"Who would leave children that young alone?"

[Clutchbag]

oldfield said that he listened at door for noise and didn't actually do a visual check - so would not have noticed a missing maddy or open window.

I still think that two perps were involved . It was planned so they knew movements - perp 1 entered via patio door which he knew was unlocked as soon as Gerry had left from check - quickly into room and chloroform on Maddy - opens window and then hands a subdued Maddy to perp 2 who walks away to a car up the road

He either then goes back the way he came or goes out of window - all were wearing gloves and this would have taken minutes

Car would have been almost in Spain by the time Kate discovers a missing maddy

obligatory IMOO - It was possible and would have left no clues or forensics - especially after flat was full of people

who knows

No, you are wrong. Matthew Oldfield did do a visual check, he stood outside the open bedroom door and looked in, and saw the twins sleeping in the middle of the room in their travel cots, even saw them breathng he said, what he didnt do is stick his head around the corner of the room and see if Madeleine was there...******** also said he noticed no wind, cold, or movement of curtains which he said were closed, even described their colour, which btw he GOT WRONG, he was describing the curtains in his OWN flat which were different! or notice if the shutters were up and also smelt nothing strange, and btw, the bedclothes in that room were tested for sedative gases and the results were negative



*******what is ODD is that his wife states in her interview that HE wondered where Madeleine slept(now why would he wonder this if he knew where the kids bedroom was when listening before from outside their window?) and went and looked into her parents bedroom for her, but he didnt look in the kids bedroom for her?? Hello??

SO IF Madeleine was snatched at 9.15 and right under the nose of her father, Matthew would have seen an open window raised shutters and open curtains, that Kate Mccann found at 10 pm, but he didnt

All his statements can be found here under M

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CASE_FILES_INDEX.htm

 

[Clutchbag]

The only explnation being kate opended the window. Or its always possible after the abductor made it away with madeleine he came back and opened the window! .:floorlaugh:

Tell me about it!
:banghead:

Only her fingerprints were found on the window too

 

[SapphireSteel]

oldfield said that he listened at door for noise and didn't actually do a visual check - so would not have noticed a missing maddy or open window.

I still think that two perps were involved . It was planned so they knew movements - perp 1 entered via patio door which he knew was unlocked as soon as Gerry had left from check - quickly into room and chloroform on Maddy - opens window and then hands a subdued Maddy to perp 2 who walks away to a car up the road

He either then goes back the way he came or goes out of window - all were wearing gloves and this would have taken minutes

Car would have been almost in Spain by the time Kate discovers a missing maddy

obligatory IMOO - It was possible and would have left no clues or forensics - especially after flat was full of people

who knows

Let us also not forget, the "abductor" seen by Tanner walked straight past Gerry and an unrelated witness with Madeleine in his arms (allegedly) and neither of them saw him.

I'll just repeat that - Gerry was standing in the street outside the apartment when Tanners "abductor" strolled past with his own daughter in his arms.

The daughter Gerry had gone to "check".

The unrelated witness Gerry was talking to saw nobody, and as the streets were quite small, empty and deserted, this is basically impossible, if indeed the "abduction" happened.

We also know the Smith Family saw the "abductor".

The only problem being, they identified him as Gerry.

Yes even the valid, unrelated eyewitnesses are being told they are "wrong" by Team McCann.

I don't know about you, but if someone had seen my daughter being spirited away, I would not be ignoring them or dismissing them - I would probably be virtually camped out on their doorstep as being the last known link to my missing baby.

AFAIK, no one from Team McCann ever even contacted them...despite their much publicised and well funded "searching".

:sick:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

You obviously missed the point..IF Tanner saw the abductor at 9.15 pm and Kate found the window and shutters and curtains open at 10 pm.... Then how come Oldfield who did a check at 9.30 not see any of that? Hello?????

I did not miss the point. We all know that people make mistakes. I am not sure that he even looked? He may have not have really noticed. I don't think this is a big deal at all. I see it as witness report and we know they can be unreliable.

He probably really did not notice. I know most men don't pay attention to such details. Again, not an AHA for me.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The only explnation being kate opended the window. Or its always possible after the abductor made it away with madeleine he came back and opened the window! .:floorlaugh:

Or Oldfield was not not correct. If you constantly are looking at KM as the bad guy, You are never going to see the truth because your vision will always be slanted against it. IT will see only one thing.

