Was Madeleine's disappearance the result of a burglary gone wrong?

[Brietta]

If the children were oblivious to noise, it wouldn't have mattered. But why were they knocked out and how? It could only have been drugs or a chloroform type of substance like gas or such like, but on second thoughts.....I know the sea air and activities that they participated in must have made them tired.
 My children, if tired enough, would sleep throughout a journey or a noisy celebration/party and storms that shook the windows, so it's difficult to tell really.

It is difficult to tell and once a child is in a sound sleep it is possible to move them without disturbing them.   I think this is particularly so if they are in a routine as the twins were ... sleep soundly during the night and up at the crack of dawn ... I know mine did so.
It is even possible to walk them in a pram from A to B and transfer them to bed without waking them.

I think the description of Madeleine being so tired she had to be carried home and her father's opinion that she had not moved position in bed indicates that she might have been drugged at tea in the crèche.     

[Miss Taken Identity]

Burglary gone wrong?

Have we not covered the newest bested version of what happened?

People were watching and acting suspicious all over the place- it's a wonder anyone got any sleep!
 if they were watching they knew the children were in there alone a chance they may wake up crying- the to ing and fro ing of parents falling over themselves to 'check' the children..would the jammying and pulling at shutters not leave any trace? or noise? maybe they had cleaning products to remove any evidence...

[sadie]

Burglary gone wrong?

Have we not covered the newest bested version of what happened?

People were watching and acting suspicious all over the place- it's a wonder anyone got any sleep!
 if they were watching they knew the children were in there alone a chance they may wake up crying- the to ing and fro ing of parents falling over themselves to 'check' the children..would the jammying and pulling at shutters not leave any trace? or noise? maybe they had cleaning products to remove any evidence...

ORLY?   

[pegasus]

But I dont think it was opened very high, was it?  You may be right tho.

I wonder just how noisy it was.  Must ring Heri., but not tonight.  Too late and I am tired .

Just listen to his video, stage three, reaching in and operating the strap, rather loud, isn't it?

[Anna]

Are you proposing that a 3 year old in bed, seeing someone opening the window of her room from outside, would not be capable of thinking to get out of bed and go into another room?

IMO 3-year olds are intelligent - here is a video of a 3-year-old girl who, when her dad suddenly became unconscious, walked (without any help or instruction) to the fire station to alert the paramedics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs-S7n9yUTc

A child of 3-4 may well understand when something is wrong with a loved one, but they are so trusting at that age. There are children who have reason to mistrust adults, but a normally adjusted child probably would not. I have lots of experience in this age group as well as younger and older children and I am sorry to disagree. I do not believe a 4 year old would run, before she knew who it was or felt threatened. However if a shadow fell over her window it could frighten her into crying or calling for Daddy.
I still wonder if previous attempts were made on the days before thursday and this is why, drugs or sprays  of some sort could have been used.
   But then the front door would probably also be used. I read a statement from a holiday res prior to McCanns, who said the cleaner would just walk in, in the morning and sometimes it was inconvenient, so they doublelocked the door and left the key in the lock on the inside, however the cleaner still got in............How, she does not know.

[pegasus]

If the children were oblivious to noise, it wouldn't have mattered. But why were they knocked out and how? It could only have been drugs or a chloroform type of substance like gas or such like, but on second thoughts.....I know the sea air and activities that they participated in must have made them tired.
 My children, if tired enough, would sleep throughout a journey or a noisy celebration/party and storms that shook the windows, so it's difficult to tell really.

If oblivious to noise then the noise wouldn't matter, that is true.
But the indications are that one person did wake up.

[Anna]

If oblivious to noise then the noise wouldn't matter, that is true.
But the indications are that one person did wake up.

[/b]


Are you referring to the door Pegasus?

[pegasus]

Are you referring to the door Pegasus?

Mainly to the two facts at 10pm (1) the window and shutter was open (2) the child was not in bed.
Together these indicate that the noise + sight of the shutter raising caused to walk/run to another room.
Equally predictable is the opener outside would flee on seeing someone inside.
The door being wider open happens to fit the theory well.

[pathfinder73]

From statements:

1. Door ajar 8:30

2. Door moved to half-open 8:35 - 9pm

3. Door back to ajar at 9:05

4. Door moved a second time once again to half-open 9:10 - 9:25

5. Door moved a third time to wide open 9:35 - 9:50

Any stranger abduction theory has to account for all 3 door moves. Good luck 

[pegasus]

@pathfinder Your theory for that evening up to 10pm IIRC has the door never moving, the shutter never opening, the window never opening, and the child never even being in that room.
Do you yourself have any theory at all about which room the child was in that evening from 17:30 onwards?

