Re: Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words

by aiyoyo 15.02.12 6:44

C.Edwards wrote:I agree with Stella on this - those trees would have easily been in the way of the windows from the apartment opposite, you can see from their height you'd need to be dozens more stories up to get the angle required to see over the top of those trees.

Well, in that case you may have proven Pat's point. All depends of course.
That Apt Blk opposite seems a lot taller, so people's view from the higher level wouldn't be obstructed.
Depending on distance of the two buildings, if far enough, then yes given enough angle people from a higher storey in the opp block could have an unobstructed view into Apt 5A.

All depends where Pat took the pics from. Was she in the opp. block or another adjacent block on the side that looks right in the alley outside Apt 5A?

by aiyoyo 15.02.12 6:51

Cheshire Cat wrote:
Nina wrote:
Daisy wrote:
Nina wrote:
Stella wrote:
candyfloss wrote:

Stella, the top photo you posted has only one old tree, the second is different, are they same place?

Yep, same place all around May 2007 and on Pamalam's site. Taken from things at that time.

The top two pictures show the wall as it opens for access slopes up slightly then flat. The third picture is just flat right to the opening.

I see what you mean. Also, in the first two photos the wall has the 'private parking' sign & a no 5 plaque.

Doesn't appear all 3 pics are of the same location. Looking at them more closely, the trees are different species altogether in the 3rd photo.

Hmmmm, the plants are different too in the narrow border just over the wall by the front doors. Yet the building looks exactly the same by comparison.

I agree. The photograph with the single tree is 5a; the photograph with several thick trees is not 5a. The photograph with the single tree would allow a clear view of the window as Pat Brown has shown in her photograph. Certainly seems if some people want to undermine Pat Brown and discredit her work! Hmmmmmmmmmmm

In the first two photos, windows are clearly visible between tree trunks, and the leafy branches are much higher up. So people from the same level opp should be able to view the windows as seen in photos.

All depends which level one is on in the opposite block, certainly those apts opp not caught by the leafy tree branches level, can have unobstructed view of either the whole of Apt 5A from higher than tree leaves level, or of its window from same level or one level up at an angle.

by Gillyspot 15.02.12 6:52

Stella wrote:With all due respect Cheshire Cat. If you look at the photographs that Pat has taken and compare these with the ones available in 2007, the trees are no longer there and the light bulbs have been all been changed.

There is no need to be quite so rude and we all do real research here, well most of us anyway.

Sorry to disagree with you but the trees are clearly still there in Pat's night time photo. You can see them through the balcony railings. As regards the lighting I can't comment on that.

by Cheshire Cat 15.02.12 7:03

Gillyspot wrote:
Stella wrote:With all due respect Cheshire Cat. If you look at the photographs that Pat has taken and compare these with the ones available in 2007, the trees are no longer there and the light bulbs have been all been changed.

There is no need to be quite so rude and we all do real research here, well most of us anyway.

Sorry to disagree with you but the trees are clearly still there in Pat's night time photo. You can see them through the balcony railings. As regards the lighting I can't comment on that.

There are tall in trees in Pats night time photograph: the photograph with the thick trees inside the carpark is not 5a anyway. I'm not impressed with Stella's research here as she is using a photograph of a different view to rubbish Pat. Why?

by Guest 15.02.12 7:23

In her post,Pat does say there was some shrubbery that has now been removed but it wouldn't have obscured the view so she seems to have taken into account that there is less foliage now.

She took the photos from the block opposite block 5 and says she was on the third floor. You can tell which apartment from the last daytime shot she posted which shows she was in the block opposite which has the small pool out front. Looking at various shots of this block on pamalam's site it does seem to be higher than block 5

This shows the view up the road with block 5 on the left at top of the road and you can see pat's apartment block at the top of the road.

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 252

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 252

by littlepixie 15.02.12 7:59

Does anyone know where the footage is of Gerry McCann and Jon Corner filming 5A from the balcony of an opposite apartment? Gerry was making the point that someone had been "watching them" and there was a clear view of 5A from this balcony. Could it be the same block Pat is in?

by Cheshire Cat 15.02.12 8:07

Stewie wrote:In her post,Pat does say there was some shrubbery that has now been removed but it wouldn't have obscured the view so she seems to have taken into account that there is less foliage now.

She took the photos from the block opposite block 5 and says she was on the third floor. You can tell which apartment from the last daytime shot she posted which shows she was in the block opposite which has the small pool out front. Looking at various shots of this block on pamalam's site it does seem to be higher than block 5

This shows the view up the road with block 5 on the left at top of the road and you can see pat's apartment block at the top of the road.

