Madeleine McCann general discussion thread #28

[~n/t~]

bbm

Thanks Goldengirls....very logical. Also complicating things further would be the fact that we cannot take ANYTHING any of the Tapas9 to say as the certain truth. Just because they say it, doesn't mean it's true. So for example, the Tapas group is saying they left the patio door unlocked. And so it would have been easy for an abductor to come in. Well, that does not mean that the patio door was actually unlocked. It could have indeed been locked. Making the abduction scenario even less feasible.

I find that it is much easier to make sense of things when you come in with the idea that all of the Tapas group are lying.

Actually I think that is the one thing they didn't lie about. Leaving the patio door unlocked so they each took turns checking on the kids. How often is debatable. I don't think they did as often as they said.

 

[haden]

What is there for sure is the dogs route, and this is very soon after Madeleine was found missing.. the dogs went straight out of the front door and all 4 dogs went to the car park.

IMO the car park should have been investigated thoroughly.. who parked there, who lived there, who was seen there. Maybe someone has seen something from their balcony but hasn't paid attention since the media attention never focused on the car park.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Not really. It was completely enough if the abductor knew, that the patio door cannot be locked from the outside. McCanns left the apartment through the patio door, so if the perp observed them, he knew the door was unlocked.

Especially if he worked there.

 

[~n/t~]

Thinking logically if you were going to abduct a child and plan it, what would you do and what would you take?

I know I am crazy but the windows and stuff is really bugging me, and last night I sat and really thought about it all almost doing a reconstruction in my head.

So how would I start to prepare if I was going to take a child I would wear dark clothing. I would carry a holdall big enough to carry a child in. Chloroform, a rag to use it, and a plastic bag to put it in when finished and a torch and surgical gloves as they are easier to wear and usually nude in colour. I would park my car away from the complex in the dark.

Getting Chloroform would be difficult but not impossible. Medical practitioners can prescribe it and I believe dentists use it, but i did a bit of research and you can buy forms of it in supermarkets and on line. You would have to take something to quieten the child. Using it is dangerous and you have to know what your doing. Hummm its a worry would I want to risk the childs life.

Any thoughts? Would you risk the child not waking up? I know my grandson who was her age at the time, there is no way I could have picked him up without waking him. He had a sleeping disorder basically never slept lol.

OK casing the joint.

I would do a walk by of the apartment assuming somehow I had found out about children being left on their own for long periods of time.

Logically I think I would prefer to go in from the front door.

Now I thought it might be difficult, but would the front door still have a lock which was hard to get a key, no I dont think it would, so possibly just a normal Yale OR an inside job and help from someone working there. Much easier to have that then having to find out what sort of lock the door had and get a key.

The area by 5A had a wall which I am sure the abductor could easily hunker down and not been seen....There is a photo of forensics doing the shutter and you can cant see her legs, so a person could hunker down out of site.

The abductor then went in, it was darkish so he turns his torch on.

Passes the kitchen on the left and into the main apartment and off this on the right was the Master bedroom, bathroom, and childrens bedroom.

Now first question was there lights on in the apartment?

I would imagine there would be a light on which would not wake the children up, but would allow the parents to see in from the patio door. HOWEVER, the bedrooms would be in the dark.

Second confusion. How did the doors open? Outwards or inwards? I would think there was no room to open inwards with bed and wardrobe on other side, so was it outwards? Anyone know?

Now which door? If traveling through the front door the abductor would come across 3 doors on the right. Where ALL the doors closed or open. (Including bathroom). What are the chances they found the right one straight away?

IF the doors were closed unless the person knew where the children were they would have to open each door to find them.

So door closed perhaps. Opens the door of the parents. Can see two empty beds in the torch light then pushes the door into the bathroom, then opens the last door.

What would he see? It would be quite dark as the shutters were down.

So torch on he would just see two large travel cots, and possible behind them a bed.

