Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: icabodcrane on October 17, 2013, 01:01:48 PM
Title: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on October 17, 2013, 01:01:48 PM
It has taken on a new significance since Scotland Yard's revelation that the man Jane Tanner saw was most probably NOT an abductor
The McCanns left for dinner at 8.30pm, and when Gerry returned to do a check at 9.05pm he found the door to the children's room open wider than they had left it
Why ? ... what explanation is there for the door to have been opened wider than the McCanns left it
Gerry reclosed the door until it was only partially open again, and went back to the restaurant
At 9.30pm Matthew Oldfield went into the McCanns apartment to do a check ( in place of Kate ) and, despite the door having been re- pulled to by Gerry at 9.05pm, he ( Matthew ) found it to be open quite wide again ( wide enough for him to see into the room )
Why ? ... what explanation is there for the door to have again been opened wider than Gerry had left it ?
Had the man Jane Tanner saw actually been the abductor then all this opening/closing of the bedroom door might make some sense ... but the man Jane saw was NOT the abductor ... so let's talk about that door.
Admin edit. Scotland Yard has been very careful, in fact clinical, in respect of what they said about the man Tanner saw. They said that he was most probably not the abductor, they didn't say he wasn't.
The disreputable British Press have chose to twist Redwoods words.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on October 17, 2013, 01:07:49 PM
Gerry clearly discounted any idea that Madeleine might have got out of bed and gone the lavatory, or raided the fridge for a sandwich. Why ? Was she incapable of getting up ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on October 17, 2013, 01:16:57 PM
Gerry clearly discounted any idea that Madeleine might have got out of bed and gone the lavatory, or raided the fridge for a sandwich. Why ? Was she incapable of getting up ?
I don't know jassi, but even if she had ( giving an explanation for the first occasion that Gerry found the door to be opened wider ), what is the explanation for it having been re-opened by the time Oldfield did his check 25 minutes later ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 01:22:00 PM
Gerry clearly discounted any idea that Madeleine might have got out of bed and gone the lavatory, or raided the fridge for a sandwich. Why ? Was she incapable of getting up ?
It would suggest that Madeleine could leave her bed for other reasons than going to her parents' one. I just now remember Paul Seddon, the priest who suggested immediately that Madeleine had a somnambulism episode (as if it had already occurred). The too open door had a very important function : as Mr McCann himself said, without this state of the door he wouldn't have looked inside of the bedroom and nothing would guarantee that Madeleine was still in the flat at 9:05/10.
I'm reading this and I don't understand myself.. I meant that Mr McCann didn't contemplate another possibility than the parents' bed, because it would suggest that Madeleine wasn't left alone sleeping but could wake up as well and organize a party !
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: faithlilly on October 17, 2013, 01:28:52 PM
I don't know jassi, but even if she had ( giving an explanation for the first occasion that Gerry found the door to be opened wider ), what is the explanation for it having been re-opened by the time Oldfield did his check 25 minutes later ?
I await davel, gilet, DCI's et al observations with interest.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on October 17, 2013, 01:34:41 PM
Another point regarding this door
On both the English and German Crimewatch reconstructions the door was shown to open from the left, when in reality, I believe, it opened from the right
That might have been an oversight, but, I think, an important one
If the door had opened from the left ( as shown on the reconstructions ) then it would explain how Matthew Oldfield would have had a clear view into the bedroom, verifying that the twins were in their cots, but unable to see Madeleine ... given that the door would have been blocking his vision of her bed
However, since the door actually opened from the right, then on peering into the room Oldfied would have been looking directly at Madeline's bed ... and it would have been the twins cots that the door blocked his vision of
Is that not correct ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 01:37:06 PM
But it was of considerable importance whilst the general concensus was that Jane Tanner had seen the abductor at 9.15pm
... it was 'corroborating evidence' if you like
Now though, now that we know Jane did not see an abductor at 9.15pm, the repeated opening and closing of that bedroom door needs another explanation
I wonder if, simply, they just forgot to erase this ex-significant detail that now, remaining, gains another value. This detail was in fact not important at all. Mr McCann didn't need it for his story (he actually spoke of that door in his first "statement" to the PJ, on the ground). He could just have said that he had pushed a little bit the door to listen better and doing so had seen Madeleine in her bed. But, when you tell a story, you can't abstract yourself totally of reality. Mr McCann, who never looked into the bedroom, had to find the door more open than he had left it to have a reason to do look inside. Something else : Mr Redwood repeatedly said they focused on 8h30-10h. Why not 9h10-10h ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Lyall on October 17, 2013, 01:37:29 PM
I think the focus on the door is a red herring. Actually it feels more like a magicians sleight of hand... Focus on what he wants us to focus while he does something else.
It's almost inconceivable that an abductor would stay in the apartment and open and close the door while the various members of the tapas 9 came and went. So the obvious options are Madeline went to the toilet, the wind blew it open or Madeline opened it to go and look for her parents. I guess there is an other option that one of the tapas 9 opened it and neglected to tell anyone else. Eitherway, it's unlikely to be of any importance regarding an abduction.
The importance lies in the importance that was given to it.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 01:52:24 PM
However, since the door actually opened from the right, then on peering into the room Oldfied would have been looking directly at Madeline's bed ... and it would have been the twins cots that the door blocked his vision of
Is that not correct ?
No, the door didn't block the vision of the cots. Staying at even 1 meter from the door and even stretching his neck, he couldn't see Madeleine, he was able to see one twin, he couldn't see the other because of a plain thick cloth (not a net) at the bottom.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Admin on October 17, 2013, 01:58:20 PM
We have altered the op slightly to reflect what was said by Redwood on the BBC Crimewatch show.
Scotland Yard spokesman DCI Redwood did not say that the man Jane Tanner supposedly saw was not an abductor. He stated simply that he probably wasn't, a big difference and one which the Press have chosen to misinterpret.
Could members adjust their posts accordingly please.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on October 17, 2013, 01:59:10 PM
No, the door didn't block the vision of the cots. Staying at even 1 meter from the door and even stretching his neck, he couldn't see Madeleine, he was able to see one twin, he couldn't see the other because of a plain thick cloth (not a net) at the bottom.
ah yes, thankyou Anne ... I'v just looked at a plan of the apartment and can see how Matthew, standing at the open door ( without popping his head in ) would not see Madeleine
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on October 17, 2013, 02:00:21 PM
No, the door didn't block the vision of the cots. Staying at even 1 meter from the door and even stretching his neck, he couldn't see Madeleine, he was able to see one twin, he couldn't see the other because of a plain thick cloth (not a net) at the bottom.
Did he even go into 5A ? Were his fingerprints found on the patio door, as they should have been, if that had been his mode of entry.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 17, 2013, 02:05:17 PM
The importance lies in the importance that was given to it.
Absolutely.
We do not know the truth about the doors, and have no way of working it out. It is what we make of it.
What seems significant to me is the fact that there would be a focus on things that seemed to relate to the 9.15 abduction scenario, when - officially at least - this seems to have been ruled out.
I am normally hesitant to resort to labels, but here I think I have to make the following point. (I have been very busy the past few days and have not been able to keep up with everything that is written here, so please forgive me if this observation is not new).
It seems to me that a lot of '[ censored word]', dismissive hitherto about the Tanner sighting - Jane's accuracy or lack of; her motive for claiming to have sighted this man; the idea that the sighting constituted any kind of evidence of abduction - are now questioning how much sense the case makes taking the Tanner sighting out of the equation:
'How can SY can be sure that they have good enough grounds to rule this man out?'
'What do you mean he was coming from the night creche - he was coming from the front door of the apartment! Isn't that a bit of a coincidence!'
All this about a man who was supposed to be a figment of Jane's imagination - or a concoction of the McCanns'.
And now we are talking about a door relating to the 9.15 scenario...
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Admin on October 17, 2013, 02:09:18 PM
Remember that it was gusty in the Luz area on 3 May 2007. The minute someone opened the patio door there would be an increase in pressure within the apartment which very well could account for a door opening slightly.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: C.Edwards on October 17, 2013, 02:10:41 PM
Remember that it was gusty in the Luz area on 3 May 2007. The minute someone opened the patio door there would be an increase in pressure within the apartment which very well could account for a door opening slightly.
Not unless the window was open really I'd have thought.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: C.Edwards on October 17, 2013, 02:25:31 PM
it just requires a gap, crack, an air brick or something that allows the air to move through the property.
I still disagree. Windy here today, I just opened the patio door with the front room door 5 metres away and one that is easy to move. It hasn't done anything other than twitch a millimetre or two each way. I opened the front door and "bang!" it slammed shut.
Hardly conclusive, but not inconclusive either....
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Lyall on October 17, 2013, 02:28:12 PM
We do not know the truth about the doors, and have no way of working it out. It is what we make of it.
What seems significant to me is the fact that there would be a focus on things that seemed to relate to the 9.15 abduction scenario, when - officially at least - this seems to have been ruled out.
I am normally hesitant to resort to labels, but here I think I have to make the following point. (I have been very busy the past few days and have not been able to keep up with everything that is written here, so please forgive me if this observation is not new).
It seems to me that a lot of '[ censored word]', dismissive hitherto about the Tanner sighting - Jane's accuracy or lack of; her motive for claiming to have sighted this man; the idea that the sighting constituted any kind of evidence of abduction - are now questioning how much sense the case makes taking the Tanner sighting out of the equation:
'How can SY can be sure that they have good enough grounds to rule this man out?'
'What do you mean he was coming from the night creche - he was coming from the front door of the apartment! Isn't that a bit of a coincidence!'
All this about a man who was supposed to be a figment of Jane's imagination - or a concoction of the McCanns'.
And now we are talking about a door relating to the 9.15 scenario...
The door angle was still mentioned in Crimewatch, SH. In a case so lacking in evidence everything mentioned by the people involved had and still has significance. The concentration on 9.15 was the deliberate strategy of the McCanns and their allies themselves. You can't just forget all that history.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 02:45:40 PM
Did he even go into 5A ? Were his fingerprints found on the patio door, as they should have been, if that had been his mode of entry.
According to many clues he never was in that flat. He couldn't just listen without seeing the shutters (smashed by the abductor around 9h15), this is why he had to enter..
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on October 17, 2013, 03:00:30 PM
We do not know the truth about the doors, and have no way of working it out. It is what we make of it.
What seems significant to me is the fact that there would be a focus on things that seemed to relate to the 9.15 abduction scenario, when - officially at least - this seems to have been ruled out.
I am normally hesitant to resort to labels, but here I think I have to make the following point. (I have been very busy the past few days and have not been able to keep up with everything that is written here, so please forgive me if this observation is not new).
It seems to me that a lot of '[ censored word]', dismissive hitherto about the Tanner sighting - Jane's accuracy or lack of; her motive for claiming to have sighted this man; the idea that the sighting constituted any kind of evidence of abduction - are now questioning how much sense the case makes taking the Tanner sighting out of the equation:
'How can SY can be sure that they have good enough grounds to rule this man out?'
'What do you mean he was coming from the night creche - he was coming from the front door of the apartment! Isn't that a bit of a coincidence!'
All this about a man who was supposed to be a figment of Jane's imagination - or a concoction of the McCanns'.
And now we are talking about a door relating to the 9.15 scenario...
If Scotland Yard are correct and the man Jane saw was an innocent parent, and if they are further correct in their belief that the man the Smiths saw could have been the abductor ( given the remarkable similarity between the child they saw being carried and Madeleine ) it is fair to assume that the abductor did not enter the apartment until after Mathew Oldfield made his 9.30pm check
Therefore there is no explantion for the claims that someone other than the McCanns or Oldfied having opened that door wider
So why were the claims made ?
I think they may have been made, untruthfully, in order to reinforce the Jane Tanner abduction theory ... I think there is a possibility that the door never WAS found to be 'half open' by Gerry at 9.05pm
What is significant, if that were the case, is that it would indicate that the McCanns gave false information to the police in order to convince them that the man Jane Tanner saw had abducted their daughter ... and that the opened bedroom door was evidence of his presence in the apartment
That would be questionable behaviour, don't you think ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 03:00:57 PM
It seems to me that a lot of '[ censored word]', dismissive hitherto about the Tanner sighting - Jane's accuracy or lack of; her motive for claiming to have sighted this man; the idea that the sighting constituted any kind of evidence of abduction - are now questioning how much sense the case makes taking the Tanner sighting out of the equation:
You might like to be called a "pro" (it looks nice), but I find this "anti" (it looks mean) abusive. I don't believe the McCann truth (the more one tries to impose a doxa, the more sceptic I am), but I have nothing "against" these people.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 03:12:31 PM
Not unless the window was open really I'd have thought.
This is a point already highlighted. Since it was windy, if the window was open when Mrs McCann entered the flat, the bedroom door should have slammed (in her first statement, the curtains were drawn apart). When I saw, in the German reconstruction, Mrs McCann closing the sliding door-window after entering (as she stated she did), I wondered why, since she said she wouldn't have looked inside without the "door more open than we left it". Absurdly she closes totally this door-window after leaving to launch the alarm.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on October 17, 2013, 03:17:02 PM
Remember that it was gusty in the Luz area on 3 May 2007. The minute someone opened the patio door there would be an increase in pressure within the apartment which very well could account for a door opening slightly.
A very interesting point Admin - especially as you say - there was a gusty breeze blowing that night. Opening the patio doors for both of them to leave the apartment at 8.30 could have taken long enough for an inwards breeze to cause the bedroom door to move slightly. Am I right in thinking that none of the other interior doors in the apartment were at the same angle to the patio door as the children's bedroom door?
I think this 'theory' is definitely worth considering.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Jarred Lancaster on October 17, 2013, 03:24:00 PM
A very interesting point Admin - especially as you say - there was a gusty breeze blowing that night. Opening the patio doors for both of them to leave the apartment at 8.30 could have taken long enough for an inwards breeze to cause the bedroom door to move slightly. Am I right in thinking that none of the other interior doors in the apartment were at the same angle to the patio door as the children's bedroom door?
I think this 'theory' is definitely worth considering.
Indeed. What, if anything, do we know about the positions of the other windows and shutters in the apartment that night? Was there an air conditioning system?
Secondly, could the children's bedroom door just have been hung incorrectly, swinging open by itself?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on October 17, 2013, 03:38:01 PM
You might like to be called a "pro" (it looks nice), but I find this "anti" (it looks mean) abusive. I don't believe the McCann truth (the more one tries to impose a doxa, the more sceptic I am), but I have nothing "against" these people.
Erm
Are you sure ?
Past posts and all that !
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 17, 2013, 03:47:32 PM
The door angle was still mentioned in Crimewatch, SH. In a case so lacking in evidence everything mentioned by the people involved had and still has significance. The concentration on 9.15 was the deliberate strategy of the McCanns and their allies themselves. You can't just forget all that history.
You can't forget history but the doors are not history, not anything. There is absolutely nothing to say what position the doors were or weren't in, and if that changed or not. If the 9.15 sighting was part of a strategy of the McCanns, so was Gerry's suggestion that the door at 9.00 was further open.
One way or another, we had no way of knowing what the status of the doors were on the night, no matter who was giving the account and why, and we have no way of knowing now.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 17, 2013, 03:50:13 PM
If Scotland Yard are correct and the man Jane saw was an innocent parent, and if they are further correct in their belief that the man the Smiths saw could have been the abductor ( given the remarkable similarity between the child they saw being carried and Madeleine ) it is fair to assume that the abductor did not enter the apartment until after Mathew Oldfield made his 9.30pm check
Therefore there is no explantion for the claims that someone other than the McCanns or Oldfied having opened that door wider
So why were the claims made ?
I think they may have been made, untruthfully, in order to reinforce the Jane Tanner abduction theory ... I think there is a possibility that the door never WAS found to be 'half open' by Gerry at 9.05pm
What is significant, if that were the case, is that it would indicate that the McCanns gave false information to the police in order to convince them that the man Jane Tanner saw had abducted their daughter ... and that the opened bedroom door was evidence of his presence in the apartment
That would be questionable behaviour, don't you think ?
That would indeed be questionable.
But without knowing what position the doors were in, it's pure speculation.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on October 17, 2013, 03:55:15 PM
A very interesting point Admin - especially as you say - there was a gusty breeze blowing that night. Opening the patio doors for both of them to leave the apartment at 8.30 could have taken long enough for an inwards breeze to cause the bedroom door to move slightly. Am I right in thinking that none of the other interior doors in the apartment were at the same angle to the patio door as the children's bedroom door?
I think this 'theory' is definitely worth considering.
It was windy the nights before http://www.geodata.us/weather/show.php?usaf=085540&uban=99999&m=5&c=Portugal&y=2007# (http://www.geodata.us/weather/show.php?usaf=085540&uban=99999&m=5&c=Portugal&y=2007#)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Lyall on October 17, 2013, 04:03:41 PM
You can't forget history but the doors are not history, not anything. There is absolutely nothing to say what position the doors were or weren't in, and if that changed or not. If the 9.15 sighting was part of a strategy of the McCanns, so was Gerry's suggestion that the door at 9.00 was further open.
One way or another, we had no way of knowing what the status of the doors were on the night, no matter who was giving the account and why, and we have no way of knowing now.
That's true, and it could now be said that draughts or Madeleine herself moved the door, but the Emma Loach films, and the book, are a record of the apparent wish to suggest the door had been moved by person or persons unknown. There was no suggestion in those sources that the two phenomena may have been unconnected. The films, book, and police statements are the history that cannot be changed now.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 04:11:41 PM
You can't forget history but the doors are not history, not anything. There is absolutely nothing to say what position the doors were or weren't in, and if that changed or not. If the 9.15 sighting was part of a strategy of the McCanns, so was Gerry's suggestion that the door at 9.00 was further open.
One way or another, we had no way of knowing what the status of the doors were on the night, no matter who was giving the account and why, and we have no way of knowing now.
One reason to do a reconstitution, not a CW show. Nobody is here over evaluating the bedroom door. The fact is Mr McCann didn't say much to the PJ, a few hours after having lost his daughter, but he told that the bedroom door was more open that he had left it.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on October 17, 2013, 04:13:10 PM
That's true, and it could now be said that draughts or Madeleine herself moved the door, but the Emma Loach films, and the book, are a record of the apparent wish to suggest the door had been moved by person or persons unknown. There was no suggestion in those sources that the two phenomena may have been unconnected. The films, book, and police statements are the history that cannot be changed now.
But they can be updated if new evidence or new leads come to light. Nothing is set in concrete.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 04:18:35 PM
That was a man who knew what he was talking about Anne ?{)(**
And he talked ! He was banned from France in 1851 because he criticised Napoleon III (the "small") and then banned from Jersey en 1855 because he criticised Queen Victoria.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 17, 2013, 06:14:01 PM
They didn't count on Matthew Oldfield checking instead of Kate at 9.30pm and finding the door open the way Gerry said he had found it at 9.05pm. I don't believe Madeleine was in the apartment when they left for the tapas bar.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on October 17, 2013, 06:31:43 PM
It was windy the nights before http://www.geodata.us/weather/show.php?usaf=085540&uban=99999&m=5&c=Portugal&y=2007# (http://www.geodata.us/weather/show.php?usaf=085540&uban=99999&m=5&c=Portugal&y=2007#)
Thank you Anne. So it was actually windier on the 2nd then, yet the door didn't move that night when the patio was opened. I think that no added significance would have been added to it on the 3rd if it had.
It's also worth considering that these were two highly intelligent people who would probably have managed to make a causal link between a windy night and a moving door. They didn't, so we shouldn't.
They have connected it with an abductor. The implication binge that s/he was in the apartment at the same time as Gerry during his 9:05 check. In fact, iirc Gerry actually said at one point that he felt as those he may not have been alone?
Icabod, I'm glad you started this thread. Since the bundleman debunking (sorry Admin, possible debunking) I've been wondering about that door. I can see three options:
1, The abductor was in the apartment before 9:05.
2, The door never moved and we are being asked to believe the abductor was in the apartment before 9:05 to fit in with Bundleman.
3, Madeleine woke twice and left the bedroom twice, once before 9:05, then again before 9:30.
If it's 1 we can dismiss Smithman as the abductor as he's really unlikely to have only got ten minutes away in an hour.
If it's 2 there was no abductor.
If it's 3 What's to say Madeleine didn't leave under her own steam?
I'm sure others can add to the possibilities of The Tale of the Moving Door.
The one thing I can't do is decide that it's no longer significant because Bundleman was actually Innocentman.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on October 17, 2013, 06:56:15 PM
Fickle thing wind - you never know when its going to strike.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 07:00:01 PM
Icabod, I'm glad you started this thread. Since the bundleman debunking (sorry Admin, possible debunking) I've been wondering about that door. I can see three options:
1, The abductor was in the apartment before 9:05.
2, The door never moved and we are being asked to believe the abductor was in the apartment before 9:05 to fit in with Bundleman.
3, Madeleine woke twice and left the bedroom twice, once before 9:05, then again before 9:30.
If it's 1 we can dismiss Smithman as the abductor as he's really unlikely to have only got ten minutes away in an hour.
If it's 2 there was no abductor.
If it's 3 What's to say Madeleine didn't leave under her own steam?
I'm sure others can add to the possibilities of The Tale of the Moving Door.
The one thing I can't do is decide that it's no longer significant because Bundleman was actually Innocentman.
After announcing a new time line as breaking news, we discover that they're not certain but behave and deduce and focus exactly as if they were. Are they kidding ? They could be certain, since they identified a possible innocent father. They exhibit pyjamas obviously different from those described by Ms Tanner and all they say is that they're quite similar. Are they kidding ? They avoid the question of the route SYman took from the creche, al-right, but instead of saying if SYman crossed GMartins where Tannerman did, they say it was close to the McCann flat. Are they kidding ?
The mystery of the moving door is certainly interesting. At about 20.30 the couple left to have dinner in the restaurant. At about 21.05 – 21.15 Gerald went to the bedroom to see the children, he saw the bedroom door was half way open which he found strange as he thought he had left it pushed to, however he entered and saw the children and saw that the window as well as the shutter were closed. At about 21.20, their friend Jane passed by the apartment (along the corridor of the main entrance) she saw an individual carrying a child who passed descending the road, however she did not recognise this individual, nor the child, only having noticed that the individual appeared to be aged between 30 or 40, had dark hair and light coloured trousers. At about 21.30 their friend Mat entered the apartment by the back door (patio door) he did not enter the bedroom and only saw the twins sleeping, he did not notice anything strange. At the same place, at about 22.00 Kate discovered the facts and the consequent disappearance of her daughter Madeleine, at this moment the window being wide open as well as the curtains and the shutter. Vol I pp. 2-10 This the fresher statement of all.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 07:03:26 PM
Thank you Anne. So it was actually windier on the 2nd then, yet the door didn't move that night when the patio was opened. I think that no added significance would have been added to it on the 3rd if it had.
It's also worth considering that these were two highly intelligent people who would probably have managed to make a causal link between a windy night and a moving door. They didn't, so we shouldn't.
They have connected it with an abductor. The implication binge that s/he was in the apartment at the same time as Gerry during his 9:05 check. In fact, iirc Gerry actually said at one point that he felt as those he may not have been alone?
Icabod, I'm glad you started this thread. Since the bundleman debunking (sorry Admin, possible debunking) I've been wondering about that door. I can see three options:
1, The abductor was in the apartment before 9:05.