I believe Stella is here to disrupt the forum by undermining the theories of Pat and Goncalo whilst leading people up the garden path with her own theories. Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 173510

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 173510

by Me 15.02.12 8:50

Irrespective of trees or no trees at opposite apartment level, the pertinent issue is how, given she'd just seen an "abductor" walking across the road did Jane Tanner (and others in the group after her) walk round by the car park and not notice the shutter up in that gap between the trees?

I would suggest given the nature of the ligthing it would be impossible not to be drawn to look at an open shutter against a backdrop of closed shutters.

by Guest 15.02.12 9:00

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 Circo

The people in green I believe were the GNR dog handlers, the rest are journalists all huddled around block 5 carpark. Why would they be hanging around another blocks car park?

Daisy, the night shot you refer to with a tree in, the base of the tree is sitting in the carpark Opposite.

Cheshire Cat. Your remarks have gone way past the point of being constructive or polite. You may have the title of being linked to the Madeleine Foundation, but you are still bound by the rules of this forum. If this has now become personal, you will have to continue your quest by PM I'm afraid, as any more posts on here of that nature will be deleted. Why are you unable to discuss anything on a sensible level now? If you or anyone else can supply a picture of block 5's carpark along with the link to where it came from, as seen in 2007 without these trees, then please do so. This is not an attack on Pat Brown, it is an observation and one up for discussion as adults. But your unfounded accusations of me attacking Pat Brown and Goncalo Amaral, suggests to me that you are trying to stir things up. If I can debate as an adult without attacking anyone, then so can you.

by Guest 15.02.12 9:27

aiyoyo wrote:
C.Edwards wrote:I agree with Stella on this - those trees would have easily been in the way of the windows from the apartment opposite, you can see from their height you'd need to be dozens more stories up to get the angle required to see over the top of those trees.

Well, in that case you may have proven Pat's point. All depends of course.
That Apt Blk opposite seems a lot taller,

It is, but you would need a mathamatician to work out the height of those trees, the angle of view you are left with compared to how much of block 5 you could still see at that time. Something very hard to do unless the trees were still there in the first place.

so people's view from the higher level wouldn't be obstructed. That depends on which floor you are on.

Depending on distance of the two buildings, if far enough, then yes given enough angle people from a higher storey in the opp block could have an unobstructed view into Apt 5A.

But would they have built apartment blocks on let's say 6 or 7 floors to be able to do this? Maybe they did to give some residents an elevated sea view, most builders are only ever interested in higher sale prices.

All depends where Pat took the pics from. Was she in the opp. block or another adjacent block on the side that looks right in the alley outside Apt 5A?

I think she must have been in the block 2 apartments directly opposite. If you look on the OC map in the library, there is a block with the number 2 on it. I can only think it must be all residential, or they are numbered up differently. I've looked on all the block information I have and cannot see a G2, so they could be all private. There is of course the gap where cars enter the carpark that would allow block 5 to be seen. But looking at the angle of Pat's photo and considering how wide those trees looked, I'm still not sure you could see 5a front door and bedroom window. 5b and 5c, most definitely, I would think.

Walter Scott · by david_uk 15.02.12 9:29

Blimey! I thought this forum was all for Freedom of Speech!

It is, but there are rules to abide by and insulting anyone else is not acceptable.

Calm down people!. maintain some peace!.

Precisely. We are here to discuss everything rationally, unlike other forums. We cover everything, which is why we are the best forum there is out there and we all have a duty to behave like adults.

If anyone cannot move on from this and debate sensibly, then please PM me. It is time to move on folks.

by Guest 15.02.12 9:35

Me wrote:Irrespective of trees or no trees at opposite apartment level, the pertinent issue is how, given she'd just seen an "abductor" walking across the road did Jane Tanner (and others in the group after her) walk round by the car park and not notice the shutter up in that gap between the trees?

I would suggest given the nature of the ligthing it would be impossible not to be drawn to look at an open shutter against a backdrop of closed shutters.

I'm trying to find a picture of how those bushes looked that used to run up that side wall, but I cannot access Pamalam's site at the moment. All of the T9 complained how dark and creepy they thought that route was and it's a very sad day when beautiful trees are cut down to satisfy those beliefs. They could have just thinned them out and kept the beauty of the greenery.

