Texana
Overreaching
BRILLIANT! absolutely the best worded and most original presentation in a few sentences, ever.
Thanks Colomom~!
Thanks Colomom~!
Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 25
- Thread starter colomom
- Start date
- Status
Tony Bennett
Former Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 11
Barnaby, you're complaining that things are too quiet?
Seems like our friends in the U.S. have got a lot on their minds just now with looking after their kids and worrying about whether electing the inexperienced Barack Obama or 'one foot in the grave' John McCain is actually going to make any difference at all to their lives over there over the next four years (will now be shot down in flames by Obama-worshippers and McCain-lovers).
But in the hope of helping you to avoid the medical condition of 'clinical bordeom' (which would require you to see a qualified Doctor), and hopefully to stimulate some further contributions to this thread, here is a snip from The Madeleine Foundation's forthcoming booklet: 'What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann: 30 Reasons which Suggest she was not Abducted' (ISBN 978-0-9507954-7-8).
In return, as our material is still in draft form, any constructive criticism or suggestions concerning this particular section of our booklet - before we go to print - would be most welcome. For Madeleine's sake, we must keep up the struggle to force the truth to emerge:
+++++++++++++++
Reason 7. The sheer impossibility of the abduction happening as claimed
Here, it is important to examine closely what the Doctors McCann, and the friends who were with them in Praia da Luz, have said about the possibility that Madeline was abducted. We give a long answer because this issue is crucial to enable us to assess whether the Doctors McCann and their friends are telling the truth or not.
We will come to their constantly changing stories about how the alleged abductor may have entered the apartment later in this document.
The scenario that the McCanns and their friends have produced runs as follows:
They say that:
· The abductor must have been watching the apartment for several days before snatching Madeleine on 3rd May.
· They (the McCanns) went down to the Tapas bar at the Ocean Club at around 8.30pm that evening (though that timing is disputed by others who say it may have been up to half-an-hour later).
· Dr Matthew Oldfield says he checked the apartment from the outside at around 9.03pm.
· Gerry McCann says he returned to the apartment from the Tapas bar to check on his children at around 9.05pm to 9.07pm.
· Gerry McCann says he was briefly in all four rooms of their holiday apartment, during which time he checked his children. He also says he spent an unusually long time in the loo. He tells us that he paused briefly over Madeleines bed and thought to himself how very lucky he was to have such a beautiful child.
· Gerry McCann says that he noticed that the door to the childrens room was wider open than before. He says that at 8.30pm it was open at an angle of about 45 degrees (half open). He remembers (he says) that when he went to check the children at 9.05pm, the door was now open at an angle of 60 degrees (two thirds open).
· The Doctors McCann now say that the door being open more than it was before may suggest that the abductor was already in the room when he checked on the children - though he says he only realised this possibility some months after the events of the day. It is clearly an unlikely scenario. Gerry McCann says the abductor might have been hiding behind the door or in a wardrobe.
· Gerry McCann says he left the room, after checking on the children, at around 9.09pm or 9.10pm. He then says he encountered a journalist, Jeremy (Jes) Wilkins, on the road back to the Tapas bar at the Ocean Club, and was talking to him for about 10-15 minutes between 9.10pm and 9.25pm. Jeremy Wilkins confirms this.
· Jane Tanner maintains that she saw a man walking purposefully, with a child in his arms, along the top of the road running alongside the McCanns apartment (we will come to the reliability of Ms Tanners observations later). She initially said the man had been walking in the opposite direction. She has stuck to her account that she saw this man at 9.15pm.
· The McCanns now maintain that they left their apartment unlocked. This contrasts with what they said on May 3rd. (Then, they claimed that the abductor had forced entry into the apartment by jemmying open the shutters. They changed this story very soon afterwards, when the evidence did not support that - please see section 9 of this leaflet). The McCanns now say, therefore, that the abductor must have entered through the unlocked patio door.
· The McCanns now explain the fact that the window to the childrens room was found open by claiming that the abductor must have climbed through the window and taken Madeleine through that window.
· The McCanns maintain that when Kate McCann says she returned to the apartment to check on the children, she knew instantly - and then so did Gerry minutes later when he is supposed to have arrived at the apartment - that Madeleine had been abducted. She told a TV interviewer that because of the requirement for secrecy about the police investigation, she could not explain why she knew instantly. The photographs of the apartment taken by the Portuguese police on the day after Madeleine was reported missing do not show anything which would clearly point to an abduction, certainly not damaged shutters.
Going by the above scenario, the abductor either entered the apartment before Matthew Oldfields check at around 9.03pm and Gerry McCanns check at 9.05pm/9.07pm - the version the McCanns now want us to believe - or after he left at 9.10pm and before he was (allegedly) seen by Jane Tanner at 9.15pm
The problems with this abduction scenario
There are many problems associated with the specific abduction scenario above that has been generated by the Doctors McCann.
