Was it really just like being in the garden while kids slept upstairs?.

[south of the river]

The argument that the patio door was within visual view of the bar might be factually correct - but as as been stated many times it was dark and it was still a distance to properly make out everything crystal clear

I mean and would be bad guy who was entering the flat form the patio would hardly be striding up the stairs whistling a happy tune  and wearing  a bright shirt - If you kept your head under the height of the wall and the stair wall then you could easily crawl up the stairs and enter the patio without being visible even from much closer - I mean this was a person who could have crossed the line to commit this crime - they would have been careful I would say not to be seen

[Mo Stache]

Bottom line is it was so dark that nobody sitting inside the tapas restaurant could have possibly seen anyone on the patio of 5a and likewise any child standing on the patio wouldn't have known where her parents were let alone seen them.

Its all academic in any event since none of the children went out to the patio.

I could stand corrected, but I remember a poster going to PdL at that time of year to determine the light quality (same weather conditions, same time of day/afternoon/evening) and I believe he said it wasn't that dark as first reported.

It may be academic, but it still provides points for consideration/discussion.

[sadie]

The argument that the patio door was within visual view of the bar might be factually correct - but as as been stated many times it was dark and it was still a distance to properly make out everything crystal clear

I mean and would be bad guy who was entering the flat form the patio would hardly be striding up the stairs whistling a happy tune  and wearing  a bright shirt - If you kept your head under the height of the wall and the stair wall then you could easily crawl up the stairs and enter the patio without being visible even from much closer - I mean this was a person who could have crossed the line to commit this crime - they would have been careful I would say not to be seen

I understand what you are saying, but at least five facts to consider SOTR:

- The patio was flooded with light from the street light that was positioined immediately across the road.  It was not a strong light, but would have showed movement and a mans outline up.

- The sitting room light had been left on, with attempted pulling of curtains across the patio door.  The minute those curtains had been pulled back to afford entry, a large chunk of new strong light would appear where there had previously been only pale light.  That new light would hav3e been very noticeable.  Once bundleman entered the room he would have been bathed in that stronger light.

- Amaral himself said that no abductor would have gone in via the patio door with it overlooked with the parents and the tapas group so close  ... and with the light, both on the patio and in the room, no doubt

- The front door was a gift for anyone wanting to get in
Completely out odf sight; nobody passing by and in virtually complete darkness.  There was no search light a la Pat Brown in those days.  That came afterwards.

Even with the new search light and all the beautiful trees stripped out, the front door was in a pool of blackness.  You can only see the front edge of the recess, not one iota of anything except the outer edge of the recess.  In any case for anyone around, it was around the corner and out of sight.


Please dont forget that the whole of the lower levels of the front would be out of sight to someone walking up from the tapas because of the very high wall.


Thanks to Pat brown for photograph

- There had been burglaries via the front doors of two other flats in the preceding weeks.  No damage to the doors, so seems a key was used.


Entry and exit were by the front door, almost withgout doubt.   

OMO but loads of pointers

[Redblossom]

Even if you had an uninteruppted view of the patio door, bearing in mind that according to the interviews (if you believe them) a check was done at 930pm, it would have been dark and if there are a group of people chatting, dining and drinking et al, what are the chances of someone watching the said door every second of every minute? It would take seconds for someone to nip in and out of that door.

I have asked this plainly common sense and logical question umpeteen times, strangely enough always ignored, because its plain stupid and in denial to even suggest they did that
 

Because if they were that worried they never would have left the babies on their own but taken them with them like most families and left them go sleep in their prams when they got tired...laughable at best

[AnneGuedes]

No chance to spot anything said, among many others, Mr Jo Moura who was there for CBS "undercover".

[CPN]

And I have pointed out umpteen times that the greatest danger to young children left unsupervised is from accidents, and this also  is, strangely enough, always ignored.

As to the question "Was it really just like being in the garden while kids slept upstairs?", of course not.  In your own garden, the children are on home ground, they know their way around the house and the garden and so how to find the parents easily.  You do not, usually leave the front door unlocked.   They do not have to go via a road and swimming pool to find you.  They speak the language of the neighbours if they wanted to ask for help, and the neighbours probably know them and would let the parents know if the children were seen out of the house etc etc

[icabodcrane]

Well if we are going by evidence  (  rather than imaginings )   we can all agree that the open window was used as neither entry or exit   (  forensic evidence has determined as much )

With regard to the patio doors,  it is possible that  they were used for  entry/exist,  based on the evidence that they  were left unlocked 

There is no evidence at all that a key was used to enter through the front door

[Redblossom]

I hardly think any consensus has been reached about how any carrier assumng that means an abductor  may have entered or exited

But if just for arguments sake, he/she could have entered via the patio doors if they were unlocked and exited through the front door if it was unlocked....and Gerry (in one in police interview)cant remember if he locked it that night, though he remembers previous days when he locked it...and in another police interview says it was locked that night....??.and  how would any abductor know if the front door was locked or not?

