Manner of abduction

[pathfinder73]

She knew Madeleine hadn't left the back way - there were the curtains/patio door plus two gates to open and they were all found closed. Madeleine would be too small to reach the front door lock?

[AnneGuedes]

So we would be assuming here that Kate returned to apartment at 10pm to find Madeleine missing,  but with the window and shutter properly secured  ? 

Fearing that that they would be deemed negligent for leaving the patio door unlocked she opens the window and raises the shutter from the inside in order to lessen their culpability. The abductor having determindly made his own way into the apartment by breaking in through the window  ,  the fact that they left  the patio door open,  thereby,   being nothing to do with subsequent events  ? 

Why should she open the window and raise the shutter to close them immediately because of the cold on the twins ? Why isn't it sufficient to say she found them open ?
The gnr report and the statements of the OC staff show they didn't insist at all on the open shutter/window, they insisted more on the abduction.

[AnneGuedes]

In those circumstances (it happened what she had predicted, Madeleine woke up and went out in search of her) she would expect Madeleine to be found quite quickly 

Why stage an abduction that would be disproven when her daughter was found ?

How,  for instance,  could she  have  explained the open window/shutter  in the event of Madeleine being found at the main reception,  where some kindly people had taken her after finding her distressed in the street  ...  that is what probably  would  have happened,  afterall,

She might have left the flat taking the longest way and looking around. As she couldn't spot Madeleine and as Madeleine couldn't possibly have gone further, she feared in her panic that the worst had happened : they had taken her.
If Madeleine was found al-right quickly, nobody would remember the open window/shutter, a fortiori because nobody saw them open.

[Redblossom]

She knew Madeleine hadn't left the back way - there were the curtains/patio door plus two gates to open and they were all found closed. Madeleine would be too small to reach the front door lock?

I dont see this problem with curtains being there, they are material not concrete.....easily moved through and around. The patio sliding door, you would be amazed at the strength a near four yr old has, again, not exactly the weight of a bank fort knox door.  The safety gate, easy to climb over, the other gate was just a latch to open and close. Just saying. And there is only KMs word for all these being closed.

Front door handle is approx half way up the door, approx 1m, not too high at all to be reached by a nr 1m high child.

[AnneGuedes]

I dont see this problem with curtains being there, they are material not concrete.....easily moved through and around. The patio sliding door, you would be amazed at the strength a near four yr old has, again, not exactly the weight of a bank fort knox door.  The safety gate, easy to climb over, the other gate was just a latch to open and close. Just saying. And there is only KMs word for all these being closed.

Front door handle is approx half way up the door, approx 1m, not too high at all to be reached by a nr 1m high child.

The latch at 1m, yes.
But the other way is quite tricky in the dark, even without the security door that I doubt they closed if Madeleine was supposed to wake up etc.

[Anna]

If there was a safety gate at the top of the stairs and that small child, climbed over it, I think  she would have toppled down the stairs. I don't think her feet would reach the top step.

[AnneGuedes]

If there was a safety gate at the top of the stairs and that small child, climbed over it, I think  she would have toppled down the stairs. I don't think her feet would reach the top step.

Safety for toddlers, fatality for young children who try to pass over them. Especially in concrete steps. Accidents have occurred.

[Redblossom]

The latch at 1m, yes.
But the other way is quite tricky in the dark, even without the security door that I doubt they closed if Madeleine was supposed to wake up etc.

Well thats a good point! But I dont believe they did leave patio open and security baby gate open.....just so that Maddie could get out look for them...and what of the other children, two two yr olds, maybe waking up and getting out too...its all too much a bit, open back doors, unlocked front doors, open baby gates..and all out of ear and eyeshot..but it was so safe!!

If there was a safety gate at the top of the stairs and that small child, climbed over it, I think  she would have toppled down the stairs. I don't think her feet would reach the top step.

She was nearly four, you would be surprised what even much younger kids can do, but Anne has a point, if it was pitch dark, it would be more risky and dangerous

[AnneGuedes]

Well thats a good point! But I dont believe they did leave patio open and security baby gate open.....just so that Maddie could get out look for them...and what of the other children, two two yr olds, maybe waking up and getting out too...its all too much a bit, open back doors, unlocked front doors, open baby gates..and all out of ear and eyeshot..but it was so safe!!