Then he would look to to the left and see another bed with possibly a child in it but it would not be that clear it could just be another empty bed.

Now first off. How would he know which bed Maddy was in?

Did the abductor just take Maddy because it was the easier option? Its hard work taking children out of travel cots, actually even putting them in a travel cot is back breaking.
So go for the easier option perhaps? HOw did they know the child in the bed was a girl? The travel cots had little view, so they wouldnt even know which one held a boy or girl.

Anyway, locates a child in the bed any child will do perhaps.

Places holdall onto floor. Puts torch down, gets chloroform bottle opens it, puts a bit of chloroform on cloth which was carried in a small plastic bag, pass over face. Puts cloth back into bag, and pocket, picks torch up, puts in pocket. Opening holdall check the child is sedated, put in bag which is big enough, zips back. Picks up, and goes back the way he came.

Opens the front door which was left ajar and quietly shuts behind him. Presses himself against the wall and listens hears nothing, no footsteps etc sounds travels at night. Hunkers down, and moves to the car park, quickly through and turns LEFT to Lagos road, and the car parked.

Time taken I reckon about 8 minutes.

So if if he went in at say 9.35 he would be out BEFORE 9.50.

Now why would the abductor have opened the window/shutter?

It makes no sense.

If you look at the official crime scene, two LARGE travel cots in the middle, then a bed under the window. It would have been POINTLESS to do so.

It makes no sense to complicate things.

So I would expect the family would have found perhaps all 3 doors open.

There is no way an abductor would bother to close doors behind them, it is just another chance to wake the other children up. You had to do it quietly and without too much light. To negotiate two cots and then a bed to open the window and shutter is madness it would have woken the children up and served no purpose unless to get rid of the smell of chloroform.

OK some people reckon the abductor went through the patio door.

Now lets go up the stairs and through the patio. The scenario and timing would be the same.

HOWEVER, i dont like the patio steps, stair gate, and lights from the tapas ocean club, and people walking RIGHT PAST the gate etc, far easier to be seen.

So the question is how did they open the front door?

Also the argument is the abductor KNEW THE PATIO DOOR WAS KEPT UNLOCKED, how did they know that?

Unless they followed one of the group how did they know that? They could have been using a key. No as far as I am concerned the abductor had NO REASON to know the patio door was unlocked.....unless they knew the family.

The child could have been taken very quickly it was a small flat. The abductor using a timing when everyone was eating and had done first checks and would have had more wine etc....so would have had to have knowledge of their routine so about 9.35.

So someone inside job/or privvy to families routine...

Who?
Creche Worker
Complaint by Mrs Fenn
Restaurant worker
Maid
Maintenance Man
ANYONE ELSE?
People were seen hanging about during the DAY....The routine of abduction was at night. Did anyone see someone hanging about at night?
I dont think i have heard of anyone. So someone must have known that routine at NIGHT. Who knew the routine?
Restaurant worker
Mrs Fenn complaint
ANYONE ELSE?

I know its just guess work but I think it has to be logical.

Again I am dismissing the dogs scenting etc, as the pj and SY have at the MOMENT. I am merely trying to work out if it was an abduction then how did they do it.

Personally the more I think about it the more I realise someone working there would have to be implicated if the front door was used.

Also the open door etc Gerry McCann well perhaps maddy did get up for the toilet we cant dismiss that or she got up to see where her parents were and then scared went back to bed.....

Also i found this article. This couple state there was no one hanging about at 9.15.

And who was the mytery couple was it them?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/40...on-night-before-sobbing-Madeleine-disappeared
Any thoughts?

Why would he/she use the front door when the patio door was unlocked?

 

[goldengirl57]

Why would he/she use the front door when the patio door was unlocked?

We dont know it was.

I am only doing a scenario. FOR me to go up the stairs etc would be more likely i would be seen, I am just throwing stuff in the pot lol....but we dont know it was unlocked. I also read that GM said he went through the front door to check the children, so who is telling the truth.

