If you look at google earth the flat was about fifty two metres as the crow flies, and seventy-five metres to walk there.
Regardless, it is face that apartment 5a was out of sight of the Tapas restaurant...further, Kate and Gerry chose seats in the restaurant which meant they sat with their backs to the apartment. Every other evening the childen were left to cry alone for hours, it is only this particular evening that they inexplicably instituted this strange and involved checking system.
As for the bag, all I can say is I have never seen any primary sources or even reliable secondary sources stating anything about a bag. All i have seen is blog sites, which provide no sources for where they obtained this information (or at least no reliable sources, it all seems to become an ever decreasing circle of blogs citing other blogs). Does not mean it is not there, just that I have not seen it in the PJ files etc.
The nanny listening service is a weird thing, but is common throughout the EU. Hotels offer them as a service. the idea is you leave the children in your accomadation and ever half an hour a nanny (we are talking someone normally on a working holiday with a childcare qualification) listens outside the door, and if they hear nothing carry on with their rounds, if they hear crying alert the parents. I did find an article about a Mark Warner resort in Egypt where the nanny had not heard crying so assumed all was well, but it later turned out the child was not in the room. the child had somehow got out of the window and was found in the car park. Mark warner did not offer the listening service at the PDl resort because it was spread throughout the village, but they at this time offered it at other campus style resorts. In America this might not be legal, but in the EU it certainly is, and it would not be considered negligent to leave children in this situation. If it was the practice would be banned (Mark warner have ceased it, but it is still used in many other places). One cannot compare US and EU laws in this manner. It is not something I agree with, but thats that, it it currently legal and judging by the number of places that offer it it is common.
Enough of the nanny-listening services please! The McCanns never used it, so repetitive reference to it is completely irrelevant.
I agree with the way it shoudl have been treated as a crime scene - if she had wondered off then what harm would it do, if she was abducted then they did nto risk losing evidence. I was at a friends house when her toddler could not be found (she turned up a hour or more later safe and well), and the police were called. Not only did over ten of them arrive, but as well as searching the area knocking on doors etc they also stopped people going into her bedroom (sadly no-one told me as I was out searching at the time,
at no stage did Kate look for her daughter - why? It is human instinct to search for what is lost.
and no-one told the police I was there, so when I went back to the house and into her bedroom to get a photo to show people my feet did not hit the floor - I am also not from that country so as far as the police were concerned I was just an unknown foreigner in the room of a missing child, it took a horrible five minutes before someone vouched for me).
The staff did report seeing people leave, and jeremy Wilkins (perhaps wilkinson will have to double check that) says he did bump into Gerry and chat to him for a bit at the time and location Gerry states. Jeremey did not really know the Mccanns, and had just met them a few times playing tennis on the holiday. i do not think their relationship could be called close enough to make anyone suspicious jeremy would lie for the Mccanns.
No one is saying Jeremy's testimony is inaccurate.
The thing is if madeleine died and her parents covered it up, then there are two time periods it could have happened pre-dinner between six (when madeleine was last seen by someone outside the "tapas 9" and eight thirty (when her parents were seen at the resturant), or during dinner between eight thirty and ten (when the alarm was raised).
Madeleine was last confirmed alive at 5.30 when her mother picked her up from creche. You keep posting the time was 6 or 6.30 Iit changes). Can you please post your link to support this time?
Now, if it happened pre-dinner, then why hide it? Even if they could be called negligent for leaving the children whilst they were at dinner, they were in the flat pre-dinner so this would not be an issue. If Madeleine had fallen this was just an accident, and the normal response would be to help her, call for an ambulance and do CPR - a doctor would realise that you do CPR until an ambulance gets there, not think because there is no pulse the person is beyond help. Why cover up a fall that happened whilst you were there? The second theory people have put about is that madeleine died of sedatives her parents gave her. First there has never been a shred of evidence to support this theory,
The evidence would be in Madeleine's body. Which has not been found.
and second why the cover-up to this extent. If you wanted to cover up giving your child sedatives, the most obvious thing would be to say the child got hold of them from your bag and thought they were sweets or something, not stage an abduction for five years. So that leaves us the second time slot - during dinner. This time we could argue they were worried about being accused of negligence, but this is not supported by the fact that what they did was not illegal,
Yes, it was
and the fact that they admitted it straight away (why cover up something you admit to within minutes)
There was no alternative!
. But even if that was the case, how did they get the time? They were only seen away for a few minutes
How long do you need to secrete a tiny body?
and one of those was at the ten pm check when the alarm was raised. So during this time they had to find madeleine dead and beyond help, decide to cover it up for some reason, hide her body somewhere the police and sniffer dogs could not find it, arrange the cover up with their friends,
Fact - the colouring book had already been prepared by the time police arrived, complete with two differing timelines.
be seen having dinner by staff for the normal amount of time, and then call police at ten. whatever you think of the mccanns this just does not seem feasible.
Yes, it does.
Also not all of the other seven people at dinner knew the mccanns well, one of them had only met them that week - why the hell would they agree to cover up this, and where did the discussions take place - at the dinner table in the restaurant, because if it happened during dinner then that's the only place they could have discussed it.
No, it wasn't. The beginnings of the story were already in place when the police arrived. See: Maddie's colouring book.
Then what did they do with the body. they somehow found a place to hide it where no police or sniffer dogs found it (and sniffer dogs that night did follow her scent down the road),
Thorough searches were not undertaken that night on the rocky and dangerous beach (high tide)
despite the fact they had no car, did not know the area
Both Kate and Gerry spent hours of their holiday in solitary jogs around the more secluded parts of the hills and beach
and no evidence has ever appeared the had access to a spade or anything.
And if they did remove it later, how on earth did no-one notice a decomposing body being carted around,
They were up together "searching" at 6am that morning, alone, before anyone else was up
despite the fact there were numerous friends, family, a huge number of media outlets trailing their every move, and police about.
Not at 6am the next morning, they were alone and PDL was deserted.
Not one person out of these tens of people remember seeing anything suspicious,
Jane Tanner? The Smith Family (who later identified GERRY!!! carrying a tiny girl away from the resort?)
and it does beg the question why move a body from a hiding place no-one has discovered in front of the world's media and risk getting caught.
