Textusa Correcting Textusa

There’s a correction that this blog has to make.

Where?

In our Bluntly Brunting Things Up post where we told you was the exact spot where the T9BRT (T9 Big Round Table)  in the Tapas esplanade.

There is very little visual material to work on this issue. The fact that there’s very little imagery of the Tapas esplanade, the location where dined the parents, and their friends, of the world’s most renown “abducted” child last dined is in itself, a very, very strange and suspicious one.

But what we have is what we have and is what we work with, and we got it wrong so must admit to that, which we’re now doing.

From the first day that I read Mr Amaral’s book among the many questions I asked myself, mostly rhetorical and in pure dismay and amazement, there was one that I was unable to answer, or better said, to understand, and that was why the detective pointed to that particular table as the one the T9 said they used on that fateful night:

It seemed obviously too small, which in fact it is, and too near the canopy.

This stands out further when one can see in the foreground of same picture 3 square tables that would accommodate 8 people, so only one more was required extra 2 places, one of which that would used to sit 9 people:

Remember that then I had no idea that the table was round as per Kate McCann and Jane Tanner.

The fact that it was so near the canopy (just out of pure laziness, I ask the readers if there is anyone that refers in their PJ statement or anywhere else that the T9 were near the plastic window, was this a myth or is it just something I made up in my mind by looking at that picture?) just seemed highly unlikely as if there was something the T9 required it was space and choosing a table next to the canopy limited significantly that.

The Brunt video proved that I was right when the Sky News reporter places the T9BRT away from the canopy as we showed in the Brunting post.

So why had Mr. Amaral signaled that particular table when it seemed obvious, to me at least, that it wasn’t in that small table that was "pushed" against the canopy, that the T9 had dined?

The answer is simple: Mr. Amaral was right and I wrong.

How did I come to that conclusion?

Well, I enlarged the picture to confirm the “X” leg format of the various tables, both square and round (the reason I did this you’ll find out in a later post), and saw at once that I was wrong.

As you can see, it’s away from the canopy, at the angle from the beam that can be seen in the Brunt video as well as away from the tree. That chair in the background (yellow arrow), which is close to the canopy, was what had misled me. It gives the optical illusion that it is part of the signaled table set but it isn’t.

The signaled table is in the exact spot where Mr Brunt is sitting in his report and where Gerry says it is in the Mockumentary:

We, in our post, wrongly placed it a couple yards further in and even said that where the T9BRT was supposed to be, there appeared a square corner in the picture below that we used on that post:

Now we know that the blue arrow in the above picture is wrong. The T9BRT is, in this picture, superimposed by the white arrow that points to the tree.

Mr Amaral signals that table because that was the table he was told by whoever that that was the one used by the T9.

Sorry Mr Amaral for having doubted your word, or in this particular instance, your arrow, on this one.

We also apologise to our readers for this fact.

We missed it by a couple of yards which are completely irrelevant. About the two relevant facts of that post, I can, at this stage, tell you that one continues to be absolutely unchanged and that is the fact that that object is said, by Mr Brunt, to be the genuine, one and only mysterious and illusive T9BRT.

The other fact,  the “shadow trick”, we've found out that it is a much bigger trick than we thought it to be. Shall we say that what we say about it in the Brunting post is not "satisfactorily correct". But unlike the mistake mentioned in this post, for which we assume full responsibility as certainly Mr Amaral didn't take the picture with the intent to deceive us, in the case of the size/shape of the table, there was a deliberate intention to mislead the viewer.

We thought we were so clever for having detected the trick and just moved on grinning like the idiots we were being because, as always, arrogance will only block reason and we failed to see how big a trick the trick really was. Hopefully soon we will correct our hand on this one too, but then we won't apologise because as we've said many times, s/he who says that s/he hasn't been fooled is the biggest fool of all.

Back to the fact that those couple of yards may  be irrelevant  as fact, they aren’t irrelevant for us, as a blog..

We wish never to make any sort of false statement, accusation or assumption, so when we find that we’ve done just that we have no qualms whatsoever in recognising the fact and correcting it.

As you know, and we’ve repeatedly have said, we have no inside information and we make our conclusions solely from publicly available material and based on logic and logical variables determined by gravity, space, distance, speed, volume, weight and time.

Now, the fact that we now have in Mr Amaral’s picture a T9SRT (T9 Small Round Table) instead of a T9BRT is the content of another post, not this one.

This post is for us to "backtrack our steps", as our friend Insane would say, something we won’t ever hesitate to do whenever we find ourselves to have been wrong. Here, we'll always correct what is there to be corrected and not turn our eyes away and pretend we didn't see.