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

[sadie]

No detective in the world can rule out death because those cadaver alerts cannot be swept under the carpet. It will have to be explained. Any detective worth their salt will have death as a good probability either as accidental or murder. Nobody knows if a bag was used or not. A bag could be used and then brought back so it's not missing or later dumped - they will have to check airport CCTV to identify the other main luggage bag.

pathfinder, I know you are fairly new ... so you will not have seen the extensive discussions on the dogs markings.  I am too tired to go over it all again.  I suggest that you PM ferryman; he is an expert on the dogs markings.

They are NOT necessarily what you think they are.  In fact the minute samples taken could have been from a huge percentage of tbe population.  From memory, I think it was 50% of the population.  I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.

Also the dog markings cover other things than cadavars.    IIRC they also cover saliva, tears, blood, urine ... so they simply are not safe as an indicator of death on their own



The dogs markings on their own mean nothing.  They have to have forensic back up, and these didn't.

Sorry pathfinder, but you are barking up the wrong tree.

Just forget the dogs markings, they didn't have the necessary back up to mean anything.

[Wonderfulspam]

Yes Pathfinder,

The dogs indications mean nothing. Eddie was alerting to saliva or blood or dead skin cells or even the scent of dead pig.

It is just a compelete coincidence that apartment 5a was the only apartment to be contaminated with saliva, blood, toe nail clippings and pork scratchings.

[pathfinder73]

Yes Pathfinder,

The dogs indications mean nothing. Eddie was alerting to saliva or blood or dead skin cells or even the scent of dead pig.

It is just a compelete coincidence that apartment 5a was the only apartment to be contaminated with saliva, blood, toe nail clippings and pork scratchings.

The only expert here was Eddie the dog who did his job and he was very good at it.

"One coincidence, two coincidences – maybe they’re still coincidences. Any more than that and it stops being coincidence."

[Angelo222]

No man came thru that window, either in or out.  That is proven by its narrowness, the lack of fibres, no scratches / marks on the sill .... and the uncrumpled bedsheets under the window.  Also, the sill height is such that even Richard 1985, from Ozzie Bigfootie forum, would severely damage his goollies if he tried to stride in.  It would take a very slim giant of 8 feet plus to possibly get in there by striding without a lot of pain.

As for scrambling thru on hands and knees or bottom first, forget it.  That would only be used in severe emergency as an exit for the lifter.

I repeat no man or woman went either in, or out, via that window


And what is more, unless picked up under the arms, (like Heris suggestion) I dont believe that Madeleine went thru there either.  Much easier for the lifter, having come in via the front door to exit the same way, carrying Madeleine.

The lifter scooped her out of bed with her head on his right arm and once outside passed her to Bundleman, who then had her head on his left arm ... as Jane Tanner witnessed.  Almost certainly she was drugged in some way.

She was NOT DEAD, as some like to think.

Had she been dead she would have gone out in a bag hidden from view. 




She was alive.

... and still is, I believe

One of your more reasonable posts Sadie but who closed the front door?

I will add, why on earth would a stranger make off with a deceased child...not very plausible is it?

And furthermore, had her parents been involved why do it when everyone was up and about?  Better to do it at 4am when even the cops were snoozing.  I still believe Madeleine walked out of her own volition and via the front door as scented by the GNR search dogs.  She was well used to going out that way every morning so she simply emulated the pattern which had been built up.

She followed the path west towards the covered walkway, again as scented by the dogs and this is where she was lost.  Some reprobate probably saw her leave and couldn't believe his luck...he only had to wait the right moment before pouncing. 

[Wonderfulspam]

One of your more reasonable posts Sadie but who closed the front door?

I will add, why on earth would a stranger make off with a deceased child...not very plausible is it?

And furthermore, had her parents been involved why do it when everyone was up and about?  Better to do it at 4am when even the cops were snoozing.  I still believe Madeleine walked out of her own volition and via the front door as scented by the GNR search dogs.  She was well used to going out that way every morning so she simply emulated the pattern which had been built up.

She followed the path west towards the covered walkway, again as scented by the dogs and this is where she was lost.  Some reprobate probably saw her leave and couldn't believe his luck...he only had to wait the right moment before pouncing.

Problem with that is some reprobate would have to be around the oc at the time & he would have to be the type of reprobate who would never boast to anyone that he was the beast who snatched maddie.

[Angelo222]

Problem with that is some reprobate would have to be around the oc at the time & he would have to be the type of reprobate who would never boast to anyone that he was the beast who snatched maddie.

But we know there were several individuals lurking around the vicinity of the apartment that afternoon and evening.  One of the crèche workers even found a guy standing in the shadows in the dark.

[AnneGuedes]

But we know there were several individuals lurking around the vicinity of the apartment that afternoon and evening.  One of the crèche workers even found a guy standing in the shadows in the dark.

Evening ? No witness said so. Actually JW who lurked around with his baby from 8h30 on, only met an identified couple, while the Moyes who came back from downtown at 9 didn't notice any of those grotesque monsters depicted as spotty, toothy, squinty, creepy, etc.

[colombosstogey]

Evening ? No witness said so. Actually JW who lurked around with his baby from 8h30 on, only met an identified couple, while the Moyes who came back from downtown at 9 didn't notice any of those grotesque monsters depicted as spotty, toothy, squinty, creepy, etc.

Exactly. For a busy place it was like Marie Celeste except for the Tapas 7 doing the rounds. 

[Redblossom]

Evening ? No witness said so. Actually JW who lurked around with his baby from 8h30 on, only met an identified couple, while the Moyes who came back from downtown at 9 didn't notice any of those grotesque monsters depicted as spotty, toothy, squinty, creepy, etc.

Sounds like spongebob squarepants there......suspect number 32 I make it.....never n the annals of criminal history has there been a case with so many "suspects"

[AnneGuedes]

Sounds like spongebob squarepants there......suspect number 32 I make it.....never n the annals of criminal history has there been a case with so many "suspects"

so many "ugly" suspects. No angelface/demonsoul, curious...

[Angelo222]

Evening ? No witness said so. Actually JW who lurked around with his baby from 8h30 on, only met an identified couple, while the Moyes who came back from downtown at 9 didn't notice any of those grotesque monsters depicted as spotty, toothy, squinty, creepy, etc.

From memory I can think of two.  One guy lurking on the stairwell and another having a fag in the bushes.

[pathfinder73]

Wasn't the guy in the stairwell Neil Berry?

[AnneGuedes]

From memory I can think of two.  One guy lurking on the stairwell and another having a fag in the bushes.

Ugly guys ?

[Redblossom]

Who was havng a fag in the bushes, where when?

Since when was havng a fag a crime?

[Angelo222]

Who was havng a fag in the bushes, where when?

Since when was havng a fag a crime?

Didn't he run off when the crèche worker came near?