For a start, the Portuguese police did a forensic examination of the window-sill, through which it is claimed that the abductor must have climbed out with Madeleine. The Portuguese police said that they found no trace of any other person having made any impression on the window-sill and, in addition, (a) the lichen on the outside window-sill appeared to be totally undisturbed and (b) only Kate Mcanns fingerprints were found on the window-sill. All of this tells us that the abductor, if there was one, did not escape with Madeleine through the window.
Further, the window is high enough in the childrens room to make it physically very difficult for an abductor to climb through it. It was reported to be 91cm. above the floor - exactly three feet. The abductor would therefore have had to climb some 3 feet, with Madeleine with him, in his arms or over his shoulder. In addition, he would have to have managed this feat without leaving any forensic traces on the window-sill. Madeleine must have weighed at least two stone (12kg). A task such as this would have meant balancing against the window frame itself; even then it would have been almost impossible even if Madeleine had been asleep.
It would clearly have been still more difficult if either Madeleine had woken up whilst being abducted, or one or both twins had done so.
Furthermore, to escape through the window, as the McCanns claim, the abductor would have had to open the shutters. It is a fact, confirmed by Mark Warners, that it was only possible to open the shutters from the inside. It is also a fact (again confirmed by Mark Warners) that if these heavy metal shutters were opened from the outside, the process was extremely noisy. But no-one heard the shutters being opened.
In addition, as the shutters were actually closed when the police and Mark Warners staff arrived to check on the shutters, the initial explanations of the Doctors McCann were that the shutters must have been closed by the abductor as well as opened by him. We have seen that the shutters could not be opened from the outside. The claim by the Doctors McCann that the abductor closed the shutters behind him prompts two related and very obvious questions:
1) having gained entry through an open patio door, what would possess an abductor to leave via a 3-foot high window when he would also have to open noisy shutters? - and
2) why and how, having allegedly scooped up Madeleine in his arms and opened the window and the shutters, would he have had the time and the physical ability to then close the shutters, all without making any sound or leaving any trace, and without waking either Madeleine or the twins?
Moreover, all this would have had to have been accomplished in the dark - unless he switched the lights on when he entered the apartment and then remembered to switch them off again as he was making his exit. No-one saw any lights on ion the apartment. The Doctors McCann left the children in the darkness when they went out for their evenings entertainment.
Therefore, to sum up - according to the McCanns scenario, the abductor would have to have:
* first - either picked an opportunity to enter the apartment after the Doctors McCann had left for the Tapas bar or entered the apartment immediately after he had seen first Matthew Oldfield and then Gerry McCann enter and leave the apartment
[NOTE: if the former of these two alternatives, then the abductor must have been in the apartment with Dr Gerry McCann during the three to five minutes he was checking on the children]
* second - walked through the open patio door without being seen
* third - found Madeleine in the dark and picked her up without waking her or the twins, opened the window;
* fourth - opened the shutters (with nobody hearing him doing so, and without leaving any finger-prints);
* fifth - climbed through the window, carrying Madeleine with him - again without being seen by anyone, and
* sixth - he would then have had to close the very noisy shutters, using controls operated from the inside.
This latter operation would have been physically very difficult if not impossible to do without (a) even brushing away even a tiny piece of the years-old lichen growing on the window-sill or (b) leaving any clothing fibres or other forensic evidence. He must in addition have accomplished this in near total darkness and without being seen or heard by anyone - except for the highly suspect evidence of Jane Tanner, which we will deal with later. If he had Madeleine in his arms, and bearing in mind he was in near darkness, he would have been unable to see anything below her or much to either side as he fumbled through the window and shutters and tried to escape from the apartment precincts. Why he would do this when there was an open patio door to walk back through is utterly incomprehensible. The reason the Doctors McCann came up with this improbable scenario is that they had to explain to the Portuguese police and to the outside world why the normally-closed shutters were partially open.
This whole incredible abduction scenario - unconfirmed by any forensics whatsoever, and indeed contradicted by Dr Kate McCanns fingerprints on the window - is so impossible to believe that we can surely say: this did not happen.
Now let us look for a moment at the McCanns theory that the abductor had been casing the joint for several days beforehand - and then pounced and abducted Madeleine when he had the chance. The Doctors McCann claim that he would have been closely watching them, including observing what the McCanns claim as the routine of half-hourly checking (though, to be frank, the evidence suggests that neither they nor their Tapas 9 friends checked on their children half-hourly or even at all whilst they were out wining and dining).
The Doctors McCann have gone further and have suggested that the abductor must have been making notes on their movements - carefully noting down the times of their departures from the apartment. But this does not seem plausible given that neither the Doctors McCann, nor their Tapas 9 friends, have given any details of how often (if at all) they were checking on their children whilst they were out wining and dining.
Another problem about that scenario is that there is nowhere that the abductor could have been observing the McCanns apartment without being seen - unless, that is, he was living in one of the flats opposite the McCanns apartment, some of which overlooked it. It is understood that the occupants of these flats have all been investigated and their statements corroborated. None of them had anyone in their flat who was watching the McCanns apartment, nor was anyone seen acting suspiciously or hanging around in that area during the week the Doctors McCann and their friends were there.
