Yes you have explained it well. A child of that age is capable of getting off the bed, going out the room, then getting onto the bed again. IMO this may explain the door angle change observed by GM.Something along those lines is also quite plausible for the door being open upon GM's check in fairness. i.e. that MM herself opened it.
In GMs statement, he mentions that MM came to sleep in their room one night because the twins were crying. And, upon seeing the door open on the 3rd when he entered, his immediate thought was that MM had done the same again and gone into his room, until he looked into the bedroom and saw all 3 children were still asleep in there.
The McCanns stated they assumed all the kids were asleep when they left the apartment, meaning they did not check if they actually were. Therefore, it's possible MM actually got up (perhaps upon hearing them leave) and opened the door to look for them before going back to her bed and that's why the door was open when GM did his check. Another possibility.
There does seem to be a lot of interest in this case in Australia, do we have any natives who could give a perspective on this?
I agree with you on that if MM had never been asleep and gotten out of bed when the parents left, she would almost certainly have done more than peek out the door before climbing back into bed and falling asleep. Even if she did not venture outdoors, I think she possibly would sit on the sofa, switch TV channels. Look in the fridge, play with make up - if it were my daughter, she would stand atop the toilet seat, turn on the tap and brush her teeth for as long as possible! If MM was initially asleep but woke later, I think she would cry at that point. But also, my daughter has never found herself alone so I don't know how fear may play a part in that situation. It is hard to say XI feel like I’m labouring my point on this so apologies. IMO, there is a big difference in MM leaving the room and finding her parents and leaving the room and not finding them.
GM made that statement as a way to justify the door being open to himself ... at that time, it was the only seemingly reasonable explanation.
Are there any other parents that want to chime in here?
Yes you have explained it well. A child of that age is capable of getting off the bed, going out the room, then getting onto the bed again. IMO this may explain the door angle change observed by GM.
If you go back to all the witness statements in the files excluding those of the tapas group, you get quite a different timescale. So I think FF is planning to used the tapas statements to prove it couldn’t have been CB, when their statements don’t match those of people outside their group. The tapas groups collaboration with each other to make sure they didn’t look negligent may unfortunately work in CBs favour. I don’t want to sway anyone about the timings, just go through the files and you’ll see what I mean
We also know that the man commiting the previous assaults in the Algarve was entering apartments when all occupants were in bed and not eating outdoors doing regular checks. He was also not too bothered about keeping himself to himself since they do have his DNA from scenes.
Yes - this all goes back to a point I made about a month ago.
We should not rely too heavily on the witness statements because none of it has ever been tested in Court under cross examination. JT is an example of one witness whose version has been torn apart by the Met.
This is why I believe Wolters won't be bothering about micro positions of doors etc etc
I think you’re probably right but he has a lot more to go on the us (please dear god let that be the case).
The statements haven’t been tested in court but they are the best information we have right now.
How open the door was is irrelevant. The fact that it was open and by whom is relevant because it narrows down the time of entry and the amount time the perpetrator was in the apartment. This may or may not be important now but could be helpful if more information is released. It may make the picture clearer so IMO working through it is worthwhile.
Isn’t trying to work out what happened in this case by trial and error and by testing theories the whole point of this forum? Waiting to find out what HCW knows and having witness statements tested in court will be reported in the news which will be interesting but it’s not sleuthing.
But there is no mention of complex or elaborate in Victoria Chambers post - just planning. The planning didn't need to be complex because the planning would have identified an extremely easy target.Entitled to your opinion of course, but in what respect do you think this complex planned abduction scenario is "more plausible"? You seem to be dismissing the theory of someone being in the apartment for a longer time on the basis that the police would surely have found some trace of them. Why do you think that? Except for the saliva stain they did an analysis on, the only other forensics they carried out were on hairs they found. And as I pointed out in an earlier post, they failed to find hairs or DNA traces of several other people who we know for a fact were in the apartment that night, and for a longer period than the intruder would have been there.