I just think the back entrance is dodgy.

BUT good no one challenged the window. It was the window i was more worried about lol.

 

[goldengirl57]

Not really. It was completely enough if the abductor knew, that the patio door cannot be locked from the outside. McCanns left the apartment through the patio door, so if the perp observed them, he knew the door was unlocked.

But that is it how would he know the door wasnt lockable from the outside. For all he knew it was locked, no it doesnt make sense. And why was JT going around the block to the front if they were known to use the side area and entrance couldnt they all access their apartments from the back?

Either way front or back there was no need to open any windows or shutters :moo:

 

[~n/t~]

We dont know it was.

I am only doing a scenario. FOR me to go up the stairs etc would be more likely i would be seen, I am just throwing stuff in the pot lol....but we dont know it was unlocked. I also read that GM said he went through the front door to check the children, so who is telling the truth.

I just think the back entrance is dodgy.

BUT good no one challenged the window. It was the window i was more worried about lol.

If GM used the front door it could be he had the key. I doubt they handed their keys to one another whilst checking the kids thus leaving the patio door open and making it easier.

The window was either staged to make it look like a break in or they forgot to close it. Didn't one of the tapas say he listened through the window?

 

[gord]

The open window always made sense to me if there was more than one abductor - ie working as a pair

If abductor a goes in via patio and opens window and hands out Maddie who then walks off to a car in the car park it makes sense for a quick getaway

it might have felt to be too risky to exit via patio with Maddie as it was visible just from the bar - entering was ok as he could crouch .

anyway just an idea.

I cant believe that still after 6 years we still have the argument that they found Maddies DNA in the hire car - they didn't !!

They found minute trace elements that could have come from up to 5 people and bearing in mind that Maddy would have shared elements of DNA with siblings and parents it is hardly surprising that there was 15 alleles - it would have been surprising if there was not

 

[~n/t~]

On the evening of May 3rd, we are told that Matthew Oldfield listened at the windows of three apartments, including the window of the bedroom where Madeleine McCann was sleeping with her twin siblings, Gerry McCann left the restaurant to check on his children at 9.10pm, Matthew Oldfield checked his own and the McCann children at 9.30pm and Kate McCann went to check at 10pm, when she discovered that Madeleine was missing

http://www.zimbio.com/Madeleine+McC...stery+Madeleine+according+Jane+Tanner+Matthew

 

[Hexe]

But that is it how would he know the door wasnt lockable from the outside. For all he knew it was locked, no it doesnt make sense.

Piece of cake. Either he knew a bit about the apartments or he just got a chance to check that door and notice, that there was no keyhole or any other mechanism allowing to lock it on the outside.

 

[haden]

On the evening of May 3rd, we are told that Matthew Oldfield listened at the windows of three apartments, including the window of the bedroom where Madeleine McCann was sleeping with her twin siblings, Gerry McCann left the restaurant to check on his children at 9.10pm, Matthew Oldfield checked his own and the McCann children at 9.30pm and Kate McCann went to check at 10pm, when she discovered that Madeleine was missing

http://www.zimbio.com/Madeleine+McC...stery+Madeleine+according+Jane+Tanner+Matthew

Matthew Oldfielf went into the apartment through the patio doors, at around 9.25ppm, according to his statement.

To me it would be interesting to know how did he exit. Was the next step of this trip checking on his own children? In this case he could have exited through the front door if they weren't double locked by Gerry.

I hope this makes sense.

Nobody ever asked Matthew Oldfield where did he go after checking on the McCann children.

If they did we would know if the route through the front door was possible at that moment.

 

[~n/t~]

The open window always made sense to me if there was more than one abductor - ie working as a pair

If abductor a goes in via patio and opens window and hands out Maddie who then walks off to a car in the car park it makes sense for a quick getaway

it might have felt to be too risky to exit via patio with Maddie as it was visible just from the bar - entering was ok as he could crouch .

anyway just an idea.