AS investigators having a neutral position is key to finding the truth.

 

[Clutchbag]

I did not miss the point. We all know that people make mistakes. I am not sure that he even looked? He may have not have really noticed. I don't think this is a big deal at all. I see it as witness report and we know they can be unreliable.

He probably really did not notice. I know most men don't pay attention to such details. Again, not an AHA for me.

read my post 741

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

No, you are wrong. Matthew Oldfield did do a visual check, he stood outside the open bedroom door and looked in, and saw the twins sleeping in the middle of the room in their travel cots, even saw them breathng he said, what he didnt do is stick his head around the corner of the room and see if Madeleine was there...******** also said he noticed no wind, cold, or movement of curtains which he said were closed, even described their colour, which btw he GOT WRONG, he was describing the curtains in his OWN flat which were different! or notice if the shutters were up and also smelt nothing strange, and btw, the bedclothes in that room were tested for sedative gases and the results were negative



*******what is ODD is that his wife states in her interview that HE wondered where Madeleine slept(now why would he wonder this if he knew where the kids bedroom was when listening before from outside their window?) and went and looked into her parents bedroom for her, but he didnt look in the kids bedroom for her?? Hello??

SO IF Madeleine was snatched at 9.15 and right under the nose of her father, Matthew would have seen an open window raised shutters and open curtains, that Kate Mccann found at 10 pm, but he didnt

All his statements can be found here under M

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CASE_FILES_INDEX.htm

He says he did. I am not taking his word as gospel either. I just doubt with nothing wrong and just checking in he would have done more than take a glance and then say it was okay.

I am just not 100% positive in that statement.

 

[Clutchbag]

He says he did. I am not taking his word as gospel either. I just doubt with nothing wrong and just checking in he would have done more than take a glance and then say it was okay.

I am just not 100% positive in that statement.

Why did he bother going inside the apartment in the first place? When his usual was just to listen from outside? Do you thnk he is fabricating everythng he saw noticed or didnt? just because it doesnt tally with Kate Mccanns descriptions? Someone or several people is not telling the truth in this case, THAT much is SURE 100%

 

[SapphireSteel]

He says he did. I am not taking his word as gospel either. I just doubt with nothing wrong and just checking in he would have done more than take a glance and then say it was okay.

I am just not 100% positive in that statement.

No one can take anything as "gospel" then!

How do LE ever make an arrest if the standards of proof are so incredibly high? :waitasec:

If one is going to argue that an eyewitness statement is lies, then it is even easier to argue that the McCann are also lying!

All the evidence points to McCann involvement. This cannot be disputed by anyone with an ounce of common sense, particularly when ZERO evidence exists indicating an intruder.

:cow:

 

[SapphireSteel]

oldfield said that he listened at door for noise and didn't actually do a visual check - so would not have noticed a missing maddy or open window.

I still think that two perps were involved . It was planned so they knew movements - perp 1 entered via patio door which he knew was unlocked as soon as Gerry had left from check - quickly into room and chloroform on Maddy - opens window and then hands a subdued Maddy to perp 2 who walks away to a car up the road

He either then goes back the way he came or goes out of window - all were wearing gloves and this would have taken minutes

Car would have been almost in Spain by the time Kate discovers a missing maddy

obligatory IMOO - It was possible and would have left no clues or forensics - especially after flat was full of people

who knows

What "movements"?

He couldn't have known about their ridiculous "checking" system because that was the first night they'd done it - and the last night of their holiday.

The previous nights the children were left entirely alone, so why not take one then?

Only Team McCann knew their "movements" that night. No one else could have, because they were unprecedented, a one off.

If there were two intruders, it is even less explicable why Gerry didn't see at least one of them, while he was checking then standing in the street chatting for 5 minutes afterward, while one of them strolled past!

The "abductor" we know about looked just like Gerry!

:cow:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

What "movements"?

He couldn't have known about their ridiculous "checking" system because that was the first night they'd done it - and the last night of their holiday.

The previous nights the children were left entirely alone, so why not take one then?

Only Team McCann knew their "movements" that night. No one else could have, because they were unprecedented, a one off.

If there were two intruders, it is even less explicable why Gerry didn't see at least one of them, while he was checking then standing in the street chatting for 5 minutes afterward, while one of them strolled past!

The "abductor" we know about looked just like Gerry!

