It’s said that a picture is worth a thousand words. That is absolutely true.
But sometimes those thousand words have a meaning greater than usual. Sometimes an image can crack a case, even a high profile one like Maddie McCann.
We believe that the picture above is such a case. We have called this picture up to now, the Frog’s BRT. As it’s much more than that, we shall call it the Tapas posh esplanade photo.
2. The differences of furniture
On Nov 1 2018, Mr Salmon tweeted this:
Ben Salmon @Tealtraum
Spoke to photographer Alberto Paredes this morning. His photos of Tapas restaurant (see Alamy) were taken in September 2007 #McCann
3:49 am - 1 Nov 2018
We showed the photos the tweet was referring to and they clearly showed the esplanade with different furniture than seen in the Tapas posh esplanade photo.
As we know Mr Salmon’s tweet had 3 reactions, one of which was from the Frog:
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Tealtraum
Oh dear- 4 months after the event. Haven't you noticed the table cloths are a different size to the ones in the earlier photo? (You are so going to regret getting involved in this (3 x crying with laughter emoticon)
6:33 am - 1 Nov 2018
From the Frog’s reaction, it seems that she’s implying that the evident change in furniture between the 2 photos is due to some refurbishment having happened: “Oh dear- 4 months after the event. Haven't you noticed the table cloths are a different size to the ones in the earlier photo?”
Just then, the Frog moved the goalposts of this supposed refurbishment. Back in October she spoke of a refurbishment around 2010, years after the picture was taken.
When all this began, to justify why the photo was from 2007 and not from 2013, the Frog then said:
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @jules1602x
It's in a sequence of photos taken in the first months. The photographer in the background also appears in other early photos. The Tapas Bar was refurb'ed in around 2010 iirc & the open area was closed in...
11:16 AM - 21 Oct 2018
3. Refurbishment – months not years
On Oct 21, the Frog is saying: photo taken in first few months, refurbishment years after. Very clear.
When she tweeted the above, the Frog had only tweeted the photo from our blog, the cropped one from a low-quality picture that appeared in the CMTV documentary. She hadn’t yet presented the higher quality version of the photo that she would later show us all.
We showed the picture she used which came from our post “The proof Ocean Club reads Textusa”.
We will also overlook Frog’s blatant deceptiveness about the open area having been closed in as no open area has been closed in.
When reacting to the surfacing of the Alberto Paredes’ photo, taken in September, the Frog apparently acknowledges that the refurbishment took place before then. No longer in 2010. Or was it done in 2007 and again in 2010? But if so, why say posh photo taken in the first few months when in those precise months, a refurbishment had happened.
Nothing like putting wheels under the goalposts so they can be moved around.
We would say that it would be ridiculous to even think that any holiday resort would do any refurbishment during the holiday season – between June and September – and equally ridiculous to think it would do it in May when all hell was breaking lose in Praia da Luz.
But let’s imagine that the said refurbishment did take place in Tapas between May and September 2007 however ridiculous that may seem.
But one cannot abandon the ridiculousness that jumps out when looking at the 2 images. An upgrade, by definition, has the objective to make things better. If indeed there had been a refurbishment between May and September, then in Tapas it had the opposite effect: transforming things for the worse. Guests who came in May had the opportunity to enjoy a better Tapas than those who arrived in August.
This following tweet exchange represents this absurdity quite well:
Replying to @jules1602x @FragrantFrog
But that’s not the the ocean club....I’ve been there... their cafe at the side of the pool is designed for eating chips and pizza in your swimmers not 3 course meals
11:15 pm - 30 Oct 2018
00The Jules... 🕵️♀️ 🎃 🧛♀️ 🧙♀️ 🧟♀️ 🎃 @jules1602x
Replying to @mcstravick_mac @FragrantFrog
It was modernised after 2007...
11:58 pm - 30 Oct 2018
Replying to @jules1602x @FragrantFrog
Lol so it was a fancy a la carte restaurant before they made it a slippery wooden table pizza corner
9:30 am - 31 Oct 2018
Jules, who holds THE secret agrees that the refurbishment was after 2007 and not between May and September 2007. Goalposts moving so fast they are getting dizzy. Good they have wheels.
