Moving door - 9:05 check

[Robittybob1]

The Oldfield's passed 5A before arriving at the tapas at 8:45. You could see shutters down if they were from the tapas bar. So it's a question for Rachel to answer. Why is that in her statement?

Which door did the Oldfields leave by? 
1.  If they left by their front door and walked around the roads I doubt if the patio door was ever visible.
2.  If they left by their patio door then they might see the McCanns patio door. 
3.  If they saw it down at that time when no one else saw it down that could indicate someone was inside there at that time.  Which would be very significant indeed.

[Robittybob1]

I think Rachel's statement needs a thorough analysis.

[Robittybob1]

Which door did the Oldfields leave by? 
1.  If they left by their front door and walked around the roads I doubt if the patio door was ever visible.
2.  If they left by their patio door then they might see the McCanns patio door. 
3.  If they saw it down at that time when no one else saw it down that could indicate someone was inside there at that time.  Which would be very significant indeed.

Question 1 and 2 answered "The deponent and her husband took a bath, dressed and went to the restaurant "TAPAS" around 20H40. They left by the main door, which they locked, arriving at the "TAPAS" about two minutes later. She emphasized that the back door was closed and properly locked."

"The deponent states that she sat more or less facing the back of the apartment and MATHEW, on the side of the table, you her left. She does not know if, from that position, he could the the back door of the apartment where Madeleine was, it being that, in her case, she could only see the top end/edge.

[Robittybob1]

Rachel in her 10/th of May statement makes this unusual statement which is not backed by anyone else "The window shutters of the McCann's apartments were closed. The patio door that they used to enter the apartment also had its shutter closed. In order to enter they had to raise the shutter".

I can only presume it is a misunderstanding for the others talk about having to open the curtain on the inside of the door so I propose she is confused by these, in that she means curtains rather than shutters.
What should have been said by Rachel IMO is the following:
"The window shutters of the McCann's apartments were closed. The patio door that they used to enter the apartment also had its curtains closed. In order to enter they had to open  the curtains."

[sadie]

My opinion is that it is unlikely that an abductor was in the apartment at the same time as Gerry McCann. In my opinion, a planned abduction should have been over in a few minutes.

In general, I think the events of the evening (including events after the discovery that Madeleine was missing) do make sense if you are willing to take a view on certain aspects of the case, bearing in mind that no one can actually know exactly what happened, apart from any third party who may have been involved.

I believe it is entirely possible that Madeleine was abducted from the apartment, even though no forensic evidence has been found to confirm this.

Alternatively, I believe that Danny Collin's view that Madeleine exited the apartment is also possible. This would mean that it is likely that a third party became involved because Madeleine has not been found. I have not read Danny Collin's book in detail and I'm sure there is much to disagree with, but it is a plausible theory in my opinion.

If Madeleine had wandered on previous occasions as Danny Collin's seems to believe then this would undermine the sniffer/tracker dog evidence about the direction Madeleine took.

I'm going to take a break from the case until Operation Grange winds up.

All the best.

The only problems with Madeleine leaving on her own are
If she left by the window
1)  How did she manage to leave without leaving finger prints?
2)  How did she manage such a high jump without scrazing herself and leaving any fibres, hair, or skin cells on the windowframe sill and just outside on the pathway?
3)  It would be exceedingly dark and frightening for a little girl with so little light ... and also being too small to see over the wall of the pathway
4)   How could she know how to open the shutters and window?   They hadn't been touched all week.  Would she have the strength in her little fingers?
5)  How come she left her cherished Cuddle cat?

If she left by the front door
1)  How did she manage to leave without leaving finger prints?
2)  Could she manage that door bolt and the door on her own with such little fingers?
3)  How come she closed the front door behind her?  Most kids would leave it open, especially if in a panic
4)  It was pitch black by the front door with a long dark walkway to go along.  The walkway had walls way above her head level.  I dont think she would have dared.
5)  How come she left her cherished Cuddle cat?

