Jemmied Shutters ? A Badly Told Story ?

[gilet]

I do think my quote above where Kate says that the shtters had not been open or opened all week. It is reasonable to asume that such shutters are normally locked from the inside. When they are suddenly found to be completely open, it would be natural to assume that they had been forced.

I would agree that if Gerry hadn't found that the shutters opened easily from the outside, it would be safe to assume they'd been forced. But Kate makes it clear in the quote I have posted from her book that they didn't suspect they'd been forced but were simply not as secure, as they had first thought.

Gerry didn't just "find" those shutters open as you claim. To him it was a shocking "sickening discovery". It wasn't a shrug of the shoulders moment as you imply where he simply changed his mind. He was sickened by the finding.

After years of reflection Kate chooses no longer to use the word "forced/jemmied" but in her book tells us that the shutters were not secure and were opened from the outside.

Using the quote you provided (so presumably you read it too), Kate says,

"In the children’s room, Gerry lowered the shutter at the open window. Rushing outside, he made the sickening discovery that it could be raised from this side, too, not just from inside as we’d thought."

Telling us that at the time of the disappearance this was, a"sickening discovery", that discovering this was to Gerry and her quite shocking in fact. 

And you are suggesting that in the couple of hours of panic after this "sickening discovery" the McCanns could not have referred to this window as having been "forced open" or "jemmied open" against the locking system which they had believed was sufficient to secure it from the inside, when making emotional and distressing phone calls to relatives and friends?

I seriously doubt that other open-minded readers here will fail to see such a possibility.

[C.Edwards]

a) how do you know Gerry McCann when he "went outside to test the shutters" as reported wasn't trying to make it look like they'd been broken/tampered with and couldn't?
b) the initial story was that the apartment was locked, they had to have a break in to make it look like they weren't being irresponsible
c) it wasn't until AFTER Gerry's first statement that the story changed to "oh actually, the back door was open"
d) John Hill (while Gerry was giving his statement) revealed there was no evidence of tampering. Amazingly that afternoon, Kate's statement differed from Gerry's. Gerry's subsequent statement "corrected" his mistake over the locked door.
e) which statement of Gerry's was more likely to be true?  The one given before the facts came out or the one afterwards?
f) why was Gerry (and Diane Webster and Fiona Payne) fiddling with a crime scene if that's what they believed?  Everyone was well educated and forensically aware enough to know not to touch anything.  Yet you lot say it's the PJ's fault. Of course it is, nothing to do with the McCanns and their friends!

[debunker]

Staying in similar accommodation in the Canart Islands we have often left windows open and relied on shutters or blinds for security,but only after giving them a good tug to rtest them.

[faithlilly]

Of course Martha

The lie was a panicked reaction in order that their relatives didn't blame them for leaving the apartment insecure. It was never going to stand up to scrutiny, they knew that and that's why they never repeated the story in any of their statements. It was a holding device, nothing more. It does however show the McCanns as people who are willing to be dishonest if the situation warrants it, simply to save their own skins.

[Eleanor]

The Uk doesn't understand these shutters because they don't have them.  In fact, hey are not difficult to open from outside.

[C.Edwards]

The Uk doesn't understand these shutters because they don't have them.  In fact, hey are not difficult to open from outside.

Some are, some aren't. No-one knows about the original ones on 5A as they've been broken/repaired and possibly even replaced over the years.

Also unless someone stands and holds them, there is no way they stay open.  There were no "prop" marks.

Also Kate McCann says that Gerry lowered the shutters then went outside and tested them.  This indicates they were "open" by the cord as that's the only way (without propping) they'll stay open.

Honestly, you lot are so dumb to continue trying to float this story as anything other than the fabrication it was.

[Eleanor]

The Uk doesn't understand these shutters because they don't have them.  In fact, hey are not difficult to open from outside.

Some are, some aren't. No-one knows about the original ones on 5A as they've been broken/repaired and possibly even replaced over the years.

Also unless someone stands and holds them, there is no way they stay open.  There were no "prop" marks.

Also Kate McCann says that Gerry lowered the shutters then went outside and tested them.  This indicates they were "open" by the cord as that's the only way (without propping) they'll stay open.

Honestly, you lot are so dumb to continue trying to float this story as anything other than the fabrication it was.

Fortunately, we don't really care about what you think.  At least, I don't

[debunker]

Of course Martha

The lie was a panicked reaction in order that their relatives didn't blame them for leaving the apartment insecure. It was never going to stand up to scrutiny, they knew that and that's why they never repeated the story in any of their statements. It was a holding device, nothing more. It does however show the McCanns as people who are willing to be dishonest if the situation warrants it, simply to save their own skins.