I cant believe that still after 6 years we still have the argument that they found Maddies DNA in the hire car - they didn't !!

They found minute trace elements that could have come from up to 5 people and bearing in mind that Maddy would have shared elements of DNA with siblings and parents it is hardly surprising that there was 15 alleles - it would have been surprising if there was not

Voice Over [Rebeca Venâncio] - It was the main evidence that gave strength to the argument of those who believed that the parents were responsible for the crime. The sniffer dogs brought by the English authorities signalled cadaver odour and to blood in the McCann family's car. The theory of Gonçalo Amaral, who was removed from the investigation, was confirmed by the Springer spaniel dogs' keen sense of smell. That Renault could have been the vehicle where Maddie's body was carried. In the car park there were over a dozen cars yet the dogs rushed towards the Renault Scenic rented by Kate and Gerry, three weeks after their daughter's disappearance. This breakthrough was decisive in the constitution of the parents of the English girl as arguidos. An expert guaranteed that the dogs have never given a false positive result, that is to say, they have never failed. In the archival dispatch of the investigation, the public prosecutors [MP] admit that the homicide is the most probable theory, nonetheless the case was archived.
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/10/maddie-case-sniffer-dogs-identified.html

 

[~n/t~]

Matthew Oldfielf went into the apartment through the patio doors, at around 9.25ppm, according to his statement.

To me it would be interesting to know how did he exit. Was the next step of this trip checking on his own children? In this case he could have exited through the front door if they weren't double locked by Gerry.

I hope this makes sense.

Nobody ever asked Matthew Oldfield where did he go after checking on the McCann children.

If they did we would know if the route through the front door was possible at that moment.

If you click on the link there is the actual timelines taken by PJ How many times did MO change his story?

 

[haden]

The open window always made sense to me if there was more than one abductor - ie working as a pair

If abductor a goes in via patio and opens window and hands out Maddie who then walks off to a car in the car park it makes sense for a quick getaway

it might have felt to be too risky to exit via patio with Maddie as it was visible just from the bar - entering was ok as he could crouch .

anyway just an idea.

I cant believe that still after 6 years we still have the argument that they found Maddies DNA in the hire car - they didn't !!

They found minute trace elements that could have come from up to 5 people and bearing in mind that Maddy would have shared elements of DNA with siblings and parents it is hardly surprising that there was 15 alleles - it would have been surprising if there was not

In this case what do you make out of the children's bedroom doors being:

1. Found opened to 45 degrees after being left at 5 degrees ( Gerry at 9.05)
2. Matthew Oldfield seeing the doors 'quite open' at 9.25 pm - after Gerry closed them back to 5 degrees at 9.05
3. Kate finding the doors wide open and window open at 10pm ( the window wasn't reported open at Matthew Oldfield 9.25pm visit)

 

[haden]

If you click on the link there is the actual timelines taken by PJ How many times did MO change his story?

Yes, that makes me very suspicious of him. If I was a detective working on the case I would have checked him inside out.

Especially if true that he was sent to call the police the first time and the police wasn't called at this time.

IMO the mistake Amaral was making is accusing the whole group of lying. What he had to do is to check out every single friend separately, as if the others were not included.

And this should have been done on the day one. I hope SY and new PJ teams corrected this.

 

[Hexe]

We dont know it was.

I am only doing a scenario. FOR me to go up the stairs etc would be more likely i would be seen, I am just throwing stuff in the pot lol....but we dont know it was unlocked. I also read that GM said he went through the front door to check the children, so who is telling the truth.

Matthew Oldfield said he used the patio door, when he went to check up the McCanns children. Kate in her first statement said:

Around 9.30pm was the time the interviewee should have gone to see her children, but her friend Matt (a member of the group) had just done a check in his apartment then gone to the interviewee's. He had entered the apartment by a glass sliding side door, that was always unlocked and once inside had not gone into the children's bedroom. He only looked through the door, and did not hear any noise. He went back to the restaurant and said that everything was fine.

