The locked front door versus the unlocked rear patio door issue.

[Wonderfulspam]

I'm putting my faith in SY...amaral is contradicted by the archiving which said there was no evidence of a crime against the mccanns

Everything really does point to a preplanned abduction doesn't it.

There is absolutely nothing suspicious about the McCanns version of events.

I wonder why SY haven't given evidence, that clear evidence which proves the paedos dunnit,  at the libel trial.

Maybe they are going to, that's why theres a delay.

[Wonderfulspam]

First statements locked key to enter. Second statement unlocked patio door to enter. Why? It certainly sets up the abductor to enter and move the door which is first mentioned in the 2nd statement. Did they know Tanner had seen that man before the window was opened. No of course that hadn't. Dianne Webster was checking the shutters for Kate straight after the alarm has been raised so they can't change it. They were ringing family members about the jemmied shutters before they knew about the man Tanner saw. Tannerman  changed everything and they will never drop him as being the abductor.

Yup, they tailored their evidence to fit in with Bundleman.

1st statement, nothing about the door, week later & he's noticed whilst entering the apartment that the door had moved, which he thought strange.

He's got London Bridge up for sale at a knock down price n'all.

[Alfred R Jones]

First statements locked key to enter. Second statement unlocked patio door to enter. Why? It certainly sets up the abductor to enter and move the door which is first mentioned in the 2nd statement. Did they know Tanner had seen that man before the window was opened. No of course that hadn't. Dianne Webster was checking the shutters for Kate straight after the alarm has been raised so they can't change it. They were ringing family members about the jemmied shutters before they knew about the man Tanner saw. Tannerman  changed everything and they will never drop him as being the abductor. Look at their website.

No, but they knew JT had seen the man before they gave any statement at all.  Yet, you believe they only concocted the patio door entry story at the second statement.  And - isn't it ironic?  Here is a doubter who obviously believes JT DID see a man at the time she said she did, while elsewhere other doubters have it that JT may have seen him on a different day or at a different time altogether, or maybe never actually saw him at all!  None of it really makes any sense does it?  Unless you consider that actually an abductor DID take Madeleine during the window of opportunity that SY have stated they have identified by their forensic examination of the timeline.

[Benice]

here was a documentary with three british experts which showed a photograph of fingerprints on the outside of the shutters...these fingerprints have never been identified. you are putting all your faith in amaral who was sacked and is now thought to have been completely wrong

IIRC those gentlemen also referred to the patio door as the front door and the carpark door as the back door.   

All in all there appears to have been  an awful lot of confusion during those first interviews about which door was which with some people referring to the patio door as the back door and other calling it the front door.    IMO this is where the misunderstanding arose in Gerry's first statement - which he corrected a few days later.

A UK police officer refers to the confusion over the doors in JT's rogatory statement.

[peter claridge]

IIRC those gentlemen also referred to the patio door as the front door and the carpark door as the back door.   

All in all there appears to have been  an awful lot of confusion during those first interviews about which door was which with some people referring to the patio door as the back door and other calling it the front door.    IMO this is where the misunderstanding arose in Gerry's first statement - which he corrected a few days later.

A UK police officer refers to the confusion over the doors in JT's rogatory statement.

At 10pm, his wife Kate went to check on the children. She went into the apartment through the door using her key and saw right away that the children’s bedroom door was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains drawn open. The side door that opens into the living room, which as said earlier, was never locked, was closed.

[Carana]

At 10pm, his wife Kate went to check on the children. She went into the apartment through the door using her key and saw right away that the children’s bedroom door was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains drawn open. The side door that opens into the living room, which as said earlier, was never locked, was closed.

I'm not sure what the issue is.

Did Kate ever state that the veranda door was locked that night?

[Benice]

At 10pm, his wife Kate went to check on the children. She went into the apartment through the door using her key and saw right away that the children’s bedroom door was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains drawn open. The side door that opens into the living room, which as said earlier, was never locked, was closed.

IMO The fact that there is no 'side door' proves the interpreter and the PJ officer had no knowledge of the layout of the apartment during that first interview.