MInd reading again.

ONly your opinion

[faithlilly]

@ gilet

Kate knew the patio doors were open so what difference did it make that the windows could be opened from the outside ? Anyone with an ounce of sense would assume if the window had been used at all it would be as an exit rather than an entry point so what difference did the fact that the shutters could be lifted make other than to convince relatives they had not been neglectful.

Scenario 1 Kate calls her family " Madeleine has been abducted. We left the patio doors open while we were in the tapas bar and someone got in"

Scenario 2 Kate calls her family " Madeleine has been abducted. A stranger broke in through the shutters that we thought were secure and took her"

What scenario do you think would guarantee the McCanns the least censure ?

[faithlilly]

Of course Martha

The lie was a panicked reaction in order that their relatives didn't blame them for leaving the apartment insecure. It was never going to stand up to scrutiny, they knew that and that's why they never repeated the story in any of their statements. It was a holding device, nothing more. It does however show the McCanns as people who are willing to be dishonest if the situation warrants it, simply to save their own skins.

Why would they be in a panicked state about leaving the apartment insecure?  Unless of course they felt that leaving
the apartment in an insecure state had allowed an abductor to gain entry.  But you don't believe in an abductor do you?
 So - why would they have been panicking if this was a story they'd all been planning to tell?  And if they'd wanted to make it look like a break-in why didn't they actually BREAK-IN?  Perhaps you can elucidate further...

There was no pre planning that night, everything was panicked and there certainly was no time to stage a break-in.

[C.Edwards]

@ gilet

Kate knew the patio doors were open so what difference did it make that the windows could be opened from the outside ? Anyone with an ounce of sense would assume if the window had been used at all it would be as an exit rather than an entry point so what difference did the fact that the shutters could be lifted make other than to convince relatives they had not been neglectful.

Scenario 1 Kate calls her family " Madeleine has been abducted. We left the patio doors open while we were in the tapas bar and someone got in"

Scenario 2 Kate calls her family " Madeleine has been abducted. A stranger broke in through the shutters that we thought were secure and took her"

What scenario do you think would guarantee the McCanns the least censure ?

Quite.

[gilet]

@ gilet

Kate knew the patio doors were open so what difference did it make that the windows could be opened from the outside ? Anyone with an ounce of sense would assume if the window had been used at all it would be as an exit rather than an entry point so what difference did the fact that the shutters could be lifted make other than to convince relatives they had not been neglectful.

Scenario 1 Kate calls her family " Madeleine has been abducted. We left the patio doors open while we were in the tapas bar and someone got in"

Scenario 2 Kate calls her family " Madeleine has been abducted. A stranger broke in through the shutters that we thought were secure and took her"

What scenario do you think would guarantee the McCanns the least censure ?

Your simplistic question is easy to answer. The latter.

But your simplistic question takes no account of the realities of the situation that night and is therefore not valid.

Your assumption as to what people would think about the window is simply that, an assumption. On finding a window open which you believe was locked a large proportion of the population would naturally assume it had been forced open and even on finding it could be forced open easily would continue to use the term.

The McCanns were facing the Patio doors. The reports suggest they believed that they could monitor that door. Such reports suggest they would not have expected or even thought possible the entry of anyone via that door without their knowledge. Such a belief was clearly naive and the McCanns have since openly admitted that it was. But it nonetheless is what they claim to have believed.

And such a belief accords with the shock they describe on finding the window that they could not see had been in their minds forced open.

[faithlilly]

@ Martha

The lie, for that's what it was, was, as I have already said, a holding mechanism, a device to avoid censure. I'm sure they were aware that they would be found out at a later date but I guess they decided they would cross that bridge when they came to it. I believe there was no master plan, that the McCanns found theirselves in a devastating situation and spur of the moment decisions made, some of which still haunt them to this day.

As to what happened that night, I have my theories but without definitive proof it would be unwise to posted them here.

To your question concerning the PJ's questioning, I'm afraid you'd have to ask them that

[debunker]

@ Martha

The lie, for that's what it was, was, as I have already said, a holding mechanism, a device to avoid censure. I'm sure they were aware that they would be found out at a later date but I guess they decided they would cross that bridge when they came to it. I believe there was no master plan, that the McCanns found theirselves in a devastating situation and spur of the moment decisions made, some of which still haunt them to this day.

As to what happened that night, I have my theories but without definitive proof it would be unwise to posted them here.

To your question concerning the PJ's questioning, I'm afraid you'd have to ask them that

MIndreading again?

[faithlilly]

@ gilet

The McCanns had their backs to the patio doors while dining in the tapas bar so had no clear view of them. Of course if you have evidence to the contrary please post .