On 4 Nov 2018, 12:19:00 we published a comment that we censored. Here it is uncensored:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Frog's BRT":
Why would anyone put small round tables together to be “cosy” when square tables would provide a bigger surface area?
If they could put enough square tables together, for 9, with space for another, why the need for a special table to be brought in for the next nights?
Presumably left there for 4 nights, in its skirted glory.
But then the other smaller tables had skirts on May 4, so maybe they had to be decorated to match.
And so many for so few customers.
But by September, early evening, they had all disappeared. Like a Cinderella story, the glass coach reverted to being a pumpkin.
It can’t be argued this was evening furniture as GA’s book photos were taken when it was dark.
When JT was asked about “mackling” tables together, she only needed to say the tables weren’t put together, one big table was produced.
Simply put, “We put some small tables together on the first night, but after that, the tapas produced a big, round table”
Instead, she rambles on.
As the other side now seem to be doing.
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 4 Nov 2018, 11:52:00”
What we censored above was “But by September, early evening, they had all disappeared. Like a Cinderella story, the glass coach reverted to being a pumpkin.” We didn’t want to spoil the surprise.
4. Refurbishment – a day, not months
The goalposts for the Tapas refurbishment would need with urgency some anti-seasick pills because it seems the 2007 refurbishment didn’t take place between May and September but between May 4 and May 5 2007.
Who says that? The Frog, that’s who. Here where she says that when continuing to show a somewhat disturbing obsession for tablecloths:
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 @algarvnewswatch
Here's a Sky News picture from 5/5/07. You can clearly see a round table with the tablecloth inside the bar.....
2:34 pm - 31 Oct 2018
Do note that Mr Len Port is tagged on this tweet. This is the picture attached to the tweet:
The picture has quite a decent resolution which when enlarged one can see through the plastic and see not one but 3 tablecloths:
Remember, it’s the Frog who says that it was taken on May 5.
Let’s compare this image with the May 4 esplanade and the one in September:
When compared with the May 4 esplanade it can clearly be seen that the group of tables nearest to the bar (yellow) are no longer there. Also missing is the table in the foreground (red).
When compared with the one in September, it seems that the May 5 esplanade matches much more closely than it does the day before:
Please do take into consideration the time lapses between images. In one there’s a difference of 24 hours while in the other there’s 4 months between them. There are greater differences in the shorter interval than in the other.
If one was to believe that the difference of furniture was due to refurbishment then one has to believe that the Ocean Club decided to do away with the posh look the Tapas had on the day all hell was breaking lose.
Maddie disappeared on Thursday, the news broke on Friday and at the end of that day (May 4) and on the next (May 5) media came in droves. The media mayhem begins and the Ocean Club apparently decides to refurbish Tapas from posh to tacky. Does that make any sense? No, of course it doesn’t.
The only logical explanation is that if the photo was indeed taken on May 4, it is of the esplanade set up for an event before it took place.
A one-time function that was planned for that day that required different furniture than the Tapas had.
5. Why not?
When considering the possibility of an event on May 4 2007 at Tapas, just a hundred yards from where Maddie had just disappeared the night before, the first and instinctive reaction is – as ours was – that’s absurd! No way would there be a party on the 4th, only an idiot would think of trying to push such a preposterous idea!
But the question that one should ask is, why not?
Why would there not be an event on May 4 2007 at Tapas?
And very quickly one comes to the conclusion that there was absolutely no reason not to have an event there on that day if one had been planned. And as events don’t just pop up, if there was one on that day it was because it was planned in advance.
A scenario whereby the Tapas esplanade was reserved before Maddie disappeared is reasonable as there is absolutely nothing that goes against it. And if that was the case, then nothing is there to say that it didn’t happen.
One must ask if a close relative of a wedding planner had passed away on the eve of a wedding that s/he had planned, would the wedding get called off? No, it wouldn’t.
No matter how much the tragedy would affect the planner’s life, things would continue as planned because the bride, groom and guests are uninvolved and are due the right for the show to really literally go on.
So if, say, the Portimão Poodle Patrons had for whatever reason reserved the Tapas to hold an event on May 4, that event would go one regardless of the fact of Maddie having disappeared. The most the little girl’s disappearance would affect it would be that it would probably be the main talking point of the guests.
