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

[Carana]

An abductor would have worn gloves as rightly evidenced by the absence of any unaccounted for prints on the window and the external shutter.  Did Jane Tanner say that the alleged abductor had gloves on per chance??

However I do have serious reservations as to why there were no shoe marks or dirt left on the inside window sill or on the duvet cover on the single bed which was situated just inside the window and over which any intruder would have disturbed???

Look back to the photo that Blossom posted of the bedroom.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1868.30

There was no need to trample on the bed to get out through the window. I personally don't find it likely that an adult would have climbed in or out of it, but that's not the point.

[Mrs. B]

I don't personally think any abductor would take the risk of climbing in & out of windows, someone exiting or entering a door is an everyday occurrence, but if you see a person trying to climb in or out of windows you'd immediately take notice.

[DCI]

However I do have serious reservations as to why there were no shoe marks or dirt left on the inside window sill or on the duvet cover on the single bed which was situated just inside the window and over which any intruder would have disturbed???

Was it checked for any though?

[Benice]

I don't personally think any abductor would take the risk of climbing in & out of windows, someone exiting or entering a door is an everyday occurrence, but if you see a person trying to climb in or out of windows you'd immediately take notice.

Totally agree.  I think they opened the window/shutters to give themselves an extra means of escape - as they knew that when the McCanns did come to check, it would be via the patio door.  Also you can't see anything from the front door because it is recessed so far back, but you can see the whole pathway - both ways from the window.

[AnneGuedes]

A pity there was no reconstruction showing whether a man carrying a child could swiftly escape through the window after having pulled the strap, all this with only one hand.

[Carana]

A pity there was no reconstruction showing whether a man carrying a child could swiftly escape through the window after having pulled the strap, all this with only one hand.

Such as this one?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=actual&linkpath=http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/zzrebelo3d.jpg&target=tlx_piczhqm

[John]

Look back to the photo that Blossom posted of the bedroom.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1868.30

There was no need to trample on the bed to get out through the window. I personally don't find it likely that an adult would have climbed in or out of it, but that's not the point.

Here is a better view of the children's bedroom layout adjacent to the window. 

[DCI]

Link, John?

John is referring to reds post, but here it is again.




There is plenty of room below that bed, with the chair moved.

[Angelo222]

Here is a better view of the children's bedroom layout adjacent to the window. 

Heriberto has looked at this before and his theory is that the abductor managed to entice a sleepy Madeleine over to the window in the darkness and out of which she was lifted. Certainly a possibility which would not have necessitated the need for the abductor to go into the bedroom at all.

[Mrs. B]

Apparently there were LOADS of footprints - but of course.....

Initially the search began for latent shoe-prints it being verified that dozens existed on the floor, in the various rooms of the apartment, which invalidated the attempt of identifying those of the perpetrator. Also, innumerable tracks [footprints] that were taken to be canine in origin mixed with red- and white-coloured chemical products, as used to see fingerprints, and an enormous quantity of hairs probably of animal (dog) origin that made it difficult to find possible traces, especially in the bedroom of two single beds and two children's cots from where the minor disappeared, and next to the aluminium window/door leading from inside the living room to the exterior area behind the apartment.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm

[DCI]

Apparently there were LOADS of footprints - but of course.....

Initially the search began for latent shoe-prints it being verified that dozens existed on the floor, in the various rooms of the apartment, which invalidated the attempt of identifying those of the perpetrator. Also, innumerable tracks [footprints] that were taken to be canine in origin mixed with red- and white-coloured chemical products, as used to see fingerprints, and an enormous quantity of hairs probably of animal (dog) origin that made it difficult to find possible traces, especially in the bedroom of two single beds and two children's cots from where the minor disappeared, and next to the aluminium window/door leading from inside the living room to the exterior area behind the apartment.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_FORENSIC_4_5_7.htm

 

[faithlilly]

Totally agree.  I think they opened the window/shutters to give themselves an extra means of escape - as they knew that when the McCanns did come to check, it would be via the patio door.  Also you can't see anything from the front door because it is recessed so far back, but you can see the whole pathway - both ways from the window.

But any intruder would open the window as soon as they entered the apartment and if, as Gerry thinks, the abductor was already in the apartment when he did his check surely the window would have been open then ?

[sadie]

I don't personally think any abductor would take the risk of climbing in & out of windows, someone exiting or entering a door is an everyday occurrence, but if you see a person trying to climb in or out of windows you'd immediately take notice.

No-one climbed thru that window and neither was Madeleine passed thru it, altho Heris theory could be a possibility.

There is too much effort being made to take the eye away from the front door being used and too much effort being made to try and push the window.  Just look at the Pat Brown fiasco.  Having intimated the window had just Kates prints on it (NONSENSE!) they even went to the trouble and expense of cutting down a fine row of trees and fitting a huge search light to try and prove that the window and blind were part of a set up by the Mccanns.  Because it was so obvious with being so overlooked,  that no abductor would go in that way.

Earlier, we noticed that the lifter would have had Madeleines head on his right arm, yet bundleman had Madeleine on his left arm.  Therefore it appears that there were at least two peeps involved (+ the director of ops / getaway driver, so probably 3 peeps) and she was passed from the lifter to bundleman, hence M's head moving from rightarm of lifter to Left arm of bundleman .




The window was opened for a number of reasons

1) to clear any fumes
2)  to give natural light
3)  As an escape route
4) To give support and advice to the lifter
5)  To pass things thru to the lifter
6)  To present a Red Herring that madeleine had climbed out that way, or ...
7)  To take attention away from the front door, with its obvious implications that a key was used .... so there was a connection to OC itself
8)  To have good visibilty of anyone approaching across the car park or along the walled pathway

Plus another couple of things which I cant remember atm

[imustpointout]

The webcam was originally used to track Brown on her Portuguese adventure that led to the revelation that the shutter could indeed be opened from outside.

[Lyall]

The webcam was originally used to track Brown on her Portuguese adventure that led to the revelation that the shutter could indeed be opened from outside.

Lifted And it falls back down doesn't it.