The other obvious problem about the claim of an abductor casing the joint is this:- Suppose an abductor had been watching the McCanns apartment day in and day out. On the McCanns own timeline, he would have seen the McCanns leave for the Tapas bar at 8.30pm.
If, as claimed, an abductor had been watching the premises, he would probably have chosen his moment to abduct Madeleine immediately after Drs Gerry and Kate McCann had left for the Tapas bar (on their own account) at around 8.30pm. Yet, if he had entered the flat just after the McCanns left at 8.30pm, how come he was not long gone 35-45 minutes later?
For the Doctors McCann now claim that the abductor either snatched Madeleine a minute or two after Dr Gerry McCann did his (alleged) check at around 9.05pm to 9.10pm, or, just as improbably, was even present for the entire 5 minutes or so Gerry was doing his 9.05pm check.
Yet a further difficulty for this improbable scenario is that Dr Matthew Oldfield claims that he did two checks one at around 8.55pm/9.00pm, (various times have been given for this alleged check) and the other around 9.30pm. Dr Oldfield claims that during his 9.00pm visit he checked from the outside but saw and heard nothing and said that the shutters were tight shut.
If the abductor really had entered before both Dr Matthew Oldfields alleged check (around 9.00pm) and Dr McCanns check (around 9.05pm), then he was exceptionally lucky, to put it mildly, not to have been detected by either man.
But there are equal if not greater problems with the suggestion that the abductor entered the apartment and removed Madeleine only after Drs Oldfield and McCann had done their checks. Would he really have dashed into the apartment after seeing Dr Oldfield checking the outside of the apartment at around 8.55pm/9.00pm and then Gerry spending 3-5 minutes checking between 9.05pm and 9.10pm? It would surely have been far too risky.
And if he entered the apartment after Dr Gerry McCann left at 9.10pm, he would scarcely have had time to enter the flat, remove Madeleine and then be seen by Jane Tanner at 9.15pm. And that is quite apart from all the other difficulties with that scenario that we have already discussed above.
Reason 8. The McCanns immediate and insistent cry of abduction - excluding all other possibilities
SNIPPED
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems like our friends in the U.S. have got a lot on their minds just now with looking after their kids and worrying about whether electing the inexperienced Barack Obama or 'one foot in the grave' John McCain is actually going to make any difference at all to their lives over there over the next four years (will now be shot down in flames by Obama-worshippers and McCain-lovers).
But in the hope of helping you to avoid the medical condition of 'clinical bordeom' (which would require you to see a qualified Doctor), and hopefully to stimulate some further contributions to this thread, here is a snip from The Madeleine Foundation's forthcoming booklet: 'What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann: 30 Reasons which Suggest she was not Abducted' (ISBN 978-0-9507954-7-8).
In return, as our material is still in draft form, any constructive criticism or suggestions concerning this particular section of our booklet - before we go to print - would be most welcome. For Madeleine's sake, we must keep up the struggle to force the truth to emerge:
+++++++++++++++
Reason 7. The sheer impossibility of the abduction happening as claimed
Here, it is important to examine closely what the Doctors McCann, and the friends who were with them in Praia da Luz, have said about the possibility that Madeline was abducted. We give a long answer because this issue is crucial to enable us to assess whether the Doctors McCann and their friends are telling the truth or not.
We will come to their constantly changing stories about how the alleged abductor may have entered the apartment later in this document.
The scenario that the McCanns and their friends have produced runs as follows:
They say that:
· The abductor must have been watching the apartment for several days before snatching Madeleine on 3rd May.
· They (the McCanns) went down to the Tapas bar at the Ocean Club at around 8.30pm that evening (though that timing is disputed by others who say it may have been up to half-an-hour later).
· Dr Matthew Oldfield says he checked the apartment from the outside at around 9.03pm.
· Gerry McCann says he returned to the apartment from the Tapas bar to check on his children at around 9.05pm to 9.07pm.
· Gerry McCann says he was briefly in all four rooms of their holiday apartment, during which time he checked his children. He also says he spent an unusually long time in the loo. He tells us that he paused briefly over Madeleines bed and thought to himself how very lucky he was to have such a beautiful child.
· Gerry McCann says that he noticed that the door to the childrens room was wider open than before. He says that at 8.30pm it was open at an angle of about 45 degrees (half open). He remembers (he says) that when he went to check the children at 9.05pm, the door was now open at an angle of 60 degrees (two thirds open).
· The Doctors McCann now say that the door being open more than it was before may suggest that the abductor was already in the room when he checked on the children - though he says he only realised this possibility some months after the events of the day. It is clearly an unlikely scenario. Gerry McCann says the abductor might have been hiding behind the door or in a wardrobe.
