5-2-3-1 Luz Key ??

Praia wrote:João Tavares looks away from the ocean for a moment, and looking at Francisco, he says:

- I don’t usually bet on Euromillions, my friend, but if I ever did, there would be at least four numbers where I would place my little crosses, to hit the winning key. And I bet that at least I would get those four right. As a matter of fact, I would even call it the Luz key.

Those would be the 5, the 2, the 3 and the 1!

_
The above is the conclusion of the book "A Estrela de Madeleine" by Paulo Pereira Cristovao, ex PJ Inspector.

I would love some input from members as to the significance of the Luz key

5, 2, 3, 1 why that order????? What is he trying to tell us?? _

Sorry mods, meant to open new thread in Debates._______________

That is just it, Francisco! – João Tavares is animated. – You have just touched an interesting point, and I need no dogs to convince me of this. The child, unfortunately, does not belong to the world of the living anymore. Even if someone was holding her, could we ever believe that she would be kept in that condition, knowing that this is the most publicized child in the world? I don’t think so. The excessive publicity that was given to her face and to the issue of her iris were her condemnation, even in the case that she left that apartment alive. When a child goes missing because she is lost in a shopping center or on the beach, I think it is correct to tell the world about what should be told, and to publicize the child’s distinctive features. Now, if she ever left there alive, publicity killed her . She is worthless to the person who took her. For adoption, it’s the biggest mistake ever. To be included in a pedophile network? She is worthless under these circumstances, even more so because they prefer to keep both themselves and the children anonymous, because if the children remain unknown, then the risks are less. The rest is just empty talk, my friend. She died and God take care of her, because she was an innocent who fell into a world of pure beasts.

Francisco has to agree with his chief. The months that have passed have proved just that, that the destiny of Madeleine was sealed in one of two possible ways, during a time lapse that did not surpass two days. The first one, when she disappeared from that apartment. The second one, when her face and her distinctive signs were prematurely publicized to the world.

He cannot understand why there was such a rush to publish the image, or such a hurry in calling the British media on the night of the disappearance. Why the assumption that this was an abduction case, when it had not yet been determined whether this was a simple case of leaving the apartment by herself? If, for example, on that night the children had been given the medicine that Madeleine’s grandfather had said they usually were given, and which induces sleep and relaxation as side-effects, then there would be an explanation for the fact that the McCanns immediately stated that the child could not have left on her own.

NORTH CAROLINA SAFETY ASSESSMENT

Part A. Safety Factor Identification
Directions: The following is a list of factors that may be associated with a child(ren) being in immediate danger of serious harm. Identify the presence or absence of each by circling either "yes" or "no", if factor applies to any child in the household or to a child to be returned to the household.
Note: The vulnerability of each child needs to be considered throughout the assessment. Younger children and children with diminished mental or physical capacity or repeated victimisation should be considered more vulnerable.
Complete based on most vulnerable child for each factor.

1 Caregiver's current behavior is violent or out of control. (Some examples of this may include the following.)
Behavior that seems out of touch with reality, fanatical, or bizarre. (Perfect child, perfect g***, princess giving tuppenceworth etc)
Behavior that seems to indicate a serious lack of self-control (e.g., reckless, unstable, raving, explosive). (roaring like a bull, prostrating self on floor, kicking beds,)

2 Caregiver describes or acts toward child in predominantly negative terms or has extremely unrealistic expectations. (Some examples of this may include the following.)
Expects a child to perform or act in a way that is impossible or improbable for the child’s age (e.g.,babies and young children expected to be toilet trained or eat neatly, expected to care for younger siblings, expected to stay alone).
Child is seen by either parent as responsible for the parent’s problem. (Colic, see p. 29 ff.)
Uses sexualized language to describe child or in name calling (e.g., whore, slut, etc.). (Perfect g*** , princess, photo with eye make-up)

5 Caregiver has not, or will not, provide supervision necessary to protect child from potentially serious harm.
(Some examples of this may include the following.)
Caregiver does not attend to child to such an extent that the need for care goes unnoticed or unmet (e.g., although caregiver is present, child wanders outdoors alone, plays with dangerous objects, plays on unprotected window ledge, has unsupervised access to uncovered pools, etc. or is exposed to other serious hazards).
Caregiver leaves child alone (time period varies with age and developmental stage).
Caregiver makes inadequate and/or inappropriate babysitting or child care arrangements or demonstrates very poor planning for child's care.

