Who entered Apartment 5A and who didn't - a definitive study.

[G-Unit]

Has this paragraph been discussed before for it seems real bizarre: 

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm
When were the other occasions Russell was in the McCann's apartment in the dark?  He went in there to write up the timeline didn't he?  Surely he had the lights on?
When he says " I didn’t go into the bedroom on this occasion," were there other occasions? Which bedroom is he talking about?
Had Russell visited the McCann's apartment during the days prior to the 3rd?


It appears so.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm
 'Jane and I made checks between courses, and would generally alternate the visits, Kate and Gerry did their checks by the clock.  I’m aware that initially we would only check on our own rooms but on occasions we often listened at other apartment doors or windows, and made checks on some visits.
On Sunday I recall I checked Kate and Gerry’s apartment as well as Rachael and Matt’s. I had taken Matt’s keys and I believe that their door was deadlocked the same as ours and that I would have needed to turn the key two times.  We kept our shutters down, and the patio door was closed I am not sure whether theirs was the same.  I recall that Kate and Gerry’s apartment was accessed by the patios door which was left closed and unlocked.  I recall that their front door was accessed from the car-park access was easily gained to the apartment from the poolside.'

"access was easily gained to the apartment from the poolside". Sounds like potential trouble noted br Russell.

The problem with his Sunday checks on the McCann children and the Oldfield child is that Matthew was in his apartment on Sunday night as he was unwell, His daughter didn't need to be checked therefore.

Reply 'No, no, but on that Sunday night, I dont, Matt didnt come to dinner on the Sunday with being sick the night before, so he didnt, he just stayed in the apartment, so I didnt actually have to go back and check at all on the Sunday'.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

Just another discrepancy that was never explained.

[Robittybob1]

Can it just be brushed off as the wrong day?  Maybe he should have said Monday rather than Sunday?  From Gerry's rogatory there wasn't anything that suggested that he was aware of others doing checks on his kids, and isn't there the story that Kate was surprised by Matt's offer of checking on the kids on the Thursday.

[G-Unit]

Can it just be brushed off as the wrong day?  Maybe he should have said Monday rather than Sunday?  From Gerry's rogatory there wasn't anything that suggested that he was aware of others doing checks on his kids, and isn't there the story that Kate was surprised by Matt's offer of checking on the kids on the Thursday.

You could say he got the day wrong, but then it's strange that Matthew and Rachael never mentioned it. It would have made Matthew's alleged offer to check the McCann children on Thursday seem less unusual.

[Carana]

L is rather interesting.  Since the spot on the bedspread was attributed to a prior occupant, and since 7 hairs were also found from him, it seems reasonable to assume that the Saturday cleaning was not sufficient to remove all traces of previous occupants.

This is just about mitochondrial DNA. It doesn't identify individuals. It establishes maternal lineage, but is not exclusive to a single maternal lineage, either. The spot on the bed was eventually established as saliva from a baby boy. The hairs could be his, his mum's or someone different who happens to share the same "L" mitochondrial group (or a mixture of all three).

In forensic terms, it was no more precise than establishing e.g. a blood group.

[Robittybob1]

This is just about mitochondrial DNA. It doesn't identify individuals. It establishes maternal lineage, but is not exclusive to a single maternal lineage, either. The spot on the bed was eventually established as saliva from a baby boy. The hairs could be his, his mum's or someone different who happens to share the same "L" mitochondrial group (or a mixture of all three).

In forensic terms, it was no more precise than establishing e.g. a blood group.

"The spot on the bed was eventually established as saliva from a baby boy" is that because a baby boy had previously live in 5A or had used the bedding before?  Where did your information come from?

[pathfinder73]

Still within the area of collection, treatment and analysis of residues, the identification of a stain on the cover of one of the beds in MADELEINE’s bedroom (not the one she slept in), which raised some suspicions, should be pointed out.

Duly analysed, the stain configured a biological residue (saliva) that belonged to a child – CHARLIE GORDON – that had been on holidays, earlier and with his parents, in the same apartment.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

[Robittybob1]

Still within the area of collection, treatment and analysis of residues, the identification of a stain on the cover of one of the beds in MADELEINE’s bedroom (not the one she slept in), which raised some suspicions, should be pointed out.

Duly analysed, the stain configured a biological residue (saliva) that belonged to a child – CHARLIE GORDON – that had been on holidays, earlier and with his parents, in the same apartment.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

Well that really goes to show that when we consider the DNA etc in the apartment we have to consider previous tenants as well.

[stephen25000]

Well that really goes to show that when we consider the DNA etc in the apartment we have to consider previous tenants as well.

Hasn't that been checked already.

There were no deaths or bodies in the apartment.

[Mr Gray]

Hasn't that been checked already.

There were no deaths or bodies in the apartment.

absolutely correct....never any deaths or bodies in the apartment

[Robittybob1]

Hasn't that been checked already.

There were no deaths or bodies in the apartment.

There is Russell admitting that he was coming and going from the McCann's apartment without any confirming statements from the McCann's that shows they were even aware that that was happening.   

[Robittybob1]

"Did the friends of the McCanns tell the McCanns they were doing checks on the McCann kids?  Did the friends of the McCanns tell them before they went? Show me the evidence of that first?  If the friends of the McCanns are doing unannounced visit on the McCann's apartment what else could have been happening?  We don't know unless they tell us.