· Gerry McCann says he left the room, after checking on the children, at around 9.09pm or 9.10pm. He then says he encountered a journalist, Jeremy (Jes) Wilkins, on the road back to the Tapas bar at the Ocean Club, and was talking to him for about 10-15 minutes between 9.10pm and 9.25pm. Jeremy Wilkins confirms this.
· Jane Tanner maintains that she saw a man walking purposefully, with a child in his arms, along the top of the road running alongside the McCanns apartment (we will come to the reliability of Ms Tanners observations later). She initially said the man had been walking in the opposite direction. She has stuck to her account that she saw this man at 9.15pm.
· The McCanns now maintain that they left their apartment unlocked. This contrasts with what they said on May 3rd. (Then, they claimed that the abductor had forced entry into the apartment by jemmying open the shutters. They changed this story very soon afterwards, when the evidence did not support that - please see section 9 of this leaflet). The McCanns now say, therefore, that the abductor must have entered through the unlocked patio door.
· The McCanns now explain the fact that the window to the childrens room was found open by claiming that the abductor must have climbed through the window and taken Madeleine through that window.
· The McCanns maintain that when Kate McCann says she returned to the apartment to check on the children, she knew instantly - and then so did Gerry minutes later when he is supposed to have arrived at the apartment - that Madeleine had been abducted. She told a TV interviewer that because of the requirement for secrecy about the police investigation, she could not explain why she knew instantly. The photographs of the apartment taken by the Portuguese police on the day after Madeleine was reported missing do not show anything which would clearly point to an abduction, certainly not damaged shutters.
Going by the above scenario, the abductor either entered the apartment before Matthew Oldfields check at around 9.03pm and Gerry McCanns check at 9.05pm/9.07pm - the version the McCanns now want us to believe - or after he left at 9.10pm and before he was (allegedly) seen by Jane Tanner at 9.15pm
The problems with this abduction scenario
There are many problems associated with the specific abduction scenario above that has been generated by the Doctors McCann.
For a start, the Portuguese police did a forensic examination of the window-sill, through which it is claimed that the abductor must have climbed out with Madeleine. The Portuguese police said that they found no trace of any other person having made any impression on the window-sill and, in addition, (a) the lichen on the outside window-sill appeared to be totally undisturbed and (b) only Kate Mcanns fingerprints were found on the window-sill. All of this tells us that the abductor, if there was one, did not escape with Madeleine through the window.
Further, the window is high enough in the childrens room to make it physically very difficult for an abductor to climb through it. It was reported to be 91cm. above the floor - exactly three feet. The abductor would therefore have had to climb some 3 feet, with Madeleine with him, in his arms or over his shoulder. In addition, he would have to have managed this feat without leaving any forensic traces on the window-sill. Madeleine must have weighed at least two stone (12kg). A task such as this would have meant balancing against the window frame itself; even then it would have been almost impossible even if Madeleine had been asleep.
It would clearly have been still more difficult if either Madeleine had woken up whilst being abducted, or one or both twins had done so.
Furthermore, to escape through the window, as the McCanns claim, the abductor would have had to open the shutters. It is a fact, confirmed by Mark Warners, that it was only possible to open the shutters from the inside. It is also a fact (again confirmed by Mark Warners) that if these heavy metal shutters were opened from the outside, the process was extremely noisy. But no-one heard the shutters being opened.
In addition, as the shutters were actually closed when the police and Mark Warners staff arrived to check on the shutters, the initial explanations of the Doctors McCann were that the shutters must have been closed by the abductor as well as opened by him. We have seen that the shutters could not be opened from the outside. The claim by the Doctors McCann that the abductor closed the shutters behind him prompts two related and very obvious questions:
1) having gained entry through an open patio door, what would possess an abductor to leave via a 3-foot high window when he would also have to open noisy shutters? - and
2) why and how, having allegedly scooped up Madeleine in his arms and opened the window and the shutters, would he have had the time and the physical ability to then close the shutters, all without making any sound or leaving any trace, and without waking either Madeleine or the twins?
Moreover, all this would have had to have been accomplished in the dark - unless he switched the lights on when he entered the apartment and then remembered to switch them off again as he was making his exit. No-one saw any lights on ion the apartment. The Doctors McCann left the children in the darkness when they went out for their evenings entertainment.
Therefore, to sum up - according to the McCanns scenario, the abductor would have to have:
* first - either picked an opportunity to enter the apartment after the Doctors McCann had left for the Tapas bar or entered the apartment immediately after he had seen first Matthew Oldfield and then Gerry McCann enter and leave the apartment
[NOTE: if the former of these two alternatives, then the abductor must have been in the apartment with Dr Gerry McCann during the three to five minutes he was checking on the children]
* second - walked through the open patio door without being seen
* third - found Madeleine in the dark and picked her up without waking her or the twins, opened the window;
* fourth - opened the shutters (with nobody hearing him doing so, and without leaving any finger-prints);
* fifth - climbed through the window, carrying Madeleine with him - again without being seen by anyone, and
* sixth - he would then have had to close the very noisy shutters, using controls operated from the inside.