2, The door never moved and we are being asked to believe the abductor was in the apartment before 9:05 to fit in with Bundleman.
3, Madeleine woke twice and left the bedroom twice, once before 9:05, then again before 9:30.
If it's 1 we can dismiss Smithman as the abductor as he's really unlikely to have only got ten minutes away in an hour.
If it's 2 there was no abductor.
If it's 3 What's to say Madeleine didn't leave under her own steam?
I'm sure others can add to the possibilities of The Tale of the Moving Door.
The one thing I can't do is decide that it's no longer significant because Bundleman was actually Innocentman.
That's a very reasonable analysis
I agree with you that if the explanation for the twice opened bedroom room door is that an abductor was in the apartment as early as 9.05pm, then it is highly unlikely that he was seen almost an hour later by the Smith family
However, if that was the case then we are left with the equally unlikely scenario of an abductor, Gerry McCann, Jez Wilkins, Jane Tanner, and an innocent father carrying a child ALL there at the same time
It looks more and more like an over-egged pudding
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on October 17, 2013, 07:08:10 PM
how could the same wind have pushed open a door when it made the door slam shut at 10 pm ?
A breeze gusting through the open patio doors with the bedroom window closed, could have opened the bedroom door, and then later on another breeze gusting through the bedroom window with the patio door closed slammed the door?
Lots of variables are possible with a gusty wind/breeze blowing especially when 3 sides of the building are exposed to the elements - - unlike the apartments which were inbetween two others and more sheltered.
We need a wind expert. (errrm - no - better not make any suggestions) ?{)(**
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on October 17, 2013, 07:13:54 PM
A breeze gusting through the open patio doors with the bedroom window closed, could have opened the bedroom door, and then later on another breeze gusting through the bedroom window with the patio door closed slammed the door?
Lots of variables are possible with a gusty wind/breeze blowing especially when 3 sides of the building are exposed to the elements - - unlike the apartments which were inbetween two others and more sheltered.
We need a wind expert. (errrm - no - better not make any suggestions) ?{)(**
If that was the explanation then it would have happened on other nights too ... it didn't
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Lyall on October 17, 2013, 07:18:03 PM
A breeze gusting through the open patio doors with the bedroom window closed, could have opened the bedroom door, and then later on another breeze gusting through the bedroom window with the patio door closed slammed the door?
Lots of variables are possible with a gusty wind/breeze blowing especially when 3 sides of the building are exposed to the elements - - unlike the apartments which were inbetween two others and more sheltered.
We need a wind expert. (errrm - no - better not make any suggestions) ?{)(**
Clarence is your man in that field Benice 8)-)))
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 07:36:38 PM
However, if that was the case then we are left with the equally unlikely scenario of an abductor, Gerry McCann, Jez Wilkins, Jane Tanner, and an innocent father carrying a child ALL there at the same time
It looks more and more like an over-egged pudding
Not really, Icabodcrane, though I agree things are getting a bit more messy. Basically we still have the unsolved mystery of the invisible woman. In that mystery the unique difference is Tannerman becoming Innocentman (supposing SY hasn't too much manipulated the facts to suit their agenda). The second mystery, the moving door one, due to Innocentman identification, will hardly find a resolution if Mr Abductor wasn't in the 5A before, with and after Mr McCann. We're then left with the question of his escape. Has it improved with unmasked Tannerman? No, because we can't bypass the main evidence of all : the little girl matching so well Madeleine against the shoulder of a fatherlike carrier.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Lyall on October 17, 2013, 07:41:16 PM
I agree with you that if the explanation for the twice opened bedroom room door is that an abductor was in the apartment as early as 9.05pm, then it is highly unlikely that he was seen almost an hour later by the Smith family
However, if that was the case then we are left with the equally unlikely scenario of an abductor, Gerry McCann, Jez Wilkins, Jane Tanner, and an innocent father carrying a child ALL there at the same time
It looks more and more like an over-egged pudding
It was already unlikely Icabod, but was sustained for six years (kind of, I'm not sure many actually believed JT had seen an abductor anyway - not even fervent supporters of Madeleine's parents.)
The new scenario may actually be less implausible to some people as it doesn't depend on an actual witness. Not having to rely on JT may actually strengthen their faith.
You can be sure the friendly media will think of something to explain this door problem.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Luz on October 17, 2013, 07:46:30 PM
After announcing a new time line as breaking news, we discover that they're not certain but behave and deduce and focus exactly as if they were. Are they kidding ? They could be certain, since they identified a possible innocent father. They exhibit pyjamas obviously different from those described by Ms Tanner and all they say is that they're quite similar. Are they kidding ? They avoid the question of the route SYman took from the creche, al-right, but instead of saying if SYman crossed GMartins where Tannerman did, they say it was close to the McCann flat. Are they kidding ?
The mystery of the moving door is certainly interesting. At about 20.30 the couple left to have dinner in the restaurant. At about 21.05 – 21.15 Gerald went to the bedroom to see the children, he saw the bedroom door was half way open which he found strange as he thought he had left it pushed to, however he entered and saw the children and saw that the window as well as the shutter were closed. At about 21.20, their friend Jane passed by the apartment (along the corridor of the main entrance) she saw an individual carrying a child who passed descending the road, however she did not recognise this individual, nor the child, only having noticed that the individual appeared to be aged between 30 or 40, had dark hair and light coloured trousers. At about 21.30 their friend Mat entered the apartment by the back door (patio door) he did not enter the bedroom and only saw the twins sleeping, he did not notice anything strange. At the same place, at about 22.00 Kate discovered the facts and the consequent disappearance of her daughter Madeleine, at this moment the window being wide open as well as the curtains and the shutter. Vol I pp. 2-10 This the fresher statement of all.
For me the swinging door is the most revealing part of their testimonies - it will be hard for people to forget the notorious "woshhhh" of the curtains by Mrs. McCann on Oprah's sofa. All these years we've been yelled at by the abduction defenders that Ms. Tanner had seen the abductor, so there was a monster that had taken the child. To prove it the McCann father and mother provided statements that the door had not been as they had left it and even that the father, retrospectively, maybe had been in the apartment with a paper thin abductor hiding behind the children's room door. Now, the swinging door is just the wind, because after all Tanner's abductor was probably just an innocent, six and a half years hidden father, making a circuit around the building with a child held in upfronted arms - probably training his biceps.
But SY says so, and we have to believe it.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on October 17, 2013, 08:39:52 PM
If that was the explanation then it would have happened on other nights too ... it didn't
But that's the trouble with wind Icab - especially gusty breezes, it can be quite still for a time and then get blowy. There no predicting when or where or for how long or how strong.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Lyall on October 17, 2013, 08:47:59 PM
But that's the trouble with wind Icab - especially gusty breezes, it can be quite still for a time and then get blowy. There no predicting when or where or for how long or how strong.
There's no predicting when children will awake, get out of their beds and maybe open doors either >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 09:24:44 PM
There's no predicting when children will awake, get out of their beds and maybe open doors either >@@(*&)
And may be never once considering how in the world they were to get out again.
The rabbit-hole went straight on like a tunnel for some way, and then dipped suddenly down, so suddenly that Alice had not a moment to think about stopping herself before she found herself falling down a very deep well.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on October 17, 2013, 09:40:06 PM
I agree with you that if the explanation for the twice opened bedroom room door is that an abductor was in the apartment as early as 9.05pm, then it is highly unlikely that he was seen almost an hour later by the Smith family
However, if that was the case then we are left with the equally unlikely scenario of an abductor, Gerry McCann, Jez Wilkins, Jane Tanner, and an innocent father carrying a child ALL there at the same time
It looks more and more like an over-egged pudding
That is one busy street! Maybe the new abductor should be 'invisibleman' ?{)(**
And may be never once considering how in the world they were to get out again.
The rabbit-hole went straight on like a tunnel for some way, and then dipped suddenly down, so suddenly that Alice had not a moment to think about stopping herself before she found herself falling down a very deep well.
We are expected to believe six impossible things before breakfast...
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on October 17, 2013, 11:13:41 PM
I have no idea. You wanted an abduction hypothesis to discuss in terms of the science, but so far nobody has even tried to knock it down by forensic science. I think there is a word that says it all. Agendas.
You've got a whole thread to 'challenge' and 'lecture' on ... please don't hijack this one as well
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 11:28:18 PM
What is the evidence the abductor was in the appt at 9
He (Mr McCann) went to the bedroom to see the children, he saw the bedroom door was half way open which he found strange as he thought he had left it pushed to
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Lyall on October 17, 2013, 11:28:43 PM
He (Mr McCann) went to the bedroom to see the children, he saw the bedroom door was half way open which he found strange as he thought he had left it pushed to
Didn't one of them mention sensing someone in the apartment at one point?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 17, 2013, 11:37:08 PM
Mathew checked at 9.30pm - no window or curtain was open in the room when he looked inside. An abductor is not going to stay in there once Gerry left and then Mathew checked. How long are you saying an abductor was hiding in there for? Nonsense. The only available time is 9.30 to 10pm for an abductor to get inside.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 17, 2013, 11:40:23 PM
Didn't one of them mention sensing someone in the apartment at one point?
Directly, I don't think so. But may be a source close or a friend or an alleged quote by a newspaper. Mr McCann admitted to have been in the room with the abductor but remarked that Ms Tanner could have caught him !
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Lyall on October 17, 2013, 11:49:32 PM
Directly, I don't think so. But may be a source close or a friend or an alleged quote by a newspaper. Mr McCann admitted to have been in the room with the abductor but remarked that Ms Tanner could have caught him !
It's mentioned in the book, along with the line "What we do now believe is that the abductor had very probably been into the room before Gerry's check."
Based only on the angle of the door.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 17, 2013, 11:54:46 PM
It's mentioned in the book, along with the line "What we do now believe is that the abductor had very probably been into the room before Gerry's check."
Based only on the angle of the door.
Talked themselves into a corner.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on October 18, 2013, 12:03:25 AM
You might like to be called a "pro" (it looks nice), but I find this "anti" (it looks mean) abusive. I don't believe the McCann truth (the more one tries to impose a doxa, the more sceptic I am), but I have nothing "against" these people.
I don't like either of the terms, actually Anne. They are far too simplistic given the multidimensionality of this case and the shades of opinion that go with it - and they are also offensive. I hesitated to use them in my post and I will attempt not to do so again.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 18, 2013, 01:26:49 AM
That's true, and it could now be said that draughts or Madeleine herself moved the door, but the Emma Loach films, and the book, are a record of the apparent wish to suggest the door had been moved by person or persons unknown. There was no suggestion in those sources that the two phenomena may have been unconnected. The films, book, and police statements are the history that cannot be changed now.
Although a substantial part of history is opinion, the historian works from sources - or at least ought to - and I don't think we can count Emma Loach's films (which I must admit I haven't watched) as a credible primary source. The 'facts' as she presents them must surely be second or third hand.
Even if Gerry's account of the door situation is correct (and it may easily be wrong, either because he lied or got confused or forgot) I just don't see enough here as a basis on which to start making - or breaking - 'connections'.
I'm just trying to work it out...
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 18, 2013, 01:41:26 AM
Thank you Anne. So it was actually windier on the 2nd then, yet the door didn't move that night when the patio was opened. I think that no added significance would have been added to it on the 3rd if it had.
It's also worth considering that these were two highly intelligent people who would probably have managed to make a causal link between a windy night and a moving door. They didn't, so we shouldn't.
They have connected it with an abductor. The implication binge that s/he was in the apartment at the same time as Gerry during his 9:05 check. In fact, iirc Gerry actually said at one point that he felt as those he may not have been alone?
Icabod, I'm glad you started this thread. Since the bundleman debunking (sorry Admin, possible debunking) I've been wondering about that door. I can see three options:
1, The abductor was in the apartment before 9:05.
2, The door never moved and we are being asked to believe the abductor was in the apartment before 9:05 to fit in with Bundleman.
3, Madeleine woke twice and left the bedroom twice, once before 9:05, then again before 9:30.
If it's 1 we can dismiss Smithman as the abductor as he's really unlikely to have only got ten minutes away in an hour.
If it's 2 there was no abductor.
If it's 3 What's to say Madeleine didn't leave under her own steam?
I'm sure others can add to the possibilities of The Tale of the Moving Door.
The one thing I can't do is decide that it's no longer significant because Bundleman was actually Innocentman.
I don't understand this connection, Caraid.
Can you explain more fully?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 18, 2013, 01:43:13 AM
Yep ... there was just no need to bang on about the door being 'more open' ... but they couldn't resist over-egging the bundleman pudding
Dramas don't happen without some sign that only heroes are capable to decrypt. If there's none, one must be created. In this case the moving door became the sign. Mr McCann claimed he saw that anomaly immediately, showing ipso facto he was an attentive father. But the reality of Madeleine sleeping tight in her bed cheated the unfortunate father, his vigilance was blunt by such touching innocence. This was his story telling. In order to confirm that Madeleine was sleeping and alive a few minutes after nine o'clock, he had to have a look. It didn't pass his mind that nobody knew he never touched the door because he found sufficient to listen, no crying being a proof everything was fine. He therefore didn't need to mention the door at all. But he did and the door more open than he had left it was like the prologue of the tragedy. Engraved in marble or the parents' bedroom door lost in translation ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 18, 2013, 01:54:28 AM
And may be never once considering how in the world they were to get out again.
The rabbit-hole went straight on like a tunnel for some way, and then dipped suddenly down, so suddenly that Alice had not a moment to think about stopping herself before she found herself falling down a very deep well.
It all gets curiouser and curiouser..
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 18, 2013, 02:25:48 AM
I don't like either of the terms, actually Anne. They are far too simplistic given the multidimensionality of this case and the shades of opinion that go with it - and they are also offensive. I hesitated to use them in my post and I will attempt not to do so again.
Grateful !
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Admin on October 18, 2013, 11:39:23 AM
Irrelevant posts have been moved to another thread - please keep to the topic.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 10, 2013, 11:52:27 PM
Mathew checked at 9.30pm - no window or curtain was open in the room when he looked inside. An abductor is not going to stay in there once Gerry left and then Mathew checked. How long are you saying an abductor was hiding in there for? Nonsense. The only available time is 9.30 to 10pm for an abductor to get inside.
Oh please.. why don't you read Matthew Oldfield statement before writing it as a fact. Matthew said there was lots of natural light in the room but no lights on.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 10, 2013, 11:57:49 PM
Gerry's statement:
9.10 The door was at 5 degrees when they left, the door was at 45 degrees when he returned. He moved the doors back to 5 degrees. Shutter was not open, the window was not open, the room was dark and Gerry saw Madeleine at this point.
Matthew Oldfield's statement
09.30 The door was open wide enough to see the twins, he believes the shutters were open too due to lots of light, but not the window.
Kate's statement
The doors to children's bedroom were wide open, the window was open, the shutter was open.
This all would mean the abductor was in the apartment for a long period of time before leaving with Madeleine. Why something like this would not be possible?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 11, 2013, 12:14:39 AM
An abductor would be in and out as quick as possible. Why would you think different? Now imagine that the door was the same when Gerry left, when Matt came at 9.30pm and when Kate arrived i.e. door was half open and it never moved. Imagine that Unbelievable!
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 11, 2013, 12:19:26 AM
An abductor would be in and out as quick as possible. Why would you think different? Now imagine that the door was the same when Gerry left, when Matt came at 9.30pm and when Kate arrived i.e. door was half open and it never moved. Imagine that Unbelievable!
Mr McCann left it almost shut, so Mr Oldfield can't have seen it too much open, now that Tannerman is Innocentman. If Mr Oldfield saw it too much open, the only explanation is the door moved by itself.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 11, 2013, 12:26:21 AM
Mr McCann left it almost shut, so Mr Oldfield can't have seen it too much open, now that Tannerman is Innocentman. If Mr Oldfield saw it too much open, the only explanation is the door moved by itself.
Matt also saw lots of natural light, and Gerry left it all dark.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 11, 2013, 12:37:38 AM
An abductor hiding in an apartment for 30 minutes before he left with Madeleine and no evidence of going through a window. I don't think so. Maybe a pig flew out of the window.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 11, 2013, 12:46:10 AM
No. Mr Oldfield saw the moon coming from the door-window... In fact he never was in this flat.
Quote
At around 9.25pm, the interviewee went into his apartment and Madeleine's apartment to check on the children. He states that the door of the bedroom that was occupied by Madeleine and the twins, was open and that there was enough light in the bedroom for him to see the twins in their cots. That he couldn't see the bed occupied by Madeleine, but as it was all quiet, he deduced that she was sleeping. That the light was not from an artificial source inside the apartment, but perhaps something coming from outside through the bedroom window. That it seemed to him that the shutters of the Master' bedroom window were open without knowing if the window was also open.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 11, 2013, 12:53:09 AM
An abductor hiding in an apartment for 30 minutes before he left with Madeleine and no evidence of going through a window. I don't think so. Maybe a pig flew out of the window.
he went out through the front doors
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on November 11, 2013, 12:55:26 AM
It took me less than 3 minutes, but I was only carrying my bag. Smithman, more muscles than me, was carrying sliding 15 kg. So let's give him 4 minutes ! ;)
Big thanks. So if Smithman was seen at the south end of Rua Escola at 22:00, and if he came from the apartment, then he left the apartment at about 21:56. I wonder if SY have bothered to time this walk?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 11, 2013, 01:01:39 AM
Nobody knows why. I don't want to speculate and we all can speculate.
Quote
I think MO was confused with the light shining into the bedroom from the living room.
Maybe. Maybe not.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 11, 2013, 01:26:40 AM
Fair enough but to find answers we've got to ask the right questions. Why would an abductor take the risk in opening a window and shutters? It doesn't make sense. The only possible reason I can think of would be that he was passing Madeleine through the window to someone else but it was quicker to go in and out through the door. He had to squeeze past 2 cots then bed and chair in corner and left no window evidence.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 11, 2013, 01:31:33 AM
Big thanks. So if Smithman was seen at the south end of Rua Escola at 22:00, and if he came from the apartment, then he left the apartment at about 21:56. I wonder if SY have bothered to time this walk?
Actually the appearance of SY, its old e-fits sold as breaking news, its rotten orange pyjama hammered as identical to fresh white Tannerpyjama, its 36 police officers full time on the case since May 2011, its 41 persons of interest in quite a few countries, its endless rogatory letter requiring 6 police officers in Faro, apart from the 5 in Porto, its HOLMES etc., is imo a much deeper mystery than the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 11, 2013, 01:37:53 AM
Correct there's a lot. I read that top SY detectives are working on this case so they must be wanting to find Madeleine dead or alive before they can wrap up this case. I think the top dogs will be working hard on the theory they think is the correct one i.e. Smithman.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on November 11, 2013, 01:43:18 AM
I think MO was confused with the light shining into the bedroom from the living room.
Jeez Pathfinder
This has been gone over and over and over. Could you read back a bit pls
Probably the main three reasons out of about 7 are that
1) he was preparing an escape route if needed in emergency 2) To pass things and give encouragement and instructions to the lifter (assuming two peeps) 3) To try and take the attention off the front door as means of coming in and out. Cos a key would have been needed and that implicated a member of staff at OC
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 11, 2013, 01:45:15 AM
Fair enough but to find answers we've got to ask the right questions. Why would an abductor take the risk in opening a window and shutters? It doesn't make sense. The only possible reason I can think of would be that he was passing Madeleine through the window to someone else but it was quicker to go in and out through the door. He had to squeeze past 2 cots then bed and chair in corner and left no window evidence.
Can we really predict why people do things? Maybe he felt threatened by the patio door visitors while being in the room. Maybe waiting for accomplice? Maybe this person who was in was not the person who actually took Madeleine away?
If I want to be really nasty I can even say that it could have been Matt Oldfield who opened that window and who passed Madeleine through it to someone as he had the most of the opportunity. I think the PJ thought that on the beginning. It was written somewhere, I think the Guardian that he was given the hard time due to being last before Kate found Madeleine missing and obviously being the one who offered to check. This is just an example. It can also be a member of personnel of OC club who 'agreed' to enter the apartment and take the girl out. It could have been a local petty thief who woke up Madeleine and accidental killed her by making her quiet so she would not scream. Opportunity, organised it can also be an accidental situation. We don't know, but we can at least hope the police is on their track.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 11, 2013, 02:00:27 AM
I believe MO. He looked devastated in the reconstruction going back in to the apartment and explaining what happened. I can't believe an abductor was hiding in that apartment for that long so I don't believe these unlikely door/window theories. That's my own opinion and I will continue to use the simple and most realistic explanation to these discrepancies. One loser once said, The Bigger the Lie, the more it will be Believed. In this case SY have used The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann and not the other word for a very good reason!
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 11, 2013, 02:58:53 AM
Lets hope the police will bring this case to the end, to the place where it should have been long ago.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on November 11, 2013, 05:03:18 AM
I cant see that happening going by their recent efforts. This case will only be resolved if Madeleine turns up.
Depending upon the circumstances, that might bring only partial resolution. A discovered body might provide no cause of death and no perpetrator, so no real solution, other than end of search and partial closure for the McCanns. Even a live Madeleine might not lead to a conviction, depending on the circumstances under which she was found.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Aiofe on November 11, 2013, 06:04:05 PM
Depending upon the circumstances, that might bring only partial resolution. A discovered body might provide no cause of death and no perpetrator, so no real solution, other than end of search and partial closure for the McCanns. Even a live Madeleine might not lead to a conviction, depending on the circumstances under which she was found.
The case is already resolved. No -one has been charged and that (IMHO) is very likely to remain the case.
The furor will dies down if they go for the internet in the New Year.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on November 11, 2013, 06:27:08 PM
If the case are resolved, why are ST and PJ still conducting inquiries?
Because missing person and murder cases should be revisited. Currently there is no=one charged or about to be charged. It remains unsolved as I suspect it always will.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on November 12, 2013, 12:19:36 AM
Because missing person and murder cases should be revisited. Currently there is no=one charged or about to be charged. It remains unsolved as I suspect it always will.
Well which is it then ... resolved ... or unsolved ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on November 12, 2013, 01:18:27 AM
I think it's one of those veiled threats that we, who question the McCann's version of events' are on thin ice ... and it is just a matter of time before our sacrilege is punished
Something like that
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 01:25:14 AM
I think it's one of those veiled threats that we, who question the McCann's version of events' are on thin ice ... and it is just a matter of time before our sacrilege is punished
Something like that
?{)(**
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on November 12, 2013, 01:43:00 AM
I think it's one of those veiled threats that we, who question the McCann's version of events' are on thin ice ... and it is just a matter of time before our sacrilege is punished
Something like that
Anyone can question the McCann's version of events and have their own opinion on their actions. But that's a far cry from point blank ACCUSING them of being 'guilty' as if it is a fact- and spreading lies and disinformation about them which have long since been discredited. It's the latter which I - (and I think most 'pros') - find so unjust, cruel and totally unacceptable. It's not that I am an admirer of the McCanns, it's because I am totally opposed to witchhunts, kangaroo courts and lynchmob mentality - no matter who the victim of that behaviour is.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 01:48:39 AM
Going back to the doors, the subject of this topic..