As with the last photo I posted up, you can see people above the wall and below the trees, so certainly a gap big enough to see open shutters from I would have thought. But there was still a heavy shrub of some kind to elevate the wall that runs up to the top of that road, that's the pictures I'm trying to find. The question is where did that shrub end and was it continuous or had gaps in it?

by **tigger** 15.02.12 9:39

Perhaps we should wait until Pat writes her report with whatever photographs - which can then be analysed?

I know little about the lay out there apart from some photographs, maps and Google satellite maps. There is nothing like being on the ground and following the movements of those involved as set down in their official statements.

part comment deleted as completely off topic

by Guest 15.02.12 9:55

I think we need to wait and see if we get any better photographs in daylight. Anyone on twitter could ask Pat to do this.

Tigger, it is not helpful to regurgitate old arguments, can we please stick to the topic of the thread.

@ david_uk any personal issues should be taken to pm.

by Guest 15.02.12 10:08

This is on McCannfiles and the sixth picture down is an aerial view that one of the newspapers must have had taken at that time.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id94.html

But let's wait to see what Pat's full report has to say about then and now.

by **tigger** 15.02.12 10:15

candyfloss wrote:I think we need to wait and see if we get any better photographs in daylight. Anyone on twitter could ask Pat to do this.

Tigger, it is not helpful to regurgitate old arguments, can we please stick to the topic of the thread.

@ david_uk any personal issues should be taken to pm.

I quoted a comment from Stella on another topic of which I quoted the reference as is good practice. Namely that adding to the confusion wouldn't help the forum. Which imo is what was happening here.

by Guest 15.02.12 10:19

tigger wrote:I quoted a comment from Stella on another topic of which I quoted the reference as is good practice. Namely that adding to the confusion wouldn't help the forum. Which imo is what was happening here.

No one is adding to confusion tigger.

The trees and shrubs that were there in 2007, ane not there any more and it is as simple as that. Digging up quotes from old posts to inflame a situation, is precisely what you have been asked not to do.

by Invinoveritas 15.02.12 11:00

Stella wrote:
Me wrote:Irrespective of trees or no trees at opposite apartment level, the pertinent issue is how, given she'd just seen an "abductor" walking across the road did Jane Tanner (and others in the group after her) walk round by the car park and not notice the shutter up in that gap between the trees?

I would suggest given the nature of the ligthing it would be impossible not to be drawn to look at an open shutter against a backdrop of closed shutters.

I'm trying to find a picture of how those bushes looked that used to run up that side wall, but I cannot access Pamalam's site at the moment. All of the T9 complained how dark and creepy they thought that route was and it's a very sad day when beautiful trees are cut down to satisfy those beliefs. They could have just thinned them out and kept the beauty of the greenery.

As with the last photo I posted up, you can see people above the wall and below the trees, so certainly a gap big enough to see open shutters from I would have thought. But there was still a heavy shrub of some kind to elevate the wall that runs up to the top of that road, that's the pictures I'm trying to find. The question is where did that shrub end and was it continuous or had gaps in it?

Stella, there is a picture on Google Earth, click on the picture OCEAN CLUB it shows the trees as they were in 2007, also the imagery that is shown is from 22/06/2007, using the time slider there appears the imagery from 16/04/2011 where one can see that the trees are gone. hope that helps Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 847771

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 847771

Friedrich Nietzsche · by Daisy 15.02.12 11:03

Stella wrote:

The people in green I believe were the GNR dog handlers, the rest are journalists all huddled around block 5 carpark. Why would they be hanging around another blocks car park?

Daisy, the night shot you refer to with a tree in, the base of the tree is sitting in the carpark Opposite.

I'm sorry, I don't know what you mean, I can't recall referring to a night shot?

To answer your question, perhaps the photograph is from the next apartment block the McCann's moved into after Madeleine's disappearance?

I find it hard to ignore the information (police statements) of the former occupants of 5A. Saleigh Gordon moved out of 5A on the 28th April - the same day the McCann's moved in. She states the bedroom window was overlooked by other apartments. Why would she lie? What she had to say was hardly flattering towards the McCann's. In fact her words were pretty damning.

by Guest 15.02.12 11:08

Also this photo from MCF shows trees along the line of the whole block apart from gaps for cars to get into the car park. It also shows the apartments opposite from which Pat took the photo on the third floor.........

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 _42928321_portugal_sat_resort416-1

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 _42928321_portugal_sat_resort416-1

Also this one with the red arrow pointing to back entrance to 5a, and the trees at the front of the apartment.........

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 TannermapI51b

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 TannermapI51b

by **Nina** 15.02.12 11:18

Lots of pictures here

http://sojo-adventures.tripod.com/id8.html

by ShuBob 15.02.12 12:05

Pat B has now updated her initial blog entry which led to TREEGATE. It would appear Stella deserves an apology from certain posters.