If she left by the patio door
1)  How did she manage to leave without leaving finger prints?
2)  Could the petite Madeleine manage the weight of the patio doors on her own?   Pushing from low down on what look like rather cheap patio doors would be much more difficult than pushing from an adult height.  I think the doors would tend to jam if pushed from so low down
3)  Once outside, if she managed it, she then turned round and closed the patio doors.  Really?
4)  At this strage she would hear the voices of her parents and their friends less than 50 metres away.  She could also see them.  Why didn't she yell them.  Madeleine has shown on various videos that she has a really loud voice.  The ears of parents are tuned into the distress calls of THEIR children.  They would have heard her IMO.
5)  Furthermore as she left the apartment via the patio door, she would have had to lift the curtain out of the way and a beam of light would have shone on to the railings.  How come no one noticed that?
6)  Then she had the child safety gate to open ... or probably climb over, with a fall on the other side of the height of the gate + one step.  Quite a formidable height for a little girl
How come no eviderce there? .... and if she managed to open it, how come that she wasted the time and effort closing it again?  Oh Really ?
7)  Then the gate at the bottom.  Once again, if she managed to get that far, she remembered to close it
8)  She would have heard and seen her parents and so close.  Why didn't she go to them?
9)  How come she left her cherished Cuddle cat?
10) Why did none of the dogs track her that way?


The woke and wandered scenario just doesn't add up IMO

AIMO, of course, but logical

[Robittybob1]

Sadie I'll only reply to the 2nd one for I do believe she left by the front door.
"If she left by the front door
1)  How did she manage to leave without leaving finger prints?
2)  Could she manage that door bolt and the door on her own with such little fingers?
3)  How come she closed the front door behind her?  Most kids would leave it open, especially if in a panic
4)  It was pitch black by the front door with a long dark walkway to go along.  The walkway had walls way above her head level.  I dont think she would have dared.
5)  How come she left her cherished Cuddle cat?

1)  How did she manage to leave without leaving finger prints?
No one ever looked for finger prints on the front door

2)  Could she manage that door bolt and the door on her own with such little fingers?
The door was snibbed but not locked so it could have been opened by a 4 year old with ease.

3)  How come she closed the front door behind her?  Most kids would leave it open, especially if in a panic
As she left she startled burglars who were trying to get in the window.  They may have closed it or she closed it herself being the sensible little person she was.


4)  It was pitch black by the front door with a long dark walkway to go along.  The walkway had walls way above her head level.  I don't think she would have dared.
She knew the way around the end of the building as she had gone that way before. 


5)  How come she left her cherished Cuddle cat?
She was going to come back for that.

[sadie]

Sadie I'll only reply to the 2nd one for I do believe she left by the front door.
"If she left by the front door
1)  How did she manage to leave without leaving finger prints?
2)  Could she manage that door bolt and the door on her own with such little fingers?
3)  How come she closed the front door behind her?  Most kids would leave it open, especially if in a panic
4)  It was pitch black by the front door with a long dark walkway to go along.  The walkway had walls way above her head level.  I dont think she would have dared.
5)  How come she left her cherished Cuddle cat?

1)  How did she manage to leave without leaving finger prints?
No one ever looked for finger prints on the front door

2)  Could she manage that door bolt and the door on her own with such little fingers?
The door was snibbed but not locked so it could have been opened by a 4 year old with ease.

3)  How come she closed the front door behind her?  Most kids would leave it open, especially if in a panic
As she left she startled burglars who were trying to get in the window.  They may have closed it or she closed it herself being the sensible little person she was.


4)  It was pitch black by the front door with a long dark walkway to go along.  The walkway had walls way above her head level.  I don't think she would have dared.
She knew the way around the end of the building as she had gone that way before. 


5)  How come she left her cherished Cuddle cat?
She was going to come back for that.

No one ever looked for finger prints on the front door
Such negligence on behalf of the police is appalling IMO

The door was snibbed but not locked so it could have been opened by a 4 year old with ease.
Am not sure that my little girl could have done that at nearly 4 ... and she was much more sturdy than Madeleine.  Also highly intelligent ... now a doctor.   But it has been a long time ago and I bow to your more recent experience of bringing little girls up.