This latter operation would have been physically very difficult if not impossible to do without (a) even brushing away even a tiny piece of the years-old lichen growing on the window-sill or (b) leaving any clothing fibres or other forensic evidence. He must in addition have accomplished this in near total darkness and without being seen or heard by anyone - except for the highly suspect evidence of Jane Tanner, which we will deal with later. If he had Madeleine in his arms, and bearing in mind he was in near darkness, he would have been unable to see anything below her or much to either side as he fumbled through the window and shutters and tried to escape from the apartment precincts. Why he would do this when there was an open patio door to walk back through is utterly incomprehensible. The reason the Doctors McCann came up with this improbable scenario is that they had to explain to the Portuguese police and to the outside world why the normally-closed shutters were partially open.
This whole incredible abduction scenario - unconfirmed by any forensics whatsoever, and indeed contradicted by Dr Kate McCanns fingerprints on the window - is so impossible to believe that we can surely say: this did not happen.
Now let us look for a moment at the McCanns theory that the abductor had been casing the joint for several days beforehand - and then pounced and abducted Madeleine when he had the chance. The Doctors McCann claim that he would have been closely watching them, including observing what the McCanns claim as the routine of half-hourly checking (though, to be frank, the evidence suggests that neither they nor their Tapas 9 friends checked on their children half-hourly or even at all whilst they were out wining and dining).
The Doctors McCann have gone further and have suggested that the abductor must have been making notes on their movements - carefully noting down the times of their departures from the apartment. But this does not seem plausible given that neither the Doctors McCann, nor their Tapas 9 friends, have given any details of how often (if at all) they were checking on their children whilst they were out wining and dining.
Another problem about that scenario is that there is nowhere that the abductor could have been observing the McCanns apartment without being seen - unless, that is, he was living in one of the flats opposite the McCanns apartment, some of which overlooked it. It is understood that the occupants of these flats have all been investigated and their statements corroborated. None of them had anyone in their flat who was watching the McCanns apartment, nor was anyone seen acting suspiciously or hanging around in that area during the week the Doctors McCann and their friends were there.
The other obvious problem about the claim of an abductor casing the joint is this:- Suppose an abductor had been watching the McCanns apartment day in and day out. On the McCanns own timeline, he would have seen the McCanns leave for the Tapas bar at 8.30pm.
If, as claimed, an abductor had been watching the premises, he would probably have chosen his moment to abduct Madeleine immediately after Drs Gerry and Kate McCann had left for the Tapas bar (on their own account) at around 8.30pm. Yet, if he had entered the flat just after the McCanns left at 8.30pm, how come he was not long gone 35-45 minutes later?
For the Doctors McCann now claim that the abductor either snatched Madeleine a minute or two after Dr Gerry McCann did his (alleged) check at around 9.05pm to 9.10pm, or, just as improbably, was even present for the entire 5 minutes or so Gerry was doing his 9.05pm check.
Yet a further difficulty for this improbable scenario is that Dr Matthew Oldfield claims that he did two checks one at around 8.55pm/9.00pm, (various times have been given for this alleged check) and the other around 9.30pm. Dr Oldfield claims that during his 9.00pm visit he checked from the outside but saw and heard nothing and said that the shutters were tight shut.
If the abductor really had entered before both Dr Matthew Oldfields alleged check (around 9.00pm) and Dr McCanns check (around 9.05pm), then he was exceptionally lucky, to put it mildly, not to have been detected by either man.
But there are equal if not greater problems with the suggestion that the abductor entered the apartment and removed Madeleine only after Drs Oldfield and McCann had done their checks. Would he really have dashed into the apartment after seeing Dr Oldfield checking the outside of the apartment at around 8.55pm/9.00pm and then Gerry spending 3-5 minutes checking between 9.05pm and 9.10pm? It would surely have been far too risky.
And if he entered the apartment after Dr Gerry McCann left at 9.10pm, he would scarcely have had time to enter the flat, remove Madeleine and then be seen by Jane Tanner at 9.15pm. And that is quite apart from all the other difficulties with that scenario that we have already discussed above.
Reason 8. The McCanns immediate and insistent cry of abduction - excluding all other possibilities
SNIPPED
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
OT- as far as I'm concerned, it's a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils.
Very interesting theory and entirely plausible.
Tony Bennett
Former Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 11
REPLY: We are not sure. Do you have any suggestions?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Barnaby
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2007
- Messages
- 1,148
- Reaction score
- 24
I won't get into the USA election debate Tony despite having very definite opinions but here is not the place.Barnaby, you're complaining that things are too quiet?
Seems like our friends in the U.S. have got a lot on their minds just now with looking after their kids and worrying about whether electing the inexperienced Barack Obama or 'one foot in the grave' John McCain is actually going to make any difference at all to their lives over there over the next four years (will now be shot down in flames by Obama-worshippers and McCain-lovers).