Also it's a summarised condensed version of what Gerry said based on the PJ's officer's interpretation of which door was which.      I am certain that with the added complication of the language barrier - somewhere during that first interview there was a misunderstanding about which door Gerry was talking about which carried on throughout the rest of the interview.  And which the PJ officer also wrongly related to Kate's entry.     If there was a verbatim statement I reckon it would easy to see how and where that confusion first arose. 

It's clear to me that if the PJ officer did have knowledge of the layout of 5A - and knowing that MO had entered through the unlocked patio door then he would most certainly have asked Gerry why on earth  he would take  the long way round - as that makes no sense, particularly if he needed the loo.   It would have been such an obvious question to ask imo.    If he had asked that question at that point I think the misunderstanding would have been cleared up there and then.

IMO There would have been no typed statement in English for Gerry to read over at that point, and if one was later given to him then IMO that is when he would see the errors and was able to correct them.   Which he did.

Summaries of statements are not a complete record of everything which was said as IIRC the conversation Gerry must have had with the PJ over that error is not recorded at all - just the fact that he had changed his statement.  The reasons for why he did that are not mentioned. 

[peter claridge]

I'm not sure what the issue is.

Did Kate ever state that the veranda door was locked that night?

Gerry mentions the front door and the patio door in the same statement, he knows which is which he just gets the story wrong.

[Carana]

Gerry mentions the front door and the patio door in the same statement, he knows which is which he just gets the story wrong.

Gerry was the first person to be interviewed, in what may be reasonably deemed to have been general chaos, or not.

Has KATE ever stated that the veranda door was locked that evening after they had left for dinner?

[Mr Gray]

Gerry mentions the front door and the patio door in the same statement, he knows which is which he just gets the story wrong.

these statements you refer to are unnoficial, translated and summarised....any link to the original

[Benice]

Gerry mentions the front door and the patio door in the same statement, he knows which is which he just gets the story wrong.

Gerry knew which doors he was talking about - but did the PJ officer misunderstand him?  I think he did.

[icabodcrane]

Gerry knew which doors he was talking about - but did the PJ officer misunderstand him?  I think he did.

But Gerry said he used his key  ...   there  is  no key to the patio door 

He could only   have been talking about the front door

No misunderstanding on that point

[John]

IIRC those gentlemen also referred to the patio door as the front door and the carpark door as the back door.   

All in all there appears to have been  an awful lot of confusion during those first interviews about which door was which with some people referring to the patio door as the back door and other calling it the front door.    IMO this is where the misunderstanding arose in Gerry's first statement - which he corrected a few days later.

A UK police officer refers to the confusion over the doors in JT's rogatory statement.

No confusion Benice imo as the patio door did not have a key nor could it be opened from the outside.  When Gerry spoke of accessing the apartment using a key he was referring to the front door located on the north side of the premises.  He later changed this to using the unlocked patio door on the south side. Question will always be why did he make such a transparent error?

[Benice]

But Gerry said he used his key  ...   there  is  no key to the patio door 

He could only   have been talking about the front door

No misunderstanding on that point

As the summary was not written by Gerry then I think it is possible that the PJ officer used the reference to a key - as a personal means to identify (in the report)  which door Gerry was talking about - but he'd  got the wrong door. 

If there was anything suspicious going on - then I think Gerry's reasons for changing the part of his statement about the doors would have been recorded in detail in his second statement. 

There is no doubt that there was much confusion about which doors people were talking about in those first interviews and not just with Gerry.

 

[John]

As the summary was not written by Gerry then I think it is possible that the PJ officer used the reference to a key - as a personal means to identify (in the report)  which door Gerry was talking about - but he'd  got the wrong door. 

If there was anything suspicious going on - then I think Gerry's reasons for changing the part of his statement about the doors would have been recorded in detail in his second statement. 

There is no doubt that there was much confusion about which doors people were talking about in those first interviews and not just with Gerry.

 

So why did Gerry refer to the error in the Ch4 documentary if it wasn't his error in the first place?