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

[pegasus]

Agreed, the timeline and abduction/burglary are fairly mutually exclusive.

The timeline is very compatible with burglary disturbed before entry.

[Brietta]

People started arriving at the tapas bar at various times from 8:35 to 9pm walking past that apartment. Matt went to check, then Gerry talking to Jez outside it then Jane etc.. If that apartment was being watched do you think they would try with all the people going past it? Anybody would be crazy to try. Matt didn't notice no window open (no draught nevermind whooshing curtains!) at 9:30. Then Jane leaves at 9:37 passes the apartment. Russell returns at 9:45 passes the apartment and Kate goes to check at 9:51. So when did this abductor/burglar strike? Between Russell and Kate (a 5 minute window of opportunity) because she said a window was open  &%+((£

I think you need to start looking out a bit more ... however much you recheck the Tapas timeline ... it won't incriminate anyone there.

How long do you think it takes to enter a ground floor property lift a child and exit? 

Particularly if you know the layout of the flat and the sleeping arrangements … for example observation - without the need for inside information - would tell you which bedroom the parents used and which the children you would only need to see which light went on when they retired.

[Wonderfulspam]

I think you need to start looking out a bit more ... however much you recheck the Tapas timeline ... it won't incriminate anyone there.

How long do you think it takes to enter a ground floor property lift a child and exit?  

Particularly if you know the layout of the flat and the sleeping arrangements … for example observation - without the need for inside information - would tell you which bedroom the parents used and which the children you would only need to see which light went on when they retired.

First you'd need a key to the front door & not forgetting you have to open the window & shutters.

Plus, he'd have had to close & lock the door behind him when he left, whilst holding Maddie, who slept through it all.

[slartibartfast]

I think you need to start looking out a bit more ... however much you recheck the Tapas timeline ... it won't incriminate anyone there.

How long do you think it takes to enter a ground floor property lift a child and exit? 

Particularly if you know the layout of the flat and the sleeping arrangements … for example observation - without the need for inside information - would tell you which bedroom the parents used and which the children you would only need to see which light went on when they retired.

If you knew the precise times that checks were going to be made, then there was a window of opportunity. But even the T9 didn't plan around exact checking times, so anyone watching out wouldn't attempt anything because of the coming and goings, assuming of course that the checks actually happened.

[pathfinder73]

I think you need to start looking out a bit more ... however much you recheck the Tapas timeline ... it won't incriminate anyone there.

How long do you think it takes to enter a ground floor property lift a child and exit? 

Particularly if you know the layout of the flat and the sleeping arrangements … for example observation - without the need for inside information - would tell you which bedroom the parents used and which the children you would only need to see which light went on when they retired.

Don't forget allegedly wasting precious time opening a window and raising shutters on the hope that he/she would leave incriminating evidence. A kamikaze abductor    And to top it all, the shutters were tampered with. Would you try to destroy potential evidence before the police arrive? Nothing adds up.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A search was also made for possible biological traces and fibres on the single bed from where the minor disappeared, using a variable-wave light source appropriate for the task, the result obtained having been negative.

The area of the pillow of the bed from the minor disappeared was inspected with the intention to detect the presence of some smell [aroma] characteristic of volatile substances typical of chloroform or ether, this search proving negative.

[Brietta]

Don't forget allegedly wasting precious time opening a window and raising shutters on the hope that he/she would leave incriminating evidence. A kamikaze abductor    And to top it all, the shutters were tampered with. Would you try to destroy potential evidence before the police arrive? Nothing adds up.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A search was also made for possible biological traces and fibres on the single bed from where the minor disappeared, using a variable-wave light source appropriate for the task, the result obtained having been negative.

The area of the pillow of the bed from the minor disappeared was inspected with the intention to detect the presence of some smell [aroma] characteristic of volatile substances typical of chloroform or ether, this search proving negative.

Any idea what they did with the bedding after completing their investigation?

[Wonderfulspam]

Any idea what they did with the bedding after completing their investigation?

Didn't the FSS torch them or was that some other beclothes, or, another pesky myth?

I read that here...

'Portuguese detectives identified a stain on Madeleine's bedspread as semen. They sent the sample to the British Forensic Science Service for a second opinion. The British lab claimed the stain was saliva before they destroyed the bedspread along with other important evidence.'

http://fakedabduction.com/

[Eleanor]

Didn't the FSS torch them or was that some other beclothes, or, another pesky myth?

I read that here...

'Portuguese detectives identified a stain on Madeleine's bedspread as semen. They sent the sample to the British Forensic Science Service for a second opinion. The British lab claimed the stain was saliva before they destroyed the bedspread along with other important evidence.'

http://fakedabduction.com/

No.  It was the bedspread on the other bed.  And it was identified as the saliva of a small boy who had previously stayed in the appartment.

Please try to get the few known facts right.

[Wonderfulspam]

No.  It was the bedspread on the other bed.  And it was identified as the saliva of a small boy who had previously stayed in the appartment.

Please try to get the few known facts right.

I was asking because I genuinely didn't know .

Sorry!

[pegasus]

IMO the person who opened the window did not disappear the child.
The burglar who opened that window would inevitably, on discovering there was someone in the room, go away completely empty handed before even entering.

[misty]

IMO the person who opened the window did not disappear the child.
The burglar who opened that window would inevitably, on discovering there was someone in the room, go away completely empty handed before even entering.

The burglar at Mrs Fenn's apartment wasn't deterred by the sound of her TV.

[pegasus]

The burglar at Mrs Fenn's apartment wasn't deterred by the sound of her TV.

The difference between the time at which disturbance of attempted burglary occured in the 5G and 5A cases is:

At 5G there was no-one in the room where he opened the window and shutter
therefore the burglary was disturbed after entry.

(If Mrs F had been asleep in that rear bedroom, she would have been woken up by the noise of him opening the shutter, he would have seen her, and it would have been inevitable that the 5G burglary would have been disturbed before entry).

At 5A there was someone in the room where he opened the window and shutter, therefore the burglary was inevitably disturbed before entry.

In neither case did the burglar steal a person.

[misty]

The difference between the time at which disturbance of attempted burglary occured in the 5G and 5A cases is:

At 5G there was no-one in the room where he opened the window and shutter
therefore the burglary was disturbed after entry.

(If Mrs F had been asleep in that rear bedroom, she would have been woken up by the noise of him opening the shutter, he would have seen her, and it would have been inevitable that the 5G burglary would have been disturbed before entry).

At 5A there was someone in the room where he opened the window and shutter, therefore the burglary was inevitably disturbed before entry.

In neither case did the burglar steal a person.

Even if the burglar was disturbed by the sound of Madeleine crying/shouting when she was awoken by the shutter noise, it doesn't explain what happened to her after that. Two intruders in less than half an hour and a child who vanishes without trace?

[pegasus]

Even if the burglar was disturbed by the sound of Madeleine crying/shouting when she was awoken by the shutter noise, it doesn't explain what happened to her after that. Two intruders in less than half an hour and a child who vanishes without trace?

It directly explains the very first part of what happened after that.
True, it doesn't directly explain the disappearance though.

[misty]

It directly explains the very first part of what happened after that.
True, it doesn't directly explain the disappearance though.

Of all the witnesses who were present that night, what was the one question not put to the receptionist  by the PJ yet asked to most other people?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HELDER_LUIS.htm


You don't need to reply - I'm sure you'll get it.