But in the hope of helping you to avoid the medical condition of 'clinical bordeom' (which would require you to see a qualified Doctor), and hopefully to stimulate some further contributions to this thread, here is a snip from The Madeleine Foundation's forthcoming booklet: 'What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann: 30 Reasons which Suggest she was not Abducted' (ISBN 978-0-9507954-7-8).
In return, as our material is still in draft form, any constructive criticism or suggestions concerning this particular section of our booklet - before we go to print - would be most welcome. For Madeleine's sake, we must keep up the struggle to force the truth to emerge:
+++++++++++++++
Reason 7. The sheer impossibility of the abduction happening as claimed
Here, it is important to examine closely what the Doctors McCann, and the friends who were with them in Praia da Luz, have said about the possibility that Madeline was abducted. We give a long answer because this issue is crucial to enable us to assess whether the Doctors McCann and their friends are telling the truth or not.
We will come to their constantly changing stories about how the alleged abductor may have entered the apartment later in this document.
The scenario that the McCanns and their friends have produced runs as follows:
They say that:
· The abductor must have been watching the apartment for several days before snatching Madeleine on 3rd May.
· They (the McCanns) went down to the Tapas bar at the Ocean Club at around 8.30pm that evening (though that timing is disputed by others who say it may have been up to half-an-hour later).
· Dr Matthew Oldfield says he checked the apartment from the outside at around 9.03pm.
· Gerry McCann says he returned to the apartment from the ‘Tapas bar’ to check on his children at around 9.05pm to 9.07pm.
· Gerry McCann says he was briefly in all four rooms of their holiday apartment, during which time he checked his children. He also says he spent an unusually long time in the loo. He tells us that he paused briefly over Madeleine’s bed and thought to himself how very lucky he was to have such a beautiful child.
· Gerry McCann says that he noticed that the door to the children’s room was ‘wider open than before’. He says that at 8.30pm it was open at an angle of about 45 degrees (half open). He remembers (he says) that when he went to check the children at 9.05pm, the door was now open at an angle of 60 degrees (two thirds open).
· The Doctors McCann now say that the door being open more than it was before may suggest that the abductor was already in the room when he checked on the children - though he says he only realised this possibility some months after the events of the day. It is clearly an unlikely scenario. Gerry McCann says the abductor might have been hiding behind the door or in a wardrobe.
· Gerry McCann says he left the room, after checking on the children, at around 9.09pm or 9.10pm. He then says he encountered a journalist, Jeremy (‘Jes’Wilkins, on the road back to the Tapas bar at the Ocean Club, and was talking to him for about 10-15 minutes between 9.10pm and 9.25pm. Jeremy Wilkins confirms this.
· Jane Tanner maintains that she saw a man walking ‘purposefully’, with a child in his arms, along the top of the road running alongside the McCanns’ apartment (we will come to the reliability of Ms Tanner’s observations later). She initially said the man had been walking in the opposite direction. She has stuck to her account that she saw this man at 9.15pm.
· The McCanns now maintain that they left their apartment unlocked. This contrasts with what they said on May 3rd. (Then, they claimed that the abductor had forced entry into the apartment by jemmying open the shutters. They changed this story very soon afterwards, when the evidence did not support that - please see section 9 of this leaflet). The McCanns now say, therefore, that the abductor must have entered through the unlocked patio door.
· The McCanns now explain the fact that the window to the children’s room was found open by claiming that the abductor must have climbed through the window and taken Madeleine through that window.
· The McCanns maintain that when Kate McCann says she returned to the apartment to check on the children, she ‘knew instantly’ - and then so did Gerry minutes later when he is supposed to have arrived at the apartment - that Madeleine had been abducted. She told a TV interviewer that because of the requirement for secrecy about the police investigation, she could not explain why she ‘knew instantly’. The photographs of the apartment taken by the Portuguese police on the day after Madeleine was reported missing do not show anything which would clearly point to an abduction, certainly not damaged shutters.
Going by the above scenario, the abductor either entered the apartment before Matthew Oldfield’s check at around 9.03pm and Gerry McCann’s check at 9.05pm/9.07pm - the version the McCanns now want us to believe - or after he left at 9.10pm and before he was (allegedly) seen by Jane Tanner at 9.15pm
The problems with this abduction scenario
There are many problems associated with the specific abduction scenario above that has been generated by the Doctors McCann.
For a start, the Portuguese police did a forensic examination of the window-sill, through which it is claimed that the abductor must have climbed out with Madeleine. The Portuguese police said that they found no trace of any other person having made any impression on the window-sill and, in addition, (a) the lichen on the outside window-sill appeared to be totally undisturbed and (b) only Kate Mcann’s fingerprints were found on the window-sill. All of this tells us that the abductor, if there was one, did not escape with Madeleine through the window.
Further, the window is high enough in the children’s room to make it physically very difficult for an abductor to climb through it. It was reported to be 91cm. above the floor - exactly three feet. The abductor would therefore have had to climb some 3 feet, with Madeleine with him, in his arms or over his shoulder. In addition, he would have to have managed this feat without leaving any forensic traces on the window-sill. Madeleine must have weighed at least two stone (12kg). A task such as this would have meant balancing against the window frame itself; even then it would have been almost impossible even if Madeleine had been asleep.
