Mark Williams-Thomas suggests Madeleine woke, wandered and was abducted.

[pathfinder73]

Quite ... and as I have said, people unfamiliar with the shutters would assume they were 'security' shutters which when down would mean the premises were secure.

Whereas those with a familiarity would know that the shutters were useless for security purposes unless the interior window was locked.

I refer you to Shining's post
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.msg294844#msg294844

No most people would check if the window was locked and secure before leaving their kids there at night when they went out to dine. They knew the shutters could be raised from the inside.

[mercury]

The objective of having a lock on a door is to deny non-keyholders or intruders entry to the interior. Therefore, the shutter being down and the front door closed and requiring a key to open it ... the Drs McCann thought the front of the apartment secure from petty thieves.
They did not know about the assaults which had been perpetrated on British children in their beds, so that did not enter their thinking.
It did not occur to them that an abductor might be on the loose, so didn't give that a moment's thought either.

It is unlikely however that Madeleine would have been able to effect an exit through the door without leaving a forensic trace on the door or on the wall. 
Do we know if the door was dusted for fingerprints?

Mark Williams-Thomas considered the woke and wandered theory; he also considered the comparisons of the disappearance of another little girl which he was able to do without prejudice.
Which was something the team leaders of the original investigation were prevented from considering.  To do so would have questioned the conviction of Leonor Cipriano for her missing daughter's murder.
Many of the investigating officers in Joana's case were also investigating Madeleine's.

Therefore it is wrong to say all avenues were open to investigation from the start if investigation of the connection between both cases was not considered particularly as an experienced professional like MWT thought it relevant to do so. 

The team responsible for 'solving' Joana's case could scarcely afford to link her's to Madeleine's disappearance even if only for elimination purposes without prejudice to what had gone before.

None of that is to the point I was making, the point being that the apartment was left unsecured vis a vis a child being able to get out.(ie reference Tanners statement where they made sure all was locked to ensure the kids could not get out) Then again, we are told by Fiona Payne and others, that the patio door was left unlocked so that Madeleine could get out and find them....so not secure there from anyone or for the children..just slightly confusing tryng to follow your argument here.

[Admin]

I know it is the season for silliness but be warned, any serious breaches of forum rules will attract an instant ban.   There will be no exceptions and no further warning.

Admin

[mercury]

No most people would check if the window was locked and secure before leaving their kids there at night when they went out to dine. They knew the shutters could be raised from the inside.

Most normal parents would do the most elemntary of checks "when leaving their toddlers alone" as if that was a norm anyway....I keep getting told they were "lulled into a false sense of security" which must mean leave  your kids alone and all doors and windows insecure...and also go tell any strange tom dick and harry they were left alone.....insane and also insane that anyone should support their behaviours here

[slartibartfast]

Most normal parents would do the most elemntary of checks "when leaving their toddlers alone" as if that was a norm anyway....I keep getting told they were "lulled into a false sense of security" which must mean leave  your kids alone and all doors and windows insecure...and also go tell any strange tom dick and harry they were left alone.....insane and also insane that anyone should support their behaviours here

As with all these cases, a triumph of desire over concern.

[Benice]

Most normal parents would do the most elemntary of checks "when leaving their toddlers alone" as if that was a norm anyway....I keep getting told they were "lulled into a false sense of security" which must mean leave  your kids alone and all doors and windows insecure...and also go tell any strange tom dick and harry they were left alone.....insane and also insane that anyone should support their behaviours here

But Mercury  - lots of people do not support their 'behaviour'  - but at the same time also do not support the idea that the McCanns immediately morphed into a couple psychopathic inhuman monsters who were capable of disposing of their own childs' body - as if she was no more important to them than a bag of rubbish.    They also don't believe that their 'behaviour' in some way justifies/excuses another person from entering their apartment and taking their child.

There was a Missing Child protocol in place at that complex.   Madeleine was not the first child to go missing - the only difference between her and those other children is that they were found.   Do you think all those other parents were 'not normal' because their children went missing as a result of their lack of vigilance -  and they had to call out a search party  - or is it only the McCanns?

It seems to me that the sceptic rule is:-

If a child goes missing and is found.   That's absolutely fine and the parents are not to blame.

If a child goes missing and is not found.  Then it's all the parents fault and they should be castigated for letting it happen -  for the rest of their lives.

I just don't get that kind of logic.


AIMO

[faithlilly]

But Mercury  - lots of people do not support their 'behaviour'  - but at the same time also do not support the idea that the McCanns immediately morphed into a couple psychopathic inhuman monsters who were capable of disposing of their own childs' body - as if she was no more important to them than a bag of rubbish.    They also don't believe that their 'behaviour' in some way justifies/excuses another person from entering their apartment and taking their child.

There was a Missing Child protocol in place at that complex.   Madeleine was not the first child to go missing - the only difference between her and those other children is that they were found.   Do you think all those other parents were 'not normal' because their children went missing as a result of their lack of vigilance -  and they had to call out a search party  - or is it only the McCanns?

It seems to me that the sceptic rule is:-

If a child goes missing and is found.   That's absolutely fine and the parents are not to blame.

If a child goes missing and is not found.  Then it's all the parents fault and they should be castigated for letting it happen -  for the rest of their lives.

I just don't get that kind of logic.


