder says, there are three lamposts. The one immediately opposite the Mccann patio is difficult to see.