As she left she startled burglars who were trying to get in the window.  They may have closed it or she closed it herself being the sensible little person she was.

Sorry Rob, but I find that too far fetched for words.  More likely if she had seen anyone trying to get in, she would have been terrifiede in that dark spot and have rushed back into the apartment rather than confront them.

She knew the way around the end of the building as she had gone that way before. 
What makes you think that she went around the end of the building?  The Police dogs?

IMO, the blanket/towel given to the Police dogs for the scent had been handled by the sweaty lifter and her/his scent overpowered Madeleines.

 I think that the lifter gave Madeleine to Tannerman and hot footed it back to the get away vehicle via that route.  This was parked where the dogs lost the scent, cos he/she got into the vehicle there and then drove off in the other direction upon realising that Jane had witnessed Tannerman with Madeleine .
 
The dogs followed predominently the smell of the lifter.

AIMO

[Robittybob1]

It is always debatable but one thing you missed from what I said "As she left she startled burglars who were trying to get in the window.  They may have closed it or she closed it herself being the sensible little person she was."

I'm thinking Madeleine startled the burglars not the burglars startled her.  She would not have left by the front if she knew the burglars were by the window.

[Brietta]

No one ever looked for finger prints on the front door
Such negligence on behalf of the police is appalling IMO

The door was snibbed but not locked so it could have been opened by a 4 year old with ease.
Am not sure that my little girl could have done that at nearly 4 ... and she was much more sturdy than Madeleine.  Also highly intelligent ... now a doctor.   But it has been a long time ago and I bow to your more recent experience of bringing little girls up.

As she left she startled burglars who were trying to get in the window.  They may have closed it or she closed it herself being the sensible little person she was.

Sorry Rob, but I find that too far fetched for words.  More likely if she had seen anyone trying to get in, she would have been terrifiede in that dark spot and have rushed back into the apartment rather than confront them.

She knew the way around the end of the building as she had gone that way before. 
What makes you think that she went around the end of the building?  The Police dogs?

IMO, the blanket/towel given to the Police dogs for the scent had been handled by the sweaty lifter and her/his scent overpowered Madeleines.

 I think that the lifter gave Madeleine to Tannerman and hot footed it back to the get away vehicle via that route.  This was parked where the dogs lost the scent, cos he/she got into the vehicle there and then drove off in the other direction upon realising that Jane had witnessed Tannerman with Madeleine .
 
The dogs followed predominently the smell of the lifter.

AIMO

I think that explains exactly what might very well have been the sequence of events.  We know the dogs will follow the stronger scent ... and I doubt if anyone stealing anything let alone a child would have walked back on themselves via the route the dogs followed.
Therefore I agree that the GNR dogs did not follow Madeleine's but followed the stronger scent.

Maybe the original intention was to exit via the patio doors and cross to the car park; still risky but it would have taken seconds; Gerry and Jez right outside might have meant a rethink.
Or maybe it was always the intention to pass Madeleine out of the window.  I thought the Panorama ten year programme was interesting regarding accessibility of keys.

I think Jane Tanner's man was carrying Madeleine.  I think rather than abandoning Tannerman having split up and following different routes one to hide and wait and one to the  parked car via the lane ... they met at a prearranged spot for pick up and drove out of the town.

I think they had at least nearly three quarters of an hour head start before the alarm was raised.

[Robittybob1]

I think that explains exactly what might very well have been the sequence of events.  We know the dogs will follow the stronger scent ... and I doubt if anyone stealing anything let alone a child would have walked back on themselves via the route the dogs followed.
Therefore I agree that the GNR dogs did not follow Madeleine's but followed the stronger scent.

Maybe the original intention was to exit via the patio doors and cross to the car park; still risky but it would have taken seconds; Gerry and Jez right outside might have meant a rethink.
Or maybe it was always the intention to pass Madeleine out of the window.  I thought the Panorama ten year programme was interesting regarding accessibility of keys.

