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

[Carana]

How does stating that the wind blew the curtains mitigate against anything?

One of the many bad bits of theorising that caused suspicion against this witness was something like this:
"there was no damage to the shutter and window, therefore the window and shutter cannot have been opened from outside, therefore this witness opened the window herself". That is rubbish because it is in fact possible to open the window and shutter from outside without damage in about 10 seconds, if the window isn't locked.

So why did Amaral keeping banging on about the idea that no abduction happened because the shutter wasn't forced. Why didn't he get a GNR officer to see if it could be raised from the outside without force?

And I still don't understand his oft-asserted allegation that Kate's fingerprints were in a window "opening position", when they clearly weren't.

Yet, according to at least one interview (with his pal Moita Flores), the window issue was supposedly a major clue, particularly concerning his allegation of a faked abduction.

 

[faithlilly]

So why did Amaral keeping banging on about the idea that no abduction happened because the shutter wasn't forced. Why didn't he get a GNR officer to see if it could be raised from the outside without force?

And I still don't understand his oft-asserted allegation that Kate's fingerprints were in a window "opening position", when they clearly weren't.

Yet, according to at least one interview (with his pal Moita Flores), the window issue was supposedly a major clue, particularly concerning his allegation of a faked abduction.

Well there was certainly enough evidence to keep Rebelo on their tail after Amaral's reassignment.

[Carana]

Well there was certainly enough evidence to keep Rebelo on their tail after Amaral's reassignment.

On the window, you mean? Yes, he appears to have checked the feasibility of someone getting in from the outside (judging by a photo of an officer attempting to get in via the window), knowing that it hadn't been forced. Would that imply that perhaps he got his team to see if it could be opened without force from outside? If not, the exercise would have been a bit pointless in terms of an entry point.

[pegasus]

So why did Amaral keeping banging on about the idea that no abduction happened because the shutter wasn't forced. ...(snip)

Mr Amaral was mistaken in assuming that that the window and shutter couldn't be opened from outside without force. He was also mistaken in assuming that a window and shutter opened from outside equals abduction.
Actually if he had realised these two things, he could have greatly improved his theory. IMO.

[pegasus]

(snip) ...Why didn't he get a GNR officer to see if it could be raised from the outside without force? ...(snip)

That test should have been done by the PJ after the window and shutter were examined for fingerprints. It possibly was done. But they failed to solve the probable opening method. This is not just a critisism of the PJ, it is possibly also a critisism of SY. Did AR and NW with their millions of pounds ever bother to get permission and go test in person the actual shutter and window of 5A using the method in Heri video?

[pegasus]

(snip) ... Yet, according to at least one interview (with his pal Moita Flores), the window issue was supposedly a major clue, particularly concerning his allegation of a faked abduction.

Yes his deduction, that the window and shutter were staged, was a big mistake IMO.
IMO the window and shutter were opened from outside without force.
This means the 10pm checker 100% accurately described the scene.
The noise and sight of the window and shutter being opened provides the reason (missing from Amaral's theory) for waking and for going to another room (present in Amaral's theory) IMO.

[Brietta]

That test should have been done by the PJ after the window and shutter were examined for fingerprints. It possibly was done. But they failed to solve the probable opening method. This is not just a critisism of the PJ, it is possibly also a critisism of SY. Did AR and NW with their millions of pounds ever bother to get permission and go test in person the actual shutter and window of 5A using the method in Heri video?

Heri has communicated some of the pertinent results of his research with the law enforcement agencies involved in Madeleine McCann's case.  Given his status as an academic I am certain it will have been scrutinised and his findings taken on board.

[pegasus]

Heri has communicated some of the pertinent results of his research with the law enforcement agencies involved in Madeleine McCann's case.  Given his status as an academic I am certain it will have been scrutinised and his findings taken on board.