It would clearly have been still more difficult if either Madeleine had woken up whilst being abducted, or one or both twins had done so.
Furthermore, to escape through the window, as the McCanns claim, the abductor would have had to open the shutters. It is a fact, confirmed by Mark Warners, that it was only possible to open the shutters from the inside. It is also a fact (again confirmed by Mark Warners) that if these heavy metal shutters were opened from the outside, the process was extremely noisy. But no-one heard the shutters being opened.
In addition, as the shutters were actually closed when the police and Mark Warners’ staff arrived to check on the shutters, the initial explanations of the Doctors McCann were that the shutters ‘must have been closed by the abductor as well as opened by him’. We have seen that the shutters could not be opened from the outside. The claim by the Doctors McCann that the abductor closed the shutters behind him prompts two related and very obvious questions:
1) having gained entry through an open patio door, what would possess an abductor to leave via a 3-foot high window when he would also have to open noisy shutters? - and
2) why and how, having allegedly scooped up Madeleine in his arms and opened the window and the shutters, would he have had the time and the physical ability to then close the shutters, all without making any sound or leaving any trace, and without waking either Madeleine or the twins?
Moreover, all this would have had to have been accomplished in the dark - unless he switched the lights on when he entered the apartment and then remembered to switch them off again as he was making his exit. No-one saw any lights on ion the apartment. The Doctors McCann left the children in the darkness when they went out for their evening’s entertainment.
Therefore, to sum up - according to the McCanns’ scenario, the abductor would have to have:
* first - either picked an opportunity to enter the apartment after the Doctors McCann had left for the Tapas bar or entered the apartment immediately after he had seen first Matthew Oldfield and then Gerry McCann enter and leave the apartment
[NOTE: if the former of these two alternatives, then the abductor must have been in the apartment with Dr Gerry McCann during the three to five minutes he was checking on the children]
* second - walked through the open patio door without being seen
* third - found Madeleine in the dark and picked her up without waking her or the twins, opened the window;
* fourth - opened the shutters (with nobody hearing him doing so, and without leaving any finger-prints);
* fifth - climbed through the window, carrying Madeleine with him -– again without being seen by anyone, and
* sixth - he would then have had to close the very noisy shutters, using controls operated from the inside.
This latter operation would have been physically very difficult if not impossible to do without (a) even brushing away even a tiny piece of the years-old lichen growing on the window-sill or (b) leaving any clothing fibres or other forensic evidence. He must in addition have accomplished this in near total darkness and without being seen or heard by anyone - except for the highly suspect evidence of Jane Tanner, which we will deal with later. If he had Madeleine in his arms, and bearing in mind he was in near darkness, he would have been unable to see anything below her or much to either side as he fumbled through the window and shutters and tried to escape from the apartment precincts. Why he would do this when there was an open patio door to walk back through is utterly incomprehensible. The reason the Doctors McCann came up with this improbable scenario is that they had to explain to the Portuguese police and to the outside world why the normally-closed shutters were partially open.
This whole incredible abduction scenario - unconfirmed by any forensics whatsoever, and indeed contradicted by Dr Kate McCann’s fingerprints on the window - is so impossible to believe that we can surely say: this did not happen.
Now let us look for a moment at the McCanns’ theory that the abductor had been ‘casing the joint’ for several days beforehand - and then pounced and abducted Madeleine when he had the chance. The Doctors McCann claim that he would have been closely watching them, including observing what the McCanns claim as the routine of half-hourly checking (though, to be frank, the evidence suggests that neither they nor their ‘Tapas 9’ friends checked on their children half-hourly or even at all whilst they were out wining and dining).
The Doctors McCann have gone further and have suggested that the abductor must have been making notes on their movements - carefully noting down the times of their departures from the apartment. But this does not seem plausible given that neither the Doctors McCann, nor their ‘Tapas 9’ friends, have given any details of how often (if at all) they were checking on their children whilst they were out wining and dining.
Another problem about that scenario is that there is nowhere that the abductor could have been observing the McCanns’ apartment without being seen - unless, that is, he was living in one of the flats opposite the McCanns’ apartment, some of which overlooked it. It is understood that the occupants of these flats have all been investigated and their statements corroborated. None of them had anyone in their flat who was watching the McCanns’ apartment, nor was anyone seen acting suspiciously or hanging around in that area during the week the Doctors McCann and their friends were there.
The other obvious problem about the claim of an abductor casing the joint is this:- Suppose an abductor had been watching the McCanns’ apartment day in and day out. On the McCanns’ own timeline, he would have seen the McCanns leave for the Tapas bar at 8.30pm.