8.30 pm the doors closed to a very small openings 9.05-9.10 pm Gerry found them open to 45 degrees and closes them back to 5 degrees 9.30 pm Matthew Oldfield said the doors were open. He leaves them as that. But no window open 10 pm Kate finds the doors wide open, tries to close them and then finds the window wide open too.
How do we explain this?
Seems from 8.30 to nearly 10 pm someone is constantly there?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on November 12, 2013, 01:51:29 AM
Anyone can question the McCann's version of events and have their own opinion on their actions. But that's a far cry from point blank ACCUSING them of being 'guilty' as if it is a fact- and spreading lies and disinformation about them which have long since been discredited. It's the latter which I - (and I think most 'pros') - find so unjust, cruel and totally unacceptable. It's not that I am an admirer of the McCanns, it's because I am totally opposed to witchhunts, kangaroo courts and lynchmob mentality - no matter who the victim of that behaviour is.
Do you see that on this forum ?
I think you are a rational poster Benice, and I enjoy debating with you, so I ask the question out of genuine interest ... do you think this forum is conducting a witchhunt with a 'lynchmob mentality' ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on November 12, 2013, 01:55:02 AM
Going back to the doors, the subject of this topic..
8.30 pm the doors closed to a very small openings 9.05-9.10 pm Gerry found them open to 45 degrees and closes them back to 5 degrees 9.30 pm Matthew Oldfield said the doors were open. He leaves them as that. But no window open 10 pm Kate finds the doors wide open, tries to close them and then finds the window wide open too.
How do we explain this?
Seems from 8.30 to nearly 10 pm someone is constantly there?
IMO there are at least 2 possible explanations. Either the abductor was in the apartment, or the bedroom door - (which IIRC is the only interior door facing the patio doors) could have been moved by the change in air pressure every time the patio doors were opened /closed - as it was breezy that night and so that might have been the reason.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on November 12, 2013, 02:09:41 AM
IMO there are at least 2 possible explanations. Either the abductor was in the apartment, or the bedroom door - (which IIRC is the only interior door facing the patio doors) could have been moved by the change in air pressure every time the patio doors were opened /closed - as it was breezy that night and so that might have been the reason.
A third option
The position of the door never changed at all ... and the McCanns lied about it in order to facilitate the 'abduction' witnessed by Jane Tanner at precisely 9.15pm
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 02:12:02 AM
IMO the most possible option is one, that the abductor was in the apartment all of this time.
And if yes, then it would be interesting to know why.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on November 12, 2013, 02:44:49 AM
The position of the door never changed at all ... and the McCanns lied about it in order to facilitate the 'abduction' witnessed by Jane Tanner at precisely 9.15pm
What? Yet more lies? Good grief - the list of lies the McCanns told that night according to some people, must be in the hundreds by now. Practically every word they uttered was a lie in some people's opinion.
Common sense tells me that cannot be the case as no two human beings could possibly remember them all. And why go to such complicated convoluted lengths - when if they had found their daughter dead in the apartment, all they had to do was wait until the dead of night, remove the body to this unfindable place they knew about - then ring the police the next morning and claim that she must have been abducted during the night? Simples. They were not imbeciles - which IMO they would have to be - NOT have come up with the much simpler options that anyone with a fraction of their intelligence would have thought of in seconds.
Sorry I've gone off the topic of the doors - but to me it's inexplicable that the McCanns would have embarked on such a convulated path involving countless lies, 7 other people, and strewn with so many potential pitfalls - when they had absolutely no need to.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on November 12, 2013, 08:43:15 AM
IMO there are at least 2 possible explanations. Either the abductor was in the apartment, or the bedroom door - (which IIRC is the only interior door facing the patio doors) could have been moved by the change in air pressure every time the patio doors were opened /closed - as it was breezy that night and so that might have been the reason.
Either Sadie or Anne posted a weather report and it was windier the night before. I think that if the mysteriously moving door had behaved equally mysteriously on other nights, it wouldn't be considered.....mysterious.....
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 11:01:39 AM
The position of the door never changed at all ... and the McCanns lied about it in order to facilitate the 'abduction' witnessed by Jane Tanner at precisely 9.15pm
That sounds the more simple and likely. Mr McCann, who said he never looked inside, thought he had to invent a pretext to look into the bedroom in order to confirm that Madeleine was sleeping in her bed at 9:10pm. The mysteriously moving door introduced also an element of dramatism in the narrative. Was the intruder in or not ? Everybody realises by now that Mr Oldfield never went inside of the flat. He possibly listened at the shutters, but couldn't say it because of Tannerman.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 02:51:14 PM
The door never changed position - it was the same when Gerry left (half-open or 55 degrees), when MO checked and when Kate arrived. The door didn't move at all. No abductor was hiding in that apartment from 9pm until 9.35pm. I don't believe Madeleine woke up twice - once after Gerry left and moved the door open. Then woke up again after MO check and moved the door fully open before Kate arrived. No No No! The simple and realistic explanation is someone lied about the door position. And if he lied then WHY?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 12, 2013, 03:03:31 PM
The door never changed position - it was the same when Gerry left (half-open or 55 degrees), when MO checked and when Kate arrived. The door didn't move at all. No abductor was hiding in that apartment from 9pm until 9.35pm. I don't believe Madeleine woke up twice - once after Gerry left and moved the door open. Then woke up again after MO check and moved the door fully open before Kate arrived. No No No! The simple and realistic explanation is someone lied about the door position. And if he lied then WHY?
I don't think Madeleine was even in her bed that night,
Gerry McCanns' witness statement 10 May 2007
bed sheets folded towards the foot of the bed
arguido statement 7 September, 2007
lying on top of the covers
'Madeleine Was Here' documentary, broadcast 07 May 2009)
covers were folded down.
And then on Crimewatch she was under the covers. >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 03:11:22 PM
IMO - Madeleine wasn't in the apartment at 8.30pm. This was a simulated abduction from the door and window evidence. And anyone involved would have to have their stories worked out to the tiniest detail and of course they will slip up from time to time. It's best not answering any questions. I'm reading first reports that Kate knew Madeleine had gone because Cuddle Cat was put out of reach by the abductor. Not sure if that's correct because Cuddle Cat was on the pillow.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Redblossom on November 12, 2013, 03:16:46 PM
IMO - Madeleine wasn't in the apartment at 8.30pm. This was a simulated abduction from the door and window evidence. And anyone involved would have to have their stories worked out to the tiniest detail and of course they will slip up from time to time. It's best not answering any questions. I'm reading first reports that Kate knew Madeleine had gone because Cuddle Cat was put out of reach by the abductor. Not sure if that's correct because Cuddle Cat was on the pillow.
That was in some tabloid paper article by Lori Campbell in very early days when anythong went....whether it was made up misunderstood or true no one knows, but the reason given for/by KM knowing she was abducted was because the window and shutters were open/raised...something a three yr old couldnt do
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 03:21:05 PM
Smithman knows. SY have got to positively identify him to have any chance of closing this case. Smithman would never admit to it ofcourse.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Angelo222 on November 12, 2013, 03:23:31 PM
IMO - Madeleine wasn't in the apartment at 8.30pm. This was a simulated abduction from the door and window evidence.
That makes no sense. Had that been the case they were hardly likely to allow Matt or anyone else to do the checks not to mention leave the patio door unlocked for any member of the group to wander in.
Madeleine wandered out into the street and was lifted. The open window and raised shutter was a poor attempt to deflect blame.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Angelo222 on November 12, 2013, 03:32:55 PM
I don't think Madeleine was even in her bed that night,
Gerry McCanns' witness statement 10 May 2007
bed sheets folded towards the foot of the bed
arguido statement 7 September, 2007
lying on top of the covers
'Madeleine Was Here' documentary, broadcast 07 May 2009)
covers were folded down.
And then on Crimewatch she was under the covers. >@@(*&)
These reenactments are very dangerous. When they made the last Bamber one the so-called 'expert' Mark Williams-Thomas claimed Sheila was shot with a shotgun. wtf!!
Total bollox as she was shot with a .22 rifle.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 04:18:30 PM
I'm reading first reports that Kate knew Madeleine had gone because Cuddle Cat was put out of reach by the abductor. Not sure if that's correct because Cuddle Cat was on the pillow.
This is a myth.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 04:22:30 PM
That makes no sense. Had that been the case they were hardly likely to allow Matt or anyone else to do the checks not to mention leave the patio door unlocked for any member of the group to wander in.
Madeleine wandered out into the street and was lifted. The open window and raised shutter was a poor attempt to deflect blame.
Actually that would have worked better if MO found her missing. It can't be the parents they were at the tapas bar. And the abductor had to come in the unlocked patio door to enter. Gerry left the door just open and MO came in and found the door open and Madeleine missing. That would have been far better. No apparent discrepancies on the door or window. But MO didn't enter the room so didn't know if Madeleine was there or not. Smithman must have really hoped and wished that MO had found her missing.
[Madeleine wandered out into the street and was lifted. The open window and raised shutter was a poor attempt to deflect blame.]
Madeleine wouldn't have made it down those steps.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 05:38:24 PM
Madeleine could not wander out, she would not open the curtains, open the patio, close the curtains, close the patio, open the gate and close the gate.. to much for a little child.. she would have left it all open.. if she was able to open it herself.
Another thing, it was dark. Dark inside, dark outside.
A child would rather cry in a dark room then go out in a dark, my opinion.
Point three.. the Portuguese search dogs showed her track out of the apartment through the main, around the building and to a car park.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 05:38:35 PM
(Dianne Webster) clarifies that the practice was for each couple to check their own children, it not being usual for anyone to check the children of other couples. - The question asked, she thinks that up to the date of the disappearance it had never happened that anyone had entered the apartment of another couple in order to check their offspring.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 05:40:23 PM
(Dianne Webster) clarifies that the practice was for each couple to check their own children, it not being usual for anyone to check the children of other couples. - The question asked, she thinks that up to the date of the disappearance it had never happened that anyone had entered the apartment of another couple in order to check their offspring.
But Matthew Oldfield offered to do it in front of everyone. In front of the Dianne Webster too.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 05:44:10 PM
Yes he was going with Russell and Kate was getting up. So he said you stay I'm going anyway so I will do the check.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 05:50:45 PM
I agree, but she could easily open the door (this is why the O'Briens locked it) and the corridor had some permanent light.
the front door had this pull up lock, where the doors lock if you pull them from outside. It is questionable if Madeleine could open this type of lock. But the shutter with the pull up cord on the side she would definitely not be able to open this, it is even hard for an adult.
Pity they never done DNA test on the shutter cord. That could have explained everything. Well, too late..
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 05:55:13 PM
The only possible exit for Madeleine was through the patio door and she wouldn't have closed the patio door behind her and even got down those steps. An abductor would have to carry her down those steps and then straight into the street without being seen. But he wouldn't have went back in the apartment to open windows and shutters.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on November 12, 2013, 05:56:27 PM
Yes he was going with Russell and Kate was getting up. So he said you stay I'm going anyway so I will do the check.
I bet he regretted saying that later.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 05:59:33 PM
Definitely but I believe he's an innocent victim who's been caught up in the middle of this. MO never had any finger prints found on the window unless he brought out his gloves. Can't see it at all as there's no motive.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 06:00:25 PM
The only possible exit for Madeleine was through the patio door and she wouldn't have closed the patio door behind her and even got down those steps. An abductor would have to carry her down those steps and then straight into the street without being seen. But he wouldn't have went back in the apartment to open windows and shutters.
Well, if we are to trust the Portuguese search dogs Madeleine went out through the main doors and most probably walking. Barefoot and holding hands of her abductor???
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on November 12, 2013, 06:02:42 PM
Could that not equally be Madeleine coming into 5A after a period at the creche?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 06:04:42 PM
Could that not equally be Madeleine coming into 5A after a period at the creche?
no, because these dogs don't work like that. they work from the last place she was seen at.
And if we are to trust all of the info given in statements and files.. someone was in that apartment for a long period of time and that person took Madeleine out through the front door and to the car park.
this is saying, if nobody lied.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 06:06:56 PM
Well the cadaver dog found her scent at the bottom of the steps in the flower bed, not at the front door.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on November 12, 2013, 06:07:30 PM
5A was the last place she was seen, so they would start from there. Can dogs determine which direction a scent is traveling in?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 06:09:18 PM
Well the cadaver dogs found her scent at the bottom of the steps in the flower bed, not at the front door.
but the search dogs which were used on the May 4th followed her scent to the car park. Two dogs on the 4th and then two dogs on the 8th, all went the same way.
I am not sure about the scent in the flower bed, is it in files? was it tested for her DNA?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 06:12:12 PM
The last time Madeleine was seen alive was at 5.30pm when Kate picked her up from the creche. David Payne claims that he saw her at 6.30pm. We don't know what happened after that time.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 06:15:28 PM
The last time Madeleine was seen alive was at 5.30pm when Kate picked her up at the creche. David Payne claims that he saw her at 6.30pm. We don't know what happened after that time.
But Portuguese police used the search dogs quite on time, and these dogs are quite good, I read somewhere they are the second in the world, after the Canadian rescue dogs but not sure where I heard this.
These dogs search for live people and they found her live track. This would be her freshest track, meaning the last.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 06:17:13 PM
Well they may have picked the last scent of her when she was alive and outside at 5.30pm.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: ferryman on November 12, 2013, 06:17:47 PM
but the search dogs which were used on the May 4th followed her scent to the car park. Two dogs on the 4th and then two dogs on the 8th, all went the same way.
I am not sure about the scent in the flower bed, is it in files? was it tested for her DNA?
No they didn't.
The dogs deployed by the GNR (no doubt well trained, and with handlers immeasurably more competent than Grime) were unfortunately of the wrong discipline for the type of search required.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 06:20:08 PM
The dogs deployed by the GNR (no doubt well trained, and with handlers immeasurably more competent than Grime) @)(++(* were unfortunately of the wrong discipline for the type of search required.
They were exactly what was needed for a lost but alive little girl.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 06:23:32 PM
Well they may have picked the last scent of her when she was alive and outside at 5.30pm.
Either they picked up the last scent of her when, after getting out though the main door, she followed the corridor and turned around the building, crossed Francisco GM and met someone on the public car park who put her in a car. Or they picked up the scent she left the day before in the morning, a scent that remained thanks to the walls' protection. In this case, she likely wasn't alive when she left the flat for the last time.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 06:30:11 PM
no, because these dogs don't work like that. they work from the last place she was seen at.
And if we are to trust all of the info given in statements and files.. someone was in that apartment for a long period of time and that person took Madeleine out through the front door and to the car park.
this is saying, if nobody lied.
If she had been carried from the corridor to the car park, the dogs would have followed that track. If she was carried alive of course. Instead of that, Rex run forward up to the bottom of the corridor.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 06:37:04 PM
After 17H30 they went to the apartment, the deponent having entered by the main door, which he did not lock while he was inside the residence. KATE and the children entered by the back door, after this had been opened from the inside by the deponent. (GM 10 May)
He went through the front door and the rest stayed out the back.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Redblossom on November 12, 2013, 06:38:58 PM
After 17H30 they went to the apartment, the deponent having entered by the main door, which he did not lock while he was inside the residence. KATE and the children entered by the back door, after this had been opened from the inside by the deponent. (GM 10 May)
He went through the front door and the rest stayed out the back?
Yes, easier to get three young kids indoors quicker than walking them all around to the front door.....I dont see a problem with that....
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 06:40:56 PM
What were the twins in? Take a push chair up the back steps.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: ferryman on November 12, 2013, 06:42:07 PM
They had a debate about whether or not to give the dogs something of Madeleine's to sniff -- a debate that would not have been necessary if they'd had tracker dogs, because tracker dogs can't work any other way.
Mark Harrison said in his report that the GNR deployed aerial scenting dogs.
Mark Harrison was right.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Redblossom on November 12, 2013, 06:45:29 PM
What were the twins in? Take a push chair up the back steps.
Well apparently they didnt have one, but even if they did, no problem carrying that up or taken round the front by GM..whilst the kids went up the stairs....I thnk you are sweating the small stuff here, no offense meant....Just lost track of what you are trying to argue
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 06:47:24 PM
They had a debate about whether or not to give the dogs something of Madeleine's to sniff -- a debate that would not have been necessary if they'd had tracker dogs, because tracker dogs can't work any other way.
Mark Harrison said in his report that the GNR deployed aerial scenting dogs.
Mark Harrison was right.
They deployed also rescue dogs. I've read the GNR reports and Rex' handler's report and there is no debate as you pretend. Rex was given a bath towel. Numi, 24 hours sooner, was given the blanket.
Please if you find a document saying that Rex was a rescue dog, post it !
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 06:48:09 PM
Well apparently they didnt have one, but even if they did, no problem carrying that up or taken round the front by GM..whilst the kids went up the stairs....I thnk you are sweating the small stuff here, no offense meant....Just lost track of what you are trying to argue
That's ok thanks. Going to take a look at these dog reports.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 06:56:09 PM
I thought so too, but it seems not http://newyorksearchandrescue.org/download/Scents%20and%20Sense-Ability%20K9%20article.pdf (http://newyorksearchandrescue.org/download/Scents%20and%20Sense-Ability%20K9%20article.pdf)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on November 12, 2013, 07:00:56 PM
That sounds the more simple and likely. Mr McCann, who said he never looked inside, thought he had to invent a pretext to look into the bedroom in order to confirm that Madeleine was sleeping in her bed at 9:10pm. The mysteriously moving door introduced also an element of dramatism in the narrative. Was the intruder in or not ?
Everybody realises by now that Mr Oldfield never went inside of the flat[/b]. He possibly listened at the shutters, but couldn't say it because of Tannerman.
Speak for yourself Anne, I fully believe Matt went into 5A. It doesn't surprise me that he didn't go into the bedrom. There was no sound coming from it - and because of that he would automatically assume that all the children were fast asleep - and that is all he went there to establish. Why would he think anything different? He wasn't there to check whether one of them had been abducted. He would have no way of knowing whether the door was how Gerry left it or not.
It's easy to say 'he lied' but not so easy to explain why and when he decided to. If he didn't go into 5A how could he have described the bedroom - someone would have to explain it all to him. When did that happen?
When did he find out that JT had seen someone and the details of when and where she saw him - she wasn't in 5A until after the PJ arrived? What difference did it make if he listened outside the window at 9.30 and so didn't see Madeleine, or if he went into the apartment at 9.30 - and didn't see Madeleine because of where he stood. In both scenarios he didn't see Madeleine so why would he think lying would make any difference to anything JT saw?
So easy for others to say ''Ohh he lied'' with the 20/20 vision of hindsight and knowing all the facts as we now know them. But he would have needed to be able to see into the future to think in the way you suggest IMO.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 07:09:10 PM
Yes I wouldn't overcomplicate things. This was very easy to do if the the window wasn't opened (BIG MISTAKE NO. 1). Originally only two checks were supposed to happen before the alert not 3 - MO put a spanner in the works concerning the discrepancy of the door (BIG MISTAKE NO. 2) . Smithman would have been in the streets at 9.35pm and not 10pm.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 07:11:25 PM
Have you read his description of the bedroom, Benice ? Have you seen the photo of the police? Why did he get in if he only listened ? Why didn't he react seeing a bed was empty ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: ferryman on November 12, 2013, 07:13:31 PM
They do have these dogs too, Ferryman, but Rex was a tracker dog.
At about 19.. the undersigned officer, accompanied by the Commander, Officer Silva, took part in a meetings with the PJ Directorate, being asked by the PJ about the viability of giving the girl's clothes to the dogs for the dogs to sniff again, and if by means of the odour inhaled, they would be able to mark an identical odour in one of the resort apartments even though its door was closed.
With regard to this task, Officer Silva referred to the fact that the time that had passed would be a crucial condition for the dogs' work in obtaining results and that the entirety of the human odours existing in the apartments and access paths could make the dogs' searches very difficult. However, in spite of not being a normal situation for tracking, it could be attempted, whilst the operation should be carried out as quickly as possible and not directed towards one but to all the apartments in the resort, it being appropriate for the handler not to know which apartment was chosen, so as not the be conditioned.
In this concrete situation, the objective would be for the dogs to carry out a discontinuous search, in other words, to sniff the girl's clothes and immediately search near to the apartments, checking to see if there was any change in the behaviour of the dogs.
Simply put, that debate (about whether to give the dog something of Madeleine's to sniff) would not have been necessary if they were tracker dogs. Tracker dogs can't work any other way.
To a tracker dog, a combination of odours would not be a hindrance, because dogs have the ability to differentiate and distinguish between different scents, disregarding the scents they are not primed to track and focussing on the ones they are.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 07:14:51 PM
At about 19.. the undersigned officer, accompanied by the Commander, Officer Silva, took part in a meetings with the PJ Directorate, being asked by the PJ about the viability of giving the girl's clothes to the dogs for the dogs to sniff again, and if by means of the odour inhaled, they would be able to mark an identical odour in one of the resort apartments even though its door was closed.
With regard to this task, Officer Silva referred to the fact that the time that had passed would be a crucial condition for the dogs' work in obtaining results and that the entirety of the human odours existing in the apartments and access paths could make the dogs' searches very difficult. However, in spite of not being a normal situation for tracking, it could be attempted, whilst the operation should be carried out as quickly as possible and not directed towards one but to all the apartments in the resort, it being appropriate for the handler not to know which apartment was chosen, so as not the be conditioned.
In this concrete situation, the objective would be for the dogs to carry out a discontinuous search, in other words, to sniff the girl's clothes and immediately search near to the apartments, checking to see if there was any change in the behaviour of the dogs.
Ferryman, I hope you only made a confusion here. This report concerns the 7th of May, not the 4th when Rex and Zarus picked up the track after sniffing the bath towel. Vol XIII Pages 3517-24
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on November 12, 2013, 07:22:43 PM
What difference did it make if he listened outside the window at 9.30 and so didn't see Madeleine, or if he went into the apartment at 9.30 - and didn't see Madeleine because of where he stood. In both scenarios he didn't see Madeleine so why would he think lying would make any difference to anything JT saw?
So easy for others to say ''Ohh he lied'' with the 20/20 vision of hindsight and knowing all the facts as we now know them. But he would have needed to be able to see into the future to think in the way you suggest IMO.
Because (perhaps...) he's the only witness to the patio door being unlocked?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: ferryman on November 12, 2013, 07:26:42 PM
The search was split into 3 zones radiating out from Praia Da Luz in a northward direction. The first zone extended 3km to the EN125 road at Espiche. W?hin this zone, sectors were drawn using the natural boundaries that exist and included the entire village. Officers were briefed and debriefed before and after deployments and records of activity collected. Each sector was repeatedly searched on 3 separate occasions over the 7 days using officers conducting line searches and supported by air scenting dogs.
Mark Harrison
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 07:30:10 PM
If Oldfield was merely checking if the children were asleep then the 'listening at the window' check he had done previously would have been sufficient
Did he ever say why, on that last occasion, he changed his routine, and went into the McCanns' apartment, having never done so before ?
I thought Kate told him that the patio door was open? If he didn't know it was open he wouldn't have went inside.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 07:30:50 PM
“ The sniffer dog search and rescue team of the GNR was sent to Vila da Luz in the attempt of locating Madeleine McCann, aged four, of British nationality, who disappeared on the night of 3rd May, from apartment 5 A, Block 5 of the OC resort, the team was composed as follows:”
“During the afternoon of 4th May, more searches were carried out around Vila da Luz and were extended to a radius of approximately 600 metres, including the surroundings of the EN125 in the stretch closed to P da L.
