Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?

[Robittybob1]

No mention of any in this in his interview of the 4th , just that he entered the apartment.

Exactly; he didn't need keys otherwise there was more to say and he didn't say it.
But it still doesn't explain how he knew this.  Was it common knowledge among all those there?

Did John Hill and Silvia Batista know this too?  Were the McCanns putting their business reputation at risk and worse not asking for the babysitting service.

[Alfie]

I have for when he offered to do the check on the McCanns kids he should have asked for the key, but he didn't, so that implies somehow he knew the patio door was unlocked without being told.

It would really help if you learned to read things carefully:
Matt Oldfield's Rog
4078 'And you said when you went in you went in through the patio door''
Reply 'Yeah'
 
4078 'Or the poolside door''
Reply 'Yeah'.
 
4078 'How did you know to go through there''
Reply 'Well Kate said that that one was open'.
 
4078 'And when did she say that''
Reply 'When I offered to go and, erm, go and look'.
4078 'Okay'.

[jassi]

This was well after the event of course. Plenty of time to have the old memory stimulated. 

[Mr Gray]

He did correct it, but it wasn't a misunderstanding because he admits in his second statement that he did indeed say that in his first statement; ''Despite what he said in his previous statements'' (10th May)

As he never mentioned front or back doors that isn't relevant, he just mentioned a 'key' and only one door had a key.

So he changed his account of how he entered the apartment at 9.05 pm.

Despite what he said in a previous statement
Is not a quote from Gerry

[Alfie]

Yes, did they specifically state what it was   - i.e. between X & Y times ?

I'm suggesting that the time window is smaller than your 30 minutes, possibly nearer 15

15 minutes is ample time in which to enter an unlocked apartment, walk to the children's bedroom, pick up a sleeping child and leave the apartment again, I'm sure you'd agree.

[jassi]

I thought you had accepted that Matt was telling the truth?  Your comment above seems to imply otherwise.

Lets say I wasn't aware of the discrepancy at that time. I would tend to accept the details given in the earliest interview.

[jassi]

15 minutes is ample time in which to enter an unlocked apartment, walk to the children's bedroom, pick up a sleeping child and leave the apartment again, I'm sure you'd agree.

I would agree that 15 minutes would be long enough given favourable circumstances. Whether it happened like that remains to be seen.

[Alfie]

Lets say I wasn't aware of the discrepancy at that time. I would tend to accept the details given in the earliest interview.

Oh.  So does he say the patio door was locked in the earlier interview?  No he doesn't.  So....

[Alfie]

I would agree that 15 minutes would be long enough given favourable circumstances. Whether it happened like that remains to be seen.

Right.  Well, there are some people on this forum who think that abduction is a highly implausible, illogical scenario, but now we have established that (in your view alone at least) there was opportunity. 

Well it's a start!

[jassi]

Right.  Well, there are some people on this forum who think that abduction is a highly implausible, illogical scenario, but now we have established that (in your view alone at least) there was opportunity. 

Well it's a start!

I never denied the possibility, so that's no breakthrough, I just don't accept that it is the only possibility.

[faithlilly]

I disagree as there is no credible reason why Gerry should claim that he walked all the way round to the front door, in the full knowledge  that the patio door that was just a few feet away from him was open  (and he needed the loo).

That simply makes no sense.   But it does make sense that in that first interview when Gerry was hardly at his best and the PJ officer was not familiar with the layout of 5A that a mix-up occurred over which door Gerry meant.  We know there was a misunderstanding about the doors because the UK police officer mentioned it to JT  and suggested that to avoid a repetition of that error - the patio door should be referred to as the 'poolside' door and the other door as the 'roadside' door.

If the reason Gerry gave for correcting his statement had been of any importance or significance then IMO that reason would have been recorded in his statement.

Unless you can say what Gerry had to gain by deliberately lying about which door he used - them IMO it's obvious it was just a misunderstanding - due to the circumstances at the time. 

AIMHO

That's the point, Gerry didn't lie in his first statement. However between that statement and his subsequent one he realised that if he had used the main door he would have to have seen the open window so the claim had to be changed.

[G-Unit]

I disagree as there is no credible reason why Gerry should claim that he walked all the way round to the front door, in the full knowledge  that the patio door that was just a few feet away from him was open  (and he needed the loo).

That simply makes no sense.   But it does make sense that in that first interview when Gerry was hardly at his best and the PJ officer was not familiar with the layout of 5A that a mix-up occurred over which door Gerry meant.  We know there was a misunderstanding about the doors because the UK police officer mentioned it to JT  and suggested that to avoid a repetition of that error - the patio door should be referred to as the 'poolside' door and the other door as the 'roadside' door.

If the reason Gerry gave for correcting his statement had been of any importance or significance then IMO that reason would have been recorded in his statement.

Unless you can say what Gerry had to gain by deliberately lying about which door he used - them IMO it's obvious it was just a misunderstanding - due to the circumstances at the time. 

AIMHO

I agree there's no credible reason for Gerry to use the locked door if an unlocked door was nearer. The only reason he would use the locked door is if the other door was also locked. All the excuses about 'misunderstandings' are conjecture. The facts are in the statements and are not clarified therefore it can't be said that the patio door being open at 9.05 is a 'fact'.

[Alfie]

Matt Oldfield confirmed the patio door was unlocked. 

[Mr Gray]

I agree there's no credible reason for Gerry to use the locked door if an unlocked door was nearer. The only reason he would use the locked door is if the other door was also locked. All the excuses about 'misunderstandings' are conjecture. The facts are in the statements and are not clarified therefore it can't be said that the patio door being open at 9.05 is a 'fact'.

The most logical explanation is the statements are innaccurate

[G-Unit]

Yes, did they specifically state what it was   - i.e. between X & Y times ?

I'm suggesting that the time window is smaller than your 30 minutes, possibly nearer 15

Where is this 15 minutes then?

2135: MO returns to restaurant table, by which time main courses are arriving or being eaten. MO tells JT that Evie unwell.
2140: JT returns to 5D to take over care of Evie from RJO.
2145: RJO returns to table to eat main course leaving JT in 5D.
2155: RMO asked time at table. RJO's main course arrives.
2200: (approx): KM leaves table to check children in 5A.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

Is it between 2145 and 2200 as in the group timeline? Those times are, of course, not guaranteed to be accurate; Russell's statement on 4th May differed widely;

At around 9.35/9.40, taking advantage of the lull [waiting pause] before being served with the first [main] course, the informant left the restaurant with Matthew to check the children. When he got there, his daughter **** was crying. He stayed in her bedroom with her. He supposes that Matthew checked his apartment. Matthew returned to the restaurant five minutes after leaving it. His partner came to take his place in ****'s bedroom around 15 minutes later after finishing dinner.

At around 9.55, he went back to the restaurant where his food had been waiting for 5 or 10 minutes. All the other adults had finished.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN.htm

Here we have Matthew returning to the restaurant at 2140/45, Jane going back and Russell returning at 2155. Nothing can be deduced from the timeline because none of them could say with any accuracy what time anything happened.