7 Caregiver has previously maltreated a child and the severity of the maltreatment, or the caregiver's response to the previous incident(s), suggests that child safety may be an immediate concern. (Some examples of this may include the following.)
Caregiver does not acknowledge or take responsibility for prior inflicted harm to the child or explains incident(s) as justified. ("And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment – why would that be our fault?”)
Both parents cannot/do not explain injuries and/ or conditions. (Pact of silence. Refusal to answer 40+ questions)

8 Child is fearful of caregiver(s), other family members, or other people living in or having access to the home.
(Some examples of this may include the following.)
Child exhibits severe anxiety (i.e., nightmares, insomnia) related to situation (s) associated with a person (s) in the home.

9 The child's physical living conditions are hazardous and immediately threatening. (Some examples of this
may include the following.)
Open/broken/missing windows.

12 Other (specify):
(Some example of this may include the following.)
Possible examples:
Serious allegations with significant discrepancies or contradictions by caregiver or between caregiver and collateral contacts. (too many to list here)
Caregiver refuses to cooperate or is evasive. (Katie’s interview for a start.)

DSS-5231 Revised 5/05 Family Support and Child Welfare Services

Gillyspot wrote:I have just been inflicting Katey's book on myself. it s a barrister from IFLG (un-named by her) who actually apparently didn't use the word "responsible" but said their childcare was "well within the bounds of reasonable parenting" This was after he apparently had seen how close the Tapas bar was to 5A. Clearly he can see through walls and bushes (and an opaque screen) for him to say that. It would also be interesting whether the McCanns told him the doors were unlocked (or locked).

Stewie wrote:

Gillyspot wrote:I have just been inflicting Katey's book on myself. it s a barrister from IFLG (un-named by her) who actually apparently didn't use the word "responsible" but said their childcare was "well within the bounds of reasonable parenting" This was after he apparently had seen how close the Tapas bar was to 5A. Clearly he can see through walls and bushes (and an opaque screen) for him to say that. It would also be interesting whether the McCanns told him the doors were unlocked (or locked).

I was wondering if it's the unlocked doors that make the difference as to whether it is seen as acceptable or not... I'm surprised the MW resorts offer child listening services as it must be a legal minefield and surely is legitimising parents leaving children alone in their apartments. Seems the only reason it's not offered at ocean club luz anymore is that the resort is spread out - so it's more inconvenient for the listeners rather than being unacceptable parenting..

So must be legally ok for MW to offer this service but probably on the basis that the parents accept the risk , and I would bet that as long as the apartment is locked but the checkers have keys to enter should they hear anything untoward. So I bet they never said to IFLG that the apartment was unlocked.. indeed if that conversation ever did happen..

Praia wrote:McCann and Healy repeat their mantra that " we all do it," utter rubbish. For years I have come into contact with countless English families on holiday in the Algarve. Most take their children out to dinner with them, those who wish to stay out later get babysitter's. Friends have babysat for children of all ages and have never come across
one family who have left their children a la the Tapas 9. Those who can't afford a sitter stay in and relax quite happily.

It never happened. I agree something tragic occured very early on. We have never come across large groups with so much illness within a few day's. The children were being looked after, imo.

Praia wrote:McCann and Healy repeat their mantra that " we all do it," utter rubbish. For years I have come into contact with countless English families on holiday in the Algarve. Most take their children out to dinner with them, those who wish to stay out later get babysitter's. Friends have babysat for children of all ages and have never come across
one family who have left their children a la the Tapas 9. Those who can't afford a sitter stay in and relax quite happily.

It never happened. I agree something tragic occured very early on. We have never come across large groups with so much illness within a few day's. The children were being looked after, imo.