At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).
After the officers had been updated about facts relating to the disappearance, they tried to reconstruct the route the girl might have taken with the two tracker dogs. For this purpose the dogs were given a blanket to sniff, provided by the parents, which had been used by Madeleine.
Beginning to follow the track using Rex, from the door of apartment 5 A (the place where the girl had been sleeping) he would always head in the direction of Block 4, leaving block 5 the dog would turn to the left, pass by a metal access door to a path existing between the apartments blocks to the leisure area (restaurant, pool and playground). Immediately another attempt at reconstruction was made using the dog Zarus, who, in general terms, ended up following the same route as Rex and having the same behaviour.
It is important to state that this tracking work was carried out in an urban area and more than 24 hours after the girl’s disappearance and numerous persons had passed along the path the dogs were tracking. It should also be stated that the path the dogs followed within the resort was practically totally surrounded by walls and the concentration of odours was stronger as they were protected from the wind. The searches finished at about 01.30”
"he would always head in the direction of Block 4, leaving block 5 the dog would turn to the left, pass by a metal access door to a path existing between the apartments blocks to the leisure area (restaurant, pool and playground)."
Have we got any images to show the direction the dogs took from 5A please? Thanks.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Redblossom on November 12, 2013, 07:35:11 PM
Because (perhaps...) he's the only witness to the patio door being unlocked?
OBrien reckons he checked in the Mccanns kids on Sunday night via the patio doors.....said doors being locked according to Gerry....that night....anyway....if he (Matt) went inside to do a "visual" check he failed to so ..what is also strange is that accordingto his wife he wondered where Madeleine slept and even went to look for her in her parents room...but didnt stick his head round the kids room....in any case, if Matt did go into 5a on that night it was out of his way, rather than just listening for noise at the window next to his from outside....
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 07:38:43 PM
The search was split into 3 zones radiating out from Praia Da Luz in a northward direction. The first zone extended 3km to the EN125 road at Espiche. W?hin this zone, sectors were drawn using the natural boundaries that exist and included the entire village. Officers were briefed and debriefed before and after deployments and records of activity collected. Each sector was repeatedly searched on 3 separate occasions over the 7 days using officers conducting line searches and supported by air scenting dogs.
Mark Harrison
air scenting dogs, yes, the GNR has a lot of them... none is called Rex and none is called Zarus..
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 07:39:05 PM
"It is also certain that the course that they made to the car park next to Block 6 was done without hesitation and in a most convincing manner. "
Where is the car park next to Block 6? Image please?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Lyall on November 12, 2013, 07:39:27 PM
OBrien reckons he checked in the Mccanns kids on Sunday night via the patio doors.....said doors being locked according to Gerry....that night....anyway....if he went inside to do a "visual" check he failed to so ..what is also strange is that accordingto his wife he wondered where Madeleine slept and even went to look for her in her parents room...but didnt stick his head round the kids room....in any case, if Matt did go into 5a on that night it was out of his way, rather than just listening for noise at the window next to his from outside....
Did ROB say that in the rogatory? Or earlier?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 07:40:59 PM
OBrien reckons he checked in the Mccanns kids on Sunday night via the patio doors.....said doors being locked according to Gerry....that night....anyway....if he (Matt) went inside to do a "visual" check he failed to so ..what is also strange is that accordingto his wife he wondered where Madeleine slept and even went to look for her in her parents room...but didnt stick his head round the kids room....in any case, if Matt did go into 5a on that night it was out of his way, rather than just listening for noise at the window next to his from outside....
Mr O'Brien also said that the same Sunday he checked Mr Oldfield's child... and Mr Oldfield was sick at home..
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on November 12, 2013, 07:43:30 PM
They certainly did seem to get confused over which day was which.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 07:44:42 PM
Thanks very much Anne. That is where Gerry said he was talking to Jez?
The entrance of this public car park is in front of the Tapas reception. Mr McCann and Mr W were talking higher in the street. Rex, at the bottom of the alley path crossed the street and turned right following for some meters the G6 wall down to the car park.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 07:56:12 PM
The entrance of this public car park is in front of the Tapas reception. Mr McCann and Mr W were talking higher in the street. Rex, at the bottom of the alley path crossed the street and turned right following for some meters the G6 wall down to the car park.
It was at the car park, next to the lamp post the dogs lost the track.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 07:58:57 PM
Pity the car park was never looked at further. People living around the car park never asked if they saw anything unusual that night.
I doubt very much that this little girl would have gone all that way. The corridor part possibly, but the alley path was very dark, I feel she would have gone backwards. But if she didn't, then why would she cross Francisco GM ? And I can't figure her out not screaming and crying and calling. No way.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 08:00:22 PM
Where is the crèche in relation to that map where Madeleine was picked up at 5.30pm?
If it's below that car park then it seems like they walked from there at 5.30pm and Madeleine went to the front entrance of 5A and not to the back as said in that 10 May statement.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 08:02:54 PM
I doubt very much that this little girl would have gone all that way. The corridor part possibly, but the alley path was very dark, I feel she would have gone backwards. But if she didn't, then why would she cross Francisco GM ? And I can't figure her out not screaming and crying and calling. No way.
It is not up to us what to believe. The PJ had a lead, within first 24 hours of the disappearance, they had at that time 2 dogs separately pointing at this car park. They could at least ask who parked their car there that night. Also there were rubbish bins there. There should be a report in the files about these bins being searched.
It is somewhere at the back of my mind that Kate said she went there during this first night. Am I wrong?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 08:07:16 PM
Where is the crèche in relation to that map where Madeleine was picked up at 5.30pm?
If it's below that car park then it seems like they walked from there at 5.30pm and around to the front entrance of 5A and not to the back as said in that 10 May statement.
I would like to know what was Madeleine's last known route from the apartment and by walking... off to search for that in the files. And if that last route matches the dogs route than that is it. But if it doesn't then it would be her new last known route.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 08:14:56 PM
The route from the crèche to the apartment is Madeleine's last known route outside at 5.30pm?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 08:16:08 PM
kate mccann witness statement on May 4th describing Madeleine's route for the Thursday May 3
Quote
At 12.30pm, they collected their children and had lunch in their apartment, as it had a kitchen. After lunch, at around 1.30pm, the children spent time near the club's swimming pool, supervised by the parents, for about 45 minutes, where they played, applied sun cream etc. After this time, they placed the children back at the "Kids Club" until around 5/5.30pm, the time when the children ate at a bar under the watchful eyes of the parents. After the 5pm dinner, they bathed the children, prepared them for the night and let them play for a while at a playground next to the tennis courts, still and always under parental supervision. At around 8pm, the children were put to bed until the following morning, when the described routine started all over again.
So according to this, Madeleine's last known route would be from apartment to a playground next to the tennis courts. Is this on the dogs route? Where these playgrounds are?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 08:17:09 PM
kate mccann witness statement on May 4th describing Madeleine's route for the Thursday May 3
So according to this, Madeleine's last known route would be from apartment to a playground next to the tennis courts. Is this on the dogs route? Where these playgrounds are?
The dogs may have lost the scent at the car park. I want to find the last known route of Madeleine from the creche to the apartment so I can compare the two?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 08:32:31 PM
The dogs may have lost the scent at the car park. I want to find the last known route of Madeleine from the creche to the apartment so I can compare the two?
Actually that what I posted is the daily routine.. it wasn't the routine of the May 3. It is very hard to read their statements! Here is Gerry's account
Quote
The tennis class finished at 11H15, he stayed in the pool area talking with his wife and other people, whom he does not remember. At 12H00, he agreed with KATE, as he recalls it, that she would make lunch and the deponent would pick up MADELEINE. He thinks that it was KATE who took the twins home. Since it was he who went to collect MADELEINE, he is sure he used the short-cut.what he means by short cut???
At 12h30 they started lunch, the meal having lasted an hour, until 13h30. After that time they made their way to the resort play area, the deponent having left through the front door and the rest of the family through the back door that, once again, he shut and locked from the inside. As for the front door, he does not know exactly if he locked it.Here you go, this is the last known route of Madeleine leaving apartment.. did she come back and leave again????
They stayed in the play area for approximately an hour, until 14H30/14H35. After that, they left the twins at the crèche near the TAPAS, they signed the register, and the three of them (deponent, KATE and MADELEINE) made their way to the crèche at the main reception, where they arrived at 14H50 and delivered MADELEINE, not being able to say precisely who signed the register.
The deponent and KATE returned to the OCEAN CLUB by the short-cut and at the secondary reception they asked the lady employee if there was a vacant tennis court they could reserve. They were told there was a vacancy between 14H30 and 15H30. As it was already 15h00, they began to play immediately. At 15H30, the tennis instructor arrived, who taught them a class until 16H30.
They stayed there, talking, until 16H45, at which time the twins went to the meal area. At 17h00, as usual, MADELEINE arrived accompanied by the nannies and the other children. After her arrival, MADELEINE dined, having finished at 17H30.
After 17H30 they went to the apartment, the deponent having entered by the main door, which he did not lock while he was inside the residence. KATE and the children entered by the back door, after this had been opened from the inside by the deponent.
They bathed the children, the deponent having left at 18H00 for a tennis game only for men, which was attended by: DAN, the tennis instructor; JULIAN, with whom he had played tennis several times; and CURTIS, with whom he had also played before.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 08:40:39 PM
Here you go.. dogs route can be a part of home to creche path
MC is where the creche is. TB is Tapas Bar.
Have the parents ever described what route they took from home to creche?
But note that last time Madeleine entered the apartment she did not enter through the front door but through the patio doors. edit: She also made her last known exit through the patio doors.
This means the dogs route should have been investigated because Madeleine that day neither went through the main door or came back through the main door, the route the dogs choose.. meaning that it is possible that she did indeed go out her last time through the main doors with the kidnapper
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Redblossom on November 12, 2013, 08:47:39 PM
The dogs may have lost the scent at the car park. I want to find the last known route of Madeleine from the creche to the apartment so I can compare the two?
The live scent dogs seem to have tracked a trail that Gerry referred to in his May 10 statement....sorry id this doesnt help, this subject is one of the more confusing ones....but certainly Madeleine would not have returned home going via the back alleyways.....
From memory, on Tuesday, 1 May 2007, being shown by RUSSELL, he went to pick up MADELEINE at creche using a short-cut that began at the car park opposite the secondary reception and went between the buildings, which he used to fetch and carry his daughter. Snip That, between Monday and Wednesday, not knowing the precise date, when they left the residence by the main door, to place the children in the respective creches, MADELEINE left [went] running to the left to the extreme opposite of the residential blocks where they were lodged, playing with the twins. That they had gone down to the furthest point away from those blocks, not knowing exactly how, the three children got into the gardens at the rear [of the blocks]. Then they followed the inside corridor [pathway] at the rear, next to the hedges [fences] up to the street that led to the secondary reception.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 08:55:47 PM
The live scent dogs seem to have tracked a trail that Gerry referred to in his May 10 statement....sorry id this doesnt help, this subject is one of the more confusing ones....but certainly Madeleine would not have returned home going via the back alleyways.....
From memory, on Tuesday, 1 May 2007, being shown by RUSSELL, he went to pick up MADELEINE at creche using a short-cut that began at the car park opposite the secondary reception and went between the buildings, which he used to fetch and carry his daughter. Snip That, between Monday and Wednesday, not knowing the precise date, when they left the residence by the main door, to place the children in the respective creches, MADELEINE left [went] running to the left to the extreme opposite of the residential blocks where they were lodged, playing with the twins. That they had gone down to the furthest point away from those blocks, not knowing exactly how, the three children got into the gardens at the rear [of the blocks]. Then they followed the inside corridor [pathway] at the rear, next to the hedges [fences] up to the street that led to the secondary reception.
I thought the dogs would pick up the last route. Why would they pick up a route of May 1st? They could simply go through the patio doors and to the playground, then to creche, that would be her last ( strongest) route? I am not satisfied with this May 1st explanation.. it is too far in past.. Madeleine walked around many times after that!
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 08:56:21 PM
Thank you everyone for maps and info. So it looks like they used a short cut from the creche and they came to that car park where the dogs found her strong scent.
Now the interesting part - from the dogs tracking it looks like Madeleine actually returned to the apartment going to the front entrance of 5A from the creche and not entering from the back?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 08:59:50 PM
Thank you everyone for maps and info. So it looks like they used a short cut from the creche and they came to that car park where the dogs found her strong scent.
Now the interesting part - from the dogs tracking it looks like Madeleine actually returned to the apartment going to the front entrance of 5A from the creche and not entering from the back?
The dogs wouldn't work this way. Their starting point is the last place the missing person is seen. And the last place she was seen is her bedroom. All dogs separately went through the main doors, not a single dog used the patio doors. IMO this means Madeleine on her last exit from that apartment went out through the front doors, not the patio doors.
So far what I believe from this is that: Person who took Madeleine spent some time in the apartment ( from around 9pm to around 9.40 pm) and they took Madeleine out through the front door and to the car park. Now, the question is whether the dogs would pick up the scent if she was carried and if she was god forbid dead while being carried?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 09:00:20 PM
The dogs may have lost the scent at the car park. I want to find the last known route of Madeleine from the creche to the apartment so I can compare the two?
Madeleine crossed that car park for the last time around 5pm East-West, then she crossed Francisco GM and entered in the tapas resort.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 09:03:43 PM
All dogs separately went through the main doors, not a single dog used the patio doors.
The first dog (the only one who went inside of the flat), Numi, went very close to that (closed) window-door. I'm not sure he was free to choose the exit.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Redblossom on November 12, 2013, 09:04:53 PM
I thought the dogs would pick up the last route. Why would they pick up a route of May 1st? They could simply go through the patio doors and to the playground, then to creche, that would be her last ( strongest) route? I am not satisfied with this May 1st explanation.. it is too far in past.. Madeleine walked around many times after that!
I doubt dogs trails are robotic or that scientific, they may have picked up several trails..weak and strong...they picked up a trail round the flats and down the road to the car park and to the entrance of the ocean club where the kids ate after the creche and where their play area was.....as for may 1st thats gerry words....he never said Madeleine and the kids went round the flats that day he was vague..monday to wednesday.... may 1st the tuesday was when Russell showed hm a shortcut....To the creche....as I said before, confusing subject, so taking my leave
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 09:05:19 PM
The dogs wouldn't work this way. Their starting point is the last place the missing person is seen. And the last place she was seen is her bedroom. All dogs separately went through the main doors, not a single dog used the patio doors. IMO this means Madeleine on her last exit from that apartment went out through the front doors, not the patio doors.
So far what I believe from this is that: Person who took Madeleine spent some time in the apartment ( from around 9pm to around 9.40 pm) and they took Madeleine out through the front door and to the car park. Now, the question is whether the dogs would pick up the scent if she was carried and if she was god forbid dead while being carried?
Madeleine arrived at 5.30pm and entered through the front door of the apartment. She followed that dog tracking route direction from apartment to the car park (but in reverse as she was coming from the creche). But that 10 May statement said she entered the apartment from the back. I don't agree with that statement. The dogs are showing she entered from the front and an abductor is not going to use that direction to go to that car park when there's one straight behind the apartment.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 09:10:29 PM
I doubt dogs trails are robotic or that scientific, they may have picked up several trails..weak and strong...they picked up a trail round the flats and down the road to the car park and to the entrance of the ocean club where the kids ate after the creche and where their play area was.....as for may 1st thats gerry words....he never said Madeleine and the kids went round the flats that day he was vague..monday to wednesday.... may 1st the tuesday was when Russell showed hm a shortcut....To the creche....as I said before, confusing subject, so taking my leave
It could have been on Wednesday 2nd morning. Anyway it's very interesting to observe that the same dogs followed the same route on the 7th, three days later. It shows that the scent remains quite a long time on a protected ground as this is the case of this route. The handler explains this very well.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 09:13:38 PM
Madeleine arrived at 5.30pm and entered through the front door of the apartment. She followed that dog tracking route direction from apartment to the car park (but in reverse as she was coming from the creche). But that 10 May statement said she entered the apartment from the back. I don't agree with that statement.
No, she entered in the flat through the patio-door. The dogs didn't follow this track. If they had started near the pool, they might have followed it.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 09:16:23 PM
But wouldn't the dogs have found her scent before they reached the car park? The back of the apartment is across the road and not far from the lane.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 09:17:50 PM
It would be interesting to know what SY and PJ make out of this dogs route !
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 09:18:29 PM
This doesn't explain while all dogs took the front door route. The dogs could as well go towards the patio doors and exit there but they did not.
No, the first dog had no choice but to leave through the main door where he picked up a scent, possibly not the freshest one. The next day, the second dogs, Rex then Zarus, didn't enter in the flat. They were freed in the corridor, first went towards 5A, then turned back and followed down the corridor.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 09:27:21 PM
But wouldn't the dogs have found her scent before they reached the car park? The back of the apartment is across the road and not far from the lane.
When Rex reached Francisco GM, he suddenly was in a area swept by cars and wind etc., he nevertheless crossed the street, perhaps because he picked up the scent Madeleine left there many times (if they always crossed this street at more or less the same point). Then he didn't hesitate and turned right (showing he had really picked up something) but then, arriving at the lamp post the dog was lost. I think he was lost because the scent was getting weaker and weaker, indicating he was in the wrong direction. That's why he crossed where Madeleine had crossed at 5 when she came back from the creche. Unfortunately the secondary reception's door was closed and nobody opened it. So the dog lost the scent irremediably. The fact the dogs couldn't choose the exit from the flat, the fact that nobody opened the door to the dog, makes me feel that nobody believed much in these dogs. A pity.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 09:36:43 PM
5.30pm was the last time Madeleine was seen alive outside the apartment so I'm astonished they never checked the back of the apartment with the dogs.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 09:38:02 PM
I agree.. It is a big pity these dogs weren't used more and their findings investigated to a bigger detail.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 09:40:29 PM
Even from these findings I think there's a discrepancy on which entrance was used by Madeleine to enter the apartment at 5.30pm. I can't dismiss these dog searches that seem to show that the front entrance way was used by Madeleine but at 5.30pm I don't know.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 09:55:01 PM
Even from these findings I think there's a discrepancy on which entrance was used by Madeleine to enter the apartment at 5.30pm. I can't dismiss these dog searches that seem to show that the front entrance way was used by Madeleine but at 5.30pm I don't know.
If you read the files, you'll see that on that day, Madeleine went out of the flat twice using the patio-door and entered once (the other is unknown) using that patio-door.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 10:06:50 PM
I presume when Gerry locks the front door, Kate carries all 3 children down the steep steps at the back. I'm not totally convinced.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 10:36:04 PM
I presume when Gerry locks the front door, Kate carries all 3 children down the steep steps at the back. I'm not totally convinced.
That's what they said and why should they lie ? Mrs McCann had not to carry her kids, they could walk !
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 10:51:44 PM
Why Lie? Because by the time he did his 10 May statement he had known that the tracking dogs had been used. And he wanted to show that the abductor must have taken Madeleine out the front door as Madeleine never came through that door at 5.30pm on 3 May. Of course he would lie if he was involved.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 12, 2013, 11:11:41 PM
Why Lie? Because by the time he did his 10 May statement he had known that the tracking dogs had been used. And he wanted to show that the abductor must have taken Madeleine out the front door as Madeleine never came through that door at 5.30pm on 3 May. Of course he would lie if he was involved.
The McCanns saw the first dog, Numi, in the flat. They gave the blanket for the dog to smell. I guess that the handler must have told them which route the dog had taken. If the issue was to check which route Madeleine took to go to the flat for the last time, they should have brought the dogs near the Tapas and start from there.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 11:14:31 PM
Agreed. I believe that Madeleine came through the front door entrance at 5.30pm not the back. The dogs followed her last outdoor alive scent at 5.30pm from the front door around the lanes to the car park where it was then lost.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 11:39:45 PM
Agreed. I believe that Madeleine came through the front door entrance at 5.30pm not the back. The dogs followed her last outdoor alive scent at 5.30pm from the front door around the lanes to the car park where it was then lost.
And why it cannot be the abductor leaving with Madeleine through the front door?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 11:45:29 PM
Because an abductor would use the car park behind the apartment. He would not go walking around lanes with Madeleine to another car park much further away and opposite the tapas bar. Remember that car park where the scent was lost was on the way to the crèche where Madeleine came back from at 5.30pm - it connects direction wise.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 12, 2013, 11:51:22 PM
Because an abductor would use the car park behind the apartment. He would not go walking around lanes with Madeleine to another car park much further away and opposite the tapas bar. Remember that car park where the scent was lost was on the way to the crèche where Madeleine came back from at 5.30pm - it connects direction wise.
Are you sure he had a car handy?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 12, 2013, 11:58:03 PM
No I don't believe he had a car as Smithman wasn't driving.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on November 12, 2013, 11:58:56 PM
Because an abductor would use the car park behind the apartment. He would not go walking around lanes with Madeleine to another car park much further away and opposite the tapas bar. Remember that car park where the scent was lost was on the way to the crèche where Madeleine came back from at 5.30pm - it connects direction wise.
I am not understanding you Pathfinder.
Are you theinking the Tapas area is at the Front? Cos that is actually the back.
The front is to the north of the building.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 13, 2013, 12:15:00 AM
Yeah car park in front of the apartment an abductor would use.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on November 13, 2013, 12:19:55 AM
No I don't believe he had a car as Smithman wasn't driving.
It could be someone known to Madeleine, taking her all the dogs route to the car park, If anyone seen them the excuse would be 'we are looking for her parents' and then the person handing her to a parked car with the smiths man again telling her they are taking her to her parents. driving off fast from there with Madeleine and then he parked near the smiths sighting and moved on foot. either to a boat or to his house
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 13, 2013, 12:35:34 AM
They need to identify Smithman to crack the case. Everything will become crystal clear when that happens. Everything connects.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 13, 2013, 01:58:17 AM
They need to identify Smithman to crack the case. Everything will become crystal clear when that happens. Everything connects.
lets hope they already have him.. it has been reported he was named to SY after the CW..
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on November 13, 2013, 01:06:47 PM
There is no evidence inside the apartment that any intruder ever set foot inside. So I think the simplest explanation for an increase in the angle of opening of a bedroom door, is simply that a child was awakened by a noise, and pulled the door wider open to go out of the bedroom.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: colombosstogey on November 13, 2013, 02:14:36 PM
The door to the childrens room.
Which way do you think the abductor went in. I think the front door.
My rationale for this is because the back/side entrance is too exposed and not only that has steep stairs and a childs stair gate on the top.
I keep being told that the patio door is unlocked and the perb would no this.
Question. How? How would an abductor know this.
The front door initially it was said there was a special lock on it. Would that lock not have been changed though when the apartment was put out for rent? The reason why I ask is the key was supposed to be a specialist key and very difficult to get a copy.
WOULD someone renting out an apartment not change the lock to a simple yale, and pass out keys, housekeeping and reception (OC for fire purposes) and probably 2 for clients.
OK just assuming it is the front door, how would someone get a key?
IS the abductor a planner or simply snatcher?
Snatcher they would have had no idea about the doors being locked or unlocked so doesnt make sense.
