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

[Mr Gray]

That is not proof the window was opened by anyone else.

And no proof they were not

[jassi]

Oh God, its Deja vu time - all over again   

[stephen25000]

Oh God, its Deja vu time - all over again   

Again, and again, and again.............

[pegasus]

That is not proof the window was opened by anyone else.

There were also  I believe other partial, unidentified prints.

Can you also explain why the prints identified could not be used to open a window.

Also, of course the apartment was accessible through an unlocked entrance. There would be no need for the windows, and there would be disturbance under the windows including scuff marks.

The prints identified as KM were on glass Stephen.
There were various other marks on window and on shutter, not identifiable.

[stephen25000]

The prints identified as KM were on glass Stephen.
There were various other marks on window and on shutter, not identifiable.

I know that already Pegasus.

[pegasus]

I know that already Pegasus.

IMO the person who opened shutter and window from outside would touch these places with thin gloves on
1. the two "stops" which stick out near bottom of outside of shutter
2. underside of shutter
3. exterior surface of glass or frame of the east sliding half of the window
4. shutter operating strap
Obviously after 4 the person gets disturbed which is why there are no scuff marks of climbing in

[stephen25000]

IMO the person who opened shutter and window from outside would touch these places with thin gloves on
1. the two "stops" which stick out near bottom of outside of shutter
2. underside of shutter
3. exterior surface of glass or frame of the east sliding half of the window
4. shutter operating strap
Obviously after 4 the person gets disturbed which is why there are no scuff marks of climbing in

Unfortunately it has not been established someone opened the window or shutter from outside.

and again access to the apartment could be made through the unlocked door, as anyone coming to the apartment could have checked.

Especially if the apartment was monitored.

A burglar might enter through a window, but then of course, other than Madeleine 'disappearing', nothing was taken from the apartment.

Scuff marks would be inevitable with one person carrying a child. So why not use the door ???

[pathfinder73]

Prints were due to placing left hand for support while leaning to look out the already open window.

Only two fingers were found on the window. I think you would support yourself with all fingers not two.

middle finger of the left hand (3x) and forefinger of the left hand (2x)

[Brietta]

Only two fingers were found on the window. I think you would support yourself with all fingers not two.

middle finger of the left hand (3x) and forefinger of the left hand (2x)

Why open a window using two fingers on the glass ... when there is a perfectly serviceable handle to use?

[Brietta]

Unfortunately it has not been established someone opened the window or shutter from outside.

and again access to the apartment could be made through the unlocked door, as anyone coming to the apartment could have checked.

Especially if the apartment was monitored.

A burglar might enter through a window, but then of course, other than Madeleine 'disappearing', nothing was taken from the apartment.

Scuff marks would be inevitable with one person carrying a child. So why not use the door ???

Were there scuff marks on Mrs Fenn's window ... as far as I know she didn't have green lichen on the sill either.  If you recall the lichen used to be the impediment to entry via the window ... now it is scuff marks.  Oh well' variety is the spice of life.

When did it become de rigueur that the abductor had to leave the premises via the window while carrying the child?

I've not seen anyone claiming that.  Possibly being passed through ... possibly the child lifted through.  Who apart from you has made such a claim?

[stephen25000]

Were there scuff marks on Mrs Fenn's window ... as far as I know she didn't have green lichen on the sill either.  If you recall the lichen used to be the impediment to entry via the window ... now it is scuff marks.  Oh well' variety is the spice of life.

When did it become de rigueur that the abductor had to leave the premises via the window while carrying the child?

I've not seen anyone claiming that.  Possibly being passed through ... possibly the child lifted through.  Who apart from you has made such a claim?

You can Believe in abduction and Madeleine returning from nowhere.

Me, I live in the real world.

[pathfinder73]

Why open a window using two fingers on the glass ... when there is a perfectly serviceable handle to use?

You would use your left thumb to press the button on the window handle to open it from the inside. So other left hand fingers could touch the glass when opening it. The two top fingers closest to your thumb if you do a quick test. You don't support yourself using only two fingers as Pegasus claimed. That is an inconsistency and I investigate those to find answers! It would help to see the actual location of the fingerprints on the window but Amaral was not happy with the lack of photo evidence taken on the night and I concur.

[misty]

Why is everyone working on the premise that there was only one person involved?
I can think of nothing less suspicious than a couple carrying "their" sleeping child upstairs to 5J.

[pegasus]

You would use your left thumb to press the button on the window handle to open it from the inside. So other left hand fingers could touch the glass when opening it. The two top fingers closest to your thumb if you do a quick test. You don't support yourself using only two fingers as Pegasus claimed. That is an inconsistency and I investigate those to find answers! It would help to see the actual location of the fingerprints on the window but Amaral was not happy with the lack of photo evidence taken on the night and I concur.

Assuming the window is closed and the lock button is in and you want to open it from inside, you would IMO wrap all 4 left fingers under the handle and with the left thumb press the unlock button, then using the handle slide that half of the window left. I don't think any fingers would touch the glass.

[mercury]

The child was in the crèche that night, the PJ had the crèche records so they knew which parents had collected their children at which times....it's not rocket science to see that they either ignored or failed to follow up details of someone who was walking around OC pathways with a child around the time Tannerman was seen.

The PJ were possibly remiss in not checking creche night files for Tannerman....even though he was going in the wrong direction ,in any case questionnaires completed by tourists for the Leicester police showed Crecheman was there at the time and he came forward, and this info it seems was not passed to the PJ...and even he was going in the wrong direction,,,,as for Smithman, the PJ would have had no reason to check this sighting against creche night records  as it wasn't reported for about two weeks, by which time said records may not have existed any more...or many other events took over....we don't know....the PJ were quite meticulous in detailing what they did, I have never seen a night creche record in the files..

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/editors-picks/madeleine-mccann-bungling-police-prime-2965027