How many of the friends were involved in these secretive visits?
I get the feeling the Thursday night 9:30 PM check was Matt's first venture into the McCann's apartment by the way he snoops around.

[Robittybob1]

Has this paragraph been discussed before for it seems real bizarre: 

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm
When were the other occasions Russell was in the McCann's apartment in the dark?  He went in there to write up the timeline didn't he?  Surely he had the lights on?
When he says " I didn’t go into the bedroom on this occasion," were there other occasions? Which bedroom is he talking about?
Had Russell visited the McCann's apartment during the days prior to the 3rd?


It appears so.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm
 'Jane and I made checks between courses, and would generally alternate the visits, Kate and Gerry did their checks by the clock.  I’m aware that initially we would only check on our own rooms but on occasions we often listened at other apartment doors or windows, and made checks on some visits.
On Sunday I recall I checked Kate and Gerry’s apartment as well as Rachael and Matt’s. I had taken Matt’s keys and I believe that their door was deadlocked the same as ours and that I would have needed to turn the key two times.  We kept our shutters down, and the patio door was closed I am not sure whether theirs was the same.  I recall that Kate and Gerry’s apartment was accessed by the patios door which was left closed and unlocked.  I recall that their front door was accessed from the car-park access was easily gained to the apartment from the poolside.'

"access was easily gained to the apartment from the poolside". Sounds like potential trouble noted br Russell.

Note how Russell has included Jane into these additional checks.  Does she ever hint at that as well? 
"It appears so.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN_ROGATORY.htm
 

'Jane and I made checks between courses, and would generally alternate the visits, Kate and Gerry did their checks by the clock.  I’m aware that initially we would only check on our own rooms but on occasions we often listened at other apartment doors or windows, and made checks on some visits."

Does Jane confirm this?  It is all we did this and we did that.  Both of them???

[Robittybob1]

Does Jane confirm this?  It is all "we" did this and "we" did that.  Both of them???

Jane's rogatory you get the sense the officer is trying to get Jane to talk about the McCann's apartment. Here is an example:

4078    “Was your apartment the same layout as the MCCANN’S or was it slightly different?”
Reply    “Err I think it was the same more or less.”

So not real admission of additional knowledge there but maybe just a hint of it.

And another attempt:

4078    “And you knew that they would be safe within the apartment because they wouldn’t be able to wander out.”
Reply    “Mm.”

And another with a very clear denial:

4078    “Because they had the biggest apartment. Did you go into any of the other apartments?”
Reply    “We went in to Matt and Rachael’s apartment but I hadn’t been in to Kate and Gerry’s apartment until, well the night Madeleine went missing. I hadn’t been in to their apartment at all.”

So Russell is exaggerating a bit about Jane's checks in the McCann's apartment but she did go into Matt's and on what day was that?

4078    “Do you remember if you went to David and Fiona’s, was it every day you went there, or?”
Reply    “Err I think, it was every day except I think on the Thursday we actually ate in, Matt and Rachael came to our apartment, it was just us and Matt and Rachael. I can’t remember why we didn’t go up to Dave and Fi’s but I don’t know whether one of their kids had gone to bed already or something but I think every day up to that point we had eaten in their apartment, but on the Thursday it was just Matt and Rachael came, came, came to ours.”
4078    “Okay. So on the Wednesday then you’re likely to have been at David and Fiona’s?”
Reply    “I think so. I’m not sure but I think so.”

So that makes it sound like Jane just went to the other apartments during the day time.

[Robittybob1]

In this article Charlotte Pennington it is claimed to have heard Kate's first words because she was in the apartment.  So did Amy and her go over there together?  That will explain why some others have referred to staff in pleural.
[quote]Miss Pennington, however, one of the first people to set foot in the couple's apartment after the disappearance, says she heard the mother use both phrases.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483715/Kate-McCann-DID-scream-Theyve-taken-claims-new-nanny-witness.html#ixzz4Svba0AoF
[/quote]

Is that even hinted at in her statement?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CHARLOTTE-PENNINGTON.htm

- She advised the aforementioned individual that no one had told them of the disappearance, who she believed by the name given, was Madeleine, also for the reason that Amy contacted via telephone her supervisor, Lyndsay, who informed her that Madeleine had indeed disappeared;
- After this situation, they began the "search procedure for a missing child" which consists of an organised search involving different areas of the complex in question;

Using statement analysis there are hints there that Charlotte and Amy went together.
1. That is how she knows Amy rang Lyndsay.
2.  "After this situation" is the reference of to going to the apartment.

[G-Unit]

In this article Charlotte Pennington it is claimed to have heard Kate's first words because she was in the apartment.  So did Amy and her go over there together?  That will explain why some others have referred to staff in pleural.
Is that even hinted at in her statement?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CHARLOTTE-PENNINGTON.htm
Using statement analysis there are hints there that Charlotte and Amy went together.
1. That is how she knows Amy rang Lyndsay.
2.  "After this situation" is the reference of to going to the apartment.

According to Jackie Williams Charlotte went nowhere immediately;

The witness immediately helped in the searches, whilst her colleague Charlotte remained at the crêche, looking after the other children that were there and waiting for the arrival of the last parents, after which she also began searching.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JACQUELINE_WILLIAMS.htm

(Don't believe what it says in the newspapers)