Planner? OK well how did they plan. Who would be in a position to plan something and get information?
They would need to know the patio door was unlocked They would need to know the families routine They would need to know where the children were located inside the apartment
Who would know that and who would be privvy to keys?
Friends Creche workers Maid maintenance man Restaurant staff
Anyone else?
Did the abductor have a car? If so where would it be kept?
It doesnt appear that anyone was seen hanging about in the evening only during the day in PDL, so who does that leave?
Friends Restaurant staff
Anyone Else?
IF I was going to take the child, i would take holdall, a something to sedate the child. What would I use? Any thoughts on this. The only thing really that is instaneous is Chloroform which is hard to get hold of. Were any of the suspects checked to see if they had bought any or had their computers checked for this?
What else could be used. I dont honestly think they would leave it to chance and not sedate.
OK go in front door, pass kitchen on the left into the sitting area of the apartment on the right is 3 doors were they open or closed?
We are led to believe that at least the childrens was closed, assume the other bedroom was too, how did the abductor know which room to go to first? Were both doors left open?
LIGHT. There is a piece by KMCC which says when she went in at 10pm and went into the room it was dark and she could only just see the bed ....so i assume the apartment didnt really have a main light left on...so the abductor would need a torch.
When the abductor then opened the childrens door what did they see?
They would have dimly seen two largish cot beds in the middle of the room, beyond that what looks like a bed and a window and a shutter.
Then if they turned slightly they would have seen another bed with possibly somoeone in it.
How did they know it was Maddy?
Was the child only taken because it was the easy option. Taking a child from out of those travel cots is hard work and you would not know what sex the children were in there....
So was Maddy not targeted just taken......
To take the child would be simple. Sedate, put in holdall, carry out go back to front door, quietly just check to see or hear if anyone is coming and go off into the night.
Why then would you open the window or the shutter. It makes no sense.
Why did Gerry worry about the bedroom doing being slightly open why mention it? It was mentioned several times even by Kate.
The timing of the door being left open seemed to following the sighting of JT.
We now know this is a bogus sighting.
So when did the abductor strike?
I think 9.40. IF they were checking they would know the family would be well into their meal and chatting, the ideal time would be 9.40.
I reckon it would take less then 6 minutes.
I say use a holdall and sedate, because it would be so easy to wake the child up by lifting etc.
The quieter you are the less likely of waking up the children.
I have done this in my head so many times....
FOR me for the abduction to work so well I am sure someone working in the complex would be implicated....
or someone who knew the MCCANNS not necessarily friends, but maybe friends of a friends etc...
The timing is crucial.
Anyway that is my points.
I do think the child could have been taken but with a lot of planning.
Any thoughts or add ons?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 13, 2013, 03:14:43 PM
You're correct an abductor would use the front door as it was the most hidden and as you say he wouldn't necessarily know that the back patio door was open unless he was watching. But that doesn't explain why the window was opened? An abductor would be in and out of the door not squeezing past two cots, bed and chair and opening windows and shutters.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: colombosstogey on November 13, 2013, 03:22:22 PM
You're correct an abductor would use the front door as it was the most hidden and as you say he wouldn't necessarily know that the back patio door was open unless he was watching. But that doesn't explain why the window was opened? An abductor would be in and out of the door not squeezing past two cots, bed and chair and opening windows and shutters.
Yes I agree not only that the room wasnt very light, and it would also mean trying to get past the cots, and then stand on a BED to get out.
Do we know for definiate the window and shutter was open? I have read several things which said it wasnt.
The GNR who went to the apartment said there was no forcible entry so surely that would negate a shutter and window being opened as it would be an obvious entry wouldnt it or exit.
I do find the window and shutter confusing too many different statements about it.
I really do believe the child could have been taken no doubt, but its just a few things that dont add up.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 13, 2013, 03:24:42 PM
Kate knew straight away that Madeleine had been abducted because of the open window.
The two main discrepancies in an abduction taking place:
1. Explaining why the Window and Shutters were opened when no evidence was found for it being used to enter or depart.
2. Explaining the moving door.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Redblossom on November 13, 2013, 03:33:56 PM
Kate knew straight away that Madeleine had been abducted because of the open window.
The two main discrepancies in an abduction taking place:
1. Explaining why the Window and Shutters were opened when no evidence was found for it being used to enter or depart.
2. Explaining the moving door.
What if a burglar thinks (by the low light inside and the absence of noise) that everyone is out. He opens the shutter and window from outside. The noise wakes a child. Note that burglar has not entered. Burglar runs away scared, he does not ever set foot inside. Child opens bedroom door and goes into lounge. I think this sequence of events would explain the discrepancies listed.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 13, 2013, 03:59:29 PM
The moving door is not a problem if they did leave the patio doors open...any wind could explain that...
The wind was blowing from North and the curtains of the door-widow were drawn. The door might have been moved by a word. As the shutters and window have been open.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: colombosstogey on November 13, 2013, 04:06:08 PM
1. One silly reason given was to let chloroform out...err, why?
2. The moving door is not a problem if they did leave the patio doors open...any wind could explain that...
Yes i thought that fleetingly just to understand WHY. Mind you Chloroform does leave a heavy sickly smell....
Yes the door to the bedroom would have probably shut the bedroom door if it was openend when going in for check, but I dont think the child had gone when Oldfield checked, i think if she did it was AFTER he checked so the door would not have mattered.
Its GM saying about the door why? Why put so much importance to it at 9.10.....
Also if you really look inside the room isnt that the door against the wardrobe OR is it the wardrobe door, if so how did the door to the bedroom open for someone to hide behind it. Also one of the larger travel cots against it too.......it wasnt moved so I assume no one hid in there.
I found this on a site called Textusa sure they wont mind me using it, but it does show the route the abductor would have gone if we are to assume they went in the front and out the window, it really makes no sense whatsover.....
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on November 13, 2013, 05:14:19 PM
I've heard some claim the window was a red herring but to take that unnecessary risk would have been suicide.
If Madeleine left the apartment after 8.30pm then a good place to start would be by looking for any one person who was away from the tapas bar when the rest of the group were there. Any one person who was missing out of the 9 in the tapas bar would be a good place to start and examine their testimony.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: VIXTE on November 13, 2013, 06:41:06 PM
You're correct an abductor would use the front door as it was the most hidden and as you say he wouldn't necessarily know that the back patio door was open unless he was watching. But that doesn't explain why the window was opened? An abductor would be in and out of the door not squeezing past two cots, bed and chair and opening windows and shutters.
Maybe he/she had nothing to put the child in and was passed something through the window by an accomplice, like a children stroller, a bag etc
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 12, 2014, 02:50:48 AM
What about the moving door? If you work that out you will solve it IMO.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 12, 2014, 10:35:53 PM
A bit of modus operandi. Even if an apartment looks like no-one is home, IMO a burglar may knock at the door just to make sure. Most times when it looks like no-one is home, there really is no-one home, so the knock goes unanswered, and entry and burgalry commence IMO. However for this the burglar needs a cover story IMO, just in case he gets surprised and someone does answer the door. Something simple like "oh sorry I thought the so and so family was staying here". This may possibly be what happened IMO at the apartment directly above 5G on 16 April 2007 (source: partly casefiles, partly crimewatch). There was a knock at the door, asking for someone who isn't staying there. Soon afterwards those tourists did go out, and the place was burgled.
IMO it is likely that the very first directly relevant physical event on 3 May 2007 at 5A, was that during dinner while the apartment looked and sounded like no-one was home, someone knocked at the north door and got no response. But that is just one person''s amateur opinion and it is possible it may be wrong.
I think you are right in that some burglars do knock on doors to see if anyone is in. It happened to us. Hubby very sick in bed didn't answer the urgent knocks, but eventually struggled out to look thru the window to see burglar walking off.
Back to bed to, soon after, hear banging downstairs. Burglar had circled round in a big loop and come in via back door, which was unlocked. Was busy pulling all the saucepans out of kitchen cupboards when he heard hubby moving around. They eyeballed each other from top to bottom of stairs before burglar disappeared.
But I have to say, I am not so sure that a burglar would run if a sleepy 3-4 year old confronted him in the dark.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 12, 2014, 10:43:14 PM
What about the moving door? If you work that out you will solve it IMO.
IMO a child went on foot from the north bedroom to another room, and because the distance between the bedroom door edge and the bedroom door frame was less than child width and insufficient to allow through passage, the child employed the procedure of pulling the door slightly to increase that opening width sufficiently to child width so as to allow passage. IMO (and might be over-complicated?)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 12, 2014, 10:49:35 PM
IMO a child went on foot from the north bedroom to another room, and because the distance between the bedroom door edge and the bedroom door frame was less than child width and insufficient to allow through passage, the child employed the procedure of pulling the door slightly to increase that opening width sufficiently to child width so as to allow passage. IMO (and might be over-complicated?)
Madeleine was asleep when Gerry checked and he said the door had moved from ajar to half-open sometime between 8.30-9pm.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 12, 2014, 11:29:44 PM
Madeleine was asleep when Gerry checked and he said the door had moved from ajar to half-open sometime between 8.30-9pm.
IMO that first widening of door angle indicates that sometime between about 8.30pm and about 9.05pm the child walked out of the north bedroom (which would require pulling the bedroom door slightly so as to increase the opening size to childwidth and to allow passage) for example maybe to go to bathroom, then returned to north bedroom and went back to bed. IMO.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 13, 2014, 12:08:39 AM
IMO that first widening of door angle indicates that sometime between about 8.30pm and about 9.05pm the child walked out of the north bedroom (which would require pulling the bedroom door slightly so as to increase the opening size to childwidth and to allow passage) for example maybe to go to bathroom, then returned to north bedroom and went back to bed. IMO.
And who moved the door from ajar to half-open a second time after Gerry left between 9.10-9.30?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 13, 2014, 12:47:01 AM
IMO the child, going on foot from north bedroom to another room.
So Gerry had just seen his daughter sleeping. Madeleine woke up the first time before he arrived and left the room. Then she fell back asleep before he saw her. Now Gerry has left she has woken up again and left the room a second time. Why would she wake up a second time and leave the room?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 13, 2014, 02:59:01 AM
BTW the single common reason IMO for all of why the child left the room and why the window was open and why no-one climbed in, is built on some starting assumptions which are just my opinion and I word like this "Just after a checker has left, the apartment looks like there is no-one home, and sounds like there is no-one home, and if someone knocks on the north door no-one would go answer it"
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 13, 2014, 01:04:40 PM
So Gerry had just seen his daughter sleeping. Madeleine woke up the first time before he arrived and left the room. Then she fell back asleep before he saw her. Now Gerry has left she has woken up again and left the room a second time. Why would she wake up a second time and leave the room?
Altho I dont think your theory is right Pegasus, I am happy to look at it and consider sensibly . I trust you would do the same with any of mine.
Could it have been that someone partially raised the shutter to look in and suss out the situation, then dropped it down again and that wakened Madeleine the first time?
After Gerry left, could it have been that who ever sussed it out, more fully opened the shutters and opened the window?
Only suggestions.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 13, 2014, 01:33:47 PM
BTW the single common reason IMO for all of why the child left the room and why the window was open and why no-one climbed in, is built on some starting assumptions which are just my opinion and I word like this "Just after a checker has left, the apartment looks like there is no-one home, and sounds like there is no-one home, and if someone knocks on the north door no-one would go answer it"
So you think the window was opened before Matt checked at 9.30 and he didn't notice it being open or the curtains blowing in the wind? Where was Madeleine when Matt checked?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 13, 2014, 04:37:49 PM
So you think the window was opened before Matt checked at 9.30 and he didn't notice it being open or the curtains blowing in the wind? Where was Madeleine when Matt checked?
As far as blowing in the wind is concerned. It was gusty. Gusts are intermitent, not all the time.
IIRC from the archived weather reports (I supplied them btw) it was building up to rougher weather and the seas were likely to get a good deal wilder. At 9.30pm it might have been relatively calm. Does anybody know?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 13, 2014, 07:54:06 PM
As far as blowing in the wind is concerned. It was gusty. Gusts are intermitent, not all the time.
IIRC from the archived weather reports (I supplied them btw) it was building up to rougher weather and the seas were likely to get a good deal wilder. At 9.30pm it might have been relatively calm. Does anybody know?
What? Do you mean relatively calm only 20 minutes before whooshing curtains and doors slamming shut ? Maybe a poltergeist abducted Madeleine.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 13, 2014, 11:48:50 PM
... Could it have been that someone partially raised the shutter to look in and suss out the situation, then dropped it down again and that wakened Madeleine the first time? ...
Adding an extra earlier visit by intending intruder would add various difficult complications IMO, and so I go for the simpler bathroom trip explanation for the first widening of door angle. IMO the indications available to an intending burglar were (a) dim light inside - only one small lamp on in whole apartment, (b) no noise when listening outside north window, (c) no response to the precautionary knock on north external door which I hypothesise, and possibly (d) seeing adult leaving. Those indications IMO are plenty sufficient for an intending burglar to establish with about 99% certainty that no-one is home.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 14, 2014, 12:03:41 AM
So you think the window was opened before Matt checked at 9.30 and he didn't notice it being open or the curtains blowing in the wind? .....
IMO possibly yes (but I emphasise that I think the check and checker are genuine).
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 14, 2014, 12:22:08 AM
That theory is not possible. There is no way that Madeleine moved the door and left that room on 3 separate occasions. She was sleeping according to Gerry at 9.05 (and the twins didn't wake up once all night long) so she wasn't waking up a second time only minutes later before Matt arrives. Why didn't Matt see her if she had left the room? And then the door moved a third time before Kate checks.
1st door move 8.30-9.00
2nd door move 9.10-9.30
3rd door move 9.35-9.50
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 14, 2014, 12:23:00 AM
Adding an extra earlier visit by intending intruder would add various difficult complications IMO, and so I go for the simpler bathroom trip explanation for the first widening of door angle.
What extra difficult complications?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 14, 2014, 12:50:19 AM
A bathroom explanation for the first door angle widening seems adequate to me (No cot sides to prevent it, had drank liquid earlier, and importantly, as reported by GM, was happily asleep after the first door angle widening).
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 14, 2014, 12:52:32 AM
A bathroom explanation for the first door angle widening seems adequate to me (No cot sides to prevent it, had drank liquid earlier, and importantly, as reported by GM, was happily asleep after the first door angle widening).
That is a possibility , but not likely with a young bladder. imo
You said
Quote
Adding an extra earlier visit by intending intruder would add various difficult complications IMO
I dont see any difficult complications tbh.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 14, 2014, 01:39:40 AM
IMO GM seeing the child happily asleep in bed indicates that nothing happened until after that check.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 14, 2014, 02:17:04 AM
It doesn't explain how the door moved 3 times? Time to separate reality from fantasy.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 14, 2014, 03:00:37 AM
For anyone? No reasonable person would believe it.
They check on the kids before they leave at 8.30. All are sleeping.
Gerry returns 30 minutes later and finds the door open.
You say Madeleine woke up the first time and went to the bathroom. She moved the door.
Gerry checks on Madeleine and she is asleep not awake. He says she was in the exact same sleeping position she was at 8.30 i.e. she hasn't left the bed.
Matt arrives next and finds the door has moved to half-open again
You explain it by saying Madeleine has woken up a second time only minutes later. No window is open so what has awoken her? Matt doesn't see Madeleine - he probably would have done if she had got out of bed and left the room.
After then Kate finds the door wide open so it has moved a third time.
You say Madeleine is responsible for all the door moves. I say that is impossible in reality. Time for you to separate reality from fantasy.
"once you eliminate the impossible whatever remains..................
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 15, 2014, 12:54:44 AM
"They" is a plural word. IMO it might give the impression you think two people checked at about 8.30pm just before going out? IMO only one did
As I said in my last post, Gerry said he saw her at 8.30 because he said Madeleine was in the exact same sleeping position when he checked at 9 so we can put your theory about Madeleine waking up and moving the door to bed. Somebody else moved the door or it's the other alternative.
Kate seems to be confused
"Around 8:30-8:35 they left for the Tapas restaurant. Before leaving they checked on the children, she doesn't know who; however Gerry says it was him. She only knows the children were quiet. She doesn't know if they were in their same positions. She says she is sure that they were asleep, because Gerry told her all was quiet."
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 15, 2014, 01:09:40 AM
... in the exact same sleeping position she was at 8.30 ...
I might be wrong about this, but on what basis did you determine that the check at about 8.30pm just before going out was a visual check (rather than just aural)?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 15, 2014, 01:16:14 AM
"Moreover, he says that with respect to Madeleine she was in the same position in which he had left her at the beginning of the night. Madeleine was lying down on her left side, completely uncovered, i.e. lying on top of the covers, with the soft toy and blanket, both pink, next to her head; he does not know if they were in the position that can be seen in the photograph attached to the files. The second person to go and check on the children should have been Kate." (GM 7 Sep)
"They also kissed Madeleine, who was already lying down. She was under the covers, she thinks, because it was a bit cold." (KM 6 Sep)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 15, 2014, 01:54:24 AM
... so we can put your theory about Madeleine waking up and moving the door to bed. ...
"we can put" is plural, so who is the other poster who shares your opinion?
IMO the child went on foot from the north bedroom to another room. In that context IMO the increase of door-opening from less than child width to more than child width is far from surprising.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 15, 2014, 02:17:00 AM
"Moreover, he says that with respect to Madeleine she was in the same position in which he had left her at the beginning of the night. Madeleine was lying down on her left side, completely uncovered, i.e. lying on top of the covers, with the soft toy and blanket, both pink, next to her head; he does not know if they were in the position that can be seen in the photograph attached to the files. The second person to go and check on the children should have been Kate." (GM 7 Sep)
"They also kissed Madeleine, who was already lying down. She was under the covers, she thinks, because it was a bit cold." (KM 6 Sep)
In your previous posts (see above), maybe I misunderstood, but IMO you seemed to be suggesting that the check at about 8.30pm was by 2 people and was visual. I constructively (and BTW politely) raised the possibilty both those details might be improved. What you post now IMO refers to a completely different time, about 7.30pm, JIMO.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on April 15, 2014, 02:40:29 AM
Can we re-cap ... because I can't make head nor tail of where this thread is going !
What has any of this got to do with the OP :
"Did the burglaries at Ocean Club have some relevance to Madeleine ?"
Well, pegasus and pathfinder ... did they ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 15, 2014, 10:40:40 AM
Could a mod kindly start another thread about The Moving Door and transfer the posts. Thanks.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 15, 2014, 01:11:51 PM
Bump for pathfinder
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 15, 2014, 01:18:30 PM
Could a mod kindly start another thread about The Moving Door and transfer the posts. Thanks.
Could Admin kindly make pathfinder a mod, then he can do it himself.
Thanks.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 15, 2014, 02:37:10 PM
New thread started as requested.
My own view on the moving door is as previously stated. Opening the patio door would result in a change of pressure within the apartment, any wind had the potential to move an internal door.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 15, 2014, 02:56:36 PM
My own view on the moving door is as previously stated. Opening the patio door would result in a change of pressure within the apartment, any wind had the potential to move an internal door.
Thank you John and WS. The wind would move the door to exactly half-open each time? Very doubtful IMO. The window being open then I think it would slam shut before Kate arrived.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 15, 2014, 03:02:38 PM
In your previous posts (see above), maybe I misunderstood, but IMO you seemed to be suggesting that the check at about 8.30pm was by 2 people and was visual. I constructively (and BTW politely) raised the possibilty both those details might be improved. What you post now IMO refers to a completely different time, about 7.30pm, JIMO.
Does it really matter? Kate can't seem to remember if she checked or not and that would've been the last time she saw her daughter - you'd thought she'd try to remember if she did or not after 4 months ("Before leaving they checked on the children, she doesn't know who; however Gerry says it was him").
The whole point is when Gerry last saw her before they left for the tapas bar and when he returned on his first check at 9 Madeleine was in exactly the same position. Now I and many others would take that to mean that she hasn't woken up and left the bed. But you don't agree? She has woken up to go to the bathroom and has ended up on the bed in exactly the same position and place when Gerry last saw her before they left. Well I don't believe that for one second.
There's two realistic possibilities in my mind (the wind one I'm not including):
1. Somebody else moved the door
2. The door didn't move
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 15, 2014, 04:54:47 PM
Does it really matter? Kate can't seem to remember if she checked or not and that would've been the last time she saw her daughter - you'd thought she'd try to remember if she did or not after 4 months ("Before leaving they checked on the children, she doesn't know who; however Gerry says it was him").
The whole point is when Gerry last saw her before they left for the tapas bar and when he returned on his first check at 9 Madeleine was in exactly the same position. Now I and many others would take that to mean that she hasn't woken up and left the bed. But you don't agree? She has woken up to go to the bathroom and has ended up on the bed in exactly the same position and place when Gerry last saw her before they left. Well I don't believe that for one second.
There's two realistic possibilities in my mind (the wind one I'm not including):
1. Somebody else moved the door
2. The door didn't move
...or the entire story is a load of bollocks. 8(0(*
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 15, 2014, 05:14:13 PM
...or the entire story is a load of bollocks. 8(0(*
So is that option 2 8)-)))
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: drummer on April 15, 2014, 08:40:54 PM
She has woken up to go to the bathroom and has ended up on the bed in exactly the same position and place when Gerry last saw her before they left. Well I don't believe that for one second.
Maybe it was her favourite sleeping position, we all have them. I prefer to sleep on my stomache and if I feel the need for the loo during the night I then return to bed in my usual sleeping position, my OH is a pain cos his is the starfish position.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on April 16, 2014, 12:05:49 AM
She has woken up to go to the bathroom and has ended up on the bed in exactly the same position and place when Gerry last saw her before they left. Well I don't believe that for one second.
Maybe it was her favourite sleeping position, we all have them. I prefer to sleep on my stomache and if I feel the need for the loo during the night I then return to bed in my usual sleeping position, my OH is a pain cos his is the starfish position.
Mrs Fenn said she heard a child crying in the McCanns' apartment for an hour and a quarter on Tuesday night
Kate says Madeleine told her she had been crying for them on Wednesday night
Why then, would this three year old who had previously behaved in just the way we might expect a three to behave on waking up alone in unfamiliar surroundings ... crying for mum and dad ... suddenly, on Thursday night behave quite differently ?
On Thursday night, we are being aske to believe, she woke up again ... only this time, for some reason, this three year old didn't cry or call out for mum and dad ... this time she calmy got out of bed in the dark, went to the bathroom, and then, unperturbed, went back to bed on her own and was peacefully asleep in no time
It simply doesn't play
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 16, 2014, 01:23:35 AM
List of possibilities for how exit from kids bedroom occured 1. Child was carried/bundled by someone through window from kids bedroom to outside. 2. Child climbed through window from kids bedroom to outside . 3. Child was carried by someone from kids bedroom into another room. 4. Child walked/ran from kids bedroom into another room. 5. Child was never in kids bedroom that evening.
IMO number 4 is likely to be what happened. Action number 4 would naturally increase the door angle opening from less-than to more-than child width.
It seems many here are disagreeing with number 4. Please offer a better alternative then. Do you think number 1 2 3 or 5 is correct? >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 16, 2014, 02:11:02 AM
List of possibilities for how exit from kids bedroom occured 1. Child was carried/bundled by someone through window from kids bedroom to outside. 2. Child climbed through window from kids bedroom to outside . 3. Child was carried by someone from kids bedroom into another room. 4. Child walked/ran from kids bedroom into another room. 5. Child was never in kids bedroom that evening.
