Conclusion that somebody would have had to have been in the room!

[Carana]

This is what one statement said
MARINA PAULA RAPOSA BAPTISTA CASTELA
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIA-CASTELA.htm
". She further adds that the respective travel agency contacted and activated the 'CHILD CARE' service. This service is composed of employees of British nationality, who are installed for their length of service in the tourist complex. On the eve of check-in, this service is directed by the administration of the Ocean Club with and end to collecting the key to the respective apartment. Given that this service is related to the travel agency, it is they who give the keys to the guests, and not the 'Ocean Club.' This service is who was responsible for the placement of children's beds in the rooms. The deponent further states that her responsibility is the hygiene of the apartments, not touching the children's beds, as it is the CHILD CARE service which effects the changing of bed linens of these same beds;

Has anyone got a clue what that means?

I understand that to mean that the service in charge of organising cots is also responsible for changing the cots' linen.

[Carana]

Behind the curtain in the parents' bedroom would seem the most logical place (IMO).

[Robittybob1]

Behind the curtain in the parents' bedroom would seem the most logical place (IMO).

So if you have to hide in a place you are unfamiliar with would you know there are curtains in the parents bedroom to hide behind, or is this place where the intruder came in?   If you had came in through there you would remember that this would be a good hiding place and an escape route if needed. Just going out through the front door and holding closed but not latching it would be very effective as well for you could just run off if it was discovered that you had been in there.

[jassi]

So if you have to hide in a place you are unfamiliar with would you know there are curtains in the parents bedroom to hide behind, or is this place where the intruder came in?   If you had came in through there you would remember that this would be a good hiding place and an escape route if needed. Just going out through the front door and holding closed but not latching it would be very effective as well for you could just run off if it was discovered that you had been in there.

Unless that was the very entrance that someone was already using

[Carana]

So if you have to hide in a place you are unfamiliar with would you know there are curtains in the parents bedroom to hide behind, or is this place where the intruder came in?   If you had came in through there you would remember that this would be a good hiding place and an escape route if needed. Just going out through the front door and holding closed but not latching it would be very effective as well for you could just run off if it was discovered that you had been in there.

Don't think the bedroom sliding doors could have been used as the blinds were down - on the photo anyway:

[Robittybob1]

Don't think the bedroom sliding doors could have been used as the blinds were down - on the photo anyway:

OK they could be another set of siding doors.

[Robittybob1]

If this diagram is drawn correctly it would be easy to go from the kids bedroom across to the parents room without being seen from the patio.

[Carana]

Not sure about that.

[Carana]

Crouching in the kitchen might be a different possibility, I suppose.

[faithlilly]

Behind the curtain in the parents' bedroom would seem the most logical place (IMO).

So what of the open window ? I think it's accepted now that the alleged abductor didn't enter through it and if it was an escape route surely he would have opened it as soon as he entered the room likewise if it was to hand the child out to someone else at the window as time was of the essence and he couldn't do it with a child in his arms. If Tannerman was in the apartment  when Gerry entered Gerry would have seen the open window.

[Eleanor]

So what of the open window ? I think it's accepted now that the alleged abductor didn't enter through it and if it was an escape route surely he would have opened it as soon as he entered the room likewise if it was to hand the child out to someone else at the window as time was of the essence and he couldn't do it with a child in his arms. If Tannerman was in the apartment  when Gerry entered Gerry would have seen the open window.

The Abductor could have opened the window after being scared out of his wits by Gerry.

[kizzy]

Ok - so obviously k mccann new straight away that maddie had been abducted.

Not only, did two highly intelligent people leave their children alone.

They also let 20 odd people, trample round the apartment.

Even your average burgled victim, knows not to let anyone touch anything, till police arrive.

Conclusion, because of this, who would know, if anyone had been in the room or not.

Why did they let all those people in.

[Benice]

So what of the open window ? I think it's accepted now that the alleged abductor didn't enter through it and if it was an escape route surely he would have opened it as soon as he entered the room likewise if it was to hand the child out to someone else at the window as time was of the essence and he couldn't do it with a child in his arms. If Tannerman was in the apartment  when Gerry entered Gerry would have seen the open window.

IMO If someone else was in the apartment - then you'd need to know how long he'd been there to answer that.  If he'd only just arrived seconds before  - then his actions would be different to those if he had been there for a while.    He may not have even got as far as entering the children's bedroom when he was interrupted.

It could be that having had such a close shave, he then decided to open the windows once Gerry had gone - for means of a sharp exit.

Because I know how even a small change in air pressure  when one door/window is opened can move other doors - a lot - and it was a breezy evening -    I've never been able to decide whether someone was in there or not.

AIMHO

[kizzy]

IMO If someone else was in the apartment - then you'd need to know how long he'd been there to answer that.  If he'd only just arrived seconds before  - then his actions would be different to those if he had been there for a while.    He may not have even got as far as entering the children's bedroom when he was interrupted.

It could be that having had such a close shave, he then decided to open the windows once Gerry had gone - for means of a sharp exit.

Because I know how even a small change in air pressure  when one door/window is opened can move other doors - a lot - and it was a breezy evening -    I've never been able to decide whether someone was in there or not.

AIMHO

All the more reason, imo the door to the bedroom would have slammed shut.

Not just wooshed the curtains.

As k mccann said

[Benice]

Ok - so obviously k mccann new straight away that maddie had been abducted.

Not only, did two highly intelligent people leave their children alone.

They also let 20 odd people, trample round the apartment.

Even your average burgled victim, knows not to let anyone touch anything, till police arrive.

Conclusion, because of this, who would know, if anyone had been in the room or not.

Why did they let all those people in.

They behaved like any normal panic-stricken parents would behave.    I doubt if they were thinking in terms of a 'crime scene' in those first 5/10 minutes of frantic searching.    And in any case it wasn't a crime scene until searches in 5a and around the vicinity had failed to find Madeleine.

Why you choose to criticise the parents for not behaving like policemen from the second they found Madeleine gone, whilst ignoring the fact that the policemen who should have been behaving like policemen - failed miserably to do their job properly when they arrived - is inexplicable to me.

AIMHO