If, as claimed, an abductor had been watching the premises, he would probably have chosen his ‘moment’ to abduct Madeleine immediately after Drs Gerry and Kate McCann had left for the Tapas bar (on their own account) at around 8.30pm. Yet, if he had entered the flat just after the McCanns left at 8.30pm, how come he was not long gone 35-45 minutes later?
For the Doctors McCann now claim that the abductor either snatched Madeleine a minute or two after Dr Gerry McCann did his (alleged) check at around 9.05pm to 9.10pm, or, just as improbably, was even present for the entire 5 minutes or so Gerry was doing his 9.05pm check.
Yet a further difficulty for this improbable scenario is that Dr Matthew Oldfield claims that he did two checks – one at around 8.55pm/9.00pm, (various times have been given for this alleged check) and the other around 9.30pm. Dr Oldfield claims that during his 9.00pm visit he ‘checked’ from the outside but saw and heard nothing and said that the shutters were tight shut.
If the abductor really had entered before both Dr Matthew Oldfield’s alleged check (around 9.00pm) and Dr McCann’s check (around 9.05pm), then he was exceptionally lucky, to put it mildly, not to have been detected by either man.
But there are equal if not greater problems with the suggestion that the abductor entered the apartment and removed Madeleine only after Drs Oldfield and McCann had done their checks. Would he really have dashed into the apartment after seeing Dr Oldfield checking the outside of the apartment at around 8.55pm/9.00pm and then Gerry spending 3-5 minutes checking between 9.05pm and 9.10pm? It would surely have been far too risky.
And if he entered the apartment after Dr Gerry McCann left at 9.10pm, he would scarcely have had time to enter the flat, remove Madeleine and then be seen by Jane Tanner at 9.15pm. And that is quite apart from all the other difficulties with that scenario that we have already discussed above.
Reason 8. The McCanns’ immediate and insistent cry of ‘abduction’ - excluding all other possibilities
SNIPPED
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for sparing me a visit to the doctor, I have seen enough of those lately
Your paper is very well written, succintly put & illustrates well the lies told by two parents who should have been doing everything in their power to be truthful and assist the police.
I so hope that someone, somewhere, will listen & more importantly act!
I would respectfully suggest that wherever else you may go with this, a copy of the final piece should go to PJ and to Leicestershire Police. One to Gordon Brown wouldn't go amiss either!
I won't get into the USA election debate Tony despite having very definite opinions but here is not the place.
Thank you for sparing me a visit to the doctor, I have seen enough of those lately
Your paper is very well written, succintly put & illustrates well the lies told by two parents who should have been doing everything in their power to be truthful and assist the police.
I so hope that someone, somewhere, will listen & more importantly act!
I would respectfully suggest that wherever else you may go with this, a copy of the final piece should go to PJ and to Leicestershire Police. One to Gordon Brown wouldn't go amiss either!
Plus Gerry himself, on his blog, said that Tanner saw the abductor at 9:10 - how odd that he clashed the time with his own!
Barnaby
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2007
- Messages
- 1,148
- Reaction score
- 24
Nothing odd about that Gerry said Refugee when he mispelled & even "forgot" his missing daughter's name!
Nothing odd about that Gerry said Refugee when he mispelled & even "forgot" his missing daughter's name!
Indeed. Notice how all the McCann supporters are 'New Labour'? Branson, the plagiaristic writer (I forget her name)...
Theres something very unpleasant behind the McCanns cover up.
Yes,save your money.Noone of any authority is going to take any notice of it imo and if you hand them out in the street they will just be binned,most people do not take much notice of leaflets given out.
Barnaby
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2007
- Messages
- 1,148
- Reaction score
- 24
I think you mean J.K.Rowling, LOL!
Yes something thoroughly unpleasant behind this sordid affair, if not some direct involvement from the "New labour" then certainly a malignant reason for the cover up!
Texana
Overreaching
I think the summary in the booklet is an excellent idea if only because it summarizes the truth. It tells what the McCanns said and how those statements do not add up to an abductor possibilities.
As for being quiet...I know I have been, I've been working my little tail off since we got back to school and work since Hurricane Ike. It's been exhausting. I'm too tired to post any coherent thought but I'm still checking in and reading--
(())) We must keep up the good fight for the truth to come out openly.
As for being quiet...I know I have been, I've been working my little tail off since we got back to school and work since Hurricane Ike. It's been exhausting. I'm too tired to post any coherent thought but I'm still checking in and reading--
(())) We must keep up the good fight for the truth to come out openly.
twinkiesmom
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 1,660
- Reaction score
- 41
Definitely send Greta Van Susteren a copy.
Tony Bennett
Former Member
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2008
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 11
In case, like me, there are others who have not heard of Greta van Susteren, here's a link to some information about her:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Van_Susteren
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Van_Susteren
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree that sending the booklet to investigative journalists, especially here in the states is a good idea. I also think you should send it to every law enforcement and child protection agency in the UK.
I am still going over it with a fine tooth comb Tony, I have barely had time to breathe lately.
I hope you and yours are safe and sound Tex...:blowkiss:
- Status