Crimewatch - Query?

[Maryshoppins]

Did anyone notice that the route that the British holiday maker took, who collected his child from the night creche, seemed strange? If you look at the map on CW it looks like he would have walked all the way around to have past the holiday apartment at the point that Jane Tanner had said she had seen him. It doesn't make sense?? Also, it was meant to be chilly that time of year. The man was wearing a coat. Why no coat for the little girl? Also, when Kate did her final check, she said she noticed the door was open so pulled it closed assuming the last person had left it open - but she never checked the children?! Until the door slammed shut and she 'knew something wasn't right' - but the whole point of going there was to check them, right?

I'm not suspecting parents at all. I have my own theory of what I suspect happened. but this doesn't add up?

Did anyone else think the same?

I think it's completely pointless to speculate as we aren't in possession of all the current knowledge.
It's not an Agatha Christie, let the professionals get on with it.

I think she was listening at the door but didn't go in... Maybe didn't want to wake the children.
I don't think there was huge new evidence either.
The sad part for me was Madeline had said to them .. You weren't there last night when I cried..

It is hard to know and how much more pain can they take. They know they did wrong that night but I feel so sorry for them too.

I realise it's not for us to solve!! However, it's not always helpful if new evidence is given - that doesn't make sense. The night creche route doesn't add up. I still think it's strange she didn't check them either.

Sounds more like a burglary gone wrong. I would assume if it was a pre meditated abduction, they would have a car waiting outside? And not risk carrying her through town? Also, the two guys with raised voices? Possibly panicking about situation gone wrong?

The ocean club is set up like a village with villas and apartments everywhere.

I don't understand why the guy who was carrying his child away from crèche hasn't come forward before - I mean it's not a new picture. Why wouldn't you eliminate yourself from the enquiry instead of waiting six years?

Also the friend that checked them at 9.30 - did he not go in and actually see the children?

It must be a nightmare to piece together because inevitably everyone remembers things slightly differently, especially if panicking.
I think it highly unlikely she will ever be found now, the only way it would happen would be if either the person who did it came forwards or if someone who knew them did. It seems unlikely after all this time. I hope the crimewatch appeal brings new information, it must be terrible to live with the uncertainty of what happened.

Maybe the friend isn't a suspect because those who are in posession of all the facts know that it wouldn't have been possible for him to have been involved due to the length of time he was gone etc?
I feel so sorry for the McCanns, I can't even imagine what they're going through.

It does make you wonder why this man didn't come forward. Although I am still bemused at the scenic route he took by foot!

there was no new evidence.

people don't come forward for a variety of reasons. In a situation where something so high profile happens and they don't feel they had anything to do with it they just don't come forward because they A, don't want to be one of the myriad who says "oh, I was staying in the resort, was wandering around that night but didn't see anything," because it adds nothing, and B, because they simply don't want to be involved.

And if you're that close to something so horrible sometimes you just blot it out, he may not even have considered that the talk of someone carrying a child on the beach could have been him because it was mentioned in reference to an abduction, not with a potentially innocent explanation e.g. him carrying his child back to their apartment.

it's all about suggestion and wording. "a man seen carrying a sleeping child at 9:15," is written in such a way as to read "the abductor was seen with madeleine at 9:15," even though it's not been written that way, the wording suggests it when written in context to the rest of the story. so man carrying his baby home after a night out doesn't even think to read it in the context that there could be an innocent explanation and that actually he might have been mistaken for the abductor, he just thinks he wants nothing to do with the whole case because he has nothing to offer. he was around that night but saw nothing.

I watched a brief clip on the BBC website. What puzzles me is that the door had been open all evening but the window shutters seem to have been opened by someone too. This doesn't add up. Did the mccanns leave the window open and the shutters closed? Apparently it wasn't that warm so why leave the window open? Wouldn't a burglar check if the door is open rather than struggling through a window? .

Who are you? Angela Lansbury?
Please leave it to the professionals; you know this thread is going to end in tears.