:cow:

What if he did look like Gerry? So what? People look like other people.
The abductor could have absolutely known their plan. all he had to do was to be watching that night from the very beginning and watch their movements. Or be close enough when they were talking about it. IT is absolutely possible that someone had been watching Madeleine from the time she arrived.

 

[SapphireSteel]

What if he did look like Gerry? So what? People look like other people.
The abductor could have absolutely known their plan. all he had to do was to be watching that night from the very beginning and watch their movements. Or be close enough when they were talking about it. IT is absolutely possible that someone had been watching Madeleine from the time she arrived.

Yes some folks do look like each other.

What is very hard to mimic or mistake is physicality.

We all move in a very distinctive way, unique to us. Some walk fast, some slow, others swing their arms, some hunch over, some walk tall, some just wander vaguely. Some stare directly ahead, others look around them, others at the ground. Our skeletons are all slightly different, as are our foot shapes and muscle bulk, so we all have a different walk. It is impossible to change, or even mimic effectively without huge effort. Actors take months to perfect a subject's physicality if they are portraying a real person.

Gerry was recognised and identified by his physicality. Mr Smith did not see a face, just a figure carrying a child.

He recognised that figure when he saw Gerry carrying one of the twins. The physicality was identical.

It's almost impossible to share anyone else's physicality, and almost impossible to imitate without study and effort.

:cow:

Before I can even contemplate "abductor" I need answers for the following -

If the "abductor" had watched them, why haven't they shown up on any photographs they took? Or videos?

Why did NO ONE see them?

Why did they leave zero evidence?

Why have they never repeated the crime, either before or since?

Why did the cadaver dog alert in 5a and on cuddle cat and in the Renault?

If they were watching the McCann habits, why didn't they take Madeleine the night before, when she cried alone and unattended for over 90 minutes?


:seeya:

 

[Flinders]

If you leave a lot of kids on a holiday at a resort in separate apartments alone at night 'till midnight regularly because you know if they cry they will traverse darks steps to find you boozing at the bar.

1. Glad I am not your friend.
2. Don't keep up with the Jones' if they are single, hot and on a fun working holiday. With your husband.

 

[jordynsmommy529]

Or Oldfield was not not correct. If you constantly are looking at KM as the bad guy, You are never going to see the truth because your vision will always be slanted against it. IT will see only one thing.

AS investigators having a neutral position is key to finding the truth.

Never said KM was the bad guy. I think Gerry is more involved then her. He was the one seen carrying Madeleine away. I don't think they murdered her but i think she died as a direct result of them being negligent. They had 3 choices they could have made too insure Madeleine's safety creche, babysitter, or too do the responsible thing and eat inside their apartment. They failed as parents and whatever happened too her is there fault anyway you look at it. GM & DP where accused of being pedophiles (or at least making pedophilia remarks) It really makes me wonder if that's why they hid her body.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Yes some folks do look like each other.

What is very hard to mimic or mistake is physicality.

We all move in a very distinctive way, unique to us. Some walk fast, some slow, others swing their arms, some hunch over, some walk tall, some just wander vaguely. Some stare directly ahead, others look around them, others at the ground. Our skeletons are all slightly different, as are our foot shapes and muscle bulk, so we all have a different walk. It is impossible to change, or even mimic effectively without huge effort. Actors take months to perfect a subject's physicality if they are portraying a real person.

Gerry was recognised and identified by his physicality. Mr Smith did not see a face, just a figure carrying a child.

He recognised that figure when he saw Gerry carrying one of the twins. The physicality was identical.

It's almost impossible to share anyone else's physicality, and almost impossible to imitate without study and effort.

:cow:

Before I can even contemplate "abductor" I need answers for the following -

If the "abductor" had watched them, why haven't they shown up on any photographs they took? Or videos?

Why did NO ONE see them?

Why did they leave zero evidence?

Why have they never repeated the crime, either before or since?

Why did the cadaver dog alert in 5a and on cuddle cat and in the Renault?

If they were watching the McCann habits, why didn't they take Madeleine the night before, when she cried alone and unattended for over 90 minutes?


:seeya:

Disagree. I know many people that I have confused for the other without a full on look. Did it the other day on vacation. They are both named sam. One was talking to my dh, he walked away out of the corner of my eye I saw him come back. It was not him, It was the other sam.

