The PJ confirm the evening's sequence of events in their Final Report...

[Alfred R Jones]

I was answering your comment Alfred;

They had had plenty of time to reflect on events, to re-read witness statements, even to re-interview even informally the 5 individuals you refer to. (snip)

As i said, there is no evidence they did any of that.

A more interesting question is why you accept what the Final Report says. It's a little strange for you to support the PJ, you have to admit. Later on in the Report they are not so definite about the timeline;

The establishment of a timeline and of a line of effective checking on the minors that were left alone in the apartments, given that, if it is believed that such checking was as tight as the witnesses and the arguidos describe it, it would be, at least, very difficult to reunite conditions for the introduction of an abductor in the residence and the posterior exit of said abductor, with the child, namely through a window with scarce space.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

The Report itself is evidence that they reflected on the case, what are you on about?  Was it written in a panic or under duress do you think?  As for your second point I have already addressed it elsewhere this evening but it cuts both ways - if you accept as true the part above you've just quoted, then why not also the time of the alerts as clarified by the Report?  Why is it so important to you for this aspect not to be right?  Go on, tell us!

[G-Unit]

The Report itself is evidence that they reflected on the case, what are you on about?  Was it written in a panic or under duress do you think?  As for your second point I have already addressed it elsewhere this evening but it cuts both ways - if you accept as true the part above you've just quoted, then why not also the time of the alerts as clarified by the Report?  Why is it so important to you for this aspect not to be right?  Go on, tell us!

You're making a mistake if you think any of it's important to me. The timeline as recounted by the group was never verified as far as I can see, so cannot be seen as 'fact'. The PJ quoted it, but the other bit I posted demonstrates how little faith they themselves had in it. I find it somewhat hypocritical for a supporter to quote and defend it when everything else the PJ said and did has been criticised and discounted.

[Alfred R Jones]

You're making a mistake if you think any of it's important to me. The timeline as recounted by the group was never verified as far as I can see, so cannot be seen as 'fact'. The PJ quoted it, but the other bit I posted demonstrates how little faith they themselves had in it. I find it somewhat hypocritical for a supporter to quote and defend it when everything else the PJ said and did has been criticised and discounted.

It obviously  IS important to you, otherwise you would not argue so long and hard against it.  Do by all means continue to ignore the facts as confirmed by the police, I wouldn't want to spoil your fun.

[Alice Purjorick]

It seems the PJ are to be believed when it comes to the timeline, despite their (alleged) complete lack of efficiency in respect of anything else.

They are stating something as a fact despite the existence of statements in the files differing significantly from those of the group. Taking the earliest statements on 4th May two of the T9 gave no time and the remainder said 'Around 10pm'.

So there are seven for 10pm (who agreed this before being interviewed), and five for an earlier time. Not so cut and dried then in my opinion.

eklektikos 

[pathfinder73]

If the timeline is wrong it is one example of why a reconstruction of the events should have been carried out as soon as it was possible to do so. 

A lot of people who were in the resort and in the area at the time were available for example Mr and Mrs Moyes, Mrs Fenn, Jez Wilkins, staff and Luz residents.  It is possible that any who might have seen something would have been prepared to return ... for example, whoever had been in residence in 5J and in particular the Murat lookalike might have turned up and been identified.

I cannot conceive the mentality which accepts an interim report on anything as holy writ while disregarding the final report.  It is illogical.

They never wanted to do a reconstruction (see Sky interview of them both moaning about it!) unless they were in control of it like in the doc. Well done for Jane giving stick to Gerry about supposedly watching football  Did you see how fast he moved across that road  Gerry sat in with Kate for her first interview and she didn't do a second one nevermind participating in a reconstruction with whooshing curtains and strange moving doors.

[Brietta]

They never wanted to do a reconstruction (see Sky interview of them both moaning about it!) unless they were in control of it like in the doc. Well done for Jane giving stick to Gerry about supposedly watching football  Did you see how fast he moved across that road  Gerry sat in with Kate for her first interview and she didn't do a second one nevermind participating in a reconstruction with whooshing curtains and strange moving doors.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=ugXW5LD32Sg[/youtube]

Forget it!  Why do you persist in posting videos made by the poor man's Leni Riefenstahl??

[Alice Purjorick]

Chuck Jones would have made a real good fist of it, I'll wager.

[Miss Taken Identity]

The report is based on what information was gathered. Was the information truthfull? The PJ don't know, so can only try and make the pieces fit.

There is no evidence of an abduction at the times given/suggested. Independant witness of person/s who last saw Maddie alive was earlier in the day/ evening. Yes, I know the rebuttal about gerry telling D to go check blah blah  but that makes no sense at all...even that story got confused.

[stephen25000]

The report is based on what information was gathered. Was the information truthfull? The PJ don't know, so can only try and make the pieces fit.

There is no evidence of an abduction at the times given/suggested. Independant witness of person/s who last saw Maddie alive was earlier in the day/ evening. Yes, I know the rebuttal about gerry telling D to go check blah blah  but that makes no sense at all...even that story got confused.

Absolutely.

..and the accounts of events of that evening are not consistent.