IMO number 4 is likely to be what happened. Action number 4 would naturally increase the door angle opening from less-than to more-than child width.
It seems many here are disagreeing with number 4. Please offer a better alternative then. Do you think number 1 2 3 or 5 is correct? >@@(*&)
Sorry, but thta is sounding very unlike you. It is sounding as though you are pretending to know that no abduction took place. It is sounding like propaganda tbh
The most obvious thing is that Madeleine was picked up and walked out via the front door. Same as that is the most likely way that the abductor came in.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 16, 2014, 02:13:23 AM
My own view on the moving door is as previously stated. Opening the patio door would result in a change of pressure within the apartment, any wind had the potential to move an internal door.
That is entirely true 8((()*/
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 16, 2014, 02:19:31 AM
Doors suddenly closing, curtains billowing There were two factors here.
1. The Mechanics of Rotary Motion. The door moves in a rotary manner; it moved around the hinged edge. There are Laws of Mechanics which explain this, but they are a bit involved
So, let us consider a simpler explanation, based on these Laws, using the extremities of the rotary motion. Say, in the same situation as in Madeleines bedroom, a window was open and a gust came thru it. That gust would be termed as a force.
i) If the door were completely open, only the edge of the door would be receiving that force. The force according to these Laws would have virtually no rotary turning moment, the force would almost all go into the hinge. The door would not move.
ii) If the door were almost closed, most of its face would be at almost right angles to the force (the gust) and the force would divide into two forces upon hitting the door, the major part causing a rotary turning moment, with just a little going into the hinge. If the gust were strong enough, the door would slam.
From this it goes without saying that the closer the door was to being shut, the greater the turning moment on it. The closer it was to be fully open the less likely it would be to slam shut. Hence as Kate closed it the turning moment increased and combined with a gust the door tried to slam shut
2. The wind was gusting at up to 20mph. An unexpected gust could have caused the door to suddenly close. A slightly open window, or door, on the south or east of the building would accentuate it. In other words a through draft., But with a strong gust it could have happened anyway.
Hope I have explained this so that everyone can understand..
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 16, 2014, 02:50:48 AM
Sorry, but thta is sounding very unlike you. It is sounding as though you are pretending to know that no abduction took place. It is sounding like propaganda tbh The most obvious thing is that Madeleine was picked up and walked out via the front door. Same as that is the most likely way that the abductor came in.
My post was not exclusively non-abduction at all, it covers all theories IMO. Thanks for your example (person carries child out front door). That BTW would be included in number 3 in my list, because to get from the bedroom to the front door he/she would first carry her from the bedroom through the internal doorway into another room (the open-plan livingarea/hallway)? And from there out the front door. So presumably in your proposal the bedroom door angle would be increased by that person when he/she enters the bedroom via the bedroom door.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 16, 2014, 02:55:49 AM
My post was not exclusively non-abduction at all, it covers all theories IMO. Thanks for your example (person carries child out front door). That BTW would be included in number 3 in my list, because to get from the bedroom to the front door he/she would first carry her from the bedroom through the internal doorway into another room (the open-plan livingarea/hallway)? And from there out the front door. So presumably in your proposal the bedroom door angle would be increased by that person when he/she enters the bedroom via the bedroom door.
Maybe, but maybe by Johns reasonable explanation or by my more technical explanation above.
We just dont know, do we?
Bedtime calls. Nigh night
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 16, 2014, 02:58:21 AM
... the closer the door was to being shut, the greater the turning moment on it. The closer it was to be fully open the less likely it would be to slam shut. Hence as Kate closed it the turning moment increased and combined with a gust the door tried to slam shut.
Agreed. This witness is telling the truth IMO.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on April 16, 2014, 03:11:24 AM
That bedroom door would only have slammed shut if another door was open somewhere
Kate says she she closed the patio door when she came into the apartment
No patio door open ... no draught ... no bedroom door slamming shut
It's not 'technical' ... it's common sense
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 16, 2014, 03:28:30 AM
That bedroom door would only have slammed shut if another door was open somewhere
Kate says she she closed the patio door when she came into the apartment
No patio door open ... no draught ... no bedroom door slamming shut
It's not 'technical' ... it's common sense
Even if the rest of the apartment is an airtight container, a gust of wind outside the open bedroom window will alter the air pressure inside the bedroom. Then air will flow between the bedroom, and the rest of the apartment, until their air pressures become the same. When I inflate my scooter tyres, there's hopefully no second hole for the air to exit from, but it seems to work, air flows through the valve.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on April 16, 2014, 03:37:35 AM
I'll tell you what I know sadie ... without being an 'engineer'
When we were kids we had open fires in the downstairs rooms
If the wind was blowing in a certain direction then whenever the front door was opened it would 'blow-back' ... smoke and soot
But when the door was shut ... no 'blow-back'
You see, there was no 'rush' of wind unless the front door was open
It was that simple
If there was no other door open in apartment five A that night, then that bedroom door would not have slammed shut
Your opinion. The door did not slam as far as I am aware but it suddenly moved. I am not going thru the technical stuff all again.
BUT do YOU KNOW if a high level roadside window was open?
Cos I dont.
And the Mccanns seem the fresh air sort to me. Now that would cause a mighty force given a 20 mph gust..
I am tired. Nigh night
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 16, 2014, 03:49:55 AM
The valve in your bicycle tire or car tire is like a door. Apply a higher pressure to to the outside of the valve than the inside, and the valve will open, and air will flow through it. When the pressure difference is the other way round, air flowing out of the valve exerts a force on the slightly ajar valve. and slams it shut. If it didn't slam shut, everyone would be riding around on flat tires. (That bedroom door is installed the opposite way round to a tire valve, but the analogy is good).
edited to correct a technical thing
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 17, 2014, 01:17:10 AM
Opening any door or window when there is a breeze blowing will have an effect on the interior. This effect can range from curtains billowing to doors creaking or moving.
There is no way we here can determine what happened in 5a that evening, that requires experimentation on an evening with almost identical wind speed and wind direction.
Opening the external patio door could very well have caused the kids bedroom door to open slightly and especially so if the wind direction was from the south.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 17, 2014, 02:22:34 AM
Matt Oldfield Rog
"When we were actually running along the beach and along the err and along the front doing the, the search and I don’t recall it being err particularly windy but as I think we said but last time it was windy enough for us to sail in the afternoon but that didn’t necessarily translate it to have been windy in the evening."
4078 "So you weren't, just to clarify what you have said, you weren't conscious of any draught?"
Reply "Yeah".
4078 "The curtains were drawn and weren't blowing around?"
Matt didn't notice any draught so it's unlikely the door position changed from ajar to half-open because of the wind. And no curtains blowing so the window was closed at 9.30.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 17, 2014, 02:52:39 AM
That sort of puts the kibosh on the Tanner sighting at 9.15pm then. Given that nobody checked the children between 9.30pm and 10.00pm that would appear to be the 'window' of opportunity which was taken by the alleged abductor.
Add to this the fact that the only GNR patrol was conveniently miles away at Odiáxere following up a report, then this afforded the perpetrators a unique opportunity to get well away.
On the point made by Matt about the wind, coastal breezes are unpredictable. One moment it could be calm and the next quite breezy. There just isn't any way of knowing for sure.
I don't subscribe to the abductor being in the apartment theory suggested by Gerry, I just don't believe they would take that risk.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 17, 2014, 09:26:16 AM
That sort of puts the kibosh on the Tanner sighting at 9.15pm then. Given that nobody checked the children between 9.30pm and 10.00pm that would appear to be the 'window' of opportunity which was taken by the alleged abductor.
Sorry, I dont agree John. Given knowledge of the apartment and a key, the whole abduction within the apartment could have been achieved in under a minute. I had an accident, am a blue badge holder and these days not very fast on my feet. With the distances involved and a slick operation, even these days, I could have achieved the whole abduction (in the apartment) in a minute, including opening the window and blind. Try it yourself, the distances are very small.
The best time to strike would have been immediately after an check. That is what appears to have happened. Jane Tanners sighting was within a 2 or 3 minutes(ish) of Gerry leaving after his check. Obviously the watcher could see that Gerry had left the apartment, but was unable to see that Gerry was still outside with Jez.
If I am right and there was a watcher, then that very fact limits the places where the watcher viewed from. imo
Add to this the fact that the only GNR patrol was conveniently miles away at Odiáxere following up a report, then this afforded the perpetrators a unique opportunity to get well away.
Do you think the abductors could have arranged for something to happen at Oxiadere, to get the GNR away from the scene?
On the point made by Matt about the wind, coastal breezes are unpredictable. One moment it could be calm and the next quite breezy. There just isn't any way of knowing for sure.
Agreed. That would be particularly so on the Atlantic Coast, I think. And PdL was essentially on the Atlantic coast
I don't subscribe to the abductor being in the apartment theory suggested by Gerry, I just don't believe they would take that risk.
I think it unlikely too, cos I believe that the to-ing and fro-ing from the restaurant was being monitored. There would only be someone in there had Gerry come back unexpectedly and the man within the apartment was trapped. Maybe he had been in and Gerry could unconsciously sense that? Smell? We dont know.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 17, 2014, 11:04:48 AM
Sorry, I dont agree John. Given knowledge of the apartment and a key, the whole abduction within the apartment could have been achieved in under a minute. I had an accident, am a blue badge holder and these days not very fast on my feet. With the distances involved and a slick operation, even these days, I could have achieved the whole abduction (in the apartment) in a minute, including opening the window and blind. Try it yourself, the distances are very small.
The best time to strike would have been immediately after an check. That is what appears to have happened. Jane Tanners sighting was within a 2 or 3 minutes(ish) of Gerry leaving after his check. Obviously the watcher could see that Gerry had left the apartment, but was unable to see that Gerry was still outside with Jez.
If I am right and there was a watcher, then that very fact limits the places where the watcher viewed from. imo Do you think the abductors could have arranged for something to happen at Oxiadere, to get the GNR away from the scene? Agreed. That would be particularly so on the Atlantic Coast, I think. And PdL was essentially on the Atlantic coast I think it unlikely too, cos I believe that the to-ing and fro-ing from the restaurant was being monitored. There would only be someone in there had Gerry come back unexpectedly and the man within the apartment was trapped. Maybe he had been in and Gerry could unconsciously sense that? Smell? We dont know.
If the window was closed at 9.30 then nobody including Tannerman had opened it before 9.30. Tannerman couldn't have exited the unlocked patio side so the only possible option was exiting via the front door. The window had to be opened sometime after Matt checked and before Kate arrived which would tie in with the later sighting of Smithman and the child he was carrying fitting Madeleine's description. SY have wisely got shut of Tannerman and are after the real one Smithman. That's the reason the PJ accused Matt because they thought he was the only person who could have moved the door twice (that's the way I would see it and also why he was checking on other kids). Matt moved the door the first time before Gerry checked when he left the tapas bar just before 9 and the second time on his check he moved the door to wide open the way Kate found it. Another option is the door didn't move and if that was the case then there's only one answer and solving the door shows you the way.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 17, 2014, 11:19:57 AM
Sorry, I dont agree John. Given knowledge of the apartment and a key, the whole abduction within the apartment could have been achieved in under a minute. I had an accident, am a blue badge holder and these days not very fast on my feet. With the distances involved and a slick operation, even these days, I could have achieved the whole abduction (in the apartment) in a minute, including opening the window and blind. Try it yourself, the distances are very small.
The best time to strike would have been immediately after an check. That is what appears to have happened. Jane Tanners sighting was within a 2 or 3 minutes(ish) of Gerry leaving after his check. Obviously the watcher could see that Gerry had left the apartment, but was unable to see that Gerry was still outside with Jez.
If I am right and there was a watcher, then that very fact limits the places where the watcher viewed from. imo
Had the shutter been fully up and the window wide open around 9.30pm then Matt would have noticed. For any prior to 9.30pm abduction to work Matt"s statements must be rubbished.
Tanners sighting is irrelevant imo.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
Do you think the abductors could have arranged for something to happen at Oxiadere, to get the GNR away from the scene?
Most definitely, it was just too coincidental that the only police patrol was away 20 miles in the opposite direction when Madeleine disappeared. If there was an abduction then it was very well planned and executed.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 17, 2014, 12:15:33 PM
Had the shutter been fully up and the window wide open around 9.30pm then Matt would have noticed. For any prior to 9.30pm abduction to work Matt"s statements must be rubbished.
Tanners sighting is irrelevant imo.
Not sure that I agree with that, if there were a lull in the wind..
The holes in that shutter when looked at from outside are only a very small percentage of the shutter. I worked it out once but have forgotten, but I think they were only about 10% of the shutter.
Thanks to the trees the light outside was very faint, almost certainly not as light as the light shining through from the sitting room ... so it would not be noticeable
The curtains were drawn at that time so altho rather cheap they would take further light.
I am not at all sure that you are right on that one, John
PS, I am aware that there are photos showing the shutter from inside with intense light / sunlight shining thru. This sunlight has the effect of making the holes appear far bigger than they really are. Refraction, halo effect, or just the far brighter light dazzling. Like headlights shining in the eyes make the headlamps look bigger.
It is an optical illusion and the size of the holes should be considered from outside, imo. They are very small. Do we know how high the shutter was opened? I didn't think it was opened very fully.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 17, 2014, 12:20:36 PM
Most definitely, it was just too coincidental that the only police patrol was away 20 miles in the opposite direction when Madeleine disappeared. If there was an abduction then it was very well planned and executed.
I agree. Very well planned and executed.
Most likely a team of at least two
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on April 17, 2014, 12:23:17 PM
Do we know how high the shutter was opened? I didn't think it was opened very fully.
"As I ran back into the children's room the closed curtains flew open in a gust of wind. My heart lurched as I saw now that, behind them, the window was wide open and the shutters outside were raised all the way up."
Kate's book, page 72
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 17, 2014, 12:24:04 PM
Not sure that I agree with that, if there were a lull in the wind..
The holes in that shutter when looked at from outside are only a very small percentage of the shutter. I worked it out once but have forgotten, but I think they were only about 10% of the shutter.
Thanks to the trees the light outside was very faint, almost certainly not as light as the light shining through from the sitting room ... so it would not be noticeable
The curtains were drawn at that time so altho rather cheap they would take further light.
I am not at all sure that you are right on that one, John
PS, I am aware that there are photos showing the shutter from inside with intense light / sunlight shining thru. This sunlight has the effect of making the holes appear far bigger than they really are. Refraction, halo effect, or just the far brighter light dazzling. Like headlights shining in the eyes make the headlamps look bigger.
It is an optical illusion and the size of the holes should be considered from outside, imo. They are very small. Do we know how high the shutter was opened? I didn't think it was opened very fully.
Matt might be many things but he wasn't blind. I am quite sure he would have recognised whether the shutter was up and the window wide open. Even Redwood is running with this scenario now and has placed the abduction near 10pm.
The shutter was fully up Sadie, I thought you knew that?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 17, 2014, 12:29:50 PM
"As I ran back into the children's room the closed curtains flew open in a gust of wind. My heart lurched as I saw now that, behind them, the window was wide open and the shutters outside were raised up all the way up."
Kate's book, page 72
Thanks Icabodcrane 8((()*/ Even after7 long years some are still learning the basics.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Carew on April 17, 2014, 12:32:08 PM
In her witness statement of 4th May, Dr McCann says that the curtains in the children`s bedroom were open.
Wouldn`t she have noticed at the time that they were closed and whooshed up in the breeze as in the "crimewatch" programme?
"At around 10pm, the witness came to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed, but unlocked, as already said, and immediately noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did."
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 17, 2014, 12:32:55 PM
Matt might be many things but he wasn't blind. I am quite sure he would have recognised whether the shutter was up and the window wide open. Even Redwood is running with this scenario now and has placed the abduction near 10pm.
I accept what you are saying about Rewood, but I dont accept what you are saying about Matt. To start off with, do you know that from where he stood his sight line incuded the window? I haven't analysed it with a drawing, but I fancy that it would be possible for Matt to have stood a little to the east side of the doorway and to have seen the twins without seeing the window.
Also the door was not fully open, I think. As he could see the twins and assume Madeleine was in her bed, why would he even bother to peer aroound the door at the window.
I truly think it is unsafe John to assume that the shutters were NOT raised when Matt emterd the room. The light outside would have been almost nil with the heads of the trees masking all the street lamps and he may not have had sight of the window even
Gotta go now. Pity cos I was finding this interesting !
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on April 17, 2014, 12:37:01 PM
"As I ran back into the children's room the closed curtains flew open in a gust of wind. My heart lurched as I saw now that, behind them, the window was wide open and the shutters outside were raised all the way up."
Kate's book, page 72
Thanks icabod. That has settled that.
The shutters were up.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on April 17, 2014, 01:24:04 PM
In his rogatory interview Matthew Olfield says that on his 9.25pm visit to the McCanns' apartment the light in the children's bedroom was not from an artificial source inside the apartment, but perhaps something coming from outside through the window. That it seemed to him that the shutters of the bedroom window were open without knowing if the window was also open
So at 9.25pm it seemed to him that the shutters of the McCann children's bedroom window were open ... yet 20 minutes earlier he had stood outside that very bedroom window doing his 'listening check' for the McCanns ... and says the shutters were closed
Did it not occur to him that it was odd for the shutters to have gone from closed to open in the twenty five minutes between his checks ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Angelo222 on April 17, 2014, 01:32:43 PM
In his rogatory interview Matthew Olfield says that on his 9.25pm visit to the McCanns' apartment the light in the children's bedroom was not from an artificial source inside the apartment, but perhaps something coming from outside through the window. That it seemed to him that the shutters of the bedroom window were open without knowing if the window was also open
So at 9.25pm it seemed to him that the shutters of the McCann children's bedroom window were open ... yet 20 minutes earlier he had stood outside that very bedroom window doing his 'listening check' for the McCanns ... and says the shutters were closed
Did it not occur to him that it was odd for the shutters to have gone from closed to open in the twenty five minutes between his checks ?
This again is one of the anomalies which a reconstitution would expose but we all know who poo poo'ed that don't we-
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 17, 2014, 02:38:22 PM
Whoever opened the window didn't go though it so it wasn't entry or exit for any abductor. With Gerry checking and then talking to Jez outside then the abductor could only have entered the apartment via the unlocked patio door before Gerry arrived (explains the first door move). When Gerry came, the abductor hid and when Gerry left he would've exited quickly re front door (explains second door move).
But that doesn't explain why the window was open? No chance was an abductor going to waste time and risk leaving evidence by first moving past all the clutter in that room in the dark to raise noisy shutters and open that window (especially after nearly being caught in the act by Gerry) and then finally exits via the front door. How could anyone believe that is what happened 8-)(--)
Matt would've noticed any shutters fully raised, curtains open or blowing at 9.30. He didn't even notice any draught. The window was opened after 9.30 (could explain the third door move due to wind) but it doesn't explain who opened it - a burglar is Pegasus theory but there's no evidence of the window being opened from the outside. The window was opened from the inside and it was after 9.30 IMO >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 18, 2014, 03:18:08 AM
99%+ of cases of unauthorised opening of window are a person intending to burgle. If that person opens the window and shutter but then, paradoxically, as the lack of forensic evidence shows, does not climb in, a logical question to ask Imo is: did someone else disturb them? So the question is, is there any possiblity there was someone sleeping in that room, who got awoken by the third stage of the the opening process (loud noise of external shutter being raised by strap with window already opened)? If there was no-one in that room, then the hypothesis is impossible and ridiculous, but what if, against all the odds, there was someone asleep in the room?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 18, 2014, 03:25:45 AM
This again is one of the anomalies which a reconstitution would expose but we all know who poo poo'ed that don't we-
The shutters are a clever design, two-stage. Pull the strap a little, and the slats seperate slightly, to let a little light in. Pull the strap further, and it starts to raise the shutter. I maybe (not sure) could find photos of the two different closed states (a) Completely closed. (B) Closed but with a gap between each slat allowing light in.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 18, 2014, 11:12:17 AM
A view of the actual shutter on the children's bedroom window showing the slats open at the top and fully closed at the bottom.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on April 18, 2014, 11:14:34 AM
A view of the same shutter from the inside showing open slats and how lots of air and light can get in even if the shutter is down.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 18, 2014, 12:15:10 PM
99%+ of cases of unauthorised opening of window are a person intending to burgle. If that person opens the window and shutter but then, paradoxically, as the lack of forensic evidence shows, does not climb in, a logical question to ask Imo is: did someone else disturb them? So the question is, is there any possiblity there was someone sleeping in that room, who got awoken by the third stage of the the opening process (loud noise of external shutter being raised by strap with window already opened)? If there was no-one in that room, then the hypothesis is impossible and ridiculous, but what if, against all the odds, there was someone asleep in the room?
45:30
p.s. the dolphin restaurant bill was clocked at 9.27 re Smiths so they left and headed to Kelly's Bar after that time which connects with Aoife's timeline not Martin or Peter's. Aiofe said they left Kelly's Bar at 10pm (she was certain about the time in her statement) which connects with the Smithman sighting time at 10.03 - my theory. That time as early as 9.50 from Martin did serious damage to the investigation but I knew that time wasn't right.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on April 18, 2014, 08:06:24 PM
Thanks John and Pathfinder for the photos of shutter with slats tight together / slats with gap between.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 21, 2014, 09:32:09 PM
The unusual location of the door within an alcove created by the built-in wardrobes gives the unusual situation that when the door is open by an angle of about 60 degrees, the view into the room for someone standing outside the door is already maximised.
The view into the room with door open about 60 degrees equals the view into the room with door open about 90 degrees. The only difference is that at 90 degrees you get also to see the end of the built-in wardrobe.
So that is how one person may describe a door as partly open, and another person describe it as fully open, when they are describing the same angle.
IMO KM saw the same angle as MO.
IIRC MO in his 2008 statement does point out this unusual feature of the room layout clearly.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 21, 2014, 11:12:12 PM
(Replying on this thread because it's about the bedroom door)
Well, Kate couldn't possibly know what position the door should have been in as Gerry had been in the apartment since she left at 8.30
She knew what position the door was in when she left the apartment at about 8.30pm. She knew that GM and MO had been in the apartment since.
It was totally reasonable for her to assume that GM and MO during their checks either did not open the bedroom door, or that if they did they would certainly return the door to its almost closed position afterwards.
A 3 year old child is entirely capable of pulling a hinged internal door wider open.
Initially the child was in the north bedroom. Later the child wasn't in the north bedroom. It seems quite obvious to me that the child pulled the door open wider to walk/run from the north bedroom into another room.
I think my chances of winning the "Most Complicated And Devious Moving Door Theory" award are small.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 21, 2014, 11:24:36 PM
(Replying on this thread because it's about the bedroom door) She knew what position the door was in when she left the apartment at about 8.30pm. She knew that GM and MO had been in the apartment since.
It was totally reasonable for her to assume that GM and MO during their checks either did not open the bedroom door, or that if they did they would certainly return the door to its almost closed position afterwards.
A 3 year old child is entirely capable of pulling a hinged internal door wider open.