Perhaps  the abductor exited by the patio doors too as well as entering via them

The  window imo is definitely not in the picture...no evidence for this and logically seems impossible and cumbersome, again, here, the mccanns didnt know if the window was shut! Thus leaving the idea that the window could easily have been opened

That is all we can surmise from the evidence without getting into groundless speculations about criminally obtained keys etc etc

So yes, a dogs dinner

[Redblossom]

Well if we are going by evidence  (  rather than imaginings )   we can all agree that the open window was used as neither entry or exit   (  forensic evidence has determined as much )

With regard to the patio doors,  it is possible that  they were used for  entry/exist,  based on the evidence that they  were left unlocked 

There is no evidence at all that a key was used to enter through the front door

thanks for putting it much simpler......
 

[AnneGuedes]

And I have pointed out umpteen times that the greatest danger to young children left unsupervised is from accidents, and this also  is, strangely enough, always ignored.

As to the question "Was it really just like being in the garden while kids slept upstairs?", of course not.  In your own garden, the children are on home ground, they know their way around the house and the garden and so how to find the parents easily.  You do not, usually leave the front door unlocked.   They do not have to go via a road and swimming pool to find you.  They speak the language of the neighbours if they wanted to ask for help, and the neighbours probably know them and would let the parents know if the children were seen out of the house etc etc

This is not strange, CPN, domestic accidents very often occur because parents don't figure casually out what is potentially dangerous, they don't put themselves mentally into their kids' shoes. This is why those sites exist, like the one you sent the link of, that list the home dangers in order to make you aware of them. Of course you should at least wonder if you're a responsible parent and consult such a site. Some basic recommendations are to close windows or doors to balconies (somnambulism), to have all cutting elements in the kitchen out of reach, to be especially careful when you're in holidays, in a place your children aren't familiar with, etc.

[CPN]

This is not strange, CPN, domestic accidents very often occur because parents don't figure casually out what is potentially dangerous, they don't put themselves mentally into their kids' shoes. This is why those sites exist, like the one you sent the link of, that list the home dangers in order to make you aware of them. Of course you should at least wonder if you're a responsible parent and consult such a site. Some basic recommendations are to close windows or doors to balconies (somnambulism), to have all cutting elements in the kitchen out of reach, to be especially careful when you're in holidays, in a place your children aren't familiar with, etc.

Yes, but Anne, as I have also pointed out, a GP above all would have been trained to be aware of these things and to look out for them - and more than likely would have had patients whose child(ren) had had to attend A&E because of a home accident.   So a lack of awareness for doctors and a GP in particular is no excuse at all

[Rachel Granada]

Yes, but Anne, as I have also pointed out, a GP above all would have been trained to be aware of these things and to look out for them - and more than likely would have had patients whose child(ren) had had to attend A&E because of a home accident.   So a lack of awareness for doctors and a GP in particular is no excuse at all

Do you think they should have been prosecuted for neglect, CPN?

[CPN]

Do you think they should have been prosecuted for neglect, CPN?

I think that is a difficult one.  There is no doubt in my mind that what happened WAS neglect - however, prosecutions are usually a last resort for Social Services.  There are other actions that can be taken such as parenting classes, the Child Protection Register etc.  And if you decide to remove children (in this case the twins), that leads to other very difficult decisions - in particular where the child(ren) will be placed, what your aim is in removing the children, how the ongoing contact with parents will be organised etc etc. . 

Just to add - I often read that the fact that the parents were not prosecuted means that there was not neglect.  This is absolutely not true. As I said, other actions can be taken instead of prosecution which is done very much as a last resort.  Incidentally I have sometimes gone over the speed limit but have not been prosecuted!! - does that mean that I was not, in fact speeding?

[AnneGuedes]

I think that is a difficult one.  There is no doubt in my mind that what happened WAS neglect - however, prosecutions are usually a last resort for Social Services.  There are other actions that can be taken such as parenting classes, the Child Protection Register etc.  And if you decide to remove children (in this case the twins), that leads to other very difficult decisions - in particular where the child(ren) will be placed, what your aim is in removing the children, how the ongoing contact with parents will be organised etc etc. .

It wasn't neglect according to the Portuguese law : they didn't deliberately put their children in danger. I really think they behaved like many people do, they were unlucky. Is it worse because they are doctors ? I don't think so. We all have experiences of doctors who hardly listen to you !
The problem is they didn't tell the truth, up to what point I don't know, but that ridiculous forced shutters/window story kommt mir nicht aus dem Sinn. Who could follow such a red herring ? The PJ, anxious to find the little girl and thinking they had misunderstood about the shutters/window.

[Rachel Granada]

I think that is a difficult one.  There is no doubt in my mind that what happened WAS neglect - however, prosecutions are usually a last resort for Social Services.  There are other actions that can be taken such as parenting classes, the Child Protection Register etc.  And if you decide to remove children (in this case the twins), that leads to other very difficult decisions - in particular where the child(ren) will be placed, what your aim is in removing the children, how the ongoing contact with parents will be organised etc etc. . 

Just to add - I often read that the fact that the parents were not prosecuted means that there was not neglect.  This is absolutely not true. As I said, other actions can be taken instead of prosecution which is done very much as a last resort.  Incidentally I have sometimes gone over the speed limit but have not been prosecuted!! - does that mean that I was not, in fact speeding?

Thanks for your thoughts, CPN.  The PT authorities did not agree, however, that is was neglect.