Could an intruder have opened the shutter and climbed in the window?

[Redblossom]

Accompanied by this (which only illustrates 4 prints for some reason)

--

No Carana, as pointed out to you in the past, the bottom right section is of two prints, thus, total of five

[colombosstogey]

What proof is there that your persistent negativism about any possible potential positive outcome is of any use whatsoever. Kneejerk negativism. It is almost as if you want Madeleine to be dead in order to blame the McCanns. No moral compass!

What a terrible thing to say. No one wants the child to be dead for gods sake, but sadly the odds are not good for her returning alive. It isnt always about the McCanns or blaming them its about a CHILD....

Hardly kneejerk negativism as its been 7 years and the longer she is away the less likely sadly she will turn up alive...although I can assure you I pray for her all the time and her safe return.

[Lyall]

You have missed the point Lyall - which was that SY obviously believe that Kate and Gerry were telling the truth when they said the bedroom window and shutters had been opened by an intruder.   

Well I doubt policemen believe anyone without supporting evidence to confirm it, but they will definitely believe David Cameron believes the McCanns are telling the truth.

[Carana]

Accompanied by this (which only illustrates 4 prints for some reason)

--

No Carana, as pointed out to you in the past, the bottom right section is of two prints, thus, total of five

You might be right on that point...

However, how do these prints show that they were in an "opening position"?

[AnneGuedes]

Well I doubt policemen believe anyone without supporting evidence to confirm it, but they will definitely believe David Cameron believes the McCanns are telling the truth.

Exactly !  I had to read thrice the word "believe" since I'm not yet convinced that the Met is operating on a sect basis.

[AnneGuedes]

You might be right on that point...

However, how do these prints show that they were in an "opening position"?

Do you really think that a poster, on this forum, is competent to answer your question ? At least more competent than the Portuguese scientific police you suspect to be story telling ?
Or are you asking just to ask ?

[AnneGuedes]

I haven't found anything other than this. If you have, I'd be interested.

I'm sorry I didn't say it clearly, Carana. What I meant is that the fingerprints issue kept a low profile.
Anybody thinking twice would understand that 1) there was no need to open the window and 2) opening the window would let cold wind disturb the sleeping twins.

[AnneGuedes]

Until they get proof that their daughter is dead the McCanns will carry on trying to find out what happened to her.  Just as Kerry Needham and the parents of other missing children who have vanished without a trace - also continue to do.

All this is valid only if Madeleine was abducted from bed, but there is unfortunately no evidence of it. So you're speaking from a point of view which is pure belief, Benice, I hope you realize this.

[AnneGuedes]

So let's see what they say. They only just released the e-fits (for what they're worth).

Presumably SY have already talked to all the parents whose children were at the kindergarten that night and have ruled out Smithman as being one of them.

I meant little children who live in PDL permanently. There are probably not many matching the carried child. I guess the PJ made a neighbourhood inquiry. Remember the PJ always doubted Tannerman, but never Smithman.

[AnneGuedes]

I know Anne, it's extremely unlikely, but it's not so easy to state the window wasn't opened by an outsider who was already in the apartment. We can't do that, and neither can the police.

They have to be careful, and so far they have been careful to avoid mentioning any of the controversial areas of the case (apart from the 9.15 sighting, and Redwood clearly didn't enjoy that experience).

The window is definitely one area they'll want to leave well alone.

They only claimed that they found the shutters and window open. They cautiously didn't stage anything.
Mr McCann, possibly when he messed up his bedroom shutters, tried to lift them from the outside and realised he could do it (as his shutters were blocked they didn't fall as normally they would do if you don't roll them with the strap).
I don't believe that Mr McCann manipulated those shutters on that night, I even find it totally implausible given the terrible situation (they really lost a much beloved daughter). Mrs Webster tried (and didn't succeed) when Mrs McCann told her she found the shutters open.
I agree with you there's no proof, but this is a presumption. And joined presumptions lead at least to conclude what couldn't have happened, contributing for the eradication of some unhelpful myths.
It is certainly not by chance that Mrs McCann, a few days after hearing Moita Flores' comment on the window, wrote on their site that the window could have been a red herring. 3 years after she launched that red herring to the dogs !

[Carana]

Do you really think that a poster, on this forum, is competent to answer your question ? At least more competent than the Portuguese scientific police you suspect to be story telling ?
Or are you asking just to ask ?

Nope. I'm asking on what basis Amaral and Moita Flores are asserting this. They are basing their assertions on the publicly available files, aren't they?

[Sherlock Holmes]

I meant little children who live in PDL permanently. There are probably not many matching the carried child. I guess the PJ made a neighbourhood inquiry. Remember the PJ always doubted Tannerman, but never Smithman.

I'm just not too confident about the likelihood of finding Smithman after all these years.

If he was a PdL resident, either he would have come forward of his own volition or been interviewed by local police as part of a neighbourhood inquiry, as you say.

If he was a tourist taking his child back from the night creche (same as bundleman) then presumably he would have been identified by SY and eliminated.

It is possible though highly unlikely that he is an innocent member of the public oblivious to the media interest in him. But that doesn't explain why the mother of the child did not prompt him or come forward herself. Where is she?

[AnneGuedes]

I'm just not too confident about the likelihood of finding Smithman after all these years.

If he was a PdL resident, either he would have come forward of his own volition or been interviewed by local police as part of a neighbourhood inquiry, as you say.

If he was a tourist taking his child back from the night creche (same as bundleman) then presumably he would have been identified by SY and eliminated.

It is possible though highly unlikely that he is an innocent member of the public oblivious to the media interest in him. But that doesn't explain why the mother of the child did not prompt him or come forward herself. Where is she?

I don't think that Smithman as an innocent outsider will be found. I don't think he will be found as an abductor (the author of a planned abduction) as well, as he was walking and taking risks to be spotted.
The only chance for Smithman is to be a local man who found Madeleine outside and lost. But who ?

[Lyall]

I'm just not too confident about the likelihood of finding Smithman after all these years.

If he was a PdL resident, either he would have come forward of his own volition or been interviewed by local police as part of a neighbourhood inquiry, as you say.

If he was a tourist taking his child back from the night creche (same as bundleman) then presumably he would have been identified by SY and eliminated.

It is possible though highly unlikely that he is an innocent member of the public oblivious to the media interest in him. But that doesn't explain why the mother of the child did not prompt him or come forward herself. Where is she?

If it were me I'm not sure I'd come forward, and especially not if I saw Crimewatch. Would you want to risk this country's newspapers learning your name and address?

[pegasus]

If you have watched the Verdade video, what the expert is demonstrating, based on what is claimed to be the exact identification location and orientation of prints, is that KM certainly opened the window.

Although he is an expert, IMO there is one mistake, which makes the conclusion, that KM opened the window, completely incorrect.

 Actually KM is telling the truth when she says she found the window already opened, IMO.