Initially the child was in the north bedroom. Later the child wasn't in the north bedroom. It seems quite obvious to me that the child pulled the door open wider to walk/run from the north bedroom into another room.
I think my chances of winning the "Most Complicated And Devious Moving Door Theory" award are small.
There's nothing complicated about something that doesn't move.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 21, 2014, 11:38:08 PM
No I don't believe Madeleine moved the door 3 times. Gerry found her exactly in the same sleeping position at 9 so do you think she moved the door?
Have you have ruled out that the child may have opened the north bedroom door once that evening?
And to answer your question: Yes it is likely that the child opened the door to go from the north bedroom into another room IMO (ETA probably after about 9.05pm).
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 22, 2014, 01:30:13 AM
Have you have ruled out that the child may have opened the north bedroom door once that evening?
And to answer your question: Yes it is likely that the child opened the door to go from the north bedroom into another room IMO (ETA probably after about 9.05pm).
So you have the child moving the door for a second time before Matt's check? What are the chances of her waking up first between 8.30-9 moving the door then falling back asleep. Then she wakes up again before Matt checks at 9.30 and amazingly moves the door to exactly the same half-open position. No open window before 9.30 to disturb her. What are the odds? I don't believe that happened for one second when there is a simple explanation for everything unusual that happened that night. Do you think she was back in bed when Matt checked?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on May 22, 2014, 02:38:09 AM
There is a possibility that the door to the children's bedroom never moved at all
[ edited - removed defamatory comment ]
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 22, 2014, 03:16:30 AM
There is a possibility that the door to the children's bedroom never moved at all
[ edited - removed defamatory comment ]
That would bring you back to a climb in window and climb out window scenario.
A child is in a bedroom with its door almost shut. Later the child is not in the bedroom and its door is more open. My suggestion: the child got out of bed, pulled the door open, the purpose of that action being to walk through the doorway into another room. This explains both the door being wider open, and the person being no longer in the room.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 22, 2014, 03:54:41 AM
That would bring you back to a climb in window and climb out window scenario.
A child is in a bedroom with its door almost shut. Later the child is not in the bedroom and its door is more open. My suggestion: the child got out of bed, pulled the door open, the purpose of that action being to walk through the doorway into another room. This explains both the door being wider open, and the person being no longer in the room.
A child waking up explains one move of the door. Which one? Before Gerry's check or before Matt's? Take your pick but that doesn't cover it. But if the door didn't move i.e. was always half-open then you better ask yourself if the child was even in the bed?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 22, 2014, 04:16:46 AM
So you have the child moving the door for a second time before Matt's check? What are the chances of her waking up first between 8.30-9 moving the door then falling back asleep. Then she wakes up again before Matt checks at 9.30 and amazingly moves the door to exactly the same half-open position. No open window before 9.30 to disturb her. What are the odds? I don't believe that happened for one second when there is a simple explanation for everything unusual that happened that night. Do you think she was back in bed when Matt checked?
IMO the child pulled the door open and walked to another room (possibly 9.05-9.30). And what is your theory of the very first bit, the transition from being just inside the northbedroom door, to being just outside the northbedroom door? If you think it wasn't walking on own feet, what method are you proposing instead to transition from one side of that doorway to the other?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 22, 2014, 04:31:29 AM
OK, so on page one line one of your theory of that mealtime, which room was the child in IYO when the parents left for meal?
From the dog alerts there's the possibility that a deceased child was not in bed. If the child was not in bed then the door didn't move and that's why Matt too amazingly found it half-open. Unless an abductor has a habit of leaving doors exactly half-open which is extremely doubtful.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 22, 2014, 10:41:49 AM
From the dog alerts there's the possibility that a deceased child who hasn't been seen since that night was not in bed. If the child was not in bed then the door didn't move and that's the reason why Matt too amazingly found it exactly half-open. Unless an abductor has a habit of leaving doors exactly half-open which is extremely doubtful.
OK so does your theory say definitely in 5A at 19.30?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 22, 2014, 12:33:36 PM
So as I understand your theory says the situation at 19.30 is: in the apartment, but without knowing which room?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 22, 2014, 11:47:34 PM
My theory all connects with the discrepancies in the statements and from the dog alerts. Everything needs to connect. How did the door move 3 times? Why wasn't the open window used? What I do know is this case can be worked out but hard to prove. I know that Smithman needs to be positively identified to have any chance of solving this case. And they are tracking him at present.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 23, 2014, 01:57:28 AM
Child opens bedroom's slightly ajar door wider and walks or runs into another room.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2014, 02:14:52 AM
Child opens bedroom's slightly ajar door wider and walks or runs into another room.
That doesn't explain the cadaver alerts. His hypothesis doesn't connect if the child fell from the sofa and tragically died at 9.10. So that would mean Kate found her before she raised the alarm. How could she hide the body in 5A without it being discovered? She wasn't gone long according to the others except for Gerry's over 10 minutes gone so that means it was now 10:15 when the alarm was raised >@@(*&) But maybe he got confused with his own check for being that long away. The GNR arrived at 11pm and were searching the apartment. The routine change and the contradictions about that visit connect with the cadaver alerts.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Mr Moderator on May 23, 2014, 01:48:22 PM
Members are reminded of the forum rules pertaining to derogatory and defamatory posts. This thread has been edited in terms of those rules.
Please stay within the topic boundaries.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 23, 2014, 03:08:02 PM
Gerry: Can I, can I just say I think the worst thing about you know, the fact that many people have blamed us and vilified us and and with hindsight you know it was clearly a mistake with hindsight but the worst thing for me about that is there's an abductor out there and that person stole our child and went into an apartment and took a child and he's anonymous and blameless.
Oprah: You believe it was a he?
Gerry: Almost certainly a male almost certainly
Oprah: And is that because one of your friends Jane...
Gerry and Kate: Tanner
Oprah: ...had seen was err explain to me because I had read that she was coming out of her villa at nine fifteen. So let's go back to that night if you don't mind.
Gerry: Yeah
Oprah: Let's go back to the night. Nine oh-five, you all are at dinner and you made the-the-the check at nine so you're checking every half hour.
Gerry: It was actually nine o'clock while the whole group were in the restaurant and one of our friend's Matt already went up and checked his err daughter and as he came back I went up to check on Madeleine [hesitation] and the twins and I went into the apartment and err really just checking the crying and the door...
Oprah: Checking to see if there was any crying
Gerry: Yeah that was it and the door was erm open more, I'd, I'd left it just ajar about 5 degrees and we checked them before we left and they were sound asleep
Oprah: Which door are you talking about?
Gerry: This is the bedroom door, to err their room, the three children were in the same room so I actually stepped into the room and the twins were sound asleep and Madeleine was lying in her bed exactly where she was when I left, Cuddle Cat up beside her head on her blanket and err and I closed the door and went to...
Oprah: And this is about nine-oh-five?
Gerry: Just yeah, so I went outside and I was outside the apartment and I met err one of the other guests and he was coming the other way with his kid and I actually crossed the road to erm to chat to him and we were sort of chatting for about five minutes and during that, Jane went to check on her children and it was at that point she was just passed us going up to the corner and she saw a man carrying a young girl with almo.. she described independently the pyjamas that Madeleine had on and she didn't see the child's face she didn't you know she saw me there she'd seen that I'd just been in the apartment and so she at the time she thought it was something odd but it didn't raise enough alarm bells to challenge the person or anything
Kate: The child was barefoot and bare armed and he had a quite heavy jacket on so I think it was one of those things that just seemed a little bit odd but obviously it's not until later on that you realise.
Oprah: So this is the sketch of that person that err your friend Jane err remembers seeing but Jane, Jane didn't say anything when she came back to the table, yeah, because she saw you standing there.
Gerry: Yeah yeah
Oprah: So erm you discovered that Madeleine was missing so you checked it about 9:05 another friend sees this man at 9:15 and you went back to check again at...
Kate: Well actually at 9:30 I stood up to go and check on Madeleine, because it was my turn. And at the same time Matt our friend stood up and we both started walking and he said well I'm going to check on G***e they were the next apartment to us he said "I'll check on Madeleine" and he hesitated a bit and then he said "no, I'll check" so he went to check at half nine came back said fine everything's fine so I then went at 10 o'clock the next check erm...
Oprah: Did he see her in the bed at 9:30?
Kate: No he just went in and listened and there was no crying
Oprah: So he came back and said everything's fine cause you all everybody's just checking to see if there's crying and there's no crying so everything's fine and so then you went at ten.
Kate: I went at ten and I went into the apartment and there was no crying I stopped and there was no crying. And then I just noticed that the door was quite open
Oprah: Which door?
Kate: Their bedroom door sorry, and we usually have the door as Gerry said sort of not closed but ajar just so that a little bit of light gets in and it's not too dark in the room so I thought oh Matt must have gone in and left the door open
Oprah: same thing he thought
Kate: Yeah, so I thought well I'll just close it over again, and as I went to close it over it slammed shut and I thought and it was like sort of you know a draught had caused it to shut so I turned behind me and I thought are the patio doors open and they were closed and I thought well that's strange so then I opened the door thinking I'll open it ajar a bit again and that was when I kind of looked into the room and when I just looked and it was quite dark and I was just looking and looking at Madeleine's bed and I was thinking is that her that I was looking for why isn't Madeleine there? And then in the end I walked over and thought oh, she's not in bed and then I thought maybe she's wandered through to our bed and that's why the door's open so I went through to our bedroom and she wasn't there and then I kind of see then I'm starting to panic a bit and I ran back into their room and literally as I went back into their room the curtains that were drawn over just "whoooosh" flew open and that's when I saw that the shutter was right up and the window was pushed right open. And that was when I just knew that erm someone had taken her. So I, I mean I ran to the window and I didn't know what I thought was going to see but I ran to the window and then I quickly hmm quickly looked through the wardrobes I had I suppose this temporary thought she was cowering in a wardrobe or something anyway she wasn't there and I just ran out and soon as...
Oprah: was she in a closet, in a closet?
Kate: Yeah just in case, just in case she's hiding or something I don't know and then I just went flying out the backdoor and erm ran to Gerry and just as soon as I saw the table where they were sitting I just started shouting "someone's taken her, Madeleine's gone" you know and erm that's how it all started really but erm [hyperventilates]
Oprah: Why did you feel immediately, I'd heard that you'd said "They've taken her, they've taken her"
Kate: nnnn....I didn't say that I said, said "somebody's taken her Madeleine's gone". Well from the way I found the room it was obvious because a child could not open those shutters and the window
Oprah: uh huh
Kate: erm so it was obvious to me
Gerry: You know when she came back and she she shouted "someone's taken her" and there was just disbelief
Kate: Taken her that's fine they all jumped up and they were saying if Kate don't worry she's fine, she's fine she'll be there she'll be there and I said she's gone, she's - tak, somebody's taken her you know it was just like...
Gerry: And the way the room was you know.
Kate: It was just like disbelief you know...
Gerry: The way that window was and the shutter up and the window open there was no way Madeleine could have done that err at that age and err it was just terrifying.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 24, 2014, 01:31:59 AM
Provisional timeline for door: 1930 closed to ajar, 2105-2125 opened to go on foot to another room, JIMO
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 24, 2014, 01:53:10 AM
Gerry said they checked and they were all asleep before they left at 8:30. He came back half hour later and their still asleep in exactly the same position. It is obvious Madeleine hasn't woken up and moved the door so who moved the door before 9?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 24, 2014, 02:03:16 AM
Gerry said they checked and they were all asleep before they left at 8:30. He came back half hour later and their still asleep in exactly the same position. It is obvious Madeleine hasn't woken up and moved the door so who moved the door before 9?
20.30 check was not visual IMO
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on May 24, 2014, 02:16:41 AM
Gerry said they checked and they were all asleep before they left at 8:30. He came back half hour later and their still asleep in exactly the same position. It is obvious Madeleine hasn't woken up and moved the door so who moved the door before 9?
Maybe the change in air pressure due to the breeze moved the door when Kate and Gerry left the apartment to go to dinner. Or failing that - maybe the door moved (for the same reason) when Gerry opened and closed the patio door at 9.05 when he entered 5A. Or maybe the adbuctor was in the apartment at that time? Who can possibly say?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 24, 2014, 02:31:54 AM
20.35pm check was non-visual "listening from the outside ... as there was complete silence ... did not even enter ..." GM 10 May 2007
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: icabodcrane on May 24, 2014, 02:38:48 AM
Maybe the change in air pressure due to the breeze moved the door when Kate and Gerry left the apartment to go to dinner. Or failing that - maybe the door moved (for the same reason) when Gerry opened and closed the patio door at 9.05 when he entered 5A. Or maybe the adbuctor was in the apartment at that time? Who can possibly say?
Who can possibly say ?
Scotland Yard, one would hope ... three years and seven million pounds later
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 24, 2014, 10:40:50 AM
20.35pm check was non-visual "listening from the outside ... as there was complete silence ... did not even enter ..." GM 10 May 2007
Madeleine is ruled out as moving the door. Everyone can see it wasn't her. She hadn't woken up before 9pm. So we are left with 3 realistic possibilities:
1. Abductor moved it
2. One of their friends moved it
3. The door never moved
Options 1 & 2 would probably be through unlocked patio door as entry. If it's number 3 then the apartment was locked including the patio door and Gerry did use his key to enter as he said in his first statement because there was possibly something inside 5A that he wanted nobody to find.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: stephen25000 on May 24, 2014, 10:43:33 AM
Madeleine is ruled out as moving the door. Everyone can see it wasn't her. She hadn't woken up before 9pm. So we are left with 3 realistic possibilities:
1. Abductor moved it
2. One of their friends moved it
3. The door never moved
Options 1 & 2 would probably be through unlocked patio door as entry. If it's number 3 then the apartment was locked including the patio door and Gerry did use his key to enter as he said in his first statement.
......and if number 3 is true >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 24, 2014, 10:45:46 AM
Yes well it's a big coincidence that Matt finds the door in exactly the same position as Gerry doesn't it? So it's a no brainer to ask if the door ever moved.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: stephen25000 on May 24, 2014, 10:46:57 AM
20.35pm check was non-visual "listening from the outside ... as there was complete silence ... did not even enter ..." GM 10 May 2007
"The deponent and his wife remained in the apartment to relax and drink a glass of wine until 8.30 pm. After checking the children, the deponent and his wife and the adults went to the "Tapas" restaurant" (GM 4 May Statement)
Checking the children means opening the door and quickly looking inside to see if they're asleep which he said he did on Oprah before they left at 8:30. A week between 1st and 2nd statements >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 24, 2014, 01:12:57 PM
Madeleine is ruled out as moving the door. Everyone can see it wasn't her. She hadn't woken up before 9pm. So we are left with 3 realistic possibilities:
1. Abductor moved it
2. One of their friends moved it
3. The door never moved
Options 1 & 2 would probably be through unlocked patio door as entry. If it's number 3 then the apartment was locked including the patio door and Gerry did use his key to enter as he said in his first statement because there was possibly something inside 5A that he wanted nobody to find.
Options 1 & 2 would probably be through unlocked patio door as entry.
I aint buyin that....
"Well the shutter was up and the window was open, I'm not lying about that, and even if they want to say theoretically, 'oh she wandered out the back of the apartment', then they're basically saying a three-year old has opened the long curtains, closed them behind her, opened the patio doors, closed them behind her, opened the gate at the top of the stairs, closed that behind her (GM interjecting: 'with the child lock') and done the same at the bottom... you know it's just not... it's not possible."
So, if an abductor entered via the back patio door prior to Gerry's check then he/she must have opened the gate, then closed it behind them, opened the child gate at the top of the stairs & closed behind them, opened the patio doors & curtains again closing both behind them.
Furthermore, if the abductor left that way then he also repeated all of the above in reverse, whilst carrying an inert Madeleine.
'you know it's just ... it's just not probable'
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 24, 2014, 01:27:00 PM
And that's why the alleged moving door is vital because it shows you how Madeleine most probably disappeared. Any abductor would require a key to enter but in that case the window wouldn't have been opened. There was no need for an abductor to open the window and noisy shutters, risk of leaving evidence, wasting valuable time etc. It screams out set up! Any way you look at it all comes back to the same thing. The dog alerts and alleged moving door show you how it all went down.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 24, 2014, 03:27:01 PM
The brown stain has to be important as to what really happened in case she was found.
"It is now my belief there was somebody either in, or trying to get in, the children's bedroom that night (2 MAY), and that is what disturbed them. The only other unexplained detail I remember from that morning (3 MAY) was a large, brown stainI noticed on Madeleine's pink Eeyore pyjama top. It looked like a tea stain. At the time I just assumed it was a drink spillage that had escaped our attention, and that might well be all it was." (Madeleine)
"During breakfast the “crying episode”, already described, took place. She noticed a stain, supposedly of tea, on Madeleine’s pyjama top, which she washed a little later that same morning. She hung it out to dry on a small stand, and it was dry by the afternoon. Madeleine sometimes drank tea; nevertheless the stain did not appear during breakfast, maybe it happened another day, as Madeleine did not have tea the previous night and the stain was dry. (KM 6 Sep)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 24, 2014, 06:56:33 PM
Sorry, I don't follow the logic. Jane never said she saw anyone going in or out of the patio doors.
Let me be clearer - Gerry's first check at 9:04
4 May Statement - 5A is locked. Nobody can enter without a key. No door moved. Window is closed.
10 May Statement - 5A is unlocked. Anybody can enter through patio door. Door has moved. Window is closed.
Abductor has to be inside before Gerry's check to move the door. Change is statement i.e. unlocked patio door makes this now possible. So when Gerry leaves and talks to Jez abductor is hiding in 5A. He is seen leaving minutes later by Jane Tanner.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Benice on May 24, 2014, 07:34:54 PM
4 May Statement - 5A is locked. Nobody can enter without a key. No door moved. Window is closed.
10 May Statement - 5A is unlocked. Anybody can enter through patio door. Door has moved. Window is closed.
Abductor has to be inside before Gerry's check to move the door. Change is statement i.e. unlocked patio door makes this now possible. So when Gerry leaves and talks to Jez abductor is hiding in 5A. He is seen leaving minutes later by Jane Tanner.
But didn't the McCanns state right from the beginning in their statements that Matt entered 5a via the unlocked patio doors?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 31, 2014, 03:13:19 AM
... It is obvious Madeleine hasn't woken up and moved the door so who moved the door before 9?
I can tell you from real world experience that the time when a parent stops putting nappies on a child tends for good reason to be coincident with the time when the child is capable of knowing when they need to go to the bathroom. Milk is mainly water. What path do you find is likely to be taken by milk, not immediately, but about an hour or so after someone drinks it?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on May 31, 2014, 09:44:51 AM
I can tell you from real world experience that the time when a parent stops putting nappies on a child tends for good reason to be coincident with the time when the child is capable of knowing when they need to go to the bathroom. Milk is mainly water. What path do you find is likely to be taken by milk, not immediately, but about an hour or so after someone drinks it?
Madeleine didn't move the door before Gerry's check. Ask Gerry as you trust him.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on May 31, 2014, 01:23:18 PM
I can tell you from real world experience that the time when a parent stops putting nappies on a child tends for good reason to be coincident with the time when the child is capable of knowing when they need to go to the bathroom. Milk is mainly water. What path do you find is likely to be taken by milk, not immediately, but about an hour or so after someone drinks it?
That is a good analysis Pegasus, but most 4 y. olds (Madeleine was just a few days short of 4) can hold their evening drink until morning, without pressure on their bladder even waking them. Usually thta is no problem.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on May 31, 2014, 11:02:44 PM
I was thinking the same but didn't say anything ! 8(>((
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 01, 2014, 12:23:52 AM
Question: "Someone left a room, and the door was wider open, explain the physical connection between the two events" Answers so far range from "No-one left the room and the door was not wider open" to "Whatever happened it was impossible they went to the bathroom". Maybe time to hang up my deerstalker, how can anyone compete with simple occam-like deductions like that.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Silkywhiskers on June 01, 2014, 02:23:08 AM
Let us not forget the random gusts of wind that moved doors within 5a, only on 3 May however and only while Kate was standing there watching.
8@??)(
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on June 01, 2014, 02:31:17 PM
Question: "Someone left a room, and the door was wider open, explain the physical connection between the two events" Answers so far range from "No-one left the room and the door was not wider open" to "Whatever happened it was impossible they went to the bathroom". Maybe time to hang up my deerstalker, how can anyone compete with simple occam-like deductions like that.
Now you are exagerating Pegasus ... and that is not like you.
Get that deerstalker back firmly on your head. Mind you, maybe I will have it if you have finished with it. You can keep the pipe.
There are any number of reasons why the door could be more, or less, open, and really it is a bit futile even contemplating them. So many possibilities.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 01, 2014, 02:47:05 PM
Now you are exagerating Pegasus ... and that is not like you.
Get that deerstalker back firmly on your head. Mind you, maybe I will have it if you have finished with it. You can keep the pipe.
There are any number of reasons why the door could be more, or less, open, and really it is a bit futile even contemplating them. So many possibilities.
It never moved, that's the most likely.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 01, 2014, 03:01:06 PM
Madeleine was asleep at 8:30 and still asleep 30 minutes later in the exact same sleeping position according to the father. No moving door in his first statement before his check. Why not?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 01, 2014, 03:33:31 PM
Madeleine was asleep at 8:30 and still asleep 30 minutes later in the exact same sleeping position according to the father. No moving door in his first statement before his check. Why not?
But you are telling us yet again what you think definitely did not happen, which forms no part of your theory, and you are quoting as true (and using as a proof) a source which you claim is IYO not true at all. You say its a lie but in the same breath you use it as a proof. Is there actually any statement re the inside of the apartment between tapas tea and 22:03.0000 which is true in your opinion and on which you base your theory? If not what on earth do you base your theory on?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 01, 2014, 03:52:56 PM
But you are telling us yet again what you think definitely did not happen, which forms no part of your theory, and you are quoting as true (and using as a proof) a source which you claim is IYO not true at all. You say its a lie but in the same breath you use it as a proof. Is there actually any statement re the inside of the apartment between tapas tea and 22:03.0000 which is true in your opinion and on which you base your theory? If not what on earth do you base your theory on?
Gerry is telling you that didn't happen i.e. Madeleine didn't move it. A dead child can't move doors i.e. the door was always half-open.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 02, 2014, 12:43:17 AM
Gerry is telling you that didn't happen i.e. Madeleine didn't move it....
So are you basing your whole theory of what happened inside the apartment that evening, on the statements of someone who you think is in your opinion lying about everything? Either you have remarkable detective skills, to deduce the truth without having a single true statement you believe, or it explains why IMO your exact timepoint 22:03, which you also get ironically get from a statement by same person, is drastically out JIMO. If you do not accept even one of the four adults who entered the apartment is telling the truth, on exactly what do you base your inside theory on? Its like you are making a cake using no ingredients?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 02, 2014, 01:25:48 AM
What is the time period, which definitely contains within it the moment the child exited the apartment? (So for example you might answer something like: "definitely between 21:20 and 22:00").
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 02, 2014, 01:54:32 AM
So are you basing your whole theory of what happened inside the apartment that evening, on the statements of someone who you think is in your opinion lying about everything? Either you have remarkable detective skills, to deduce the truth without having a single true statement you believe, or it explains why IMO your exact timepoint 22:03, which you also get ironically get from a statement by same person, is drastically out JIMO. If you do not accept even one of the four adults who entered the apartment is telling the truth, on exactly what do you base your inside theory on? Its like you are making a cake using no ingredients?