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2012/02/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-picture.html

by Guest 15.02.12 12:08

ShuBob wrote:Pat B has now updated her initial blog entry which led to TREEGATE. It would appear Stella deserves an apology from certain posters.

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2012/02/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-picture.html

Thanks Shubob,

This is the updated bit.......

I must add since I have been rightly corrected and I have doublechecked the photos at that time, there are trees also lining the back side on the street, it is difficult to say today if one is high up looking down from one balcony or the other, who can see the window). My purpose of this photo was to show that the window and door of 5A was not a location that was as hidden from view as one might think.

by Guest 15.02.12 12:16

Thank you ShuBob for bringing this update to our attention and many thanks to Pat for taking another look into this. Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 725573

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 725573

by **PeterMac** 15.02.12 12:25

Stella wrote:
candyfloss wrote:

Stella, the top photo you posted has only one old tree, the second is different, are they same place?

Yep, same place all around May 2007 and on Pamalam's site. Taken from things at that time.

Why is the wall different ?

by Guest 15.02.12 12:26

This bit seems to be added...................

Predators who crawl in and out windows tend to choose windows that look out on dark empty spaces or are nowhere near other buildings. For example, a predator might break in on the back side of an apartment building that has no lights and nothing but a deserted lot behind. A predator might crawl in the back window of an isolated house. But the 5A window was on a corner with traffic going by, on a parking lot which people are driving in and out of, under other apartment windows, across from other apartments and next to other apartments. Partially obscured from some angles, the predator knows the window is not obscured at other angles. He may not know exactly who can see him and who can't. For example, there is a break in the trees where the drive comes into the parking lot and through which the window can be seen. Just knowning that there is an apartment building looming over one's crime area for people to look down on you (either breaking in or out or leaving the area with a child) would be unnerving. Any predator would be smarter going in the back door which is far easier to slip in and out of and not be seen.

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2012/02/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-picture.html

by Guest 15.02.12 12:29

Latest tweet from Pat......

ProfilerPatBPAT BROWN

I DID overlook the trees on the back side of the lot, so please go to my post & read my revised blog post. http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2012/02/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-picture.html #McCann

35 minutes ago

Friedrich Nietzsche · by Daisy 15.02.12 12:30

PeterMac wrote:
Stella wrote:
candyfloss wrote:

Stella, the top photo you posted has only one old tree, the second is different, are they same place?

Yep, same place all around May 2007 and on Pamalam's site. Taken from things at that time.

Why is the wall different ?

Because the 3rd pic is of the block adjacent to block G (5A).

by Guest 15.02.12 12:32

[quote="candyfloss"]This bit seems to be added...................

Predators who crawl in and out windows tend to choose windows that look out on dark empty spaces or are nowhere near other buildings. For example, a predator might break in on the back side of an apartment building that has no lights and nothing but a deserted lot behind. A predator might crawl in the back window of an isolated house. But the 5A window was on a corner with traffic going by, on a parking lot which people are driving in and out of, under other apartment windows, across from other apartments and next to other apartments. Partially obscured from some angles, the predator knows the window is not obscured at other angles. He may not know exactly who can see him and who can't. For example, there is a break in the trees where the drive comes into the parking lot and through which the window can be seen. Just knowning that there is an apartment building looming over one's crime area for people to look down on you (either breaking in or out or leaving the area with a child) would be unnerving. Any predator would be smarter going in the back door which is far easier to slip in and out of and not be seen.

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2012/02/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-picture.html[/quote]

Agree 100% Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 351181

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: A Picture Worth a Thousand Words - Page 3 351181

Which means, when Jane Tanner was walking along the top of that road, just before turning into the carpark, she would have noticed the shutter up, if it had really been up.

by Cheshire Cat 15.02.12 13:09

Daisy wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
Stella wrote:
candyfloss wrote:

Stella, the top photo you posted has only one old tree, the second is different, are they same place?

Yep, same place all around May 2007 and on Pamalam's site. Taken from things at that time.

Why is the wall different ?

Because the 3rd pic is of the block adjacent to block G (5A).

"Those trees are past the third floor of block 5, I really do not think any apartment opposite could have seen a thing."
The 3rd pic is the pic that Stella used to attempt to persuade me that that no opposite appartment would have had a view of the McCann's window because of the thick tree cover. The photographs of 5A from 2007, that match with the view that Pat had from the opposite window, do not show that same thick screen of trees.

Latest topics