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

[Carana]

Yeah they PROBABLY came to that conclusion because the story didn't fit a time line they created.

NOW..here is the thing. How did this intruder get in, not via the window with whooshing curtains  AND not the same way Gerry  came in cos he used a key?

A discussion on key-not-key is on a different thread.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8992.0

[barrier]

A discussion on key-not-key is on a different thread.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8992.0

If some are promoting that there was an intruder in the apartment at the time of GM's visit,then the key has relevance,the bogey man didn't happen in the room via a tardis.

[Robittybob1]

If some are promoting that there was an intruder in the apartment at the time of GM's visit,then the key has relevance,the bogey man didn't happen in the room via a tardis.

The simplest way in was through the unlocked patio door, but if you were inside at the time Gerry did his check, you would need to hide firstly, and when he left you couldn't leave via the same door as you came in as Gerry and Jez were talking just beyond the gate, either that or just wait till Gerry left, but I think you would be concerned that he may have detected you.  (Door moved out of position was one clue).
I don't think you'd hang around.
Hang on but if this is true you wouldn't walk across the top of the road Gerry and Jez were standing on. 


That scenario has a fatal flaw and therefore I'd say Tannerman was not in the apartment when Gerry was in there.

[misty]

[/b]=topic=9016.msg441299#msg441299 date=1516302128]
The simplest way in was through the unlocked patio door, but if you were inside at the time Gerry did his check, you would need to hide firstly, and when he left you couldn't leave via the same door as you came in as Gerry and Jez were talking just beyond the gate, either that or just wait till Gerry left, but I think you would be concerned that he may have detected you.  (Door moved out of position was one clue).
I don't think you'd hang around.
Hang on but if this is true you wouldn't walk across the top of the road Gerry and Jez were standing on. 


That scenario has a fatal flaw and therefore I'd say Tannerman was not in the apartment when Gerry was in there.

You may not have had a choice if a family on their way back to Block 4 were passing the car park exit as you left, carrying a young child. You'd head away from them, not past them. Gerry & Jez were far enough away to not be able to see you or the child clearly if you were spotted.
All IMO.

[Brietta]

You may not have had a choice if a family on their way back to Block 4 were passing the car park exit as you left, carrying a young child. You'd head away from them, not past them. Gerry & Jez were far enough away to not be able to see you or the child clearly if you were spotted.
All IMO.

 ... and in the event, neither Gerry nor Jes did see him ... but Jane saw all three.

[misty]

I like your reasoning misty, but how could the abductor have got across to the parents bedroom without Gerry seeing him?  It doesn't take long to open a patio door and step in.

Also, i am doubtful if the abductor could have even made it to the bathroom in the time to open that Patio door and step in


Unless, of course, he was last minute warned by someone outside watching and just had the time to do that before the patio door opened.  All very risky though.... and he must have moved on from the bathroom because Gerry used the loo before returning to the restaurant, didn't he?

Bear in mind the long curtain was reportedly closed across the patio door, so Gerry would have had to open the door, move the curtain, then possibly turn around & slide the door closed again.

On the attached video, it provides some idea how dark it was inside the apartment without the benefit of the small table lamp on. Matt also is shown indicating how far into the apartment he was before he could see into the children's' bedroom through the half-open door. You will also note there is an archway which provides a recess for the 3 doors & reduces visibility from the patio door aspect. IMO there was sufficient time for a fleet-footed intruder to move from one bedroom to the other without being seen.
https://youtu.be/na4aBr5PTYY?t=257

[misty]

Do we know the order of the places Gerry went in 5A?   Because it might just have been possible that Gerry used the loo first, then an abductor would have had time to move out of Madeleines bedroom and hide, say, in the kitchen.

Risky !   Phwew !

