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

[AnneGuedes]

What do you mean anne second worse?

The first one would be accidental homicide. The second would be leaving alone a little child who could wake up out of anxiety to be left alone again, with the door open to go and search for her parents.

[sadie]

Where have you seen that the patio door, the curtains and the stair gate were closed ?

Nobody but the group was in the restaurant after the Carpenter left. Many witnesses (like Mrs Webster, Mrs Oldfield and waiters) said it was not possible to see more than the dark top part of the sliding door and even so behind a plastic screen with reflecting lights.

They were quite possibly talking about their own apartments there Anne.  The view of each apartment was affected by the lie of the land (hilly land) and by whatever shrubs were in the way.

You have seen this photo many times Anne and it is absolute proof that the apartment patio windows were in view.  If the tapas restaurant can be seen as it can in this photo, then the reverse is true.  Someone in the Tapas restaurant can see the patio windows.


for newcomers to this photo:

This shot is taken from in front of the main sitting room patio windows of 5A.

In the upper centre of the photo you will see a little of the swimming pool.  Immediately behind the pool there are two large picture windows.  These are the windows to the Tapas outdoor restaurant where The Mccanns (and we) ate.  The Mccanns sat in the RH window just behind what appears to be a tree trunk.

As that place can be seen clearly from outside the patio windows, so the patio windows can be seen from the tapas table.

In the photograph, the bushes were in slight need of cutting.  It is my belief that these bushes had actually been cut immediately before the abduction, in which case the view would have been better.

5A was unique, in that it had a street lamp immediately outside.  Immediately outside but on the opposite side of the road.   The light from this lamp illuminated 5A patio area thru the arched window at the side. 

None of the other members of the tapas group had a flat that had a rear elevation that was illuminated as far as i am aware, so their windows would appear very dark.  Almost certainly they were talking about their own apartments because before they knew about the abduction, there was no particular reason to look especially at the Mccanns apartment



Anne, you have seen this proof many times.  WHY DID you try and make out that things were different?  New peeps might have believed you.

[pegasus]

Here is a photo of the table the adults were sitting at, taken from 5A balcony that same night (photo by the PJ).
Click to enlarge

[sadie]

'Professional Investigator Heriberto Janosches'


Another self professed expert ?

Is he an expert in faked abductions as well ?   

He is impressively qualified. Like you as a teacher of Chemistry are no doubt qualified in Chemistry

Heriberto Janosch González.
Psychologist and Educator,
Master of Investigation in Psychology.
Expert's Degree in Criminology. Madrid

[Also Mathematics teacher at a senior level, so logical].


Time to take the snear off your face Stephen.  Heriberto has worked on a number of cases and is an expert.

[sadie]

Here is a photo of the table the adults were sitting at, taken from 5A balcony that same night (photo by the PJ).
Click to enlarge

What a terrible photograph ... and how the distances are exagerated on all the photographs.  It has been proven using GEarth that The Mccanns and Tapas group were only about 50 metres away from 5A

Suffice to say that Amaral himself said that nobody could have entered 5A via the patio because it was only 50 metres away and too overlooked by the tapas group.

He said this at the time when he first started saying that Madeleine had to have died in 5A, because there was no way in, or out, that was plausible.   He actually stated that no-one could have got in thru the locked front door!

 -- inappropriate  comment moderated out  --

It since seems to have been whooshed.  Maybe when it was pointed out that it was possible to have got in using a key to the front door.  Amaral must have felt silly at that point.

[pegasus]

If a stranger is opening a bedroom window from outside and the noise it wakes a child, the child will not walk up to them.
I did a half-day course at the University of Common Sense

[sadie]

If a stranger is opening a bedroom window from outside and the noise it wakes a child, the child will not walk up to them.
I did a half-day course at the University of Common Sense

If they know the person, they might.

[pegasus]

I would be straight out the room in the opposite direction.

[AnneGuedes]

Screaming Mum or Dad.

[pegasus]

Equally the person opening the shutter would run away into the night the moment he saw/heard someone was in. These two problems seemed unsolveable seperately. Why would someone go to another room not taking any possesion surely they would take something with?  Why would someone else open a shutter and window from outside but then not enter but go away surely that would be utterly pointless? But when considered together it is easy solution for they mutually solve each other.

[peter claridge]

When the claimed point of entry for the abductor was via the bedroom window McCann's said they had a clear view of the rear of the apartment, when they had to change the point of entry (for obvious reasons) to the claimed unlocked patio doors (original purpose to facilitate Oldfield's claimed check) they said they were looking the other way!

[stephen25000]

He is impressively qualified. Like you as a teacher of Chemistry are no doubt qualified in Chemistry

Heriberto Janosch González.
Psychologist and Educator,
Master of Investigation in Psychology.
Expert's Degree in Criminology. Madrid

[Also Mathematics teacher at a senior level, so logical].


Time to take the snear off your face Stephen.  Heriberto has worked on a number of cases and is an expert.

He has an opinion on the case, no more, no less.

That does not make it correct.

It is merely supposition and no more than that.

He also assumes abduction as a fact.

Almost needless to say, that has not been proved.

[colombosstogey]

Perhaps people forget that under the window was a bed. Now if the child was asleep in this bed and someone opened the shutter and window it would almost make sense as to taking the child out (without her screaming of course).

BUT the burglar lifts up the shutter, opens the window and climbs in and nearly breaks his neck when he suddenly accounters a rather springy mattress and goes flying into the 2 twins cots all of this of couse without waking anyone up....or making a mess on the bed covers etc.....

Perhaps he was a trained Ninja......land and roll, land and roll....

[sadie]

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

[pathfinder73]

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.