At around 10pm, the interviewee went to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed but not locked, as she said before.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

Bolded by me.

As for Gerald, this is the excerpt from his first statement:

In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked, went to his children's bedroom and checked that the twins were fine, as was Madeleine. "He then went to the WC" where he remained for a few moments, left, and bumped into a person he had played tennis with and who had a child's push chair, he was also British, he had a short conversation with him, "returning after that to the restaurant." At about 21.30 his friend Matt (member of the group) went to the apartment, where his children were and on his way went to the witness' apartment, entering by means of a glass sliding door that was always unlocked and was located laterally to the building.

Another excerpt from the same statement:

At about 22.00 it was his wife Kate who went to check on the children. She entered the apartment by the door using the key and saw immediately that the door to the children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the blinds were raised and the curtains were drawn open.

Bolded also by me.

Okay, so they leave the sliding door unlocked, but they bother with the froont door and passing over the key? Weird.

But it's not the end. Here comes an excerpt from his second statement (BBM):

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE by the rear door which he consequently closed but did not lock given that that is only possible from the inside. Referring to the front door, while he is certain that it was closed it is unlikely that it was locked as [because] they had left by the rear door.

So then he and his wife used the key on an unlocked door, while checking on the kids?

At 21H05 MATHEW returned, the time at which the deponent left the table to go to check how his children were.
----- He followed the normal route up to the rear door, which being open he only had to move [slide] it, that being the way in which he entered [was entering] the lounge, he noted that the children's bedroom door was not ajar as he had left it but half-way open, which he thought strange, having then put together the thought of MADELEINE having got up to go to sleep in his bedroom so as to avoid the noise produced [created] by her siblings.

So now he changd his mind. He used the sliding patio door, not the front one. Undecided man he is. Also notice, he stated, he left the children bedroom door ajar and found it half open. Didn't he said somewhere else he left that door nearly closed?

Half and hour later, without anything to signal [with no way to tell the time], it being 22h03, he turned to alert KATE that it was time for her to go to see the children. She immediately made her way to the apartment by the usual path, she having entered by the rear door.

He changed his mind also about Kate, Now he says, she also entered through the rear door. Why that change?

 

[gord]

Voice Over [Rebeca Venâncio] - It was the main evidence that gave strength to the argument of those who believed that the parents were responsible for the crime. The sniffer dogs brought by the English authorities signalled cadaver odour and to blood in the McCann family's car. The theory of Gonçalo Amaral, who was removed from the investigation, was confirmed by the Springer spaniel dogs' keen sense of smell. That Renault could have been the vehicle where Maddie's body was carried. In the car park there were over a dozen cars yet the dogs rushed towards the Renault Scenic rented by Kate and Gerry, three weeks after their daughter's disappearance. This breakthrough was decisive in the constitution of the parents of the English girl as arguidos. An expert guaranteed that the dogs have never given a false positive result, that is to say, they have never failed. In the archival dispatch of the investigation, the public prosecutors [MP] admit that the homicide is the most probable theory, nonetheless the case was archived.
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/10/maddie-case-sniffer-dogs-identified.html

we are in danger of going over old ground again !!