As would be expected, the Tapas esplanade life continued after Maddie disappeared. So, if there was an event planned for the 4th, then it would have gone ahead as planned.
The only disruption to Tapas that Maddie’s disappearance would cause would be the minutes lost by each member of the staff to answer questions by the PJ. The PJ had literally hundreds of people to question, so they wouldn’t keep anyone for more than a few minutes.
Staff losing a few minutes would not put the event in question, nothing to stop it from taking place.
And if it happened that any member of the staff had by chance seen anything that the PJ considered relevant enough for that person to go to Portimão, then s/he would simply be replaced and the event continue as planned.
If one was planned, there’s no reason for there not to have been an event on May 4 at Tapas.
There’s no reason for the Tapas posh esplanade photo not to have been taken on that day before the event took place.
6. When was the photo taken?
We will explain during this post the reason why we think the photo was taken on May 4 but the question is not about that but about what time of day the photo was taken.
The photographer is taking the picture facing West.
This means that for the wall of the bar on the left side of the picture to be bathed by sunlight, it had to be morning.
That shadow, the shadow of the canopy and the shadow of the legs of the chair in the low left-hand corner of the photo tells us that the Sun was relatively high so we would say the photo was taken between 10 and 11 am on Friday May 4 2007.
7. Lunch or dinner?
Establishing that the photo was taken in the morning, the next question one must ask is was the event to take place for lunch or dinner?
One can immediately set aside the Tennis dinner as the reason for that set-up as that dinner was reserved for 12 and the set-up we see anticipates many more people. And there’s no table for 12.
Not being for the Tennis dinner reserved for that night, then that would mean the set-up was for a lunch function.
But we have to be consistent. We know the tennis dinner is fictitious and the event is real. So, it isn’t the tennis dinner that will tell us whether the event was set up for lunch or for dinner.
Waiter Nuno Bernardo says this:
“He works in the Tapas restaurant where he is a waiter and serves meals on the terrace and at the tables.
He adds that during the day this commercial space serves more as a pool bar serving light snacks and drinks to the guests that frequent the space.”
Is it minimally plausible that this would be the normal set-up for a pool side-bar to serve “light snacks and drinks” during lunch time? We don’t think so. We would say that the table skirts would be to be an exaggerated overdressing of tables considering what the pool-side and pool-using dress code is.
Would tablecloths be set on the tables if they were meant for dinner? Risking getting them dirty during the day, especially during lunch? We don’t think so.
The fact is that picture was taken in the morning and that in the morning it had this posh set-up.
Not wanting to be dogmatic, it all points to having been arranged for a function at lunch time and because it was a special event, other guests would be asked not to use the bar or even be asked not to use the premises that day, unless invited.
A special function that had requirements that the Tapas everyday furniture didn’t satisfy. From the picture one can immediately see 3: rough wooden table tops, table-skirts and tablecloths. Not saying that Tapas didn’t have tablecloths, but it would be likely for it not to for those round rough-wood tops. The tablecloths could have come from the Mill or they could have been supplied by whoever supplied the tops.
This to say that this picture proves absolutely nothing about what was “usual” in Tapas because, besides the chairs, nothing it shows was usual there.
To say that the Tapas group sat at any of the tables shown is ridiculous and shows despair. The big round table that is seen, is not even a table but a big round rough-wood top placed there that day for that function.
8. Objective of the posh photo
Literally every single photo, without exception, tells us why they were taken. Every photo has a reason to have been taken.
Even those taken by accident tell us that they were… accidentally taken.
We ask the reader to look at every single picture they have and see in each one what was intended that it captured. Be it a selfie, a landscape, a building, something of a trip to be remembered, whatever the subject there is a subject. A camera works like a gun, it is pointed and fired. It may be used as a precision rifle, and its target is clear and focused or as shotgun, dispersing lead broadly.
The purpose doesn’t have to be complex or planned. A flower that one sees and likes and just photographs for no other reason than to capture that beauty. But that’s the reason. There’s always a reason.
So, what purpose is behind this photograph? Why was it taken?
Was it for publicity purposes?
No, the lifted tablecloth and the people who appear in it tells us that it wasn’t the case.
The tablecloth wouldn’t be lifted and the photographer would ask politely Mr Len Port and the staff to step away for just a moment and they would certainly understand.