When open, in the dark, the base of that security gate is tricky.

[AnneGuedes]

Hi Red, was there any mention of a security gate (as depicted above) in any of the 'checking' statements i.e. any mention of opening or closing of them, or of their existence, by any persons who claimed to carry out checks on the apartment on any night  during the holiday ?

The only person who seems to have thought of it was Mr Payne.
Then 4 years passed before it was mentioned again, except for the forums of course :
We shut behind us both the child safety gate at the top of the short flight of steps and the gate at the bottom, as we always did.

[AnneGuedes]

We shut behind us both the child safety gate at the top of the short flight of steps and the gate at the bottom, as we always did.
Not really compatible with the sliding one left open for Madeleine... and actually looking like a trap.
One cannot think of everything.

[colombosstogey]

We shut behind us both the child safety gate at the top of the short flight of steps and the gate at the bottom, as we always did.
Not really compatible with the sliding one left open for Madeleine... and actually looking like a trap.
One cannot think of everything.

I read at the beginning the gate was shut, I am sure it was in the first statements one of the men mentioned it.

I dont believe the child could have climbed over that gate in the dark or would have wanted to. I believe if she did come out of the apartment she would have stood on the balcony crying for her mum and dad. It was dark and scary with monsters in the shadows. IF she had attempted to climb over it, I would think the chances are she could have easily fallen badly onto the concrete steps.

[Meadow]

The are two areas of responsibility and accountability.

The first the McCanns were able to circumvent eloquently 'she's been taken' and in the light of day after a few consultations  'within the bounds of responsible parenting'    Ask yourself, if you were on the razz and left the kids home alone, would you want to be singing within the bounds of responsible parenting.  Thus this all falls into the category, we didn't do it, it was the abductor

The second something happened in the apartment, whatever that something was.  Whatever it was, even an accident that might have been preventable or responded to had the parents been present, leads to only one area of responsibility the parents.  After all they should be good first aiders.  So depending on the response to the situation the 'first' could become and excuse for the latter.

Going with the flow of the first - the web is then weaved of the responsible checking, the famous timeline.  Six years+ of it - all happened whilst Mr McCann checked, chatting with JW whilst JT walked by  and saw the abduction in progress.  REALLY.  Really!!  No - whoooooooooooooshed it never happened that way.  She merely saw a parent with child returning from the sleep in creche.  But it filled the gap for six years, even though the parent is apparently walking in the wrong direction, this must be the best piece of police work FULLY UNEXPLAINED by the MET, believe it, 'coz we say so!

So let off the hook of what must have been the blind, deaf and dumb check by MO for six years, the fall-guy.  The alleged abduction happened after his check and JUST before Mrs McCanns.  If indeed Madeleine was in the arms of a man sighted minutes later by the Smiths.  Who we have all known about within weeks of Madeleine's disappearance.

Anything is possible.

[AnneGuedes]

She merely saw a parent with child returning from the sleep in creche.  But it filled the gap for six years, even though the parent is apparently walking in the wrong direction, this must be the best piece of police work FULLY UNEXPLAINED by the MET, believe it, 'coz we say so!

So let off the hook of what must have been the blind, deaf and dumb check by MO for six years, the fall-guy.  The alleged abduction happened after his check and JUST before Mrs McCanns.  If indeed Madeleine was in the arms of a man sighted minutes later by the Smiths.  Who we have all known about within weeks of Madeleine's disappearance.

Anything is possible.

It is understandable why, in spite of DCI Redwood's claim, Madeleine's official site still points to Tannerman, a 6 and a half years collective belief (believe it because we say so)
But who is ready to expect the same from SY ? Believe Tannerman is an innocent father because we say so ?
Anything is possible up to a certain point, which itself is beyond plausibility.

[Angelo222]

It is understandable why, in spite of DCI Redwood's claim, Madeleine's official site still points to Tannerman, a 6 and a half years collective belief (believe it because we say so)
But who is ready to expect the same from SY ? Believe Tannerman is an innocent father because we say so ?
Anything is possible up to a certain point, which itself is beyond plausibility.

Why does the Find Madeleine official site still promote Tannerman as a suspect when clearly he was an innocent parent returning home?  Is the site so poorly managed that they just haven't bothered to update it??