I don't think the dog alerting means much. I have been reading a lot about handlers and dogs and how they can be lead to alert. What if the child had at one time had a booboo and bled on the cat, And then the dog alerted on the scent of the decaying blood.

If the child was crying, Maybe they knew that eventually a crying child would become an alarm. You don't want to be carrying a screaming child.
We don't know that who ever did this did not repeat the crime. They could have also been a foreigner and left and are off and away. They could have stolen Madeleine to keep her and have what they want.

There are many answers to this.

 

[gord]

Yes some folks do look like each other.

What is very hard to mimic or mistake is physicality.

We all move in a very distinctive way, unique to us. Some walk fast, some slow, others swing their arms, some hunch over, some walk tall, some just wander vaguely. Some stare directly ahead, others look around them, others at the ground. Our skeletons are all slightly different, as are our foot shapes and muscle bulk, so we all have a different walk. It is impossible to change, or even mimic effectively without huge effort. Actors take months to perfect a subject's physicality if they are portraying a real person.

Gerry was recognised and identified by his physicality. Mr Smith did not see a face, just a figure carrying a child.

He recognised that figure when he saw Gerry carrying one of the twins. The physicality was identical.

It's almost impossible to share anyone else's physicality, and almost impossible to imitate without study and effort.

please - can you imagine going into a court room to do a 100% ID on that he looked the same physicality ???? Smith is quoted that he was somewhere between 60% sure in any case and this was 3 months after the event !!

:cow:

Before I can even contemplate "abductor" I need answers for the following -

If the "abductor" had watched them, why haven't they shown up on any photographs they took? Or videos?

What photographs ?? They are hardly going to wander around making themselves available for photos ?? They were about to abduct a child - so I would imagine they kept themselves fairly low key and hidden

Why did NO ONE see them?

There are reports of strangers in and around the area - but again they would have operated at night and kept them selves well under the radar

Why did they leave zero evidence?

what evidence do you think they would have left ? walk in p[ick up Maddy and hand her out a window - walk out - with gloves . The flat was full of Tapas , plus previous guests plus GNR plus PJ plus dogs

Why have they never repeated the crime, either before or since?

who knows - The backlash from this was huge - They would certainly got scared off - How many kids have gone missing in Spain or Portugal since ?? None ?

Why did the cadaver dog alert in 5a and on cuddle cat and in the Renault?

That I don't know as dogs cant give this answer

If they were watching the McCann habits, why didn't they take Madeleine the night before, when she cried alone and unattended for over 90 minutes?

Again who knows they has a plan ? they watched for a few nights - got their ducks in a row ??? again I don't know - just looking at what is possible and what is impossible - an abduction is certainly possible

Again how much physical evidence did they find of a dead maddie being stashed in the vicinity. moved and then disposed again - ?? nothing


:seeya:

.......................... my answers above in bold

 

[jordynsmommy529]

Don't trust the dogs that have been right how many times? Why would the dogs have been correct 200 hundred other times but wrong on this one case? You choose not too believe because you hope Madeleine is alive I hope the same thing but my gut tells me she's not.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Never said KM was the bad guy. I think Gerry is more involved then her. He was the one seen carrying Madeleine away. I don't think they murdered her but i think she died as a direct result of them being negligent. They had 3 choices they could have made too insure Madeleine's safety creche, babysitter, or too do the responsible thing and eat inside their apartment. They failed as parents and whatever happened too her is there fault anyway you look at it. GM & DP where accused of being pedophiles (or at least making pedophilia remarks) It really makes me wonder if that's why they hid her body.

:goodpost:

ITA.

 

[chlban]

I have never understood why they were never charged, at the very least, with child endangerment. They left their tiny children unattended to go out an party. If some poor mom had done the same they would certainly have been arrested but these two pathetic excuses for parents are instead meeting with Pope and he Prine Minister. Nuts.

 

[Flinders]

I have never understood why they were never charged, at the very least, with child endangerment. They left their tiny children unattended to go out an party. If some poor mom had done the same they would certainly have been arrested but these two pathetic excuses for parents are instead meeting with Pope and he Prine Minister. Nuts.

In Australia this week, a 15 year old looking after 4 children (which she was related too) under the age of 11 had a house fire with a fatality of a 2 year old boy.

The media is saying that the 15 year old is a child and not responsible. I concur. The house fire started when she cooked hot oil on the stove.

Did they have a young local babysit?