I think Jane Tanner's man was carrying Madeleine.  I think rather than abandoning Tannerman having split up and following different routes one to hide and wait and one to the  parked car via the lane ... they met at a prearranged spot for pick up and drove out of the town.

I think they had at least nearly three quarters of an hour head start before the alarm was raised.

I appreciate that you have proposed a theory Brietta.

I need to understand what you mean here "would have walked back on themselves via the route the dogs followed".

How would you know if the person that only "may have" touched the towel was a "stronger scent" than Madeleine's bare feet?

[Brietta]

I appreciate that you have proposed a theory Brietta.

I need to understand what you mean here "would have walked back on themselves via the route the dogs followed".

How would you know if the person that only "may have" touched the towel was a "stronger scent" than Madeleine's bare feet?

Probably didn't express myself too well.
The dogs followed a path for the length of the apartment block 5 ... they then walked down the little lane between blocks 4 and 5 to follow the pathway behind block 5 therefore running parallel with the route already taken at the front.

Anyone exiting 5A and taking that route imo was lengthening their time in public view as well as 'doubling back' to the area they left from.

After puberty I believe there is change in glands in the groin and armpits which means that adults end up more smelly than children.
It is likely that would leave a stronger scent which the dog would follow. 

[Robittybob1]

Probably didn't express myself too well.
The dogs followed a path for the length of the apartment block 5 ... they then walked down the little lane between blocks 4 and 5 to follow the pathway behind block 5 therefore running parallel with the route already taken at the front.

Anyone exiting 5A and taking that route imo was lengthening their time in public view as well as 'doubling back' to the area they left from.

After puberty I believe there is change in glands in the groin and armpits which means that adults end up more smelly than children.
It is likely that would leave a stronger scent which the dog would follow.

OK I understand that but in my theory  it is Madeleine going around the block 5 heading to the Tapas.  That is why it appears as doubling back,  She is not being carried but walking or running on her own. hence leaving a trail as the skin is being worn off her bare feet.

[Brietta]

OK I understand that but in my theory  it is Madeleine going around the block 5 heading to the Tapas.  That is why it appears as doubling back,  She is not being carried but walking or running on her own. hence leaving a trail as the skin is being worn off her bare feet.

Why would Madeleine have exited via the front door into what was a dark and daunting area for a wee child?

The patio door was unlocked; the street light was directly opposite and the lights from the tapas made using that exit a better lit prospective route.

But why would she have headed for the small reception area anyway?  Misty asked the question some time ago about whether she even knew her parents were not in the apartment.  She was asleep when they left.  Did she even know they could be located in the tapas restaurant?

[sadie]

Probably didn't express myself too well.
The dogs followed a path for the length of the apartment block 5 ... they then walked down the little lane between blocks 4 and 5 to follow the pathway behind block 5 therefore running parallel with the route already taken at the front.

Anyone exiting 5A and taking that route imo was lengthening their time in public view as well as 'doubling back' to the area they left from.

After puberty I believe there is change in glands in the groin and armpits which means that adults end up more smelly than children.
It is likely that would leave a stronger scent which the dog would follow.

Also, can you imagine the fear at doing what they/he/she did?  Stealing a child.

Fear creates a specially strong B.O.

[sadie]

Why would Madeleine have exited via the front door into what was a dark and daunting area for a wee child?

The patio door was unlocked; the street light was directly opposite and the lights from the tapas made using that exit a better lit prospective route.

But why would she have headed for the small reception area anyway?  Misty asked the question some time ago about whether she even knew her parents were not in the apartment.  She was asleep when they left.  Did she even know they could be located in the tapas restaurant?

If she exited via the front door, I agree.  She would not know that her parents were at the Tapas restaurant ... unless they had told her

If she had exited via the patio door, I believe that she would have seen them and heard them from the patio .... and bellowed to them.

A mother, especially, hears her childs cry above all other noises.  I think Kate would have heard her.