The last video taken of Madeleine McCann.

[ShiningInLuz]

Rachael Oldfield said her view was limited to the top of the patio doors because of the foliage. She was there on 3rd May. No-one here was there, so why not accept Rachael's testimony?

Reply 'Erm well kind of the top half really'.

1578 'Okay'.
 Reply "Yeah you know, I didn't get a full you know, you couldn't get a full view sort of right in, cos there were bushes, there were bushes and stuff there, erm'.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

I wasn't debating the view. 

Sadie was challenged as to recently trimmed bushes.  She provided the evidence to support her claim.  Any debate about the view needs to allow for recently trimmed bushes.

In such tiny steps, we make progress.   

[faithlilly]

Yes.

Then we’ll have to agree to disagree. Your contention maybe true however the PJ photos from the night are not clear enough to prove it conclusively.

[G-Unit]

I wasn't debating the view. 

Sadie was challenged as to recently trimmed bushes.  She provided the evidence to support her claim.  Any debate about the view needs to allow for recently trimmed bushes.

In such tiny steps, we make progress.   

I accept you were discussing bush trimming. Why is bush trimming of interest?

[Vertigo Swirl]

I accept you were discussing bush trimming. Why is bush trimming of interest?

LOL.  Perhaps this is one for the personal grooming forum.

[Brietta]

From now on please note Off Topic posts will be deleted.  TY

[ShiningInLuz]

I accept you were discussing bush trimming. Why is bush trimming of interest?

The PJ photos show the vegetation is neatly trimmed.

The hedges are slightly taller than the balcony railing, which means we have a pretty accurate idea of their height.

[slartibartfast]

LOL.  Perhaps this is one for the personal grooming forum.

Glad it wasn’t just me...

[Robittybob1]

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm

If you scroll down to the bottom of this link there is a photograph of the front of 5a with a police on the pavement at the side ( Who Owns 5a )  which suggests it was taken close to the disappearance. Notice the height of the bush at the front.

We have previously shown that there are errors in that GMB page, in that they identify the wrong building looking back across to the Tapas Bar.  I have a feeling they are identifying the Kid's Club or whatever it was called as the Tapas.
But there was an amazing find for me on that page of something I have never seen before:

"Blood

There is also the evidence of a "partial footwear mark" found just outside Madeleine's bedroom which had traces of blood in it visible to the naked eye, according to a forensics report."

Now is that true? 

[Note:  I have started a new thread to discuss this partial footprint.]

[Sunny]

I don't know whether GMB has "errors" as such but the page you have linked to refers to copies of media stories regarding the case. The media stories may have had errors in and they have been copied over in their entirety as IMO they should be. It isn't up to the blog owner to change media articles.    I think GMB is simply a record of things that were said etc even if they were wrong.  It all makes a record of statements etc that those interested in the case can go back to, and check what was said, by whom and when, should they wish.

[Miss Taken Identity]

CITE for Bushes cut back

Oh the little thing, a cite, that was demanded by several people on here who IMO themselves owed loads of cites about 2 months ago ... and NEVER gave them.  It is below.  One poster I except from this criticism.
Having waded thru a number of statements, but by no means all, I haven't found the exact cite I was looking for, but these three points/ photos prove what I was saying. 
 
THE BUSHES HAD JUST BEEN CUT BACK immediately before Madeleine disappeared


1)   http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P1/01_VOLUME_Ia_Page_21.jpg

Clearly showing freshly trimmed bushes on the PJ photos.  Taken, by the PJ, on the night that Madeleine vanished


2)  Matts rog:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

-snip-
4078 'Is there anything that you can think of, worthy of mention, up until the Wednesday night before we move onto the Thursday''
[Matts] Reply 'Erm, no, my initial thought is there's nothing that's leapt out that I haven't mentioned before. Erm, I mean, there was no sort of strange people or anything unusual with the, with the flat. Some people had, I mean, gardeners came round to trim the gardens once or twice, or maybe just once a week, I mean, because we were there for three weeks, maybe they came round slightly more. Erm, somebody had workmen in maybe during, the shutter we broke, the shutter, erm, broke for, the outside shutter by the patio door broke for us on the first day, I think it went back up into its, so you couldn't actually drop it on the outside, the shutter by the patio, but we didn't drop that anyway, erm, until we got in at night, but I think it broke and it had to be, and I think they did come, yes, they did come and repair it. But apart from that there wasn't really anybody else (inaudible)'.   -snip-


3)   http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/notwviewfrompatio.jpg

This shows more or less the same view as the PJ photo taken the night Madeleine disappeared.  On this photo the bushes have grown a little BUT on the PJ Photo taken at the time Madeleine went, the bushes are cut right back


4)   10 year video of kate and gerry mccann sky  @1.16 on
http://youtu.be/RdkfvdgQYUs

@1.16  This shows a pom pom bush on the lh side of the photo.   This is one of the two shown in the photos above.  It has clearly JUST been trimmed.                                                                                 It will never be the same size again.  As the bush matures its size grows, its branches thicken and it will gradually get bigger, even though trimmed regularly.