AIMO

I think the difference between this and other missing children is that Madeleine disappeared not through her parents taking their eyes off of her for a few moments but as the result of a set  of decisions where their child's comfort and security, it would seem, played very little part.

[Mr Gray]

I think the difference between this and other missing children is that Madeleine disappeared not through her parents taking their eyes off of her for a few moments but as the result of a set  of decisions where their child's comfort and security, it would seem, played very little part.

I must admit it does make you wonder why all the other thousands of missing children who disappear when there parents take there eyes off them for a few seconds don't get as much attention...it would seem they are not even reported to the police...no mention of them anywhere

[Benice]

I think the difference between this and other missing children is that Madeleine disappeared not through her parents taking their eyes off of her for a few moments but as the result of a set  of decisions where their child's comfort and security, it would seem, played very little part.

We don't know the circumstances in which other children went missing at the OC but were found - so IMO you are making presumptions which we cannot know are true.

One could be just as critical of UK parents whose children drown every year in swimming pools.  What parent would allow their child to wander off -  knowing a swimming pool was close by.  Isn't that grossly irresponsible?

IMO it all comes down to human error at the end of the day.  What I don't understand is why the McCanns are not allowed by sceptics to make human errors - but the rest of us are.  Hence that universally known saying ''We all make mistakes''.       That makes no sense to me.

[stephen25000]

We don't know the circumstances in which other children went missing at the OC but were found - so IMO you are making presumptions which we cannot know are true.

One could be just as critical of UK parents whose children drown every year in swimming pools.  What parent would allow their child to wander off -  knowing a swimming pool was close by.  Isn't that grossly irresponsible?

IMO it all comes down to human error at the end of the day.  What I don't understand is why the McCanns are not allowed by sceptics to make human errors - but the rest of us are.  Hence that universally known saying ''We all make mistakes''.       That makes no sense to me.

Why should tax payers have to fork out for parents who deliberately left their children by themselves, for 5 nights in a row ?

Why didn't they take responsibility for their own actions  and pay for any searches themselves ?

Don't bother referring to the donated money in the fund. That was also other peoples money.

[Benice]

Why should tax payers have to fork out for parents who deliberately left their children by themselves, for 5 nights in a row ?

Why didn't they take responsibility for their own actions  and pay for any searches themselves ?

Don't bother referring to the donated money in the fund. That was also other peoples money.

What has any of that has got to do with the points I was making in my post?

Everyone makes human errors and make errors of judgement - some have tragic results and some don't.    Why is it only the McCanns who are excluded from the rest of us in that respect? 

(must go out now)

[G-Unit]

I think the difference between this and other missing children is that Madeleine disappeared not through her parents taking their eyes off of her for a few moments but as the result of a set  of decisions where their child's comfort and security, it would seem, played very little part.

They have also failed to convince  a lot of people since that their version of events is  correct. Just one example; the moving door. Initially it was said the 'Tannerman abductor' may have been in the apartment at the same time as the father, and it was he who moved the bedroom door. After the father left he moved it again before the friend checked. As Tannerman has been eliminated, who moved that door? Are we supposed to believe that another abductor was there at 9.10pm who moved a door twice and then returned later to pick up a child?

[Mr Gray]

They have also failed to convince  a lot of people since that their version of events is  correct. Just one example; the moving door. Initially it was said the 'Tannerman abductor' may have been in the apartment at the same time as the father, and it was he who moved the bedroom door. After the father left he moved it again before the friend checked. As Tannerman has been eliminated, who moved that door? Are we supposed to believe that another abductor was there at 9.10pm who moved a door twice and then returned later to pick up a child?

yes..the moving door...all the GBP are talking about it

[pathfinder73]

yes..the moving door...all the GBP are talking about it

They probably haven't heard about it. The moving door is not in Gerry's first statement nor entering via the unlocked patio door

"As usual, every half hour and as the restaurant was near, the witness or his wife, would check whether the children were all right. In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked, went to his children's bedroom and checked that the twins were fine, as was Madeleine. "He then went to the WC" where he remained for a few moments, left, and bumped into a person he had played tennis with and who had a child's push chair, he was also British, he had a short conversation with him, "returning after that to the restaurant." 4 May

"He followed the normal route up to the rear door, which being open he only had to move [slide] it, that being the way in which he entered [was entering] the lounge, he noted that the children's bedroom door was not ajar as he had left it but half-way open, which he thought strange, having then put together the thought of MADELEINE having got up to go to sleep in his bedroom so as to avoid the noise produced [created] by her siblings. In this way he entered the children's bedroom and established visual contact with each of them, checking and is certain of this, that the three were sleeping deeply. He left the children's bedroom returning to place the door how he had already previously described, [then] going to the bathroom. Everything else was normal, the blinds, curtains and windows closed, very dark, there only being the light that came from the lounge.
----- He adds that he never entered any other part of the residence [his bedroom or the kitchen] where he was for only two or three minutes, leaving yet again through the rear door that he closed but did not lock. He clarifies that he returned without seeing the children of any other family because he had not been asked to by them.
----- After going through the side gate, and while on his way to the secondary reception entrance, less than 10 metres from the gate, he saw JEZ coming up the street on the opposite pavement bring with him a baby carriage with his youngest child." 10 May

[G-Unit]

yes..the moving door...all the GBP are talking about it

cite?