Did the moving door have any relevance to Madeleine's disappearance?

[sadie]

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.

[sadie]

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

[icabodcrane]

  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

[John]

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?

[John]

"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     Even after7 long years some are still learning the basics.

[Carew]

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."

[sadie]

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 !

[sadie]

"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.

[icabodcrane]

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  ?   

[Angelo222]

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-

[pathfinder73]

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 >@@(*&)

[pegasus]

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?

[pegasus]

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.

[John]

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.

[John]

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.