I am sure Amaral thought he had the smoking gun when he found the dogs alerting - but problem was when the analysis was done they didn't find the forensics that would have placed Maddy in the car

To me the whole hire car thing puts just doesn't make any sense. If the parents had managed to dispose of a body for 6 weeks - without it being discovered - then I just cannot see then moving it again ?? and doing this whilst under suspicion -

but anyway as I said old ground still a mystery

 

[gord]

In this case what do you make out of the children's bedroom doors being:

1. Found opened to 45 degrees after being left at 5 degrees ( Gerry at 9.05)
2. Matthew Oldfield seeing the doors 'quite open' at 9.25 pm - after Gerry closed them back to 5 degrees at 9.05
3. Kate finding the doors wide open and window open at 10pm ( the window wasn't reported open at Matthew Oldfield 9.25pm visit)

if using the " pair theory " - once Maddy was handed out the window then it would have been a very quick exit - without bothering tio sut door or not - just get the F out of there

To me it must have happened after Gerry's visit - maybe even after MO visit

who knows if there was a draft from the open window that might have moved the doors in some way - entirely possible - I know what happens here if I have from door and back door open at same time all the doors in middle slam shut - and it doesn't have to be windy

 

[CHERIE.T]

I think the problem with Logic and criminals is that they are often NOT logical. They are going for the END goal, How they get there is not always logical or practical.

Sneaking in windows, Stealing children from their beds.. Not logical at all..

So to say there is something logical in a criminal's actions to me is just not pertinent to the actual crime .

color and bbm.

Thankfully somebody said it.
Apparently people like to use the term logical when disputing anything about the parents. It's like a silent screw u to whomever the reply is to. :twocents:

 

[haden]

Matthew Oldfield said he used the patio door, when he went to check up the McCanns children. Kate in her first statement said:

Around 9.30pm was the time the interviewee should have gone to see her children, but her friend Matt (a member of the group) had just done a check in his apartment then gone to the interviewee's. He had entered the apartment by a glass sliding side door, that was always unlocked and once inside had not gone into the children's bedroom. He only looked through the door, and did not hear any noise. He went back to the restaurant and said that everything was fine.

At around 10pm, the interviewee went to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed but not locked, as she said before.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

Bolded by me.

As for Gerald, this is the excerpt from his first statement:

In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked, went to his children's bedroom and checked that the twins were fine, as was Madeleine. "He then went to the WC" where he remained for a few moments, left, and bumped into a person he had played tennis with and who had a child's push chair, he was also British, he had a short conversation with him, "returning after that to the restaurant." At about 21.30 his friend Matt (member of the group) went to the apartment, where his children were and on his way went to the witness' apartment, entering by means of a glass sliding door that was always unlocked and was located laterally to the building.

Another excerpt from the same statement:

At about 22.00 it was his wife Kate who went to check on the children. She entered the apartment by the door using the key and saw immediately that the door to the children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the blinds were raised and the curtains were drawn open.

Bolded also by me.

Okay, so they leave the sliding door unlocked, but they bother with the froont door and passing over the key? Weird.

But it's not the end. Here comes an excerpt from his second statement (BBM):

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE by the rear door which he consequently closed but did not lock given that that is only possible from the inside. Referring to the front door, while he is certain that it was closed it is unlikely that it was locked as [because] they had left by the rear door.

So then he and his wife used the key on an unlocked door, while checking on the kids?

At 21H05 MATHEW returned, the time at which the deponent left the table to go to check how his children were.
----- He followed the normal route up to the rear door, which being open he only had to move [slide] it, that being the way in which he entered [was entering] the lounge, he noted that the children's bedroom door was not ajar as he had left it but half-way open, which he thought strange, having then put together the thought of MADELEINE having got up to go to sleep in his bedroom so as to avoid the noise produced [created] by her siblings.

So now he changd his mind. He used the sliding patio door, not the front one. Undecided man he is. Also notice, he stated, he left the children bedroom door ajar and found it half open. Didn't he said somewhere else he left that door nearly closed?

Half and hour later, without anything to signal [with no way to tell the time], it being 22h03, he turned to alert KATE that it was time for her to go to see the children. She immediately made her way to the apartment by the usual path, she having entered by the rear door.

He changed his mind also about Kate, Now he says, she also entered through the rear door. Why that change?

I think this is a misunderstanding during the translation. IMO different people call 'the back door' differently. For some 'the back door' means the front door, for others 'the back door' means the patio doors.