And if the staff were to appear, and it was for publicity purposes, they would be interacting either with someone, a guest or someone posing as a guest, or with the photographer.
The fact that no one in that photo is in a pose but just caught in a moment of their lives, shows that the objective was not to use it for publicity. Mr Len Port looking away from the esplanade, reinforces the idea that the photo was taken without the photographer intending to produce a visually appealing photo.
Saying that a gush of wind would justify the folded back tablecloth makes no sense because, again as with asking people to step aside, the photographer would have to just take 2 steps forward and put the tablecloth right, step back and take the picture.
If there was wind, then the photographer would just ask a member of the staff to clamp the tablecloth in place.
None of other photos or live TV coverage of that day shows any hint of windy conditions, photo also shows the clip removed and tablecloth then folded back. If windy, the clip wouldn’t have been removed.
After all it wasn’t a moment or an expression that needed to be captured. We’re talking about inanimate objects so no hurry to take the picture. Only when things were as the photographer desired would the picture be taken.
And that’s the point, the things were as the photographer desired. The tablecloth was lifted because the photographer wanted it lifted and those people being present didn’t affect in anyway the purpose intended.
In fact, when if we look at the picture that was aired in the CMTV documentary, which captures more than the one tweeted by the Frog, one can see on the left 2 other men, reinforcing the idea that the photographer was not concerned about who appeared in the photo.
And that’s because the intent of the picture was to capture the set-up of the esplanade. Just that. To show how it looked when all rough-wood round tops, table-skirts and tablecloths were in place on it.
Why was the tablecloth lifted? To show what the tables were made of.
This picture is clearly what we call “logistic memory”. To be kept and used to show how to set up the esplanade this way for similar future events. That simple.
The only variation regarding future events would only be the number of rough-wood tops, table-skirts and tablecloths that would be needed depending on the variation of the number of guests between this event and what those were to have.
To have an image for the Tapas staff to show them what exactly is intended when they are told to set up the esplanade for such a kind of event. That’s why the entire esplanade is captured and why the presence of people is irrelevant to the objective of the picture.
The fact that someone felt the need to take such a picture tells us 2 things immediately: that this was the first time such a thing was organised and there was reason to believe other similar events were expected to take place in the future.
In the morning of May 4 there was indeed a big round table in the Tapas esplanade. Only it was not the BRT the T9 say they used during the week. The big round table in the photo only entered the premises in the morning of May 4 and on May 5 it wasn’t there.
Its top made of rough wood and this contradicts JBLIttlemore and Jules:
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @jules1602x
Sounds classy ; ) No formica there then? So was the photographer willing to discus the photograph of the BRT with you? #Mccann
2:38 pm - 9 Oct 2018
Special Agent Jules... 🕵️♀️ @jules1602x
Replying to @JBLittlemore
He probably thought I was off my trolley..
I felt a right brucey asking...
But he was very helpful yes... :)
2:44 pm - 9 Oct 2018
Not formica but rough wood as temporary.
The table shown by Brunt as the BRT does not have a rough wood top:
Damned facts always getting in the way of those trying to deceive…
This picture doesn’t in any way prove the existence of the BRT as Frog ridiculously attempts. It just proves that at a certain point in time, the Tapas esplanade was set up with round rough-wood tops on the existing tables for a function. One of the round tops bigger than the others. That’s fact.
Presumably for a lunch on May 4 but that is subjective, while the above isn’t.
Another subjective assumption is to say the biggest round rough-wood top would be the main table of the event.
9. The importance of Neil Berry’s interview
If there had really been an event planned on May 4, wouldn’t we have known? We think we certainly would.
We have images from SIC of the morning of May 4 that were aired on the 20H00 news that night. We know that it is in the morning in the exact same way we determined it was in the posh pictures. In this case, the entrance of the Tapas area appears bathed by sunlight, and as it faces to the East, the images were filmed in the morning.
So, if Tapas had been swarming with guests that lunch or afternoon, wouldn’t they be moved out of sheer curiosity to see what was being filmed and would be caught by the cameras, like many residents and guests were?
Screengrabs from this webpage (scroll down to find the video):
No one appears to be dressed for such an occasion in the images.