----------------------------

OK, I haven't found the exact cite I was looking for, but these four points/ photos prove exactly what I was saying.   
THE BUSHES HAD JUST BEEN CUT BACK immediately before Madeleine disappeared

My eyes are not good ... and I resent people disbelieving me, I am Huguenot and proud of my honesty.  ...  And anyway, established members on here should know me better than that by now.

Why was this person allowed to take this thread off topic? and why did mods continue to encourage off topic on this post. I believe it was to deflect from the main discussion. Should they all be removed? or put onto other threads?


back on topic...It has been explained as to why the audio would be removed. This was due to TV showing  the video clip and Gerry saying a notty word.  Trying to defend this is futile and unrealistic in a debate.IMO

[Robittybob1]

Why was this person allowed to take this thread off topic? and why did mods continue to encourage off topic on this post. I believe it was to deflect from the main discussion. Should they all be removed? or put onto other threads?


back on topic...It has been explained as to why the audio would be removed. This was due to TV showing  the video clip and Gerry saying a notty word.  Trying to defend this is futile and unrealistic in a debate.IMO

That post is typical of your attempts to stay on topic.  90% off topic and right at the last sentence or so come back onto  topic with some unsupported proclamation.

"Trying to defend this is futile and unrealistic in a debate."  Is that your opinion? 
"This was due to TV showing  the video clip and Gerry saying a notty word."  That is also opinion.

What about ".It has been explained as to why the audio would be removed."  That too sounds like opinion, so in the end all we got was a load of your opinions which don't have to be supported.

[G-Unit]

That post is typical of your attempts to stay on topic.  90% off topic and right at the last sentence or so come back onto  topic with some unsupported proclamation.

"Trying to defend this is futile and unrealistic in a debate."  Is that your opinion? 
"This was due to TV showing  the video clip and Gerry saying a notty word."  That is also opinion.

What about ".It has been explained as to why the audio would be removed."  That too sounds like opinion, so in the end all we got was a load of your opinions which don't have to be supported.

Perhaps, as a moderator. you could answer the question asked? The post being questioned made no attempt at all to conform with the thread topic.

[Robittybob1]

Perhaps, as a moderator. you could answer the question asked? The post being questioned made no attempt at all to conform with the thread topic.

There are many moderators on the forum and it isn't just me who decides whether a post is on topic or not.  OK I agree on the surface it seems off topic, but to research as to whether it was in response to another accepted post, becomes a mission. 

[Miss Taken Identity]

That post is typical of your attempts to stay on topic.  90% off topic and right at the last sentence or so come back onto  topic with some unsupported proclamation.

"Trying to defend this is futile and unrealistic in a debate."  Is that your opinion? 
"This was due to TV showing  the video clip and Gerry saying a notty word."  That is also opinion.

What about ".It has been explained as to why the audio would be removed."  That too sounds like opinion, so in the end all we got was a load of your opinions which don't have to be supported.

If the post had been deleted on sight then pages wouldn't have been taken over. as a mod I am asking the question. any answer- any time ?

If we are going to promote the rules...



"Trying to defend this is futile and unrealistic in a debate."  Is that your opinion?

Yes! Due to observation. However, this thread is a testament to that.

"This was due to TV showing  the video clip and Gerry saying a notty word."

It was shown on TV and  it is illegal, as has been explained,  to use profanity in news clips. [research the telecommunications act 2003]- I have already quoted  earlier on in the thread.

HENCE why I said ".It has been explained as to why the audio would be removed."

It was explained at the time from a question who would remove the audio.

[Miss Taken Identity]

There are many moderators on the forum and it isn't just me who decides whether a post is on topic or not.  OK I agree on the surface it seems off topic, but to research as to whether it was in response to another accepted post, becomes a mission.

Indeed. however, you encouraged the conversation,knowing this.  what has bushes got to do with the video clip?  I fail to see how any one missed this little anomaly.

Being sarcastic when I try and bring the thread back on topic was not appreciated.

My real subliminal message was missed. why do threads get taken off topic ? is it to divert from awkward questions or discussions being addressed.  It  is no accident IMO.