 
 

[pathfinder73]

@pathfinder Your theory for that evening up to 10pm IIRC has the door never moving, the shutter never opening, the window never opening, and the child never even being in that room.
Do you yourself have any theory at all about which room the child was in that evening from 17:30 onwards?

And that explains a desperate open carrying Smithman heading towards the beach - a missing child can't be found dead close to 5A just after the alarm is raised. How did an abductor have time to abduct, kill her and leave her there - what would time of death reveal if found? The child had to be moved further away from the crime scene and Smithman was heading towards the safest place, the beach where it's dark and quiet. The sun doesn't rise for another 8 hours.

No child had any reason to enter the bedroom before going to bed. That room was kept dark all week and was  only used for sleeping in. So from 5:40 to 7pm they would mainly be in the sitting room.

[pegasus]

And that explains a desperate open carrying Smithman heading towards the beach - a missing child can't be found dead close to 5A just after the alarm is raised. How did an abductor have time to abduct, kill her and leave her there - what would time of death reveal if found? The child had to be moved further away from the crime scene and Smithman was heading towards the safest place, the beach where it's dark and quiet. The sun doesn't rise for another 8 hours.

No child had any reason to enter the bedroom before going to bed. That room was kept dark all week and was  only used for sleeping in. So from 5:40 to 7pm they would mainly be in the sitting room.

So that evening, your theory has the child situated in the lounge up to about 19:00 but never in the north bedroom.

I am guessing that sometime after 19:00 your theory has an adult going into the north bedroom to place toy on bed?

[Mr Moderator]

From what I remember of the statement in the files, the PJ were content to take the word of the person in charge that the workmen had checked the trenches before filling them in.

I do not think that was good enough. 

I think the assumption was that if Madeleine had fallen in she would have been discovered.  I think that as soon as it was known that a small child was missing work should have been halted on open trenches and specialist excavation ordered under the supervision of the PJ.

For example the search and rescue dogs - either GNR or mountain rescue - would possibly have been appropriate to use as the circumstances probably suited their training.

Perhaps the use of a forensic anthropologist?

I don't think Madeleine was in a trench nor do I think she was in a dumpster ... but it is my opinion those possible locations were not searched appropriately to eliminate them in a case of this kind.

A good post Brietta.  It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that a child could fall into an open trench bringing fill material in on top of him or her as they fell.  Workmen could very easily miss a child in such a situation.

Similarly, a child falling down an open culvert as a result of a displaced manhole cover could end up just about anywhere in the underground system and unless it is all checked properly using cctv then that child might not be discovered.

I don't believe the sewer and rainwater overflow systems were all checked in Praia da Luz after Madeleine disappeared, can anyone verify this?

[Carana]

A good post Brietta.  It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that a child could fall into an open trench bringing fill material in on top of him or her as they fell.  Workmen could very easily miss a child in such a situation.

Similarly, a child falling down an open culvert as a result of a displaced manhole cover could end up just about anywhere in the underground system and unless it is all checked properly using cctv then that child might not be discovered.

I don't believe the sewer and rainwater overflow systems were all checked in Praia da Luz after Madeleine disappeared, can anyone verify this?

There was an open manhole that evening.

I would further like to say that in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine, I saw a manhole with a cover removed.

This manhole is situated on a junction of a road that runs parallel to the supermarket near to the Tapas Bar and the McCanns apartment. The cover along with the surround that been removed and placed to the side of the road.

The road is lit by street lighting but I believe you would not have seen the hole and anyone could have fallen in.

I returned the next day and noticed that the cover had been replaced. I am concerned that she may have fallen down the manhole and was not seen.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/REX-MORGAN.htm

If it was a cavity with a bottom and a hole in the side for just passing cables, then she couldn't have passed through. However, if it was a deeper one for sewage or rainwater passing into some kind of evacuation system, then I would have thought it possible, but then presumably the body would have washed up somewhere or created a noticeable blockage at some point.

I haven't found anything about a thorough verification of sewerage / rainfall evacuation at the time.

From what I can gather, there must be lots of former farmhouses which would presumably still have septic tanks and wells in the area.

The GNR and other rescue services were looking for a child who was still alive or who may have died accidentally (i.e., not murdered with concealment of a body). I presume that a manhole lid or a protection on a well that would have been too heavy for a child to lift would not have attracted much attention at that stage. One that had been open, but replaced the next morning may be a different issue.

Harrison did suggest searching the crèche area and open land to the east of PdL with enhanced methods, but this does not seem to have taken place.

[John]

I think the open shutter and window was enough to prevent any extensive search of the underground drainage system which by all accounts is pretty extensive in Luz.  Whether that was the right thing to do is questionable but then we have the benefit of hindsight now.