We also have Neil Berry being interviewed on the tennis courts. If the esplanade was filled with people, would that location be chosen? Why? There’s no way to avoid the esplanade to go to the tennis courts. So why barge in on an event with a man in shorts and T-shirt just to film him there when he could be filmed outside?
We are certain no event took place. But that doesn’t mean things weren’t set up for one. No one warned the Tapas staff that the event was cancelled before things were being set-up. The information that it was cancelled came after it was.
Perfectly natural and acceptable. Maddie had disappeared the night before. The storyline was being constructed, in rough strokes as expected. That was the priority then, the construction of the narrative to allow abduction.
If there was an event planned for the next day in Tapas, it was set in motion and the esplanade was made ready for it. No reason for it not to be.
If Tapas was filled with people on the esplanade, would Neil Berry give an interview to the TV on the tennis courts that day? We believe the TV crews would stay away from the Tapas premises especially taking into account that there’s no way to avoid the esplanade to get to the courts.
If said event was taking place, it would be expected for the film crews to respect the event, the organisers and the participants. They would have nothing to do with Maddie’s disappearance so why disturb them. Neil Berry’s interview is a clear indication that the esplanade was not being used by people that day for an event.
10. Order to dismantle
The fact of the event having not gone ahead, doesn’t invalidate the fact that it was set up.
There are 2 strong clues that it was.
The first is a truck parked at the entrance of the Tapas entrance. To unload or load items. By the angle of the shadows, we would say to unload as it seems early morning.
The other is the image of the bar filmed from the outside the tennis courts. One can see through the bar and on the other side, on the esplanade there seems to be a white object, and now knowing what we know, most likely a table covered with a tablecloth. Quite a big one.
It does look like the Tapas esplanade was set up that morning.
If no one was warned not to set things up, certainly someone gave the order to take it all down and put things the way they were before.
So, it’s likely that the Tapas posh esplanade picture was taken for internal use, for “logistic memory” as we said, when the Tapas staff was told to dismantle.
A picture that had nothing to with Maddie’s disappearance, for internal use only. A picture that was never meant to be publicly published.
For some reason it didn’t see the light of day for 6 and a half years, 2,388 days to be specific, in the CMTV documentary. How it found its way there remains a mystery. The other mystery is how it also found its way to the Frog’s hands.
11. Why not, not?
Once one understands the purpose of the picture, it’s then relevant to start to pose the questions which will show its true relevance to the case. And the first one is: why didn’t the event take place?
As we saw, if it had been the Portimão Poodle Patrons that had reserved the space for an event that day, it would have taken place. As it would have if it had been any other entity reserving the space. But the event didn’t go on. Why?
Only a group of people who collectively thought that it was best the event did not to take place because of what happened to Maddie would have cancelled.
A group of people who collectively could, in a moment’s notice be contacted and told not appear at Tapas, a group made up of people who were easily and quickly reachable to be informed that there would not be an event. People who were in Praia da Luz that week.
The cancellation of that event and Maddie’s disappearance are interrelated. One got cancelled because of the other.
Because the Tapas esplanade was indeed set-up, it means all was cancelled on that day. A literally last-minute cancellation. And for some reason it got cancelled and that reason could only have been Maddie.
A group of people who felt that because of what had happened to Maddie it was best for them not to be seen participating in an event, or, as is most likely, not even being seen in Luz where they were not supposed to be.
A group of people in Luz who once they were informed that the event had been cancelled, also knew they had to pretend that there hadn’t even been one planned.
See where this is going?
Need we say more? It certainly wasn’t the Portimão Poodle Patrons, an association we have just invented, that reserved the space.
Nor was it a group of guests who found themselves by chance that week at Luz, who started to get along, so well that they decided to end the week by reserving the Tapas and having rough-wood round table tops and table-skirts brought in.
No, this was a highly coordinated group of people who were together in Luz for a reason. A group that decided to set up an event for lunch-time on Friday. On very posh tables. Frilly and all that.
A hint, wasn’t the week of the Tapas group to end on Saturday?
So, if one wanted to throw a farewell party, wouldn’t Friday lunch be just the day? If the main activities of said week took place at night, wouldn’t a lunch be just perfect for that purpose? Just saying.
12. The Tapas 9 and the Tapas posh esplanade picture
Once understood that the tablecloth was turned back on purpose, one can very easily make a mistake which will make one miss completely the importance of the photo: throw into the equation the Tapas 9.