Assuming that nothing was lost in translation, Gerry never went into the parents' bedroom - children's room first, bathroom second.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm
snipped
 He followed the normal route up to the rear door, which being open he only had to move [slide] it, that being the way in which he entered [was entering] the lounge, he noted that the children's bedroom door was not ajar as he had left it but half-way open, which he thought strange, having then put together the thought of MADELEINE having got up to go to sleep in his bedroom so as to avoid the noise produced [created] by her siblings. In this way he entered the children's bedroom and established visual contact with each of them, checking and is certain of this, that the three were sleeping deeply. He left the children's bedroom returning to place the door how he had already previously described, [then] going to the bathroom. Everything else was normal, the blinds, curtains and windows closed, very dark, there only being the light that came from the lounge.
----- He adds that he never entered any other part of the residence [his bedroom or the kitchen] where he was for only two or three minutes, leaving yet again through the rear door that he closed but did not lock. He clarifies that he returned without seeing the children of any other family because he had not been asked to by them

[Alice Purjorick]

So you criticise the McCanns for not treating the apartment like a crime scene, but have no criticism at all of the policemen whose job it was to cordon off the crime scene, and by failing to do that - added to the possible destruction/contamination of evidence.    Fair enough - that's your prerogative.

IMO Even if  Kate knew in her heart that Madeleine had been abducted that doesn't mean she wasn't hoping against hope that she was wrong.   Once again a perfectly normal reaction by any parent in that horrific situation IMO.

Which policemen would they be ?
How do you reconcile your opinion with the statement in the archiving process that "the apartment had been rummaged before the GNR arrived on the scene". ?
I guess the "real goods" were obtainable after the apartment had been rummaged and only useless stuff was destroyed by the "rummaging"? Thus leaving it the fault of the cops. Yeah that fits but tell it to the marines the sailors will not believe it ..

[Robittybob1]

You may not have had a choice if a family on their way back to Block 4 were passing the car park exit as you left, carrying a young child. You'd head away from them, not past them. Gerry & Jez were far enough away to not be able to see you or the child clearly if you were spotted.
All IMO.

Yes it is still back on for he might have had a car in that direction (so he has to take the chance in order to get to his vehicle).  There was no other way over there.
 
If had been me I would have parked closer to apartment 5A.

I don't like the idea that Tannerman was nearly spotted by another couple as they have not come forward.

[misty]

Yes it is still back on for he might have had a car in that direction (so he has to take the chance in order to get to his vehicle).  There was no other way over there.
 
If had been me I would have parked closer to apartment 5A.

I don't like the idea that Tannerman was nearly spotted by another couple as they have not come forward.

Haven't they? IMO they came forward at the time & the intention was to use them eventually to discredit Jane's sighting.

[Robittybob1]

This was my point, how would they know if an intruder had been in or not?

Jane Fiona and Rachael are debating the issue in real time and basically use the open window as proof that someone had been in there.  It wasn't till time later that someone clearly demonstrated it was possible to open the window and raise the shutters from the outside, provided the window had not been locked properly. (Heriberto Janosch videoed this)
They were thinking this could only be done from the inside, and they considered that Madeleine could not have raised the shutters on her own.

My evidence of the "push indentation" on the curtain behind the bed strongly suggests that was done from the outside.  IMO the signs seen by Kate were the result of an attempted burglary.

[Robittybob1]

My evidence of the "push indentation" on the curtain behind the bed.
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0CuLJk4p2HY/V8W60rlGHXI/AAAAAAAAL1Y/pycAauc75M04Z9QN4lkqocjV4Wp58we7ACLcB/s640/3%2Boriginal%2BCurtains%2Bdoors%2B2.jpg IMO A person pushing the curtain from the inside would push at a higher spot, rather than below the window sill level.

[Carana]

My evidence of the "push indentation" on the curtain behind the bed.
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-0CuLJk4p2HY/V8W60rlGHXI/AAAAAAAAL1Y/pycAauc75M04Z9QN4lkqocjV4Wp58we7ACLcB/s640/3%2Boriginal%2BCurtains%2Bdoors%2B2.jpg IMO A person pushing the curtain from the inside would push at a higher spot, rather than below the window sill level.

Someone might have moved the curtain while bending down to check behind the bed or something, though.

[Robittybob1]

Haven't they? IMO they came forward at the time & the intention was to use them eventually to discredit Jane's sighting.

Can you jog my memory please?  Who were they? 

[Robittybob1]

Someone might have moved the curtain while bending down to check behind the bed or something, though.

Well there is another thing to check if I ever get there.
I tend to think as soon as the bed was moved the curtain would hang straight.  Compare both curtains; the other one not behind the bed is hanging straight.
 
IMO With the bed pushed hard up against the wall there was no need to look behind the bed. No one moved the bed.