My theory is Madeleine was never in bed that night. You are the one who believes that she was and if you believe .... ........ are telling the truth then you must know that ..... doesn't believe Madeleine moved the door. He thinks it was Tannerman. That door was said to move for a very good reason. Strange that move isn't mentioned in his first statement. You wouldn't forget that vital piece of information because it would be the first thing you'd think about after ............ had disappeared.
10:03 connects with Aoife and Smithman. That was the biggest mistake ever i.e. check watch for exact time for alibi. Martin and Peter's times were incorrect on leaving the Dolphin restaurant but Aoife's time matches. She said they left Kelly's bar at 10pm.
Dolphin bill time 9:27 (source TOTL)
Around 21H00 they left the restaurant and headed toward 'Kelly's Bar' (Martin Smith) Incorrect time
He would like to clarify that on the 3rd of May, he and his family went to the Dolphin restaurant, situated in Praia da Luz, where they dined. Around 21H00 they left the restaurant and went to Kelly's Bar, about one minute away on foot. (Peter Smith) Incorrect time
Regarding the 3rd of May, 2007, she went, with all her family, to eat at the Dolphin restaurant, which is close to Kelly's Bar. When they left the restaurant, around 21H30 (Correct time - PF), they headed toward Kelly's Bar. They stayed there for about 30 minutes. — Around 22H00, they left Kelly's Bar. The group headed, on foot, for their apartment. Questioned, she responds that she knows the time that they left because her father and her brother decided to leave early that night. (Aoife Smith)
The other is the Irish family payment (of their bill) at the Dolphin restaurant. They made that payment with a debit card at 21:27 hours but – you have to bear in mind that after they left the restaurant they went to a bar (…) (TOTL - G. Amaral)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 02, 2014, 02:18:35 AM
By apparently (?) rejecting the statements of all 4 adults who were inside the apartment, that leaves you with freedom to create whatever sequence and timeline inside the apartment you wish, as you have no veracious statement inside that night IYO to constrain your theory. JIMO your 21:20ish exit time (possibly the earliest proposed by anyone now?) is drastically way out. And the completely normal behaviour observed by chat witness is a bit of a clue that nothing had been discovered at that time isn't it?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Martina on June 02, 2014, 02:41:22 AM
Matt's statement is a bit problematic in some parts. Here is an excerpt from his rogatory:
So I approached the room but I didn't actually go in because you could see the twins in the cots and one of the, you could see the twins in the cots because they're in with, sort of the cots were in the middle of the room with sort of a gap of about sort of maybe a foot between the two, the cots had sort of got that fabric end and sort of a mesh side, so you could see the sides and you could see them, erm, see them breathing and there were two there and it was all completely quiet.
Compare that description with the photo of the Children bedroom in 5A.
Sure, the cots have these mesh sides Matt is talking about. The problem is that in the position they were standing he could not see the inside of the cot closer to the door, the one with the fabric ending. It was not possible to see one of the twins breathing without actually walking into the room. So, basically he went to check on three children, and left without actually checking if two of them were still in their beds. Does anyone see here any logic?
e
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 02, 2014, 02:49:09 AM
Matt talks about it at 12:40
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 02, 2014, 02:49:49 AM
Matt didn't see if she was in bed because he couldn't see most of it from where he was standing. Only three people claim to have seen Madeleine after 6pm - Gerry, Kate and David.
Agreed at approx 21:30 did not see the child. And the witness's statements are completely honest IMO.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 02, 2014, 02:53:58 AM
I believe Matt is telling the truth about his check as for the rest 8(0(*
two checks actually
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Silkywhiskers on June 02, 2014, 08:42:10 PM
Yeah I love how the "checking" system is the biggest FAILURE in this case.
Closer examination reveals the "checks" were not at all thorough, indeed Gerry thinks that the Abductor was hiding behind the door while he relieved himself!!!!
Checking FAIL.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 03, 2014, 04:33:45 PM
If Cato Fong had been hiding in there from Clouseau I think he might have been a bit more inventive than behind the bedroom door. IMO there was never any abductor in there but just as a hypothetical exercise it is easy to make a complete list of all the interior physical spaces in which an imaginary hiding abductor could physically fit.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Silkywhiskers on June 03, 2014, 08:26:40 PM
If Cato Fong had been hiding in there from Clouseau I think he might have been a bit more inventive than behind the bedroom door. IMO there was never any abductor in there but just as a hypothetical exercise it is easy to make a complete list of all the interior physical spaces in which an imaginary hiding abductor could physically fit.
There was never any room for an abductor, period.
I'm using irony and sarcasm in my other post.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 03, 2014, 09:28:09 PM
IMO there was no abductor hiding anywhere but if there was there are plenty of physical spaces and for example he could have hid in a top cupboard, even Clouseau would not expect that.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Silkywhiskers on June 03, 2014, 09:35:06 PM
If you are "checking" your children, you are on alert.
How on earth could ANYONE hide in that tiny apartment, when a prowling father was about?
We all KNOW when a house is empty and when it's not. Instinct left over from caveman days.
Gerry entered a tiny apartment complete with intruder, and had NO IDEA said intruder was there?
Intruder did not breathe, or sweat, or reveal himself in any normal human way?
Please........how ridiculous.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 03, 2014, 09:57:01 PM
If you are "checking" your children, you are on alert.
How on earth could ANYONE hide in that tiny apartment, when a prowling father was about?
We all KNOW when a house is empty and when it's not. Instinct left over from caveman days.
Gerry entered a tiny apartment complete with intruder, and had NO IDEA said intruder was there?
Intruder did not breathe, or sweat, or reveal himself in any normal human way?
Please........how ridiculous.
Pathfinder came up with a witty hiding place suggestion. However IMO the child was alive and asleep in bed during the check of about 21:05 (and that BTW is how Mr Amaral re-enacts it in his film).
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 03, 2014, 10:13:57 PM
So yet again you are totally discounting Eddie's alerts? ...
IMO you can't possibly have read that in my posts. IMO child alive sleeping in bed during the 21:05 check, and Eddie is correct always. I see no contradiction at all, do you?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on June 04, 2014, 01:46:34 AM
I do not have the same theory as you. However to some extent we possibly may agree on certain points at least in outline form. Such as: that the cat never signalled. It is relevant to this door thread, because as soon as one assumes the observed signal was to the cat, instantly and inevitably that leads to the conclusion that the child bedroom scene was staged, which is incorrect. All JIMO.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on June 04, 2014, 02:15:21 AM
I do not have the same theory as you. However to some extent we possibly may agree on certain points at least in outline form. Such as: that the cat never signalled. It is relevant to this door thread, because as soon as one assumes the observed signal was to the cat, instantly and inevitably that leads to the conclusion that the child bedroom scene was staged, which is incorrect. All JIMO.
I am fully aware that you do not have the same theory as me, but you research and have a logical mind, which I appreciate ... and the comment I commended was classy
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2014, 02:33:29 AM
Thankyou, but back to the door, all I did was looked at a door which was reported to have become wider open, and said, oh, maybe someone opened it to walk through, let's see there were only three people there, can't be the two in cots, so that solves who opened the door. Never anticipated that a person opening a door to go through it would be so opposed, and from all sides
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on June 04, 2014, 02:50:55 AM
Thankyou, but back to the door, all I did was looked at a door which was reported to have become wider open, and said, oh, maybe someone opened it to walk through, let's see there were only three people there, can't be the two in cots, so that solves who opened the door. Never anticipated that a person opening a door to go through it would be so opposed, and from all sides
Have you ever wondered about the door moving as the patio door was slid open / and / or closed? Or about there possibly being a window left open causing a draft (after the kiddies bedroom window was opened?)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2014, 02:56:26 AM
Was there a monty python sketch called "How to open a door before walking through it"? Or am I imagining it?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 04, 2014, 03:04:02 AM
Have you ever wondered about the door moving as the patio door was slid open / and / or closed? Or about there possibly being a window left open causing a draft (after the kiddies bedroom window was opened?)
No draft moved the door. That door was a load of BS!
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2014, 03:30:40 AM
Have you ever wondered about the door moving as the patio door was slid open / and / or closed? Or about there possibly being a window left open causing a draft (after the kiddies bedroom window was opened?)
But a theory which has a draft opening the door, must then seperately solve the problem, how come the child started off in the room and then was not in the room.
By proposing a devious and admittedly almost impossible combination move (a child opening the door and then walking through the resulting opening) I can fool myself that I have solved both problems at once.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2014, 03:46:29 AM
That is the type of great line that the two men up in the balcony used to come up with, my favourites. Yes I see the idea - being in that room was invented, so that means the door movements must be invented, and so the open window must be invented too, and so on, but IMO it's incorrect.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on June 04, 2014, 03:53:12 AM
Going back a little someone made reference to Gerry's contention that the abductor might have been hiding behind the door while he went to the toilet. Surely that isn't a realistic proposition since the window wasn't open at that point?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2014, 09:48:03 PM
Going back a little someone made reference to Gerry's contention that the abductor might have been hiding behind the door while he went to the toilet. Surely that isn't a realistic proposition since the window wasn't open at that point?
(I think it was shutter noise but) it's possible to propose the flushing noise woke the child
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on June 04, 2014, 09:52:56 PM
But a theory which has a draft opening the door, must then seperately solve the problem, how come the child started off in the room and then was not in the room.
By proposing a devious and admittedly almost impossible combination move (a child opening the door and then walking through the resulting opening) I can fool myself that I have solved both problems at once.
Because she was abducted, Pegasus
If only you could free yourself from preconceptions it would all become very clear to you. Cos you are a clever analytical guy, BUT your preconceptions keep pulling you back. Imo
Going back a little someone made reference to Gerry's contention that the abductor might have been hiding behind the door while he went to the toilet. Surely that isn't a realistic proposition since the window wasn't open at that point?
Whats wrong with that , John?
Almost certainly the abductor came in via the front door.
Door Out of sight No-one passes it at all Set back in a black hole Amaral said no-one came in or went out throught the windows.... no fibres
He came and went with Madeleine via the front door ... almost without doubt.
Had a key
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2014, 10:53:36 PM
... If only you could free yourself from preconceptions ...
That there was a conspiracy, the open window and shutter were faked or invented, one or more of the group were faking behaviour during dinner time, someone carried a body through the street so you could see it, the child did not walk into another room, the child bedroom scene was staged - these are a few of the preconceptions which I now think are not true.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: sadie on June 04, 2014, 11:26:06 PM
That there was a conspiracy, the open window and shutter were faked or invented, one or more of the group were faking behaviour during dinner time, someone carried a body through the street so you could see it, the child did not walk into another room, the child bedroom scene was staged - these are a few of the preconceptions which I now think are not true.
I gather Pegasus that you are changing your views as you find things out? That is healthy. Something that I have been doing for 7 years and my thoughts are still evolving according to what I am finding.
Some on here will not budge an inch. They are stuck solidly in a groove. TBH, they have allowed themselves to be suckered into the position they are now in by listening to lies, disinformation and downright myths
.... and they dont seem to have the understanding (or wish?) to get out of that groove.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 04, 2014, 11:50:41 PM
It means the child was still alive when she vanished.
Eddie and Grime indicate the opposite.
As does the dig in PDL right outside the back door....
grime says nothing of the sort..stick to the facts
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 07, 2014, 02:33:35 AM
BTW as well as not getting who opened the bedroom door, peeps are also out on time of exit from apartment - it wasn't 21:20 (as in JT sighting, or in pathfinder theory) and it wasn't 22:00 (as in smith sighting theories like SY's), and it wasn't the window between, all just IMO.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on June 07, 2014, 06:34:49 AM
BTW as well as not getting who opened the bedroom door, peeps are also out on time of exit from apartment - it wasn't 21:20 (as in JT sighting, or in pathfinder theory) and it wasn't 22:00 (as in smith sighting theories like SY's), and it wasn't the window between, all just IMO.
In your theory did Madeleine get up before 9:10 then go back to bed and settle herself to sleep again after waking up alone in a strange place/country?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 08, 2014, 04:58:53 PM
In your theory did Madeleine get up before 9:10 then go back to bed and settle herself to sleep again after waking up alone in a strange place/country?
If the bedroom door was wider open at 21:10 than at 20:30, then it can only have been the child who made it wider open by leaving the bedroom then returning to the bedroom, for example to go bathroom, or to see if adults are in. I don't think this return trip, if it happened, is of any importance.
I am interested in the door becoming wider open after 21:10, which IMO definitely did happen, and it can only have been the child who opened it, to go into another room, I have already explained the reason for this, which is someone opening the window and shutter from outside.
The key fact (or assumption you might say), which is required to be recognised to understand this short sequence of events, is that the apartment looked like no-one was in. If I got that wrong, then my whole theory (and I only posted the first bit) is nothing more than a pile of horse droppings.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on June 08, 2014, 06:26:11 PM
If the bedroom door was wider open at 21:10 than at 20:30, then it can only have been the child who made it wider open by leaving the bedroom then returning to the bedroom, for example to go bathroom, or to see if adults are in. I don't think this return trip, if it happened, is of any importance.
I am interested in the door becoming wider open after 21:10, which IMO definitely did happen, and it can only have been the child who opened it, to go into another room, I have already explained the reason for this, which is someone opening the window and shutter from outside.
The key fact (or assumption you might say), which is required to be recognised to understand this short sequence of events, is that the apartment looked like no-one was in. If I got that wrong, then my whole theory (and I only posted the first bit) is nothing more than a pile of horse droppings.
I find it hard to believe that a 4 year old child could wake in unfamiliar surroundings and settle herself so quickly afterwards.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on June 08, 2014, 06:29:26 PM
Particularly one who apparently had sleeping problems anyway.
"Madeleine would often get up in the night and go and sleep in the same bed as err Kate and Gerry so I think their sleep patterns were pretty disturbed." (DP)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 08, 2014, 06:45:54 PM
I find it hard to believe that a 4 year old child could wake in unfamiliar surroundings and settle herself so quickly afterwards.
I see no problem with a child on holiday waking and going back to sleep, a very common thing methinks.
But is no-one interested in why the bedroom door was found wider open at 22:00? Does no-one, except me and Mr Amaral, even consider the possibility that it might have been opened by the only mobile person known to be present? It's not rocket science. You will never get to the second part of what happened, if you don't accept reasonable possibilities for the first part, JIMO.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: jassi on June 08, 2014, 06:59:28 PM
How could she possibly know how the door had been left, seeing as others had been in the apartment, 'checking' since she left at 8.30 ?
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 08, 2014, 07:01:29 PM
Yes, you would, but it begs the question as to why she thought it strange .
She explained that it was usually ajar but then she thought Matt may have moved it open which he didn't. But you would still check to see if they were in bed before shutting the door.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 08, 2014, 07:37:39 PM
Yes well I base my theory around the prime suspect seen taking Madeleine away on the night. You ignore Smithman at your peril because he did it.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on June 08, 2014, 07:43:43 PM
I see no problem with a child on holiday waking and going back to sleep, a very common thing methinks.
But is no-one interested in why the bedroom door was found wider open at 22:00? Does no-one, except me and Mr Amaral, even consider the possibility that it might have been opened by the only mobile person known to be present? It's not rocket science. You will never get to the second part of what happened, if you don't accept reasonable possibilities for the first part, JIMO.
Waking, getting up, opening the door, getting back into bed and falling asleep in the same position that her father left her in 40 minutes before?
Actually, I do find that strange. It's been a while since I've had toddlers, but I'm fairly sure that waking up in a strange place and finding themselves without Mummy or Daddy would've been a massively traumatic experience and not conducive with settling back to sleep!
Even if this did happen (it's not impossible, just highly unlikely imo) You then need to explain the door moving again between 9:10 and 9:30. Dr Mccann closed it to it's usual position of 5(?) degrees, yet it was half open for Matts check at 9:30, then wide open again at 10.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 08, 2014, 07:45:36 PM
Waking, getting up, opening the door, getting back into bed and falling asleep in the same position that her father left her in 40 minutes before?
Actually, I do find that strange. It's been a while since I've had toddlers, but I'm fairly sure that waking up in a strange place and finding themselves without Mummy or Daddy would've been a massively traumatic experience and not conducive with settling back to sleep!
Even if this did happen (it's not impossible, just highly unlikely imo) You then need to explain the door moving again between 9:10 and 9:30. Dr Mccann closed it to it's usual position of 5(?) degrees, yet it was half open for Matts check at 9:30, then wide open again at 10.
Not forgetting, if anyone wants to try & claim it was the wind what dunnit, how that howling wind through the open window only blew with sufficient force required to slam the door shut, at the exact moment that Kate went to close it.
Then, even more incredibly, that same gusty wind must have paused for a bit, as Kate stood there trying to workout if some flat bed clothes were Madeleine or not & also while she rushed to check the other bedroom, since during that time it didn't slam the door again.
Then, when Kate returned to the bedroom, the wind obligingly blew the curtains open & she knew straight away that she'd been err taken....y'know.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Martina on June 08, 2014, 07:59:22 PM
Not forgetting, if anyone wants to try & claim it was the wind what dunnit, how that howling wind through the open window only blew with sufficient force required to slam the door shut, at the exact moment that Kate went to close it.
Obviously that was the wind with high dramatical skills.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 08, 2014, 08:55:40 PM
The child was visually seen at about 19:30 then not again until about 21:10.
The check at about 20:30 (just before dinner) was not visual and cannot possibly have noted the sleeping position
"listening from the outside and, as there was complete silence, he did not even enter"
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id192.html#sta2
Yes, you're quite right. It wasn't a visual check at 8:30. I'm sure I recall Dr Mccann saying that Madeleine was in the same position though? Must've been the 7:30 position....
I still stand by my opinion that Madeleine is unlikely to be responsible for all 3 differing door positions though.
I can't believe that it's usual for a 4 year old to wake up in a strange place and settle herself back down again. I would've thought she'd be distraught.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 08, 2014, 10:25:45 PM
Yes, you're quite right. It wasn't a visual check at 8:30. I'm sure I recall Dr Mccann saying that Madeleine was in the same position though? Must've been the 7:30 position....
I still stand by my opinion that Madeleine is unlikely to be responsible for all 3 differing door positions though.
I can't believe that it's usual for a 4 year old to wake up in a strange place and settle herself back down again. I would've thought she'd be distraught.
That was at 9.
'Madeleine Was Here' documentary.
"So, I actually came in and Madeleine was just at the top of the bed here, where I'd left her lying and the covers were folded down and she had her cuddle cat and blanket, were just by her head."
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pathfinder73 on June 08, 2014, 10:27:19 PM
And you base your conjecture "nobody saw at 19:30" on which police statement which you believe is true ?
None of theirs at that time. The dogs and contradictions told me so.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on June 08, 2014, 10:28:02 PM
Why do you keep describing the apartment as a strange place Cariad? Madeleine had been sleeping in there every night for the previous 5 or 6 nights, by which time her surroundings would have become very familiar.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on June 08, 2014, 10:33:25 PM
Why do you keep describing the apartment as a strange place Cariad? Madeleine had been sleeping in there every night for the previous 5 or 6 nights, by which time her surroundings would have become very familiar.
5 nights isn't really long enough for somewhere to become familiar for a child is it?
Is it?
Anyone got young kids care to comment? I know children adapt quicker than adults, but it would be freaky for a 4 year old to wake up alone in an apartment they'd spent 5 nights in wouldn't it?
Or anywhere really?
I'm almost certain that my boys would come in with me if they woke in the night at that age.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 08, 2014, 10:38:24 PM
5 nights isn't really long enough for somewhere to become familiar for a child is it?
Is it?
Anyone got young kids care to comment? I know children adapt quicker than adults, but it would be freaky for a 4 year old to wake up alone in an apartment they'd spent 5 nights in wouldn't it?
Or anywhere really?
I'm almost certain that my boys would come in with me if they woke in the night at that age.
Speaking from my own experience I would say that after a couple of nights in a rented cottage or villa my kids always felt very settled and at home but then all kids are different, I guess. Certainly the surroundings would be very familiar after 5 nights.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on June 08, 2014, 11:02:49 PM
And (hypothetically of course) if they did wake and go into your room but found you were not there, what would they do then?
um... scream hysterically for Mummy? I think they'd've been terrified. Actually, thinking about it, I reckon they would've woken their brother..... On purpose I mean, not by screaming. Woken the other one for moral support/assistance/so as not to leave them alone if they decided to find Mummy.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 08, 2014, 11:27:04 PM
Thanks Cariad. I value your opinion. It is difficult to work out what would happen, in the scenario of waking up, if there are no adults.
IMO, if the child was not scared by anything, had simply woken up and was relaxed, and knew there was a possibility adults might be out, I think they might get back into bed and go back to sleep. I am still working on understanding what would happen exactly in the other (woke up and scared) variant.
BTW it is good to see someone thinking of events from the most important person's perspective.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on June 08, 2014, 11:53:30 PM
Thanks Cariad. I value your opinion. It is difficult to work out what would happen, in the scenario of waking up, if there are no adults.
IMO, if the child was not scared by anything, had simply woken up and was relaxed, and knew there was a possibility adults might be out, I think they might get back into bed and go back to sleep. I am still working on understanding what would happen exactly in the other (woke up and scared) variant.
BTW it is good to see someone thinking of events from the most important person's perspective.
The other point that's worth making, that I don't think anyone has yet, is that as the eldest child, Madeleine probably could use the child gates and probably had it drummed in too her not to leave them open.
I don't dismiss woke and wandered cause everything was closed after her.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Martina on June 09, 2014, 12:00:31 AM
The other point that's worth making, that I don't think anyone has yet, is that as the eldest child, Madeleine probably could use the child gates and probably had it drummed in too her not to leave them open.
I don't dismiss woke and wandered cause everything was closed after her.
...but of course it was perfectly safe to leave these children alone and unattended in the flat.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Cariad on June 09, 2014, 12:15:51 AM
...but of copurse it was perfectly safe to leave these children alone and unattended in the flat.
How anyone could think that is beyond me.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 17, 2014, 02:35:51 PM
Amongst the many risks of leaving a child home alone is attempted burglary.
Only one low wattage light on,. No sign or sound or motion of people inside. Complete silence when listening at window and door Possibly an adult seen turning off all lights except one and leaving. No answer to a final-check precautionary knock (IMO) on the door The burglar concludes: "no-one is home, it is safe to commence gaining entry"
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: Mr Gray on June 17, 2014, 02:48:34 PM
The other point that's worth making, that I don't think anyone has yet, is that as the eldest child, Madeleine probably could use the child gates and probably had it drummed in too her not to leave them open. I don't dismiss woke and wandered cause everything was closed after her.
Another possibility is hiding (I read past cases)
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: John on June 18, 2014, 11:12:36 PM
I think if Madeleine was going to leave the apartment and seek out her parents she would have done so on the Tuesday night when according to the resident upstairs she cried and called daddy for over an hour.
Title: Re: Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?
Post by: pegasus on June 18, 2014, 11:43:00 PM
I think if Madeleine was going to leave the apartment and seek out her parents she would have done so on the Tuesday night when according to the resident upstairs she cried and called daddy for over an hour.
Good point. IMO the child did not leave the property.