We have witnessed that mistake being made from comments/questions.
Could they be trying to show that there was indeed a BRT? Could the tablecloth have been turned back to convey the idea that there was indeed wind and so support Kate’s whoosh, clunk?
We have already said in a comment that when the picture was taken there was no BRT issue, so no need to prove that there was one.
A reason why we have renamed the picture from Frog’s BRT to Tapas posh esplanade, is because the picture has nothing to do with the McCanns and the other T7.
When we use the acronym BRT, it is to refer to the table used by the McCanns. The table that appears in that picture was in place only for a few hours. Came in on May 4 and left that same day. The T9 never saw it, much less sat around it.
When the picture was taken most likely the first Tapas statement hadn’t even begun in Portimão and the only details known then about the dinners would be that the group allegedly dined at Tapas all week and allegedly checked on their children. That around 22H00 Kate got up, walked to the apartment and realised that Maddie had disappeared.
This is what the Tapas staff had to tell the PJ on May 4:
JERONIMO TOMAS RODRIGUES SALCEDAS says “He did not notice if from the group of British citizens (in number 8 or 9) that yesterday dined in restaurant (which was partly made up of the parents of the missing [child]), someone left [absented themself] during such dinner”
SVETLANA STARIKOVA VITORINO says “yesterday, one individual, purportedly the father of the missing, left the dinner table where a group of friends (in number 8 or 9), for about 30 minutes. After having returned, a woman whom she believed to be his wife, also left the table”
JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA says “Of the group of 8/9 British citizens who dined at the restaurant last night, as usual, of which the parents of missing were part (he didn't know them) he noticed that two individuals left the table, of the male gender.”
RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA says “Of the group of 8/9 British citizens who dined at that restaurant yesterday, like they usually did, which was partly made up of the parents of the missing (he did not know them) he noticed that absent from the table, for about 15 minutes, [was] a man (tall, little more than thirty years of age, normal physical stature, white complexion and hair color light brown);”
MIGUEL SALCEDAS COELHO says “He did not know the missing or her parents, he knew only that they were part of a group of British citizens who usually dined there”
JOELSON FABIO SOARES SANTOS LUCIO says “As he works in the pantry, he never goes to the area where are the tables, so he saw nothing”
Basically, all they said was that it was “a group of 8/9 British citizens” and that sometimes some of them got up, left and returned. Nothing more. As if they had been told to say that they only remembered these two strong basic ideas.
No shape of table, nor where they sat. Very generic and in no way a reason to raise suspicion. Perfectly plausible and reasonable to join up 4 of the small square tables available and sit 9 around it.
Besides the event being cancelled because of them, there is no connection between the T9 and the Tapas posh esplanade picture.
13. The Tapas posh esplanade picture and SIC
If the picture was already extremely relevant to understand the scope, number and the importance of the people who quickly closed ranks even though they had absolutely nothing to do with what had happened to Maddie, there is one fact that demonstrates all: the SIC video of that day that aired on May 4 2007 at 20H00.
We’ve become so accustomed to NOT seeing the inside of the Tapas esplanade, to seeing it being hidden from all of us, to seeing it NOT being filmed, that the most important detail of this posh esplanade picture saga almost escaped us when it was right in front of us.
If the BRT was not a problem, as it wasn’t then, and if there was no storyline to be followed, as there wasn’t then, then why didn’t the SIC TV crew film the inside of the esplanade?
Note, it films the window of the apartment, it films the back stairs of the apartment, the 5A window, the view of the apartment, the back alley (where Mr Len Port appears), the entrance of Tapas and it even films the playground and Neil Berry on the tennis courts, but to show “where the parents were last night”, the TV crew goes outside the Tapas complex, around the block to the other side and from the outside the complex they film the Tapas bar from the opposite side of the esplanade:
The Neil Berry interview shows that they had access to the inside of the premises, so why not film the esplanade and show the viewpoint the group had to the apartment from there?
The TV crew runs away from the esplanade as though it was a source of the plague!
Before there was any BRT controversy the SIC TV crew knew, or was told, that the esplanade was not to be filmed.
Why? Because the esplanade was set up as we see it in the Tapas posh esplanade picture: for the event on Friday at lunchtime.