Good. The key fact to note is that the window definitely does not auto-lock. So it can be fully closed and yet completely unlocked. Once one understands that, the method in Heri's video becomes possible and indeed probable, taking only about 10 seconds (much quicker than non-burglar Heri) to change the shutter and window from fully closed to maximum open. IMO this is how the same models of shutter and window were opened at 5G 5L 4A and 5A.

[Brietta]

Good. The key fact to note is that the window definitely does not auto-lock. So it can be fully closed and yet completely unlocked. Once one understands that, the method in Heri's video becomes possible and indeed probable, taking only about 10 seconds (much quicker than non-burglar Heri) to change the shutter and window from fully closed to maximum open. IMO this is how the same models of shutter and window were opened at 5G 5L 4A and 5A.

I can't find any fault in that, Pegasus; although I still lean toward the window and shutter being opened from within; only the person who opened them knows from where and why.

[pegasus]

I can't find any fault in that, Pegasus; although I still lean toward the window and shutter being opened from within; only the person who opened them knows from where and why.

In your abduction scenario Brietta (or indeed in any scenario) it would be pointless to open the window and shutter from inside. My suggestion ( a burglar opens them from outside then is interrupted before climbing in) would cause child goes to another room, and from there it is possible to continue the scenario as either a non-abduction or an abduction.

[mercury]

How does stating that the wind blew the curtains mitigate against anything?

One of the many bad bits of theorising that caused suspicion against this witness was something like this:
"there was no damage to the shutter and window, therefore the window and shutter cannot have been opened from outside, therefore this witness opened the window herself". That is rubbish because it is in fact possible to open the window and shutter from outside without damage in about 10 seconds, if the window isn't locked.

Possibly but the stronger reason is that thiswitness never made any reference to this event for a whole two years and almost a year after the secrecy laws ceased to be in effect post arguido status removal

Also, in no ones statements at the time (2007) was it ever mentioned either...it is a valid observation/question

[pegasus]

Possibly but the stronger reason is that thiswitness never made any reference to this event for a whole two years and almost a year after the secrecy laws ceased to be in effect post arguido status removal

Also, in no ones statements at the time (2007) was it ever mentioned either...it is a valid observation/question

It would be interesting if we know how many minutes long was KM's 4th May interview to compare that with the length of its transcript in the files. IMO the transcript is probably a much abbreviated summary of the main points and probably omits many of the details she said in the interview?

[mercury]

It would be interesting if we know how many minutes long was KM's 4th May interview to compare that with the length of its transcript in the files. IMO the transcript is probably a much abbreviated summary of the main points and probably omits many of the details she said in the interview?

It might be interesting overall but not necessarily relevant...I accept its possible the transcripts may have missed some things out, if they did, but it's a funny coincidence that they missed out extremely relevant thngs...another example is Tanner's description in the joint statement of the child's clothing...she didn't see the top well but thought possibly pink. No mention of the child's top in either of her police statements. There are other examples, but never mind, all have an innocent explanation we are told.

[Brietta]

It would be interesting if we know how many minutes long was KM's 4th May interview to compare that with the length of its transcript in the files. IMO the transcript is probably a much abbreviated summary of the main points and probably omits many of the details she said in the interview?

There are things which have paled into insignificance since the PJ and SY found enough new evidence to justify to their political masters that Madeleine McCann's case should be reopened.

Therefore us amateurs puzzling about the mechanics of Madeleine's removal from the scene is logical.  Puzzling about what her mother may or may not have said is not.  If it was relevant in any way ~ she would have been reconstituted arguida.

She was not ... but other people were.

[stephen25000]

There are things which have paled into insignificance since the PJ and SY found enough new evidence to justify to their political masters that Madeleine McCann's case should be reopened.

Therefore us amateurs puzzling about the mechanics of Madeleine's removal from the scene is logical.  Puzzling about what her mother may or may not have said is not.  If it was relevant in any way ~ she would have been reconstituted arguida.

She was not ... but other people were.

...and what has come of it ?

More letters of request.