I don't quite understand the logic of why this elaborate planned abduction theory seems more plausible than say, someone attempting to abuse MM in the apartment and something going wrong. We already know of dozens of other similar abuse crimes in the algarve alone in the prior years where an abductor crept in and abused children in their holiday apartment. Is it that difficult to believe one such attempt might go wrong and result in a child's death? Especially with no parents around to be alerted things could have escalated further than they otherwise might have.
On the other hand, how many cases do we know of a foriegn child being deliberately abducted from an upper class holiday resort as part of some well planned abduction? What would be the motive for something so risky? People who steal and traffic children for financial gain wouldn't take such risks, there are much easier targets they would go for with far less exposure and fallout.
All JMO opinion but this seems more like an impulsive crime and the reason it still unsolved is due to luck on behalf of the perp, poor initial police work, lack of cctv and lack of people around at the time of year.
Depends on your definition of elaborate. The scenario being proposed involved an inside job, an employee sneaking in using master keys so that any DNA found wouldn't stand out, them then passing the child out of the window to another person and then into a waiting car. All with the puspose of making money. IMO, that's a pretty elaborate plan to snatch a kid. Espeically if it had to involve reconnaissance of the entire Tapas group as part of the planning.But there is no mention of complex or elaborate in Victoria Chambers post - just planning. The planning didn't need to be complex because the planning would have identified an extremely easy target.
I also think it was a planned quick in and escape abduction but I don't remotely think it was elaborate, complex or difficult. In fact I think MM was abducted for the very opposite reason - ground floor flat next to road and basic planning identifying parents going each evening. possibly from staff gossip.
There was a witness account from a previous occupant of 5a with a child of an exterior light going on and a babysitter finding a man hanging around.
IMO MM was taken because an evil pervert saw she was in accessible appt 5a and her parents were operated a simple rota of checking. Their friends children are still there because they were in harder to access appts. That's good simple cunning planning
I do, however, agree with you about it not being a people smuggling crime ring. For the same reason.
Paedophiles do plan. They groom children they groom parents and when they see clear opportunities they abduct. That is how so many horrific stories unfold. I think CB would have found it far easier to abduct than stay and do whatever
Depends on your definition of elaborate. The scenario being proposed involved an inside job, an employee sneaking in using master keys so that any DNA found wouldn't stand out, them then passing the child out of the window to another person and then into a waiting car. All with the puspose of making money. IMO, that's a pretty elaborate plan to snatch a kid. Espeically if it had to involve reconnaissance of the entire Tapas group as part of the planning.
On your last point, not sure why you think CB would find it easier to abduct her than abuse her in the apartment. What is easier about it? We know of other cases in the area where someone was doing exactly that, abusing them in their own bed, probably with the intention of not waking them.
My little one is the same age as MM was. I do not see how it would be possible to just go back to sleep if she didn't find us there. She would cry uncontrollably. And the same would apply to my eldest when she was that age. I find it very difficult to believe that a child that age would just go to the toilet on their own and then go back to sleep... without checking on their parentsI feel like I’m labouring my point on this so apologies. IMO, there is a big difference in MM leaving the room and finding her parents and leaving the room and not finding them.
GM made that statement as a way to justify the door being open to himself ... at that time, it was the only seemingly reasonable explanation.
Are there any other parents that want to chime in here?
It's not quite like the Blanket Protests in Northern Ireland...Goodness me, this guy’s idea of a protest is smearing yoghurt on the walls, he’s not Hannibal Lecter.
My little one is the same age as MM was. I do not see how it would be possible to just go back to sleep if she didn't find us there. She would cry uncontrollably. And the same would apply to my eldest when she was that age. I find it very difficult to believe that a child that age would just go to the toilet on their own and then go back to sleep... without checking on their parents
The witness PF said she heard a child crying and calling daddy for an hour on the first. KM said MM asked why they hadn't come when they'd called on the morning of the third. I see no reason to disregard either of those things.My little one is the same age as MM was. I do not see how it would be possible to just go back to sleep if she didn't find us there. She would cry uncontrollably. And the same would apply to my eldest when she was that age. I find it very difficult to believe that a child that age would just go to the toilet on their own and then go back to sleep... without checking on their parents