Someone felt that filming that esplanade the way it was posh, would compromise the presence of the VIPs in Luz being known.
On May 4 in the morning, the SIC TV crew was persuaded to not film the esplanade.
14. Why May 4?
We think that from the above, we have shown quite clearly why we think the photo was taken on May 4.
But to add to all of the above, we also have 2 tweets from the Frog showing us that it was so.
One, in which she tweets to Mr Len Port and the other where she informs Jules and Mr Salmon that she has done so:
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
@algarvnewswatch Hello, Mr Port. Sorry to trouble you but please are you able to confirm that this photo, which I believe shows you in the background, was taken in the Ocean Club Luz Tapas Bar on 4/5/07?
10:47 AM - 31 Oct 2018
Green Leaper @FragrantFrog
Replying to @jules1602x @Tealtraum
I've tweeted Len Port asking him if he can confirm the date that pic was taken was 4/5/07. There's another one showing round tables with tablecloths taken 5/5/07 by Sky news. Don't know how much more proof Tex needs...says someone whowuzthere
2:09 PM - 31 Oct 2018
One only asks another person if they remember something that has happened 11 and half years earlier if there was something remarkable to be remembered.
Tables on an esplanade are not something memorable. Unless they, on that day, looked totally different from all other days.
The Frog is trusting that Mr Len Port will remember how posh the esplanade looked that day and will remember that it was on the day after Maddie disappeared.
That he will remember that he never again saw the Tapas esplanade looking like that again.
15. The BRT and the abduction
Today no one speaks of abduction. In fact, there are people who find those who supposedly still believe in it to be nutters and totally uncouth:
00Sade 🕵️♀️ @SadeElisha86
00Sade 🕵️♀️Retweeted David Baddiel
I agree! Can you believe there are still people in 2018 who believe she was abducted? Nutters! And very hateful too, so uncouth. #mccann
Replying to @libshitz
Because if you click on it you will see just reams of intense hatred and conspiracy theory fuckwittage.
10:57 am - 13 Nov 2018
2:20 pm - 13 Nov 2018
Very true. Only someone uncouth can still believe in Maddie’s abduction these days.
But those of us who lived through the initial years of the case, remember well how the exact same tactics that were used by the abduction apologists are now being used by the BRT apologists.
Remember how they shouted what nonsense it was to think that there had been no abduction? How they insulted us about how unfair and unjust we were being to the parents and that we were all off our rockers if we thought they were lying?
Did it work? Did their hysteria make us believe more or less in the abduction? It confirmed there was no abduction.
In much the same way, the more they protest about the BRT, the more they come up with different versions of it, the more they try to ridicule our opinions, the more they confirm we are right.
Facts are facts, and facts don’t get shouted down.
The biggest difference was that the abduction-apologists had their stories well-coordinated while the BRT apologists just keep digging their holes deeper and deeper.
Even well-coordinated, the abduction didn’t survive time and truth. All that bullying for nothing.
So, what are the odds the BRT apologists will have in being able to sell their story? Very much against them. That’s why fewer and fewer have come out to defend it.
That’s why our critics have become silent. Even when they speak they say nothing because they only spew anger and anger is one having nothing to say and just makes noise.
Joining all the dots above, it’s clear that the esplanade was set up for an event on May 4. The event got cancelled because Maddie had died the evening before.
Although its clear from the picture that food had not been served yet, we are certain that Strawberry vodkas and watercress and egg salads were certainly on the menu, to paraphrase Kate’s book.
When one looks at the picture, what one is seeing is the closing of the swinger’s regatta, that ended up only being half of a dress rehearsal and never to be premiered.
When one looks at that table, the main table of the event, the one being ridiculously made out to be the fictional BRT, it was real. It has 7 chairs around it.
Speculating, and considering that one of the chairs of the main table would be for the host, the other 6 chairs could well represent the number of the really important people who 2 nations are still covering for after all these years.
The fact that someone thought best to have a “logistic memory” of the event, tells us this was the first, supposedly of many others to follow. The Maddie case most likely has killed that promising future so we would say it never happened again.
Hopefully the reader can now understand that the picture not only proves there was no BRT during the week, as it also proves that the events happened under the control of people way above and beyond the Tapas 9 paygrade.