UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Alice Purjorick on January 02, 2018, 05:29:17 PM
-
I was going to tack this onto the end of an existing thread but Cerberus said that thread was so old I should consider starting a new one. Oh well in for a penny and all that.
Here is another theory; or two or three or four.
Start Point: Most, well many, things are possible but the question of probable vs improbable is never far away.
The Pre-planned Snatch Theory
Any pre-planned snatch will have a similar framework cum activity list including but not limited to as we say.
The theory is contingent on certain items being a given i.e.:
1 There was abduction.
2 Abduction was commissioned by a rich type who specifically wanted MBM.
3 MBM was a heavy sleeper witness GM and MO both entering and leaving the apartment without awakening her, according to their statements.
4 According to the timeline drawn up by T9 there were two 10 minute slots after 21:15 when abduction could be effected.
Expressed in the first person with names for ease of identification, following the plot and it’s more fun that way.
Here we go then:
I am the contractor:
I am approached in the usual way by an intermediary with the usual hypothetical tale.” A certain person wishes to receive a young person to form part of their family it is said you may know how this may be effected and could put me in touch with etc…………”. I agree to meet a few hours later. I agree to meet after a bit of mucking about checking credentials etc. So a deal is agreed 50% fee up front 50% fee on completion paid into a numbered account. That is 50% in my bank before I even roll out of bed. The fee is mega nay giga-high based on the risk and potential sentencing for kidnap. I have the option to call it off at any time no fuss no muss returning the fee deposit less reasonable expenses.
What ? Kidnap a nominated female child aged about four years.
Where? Luz
When ? Between 28th April 2007 and 5th May 2007
Who ? In house staffing; [bearing in mind the potential repercussions keep staffing to a minimum. No bought in resources as they have an inherent failing, to whit: they can be bought but the unknown is how long they will remain bought. We don’t have enough time for a good bit of coercion/blackmail].
so:
Self + Dolores + Chandler (maybe ?).
How? Target timing: 3 days reccy; 1 day preparation, 1 day execution. Tight!
Equipment: First pass: 2 burner phones, pick locks,1 holiday rental car from a big name company preferably a small hatchback. Two rolls of tape and a slack handful of cable ties. Fabric sling bag and fleece with OC logo for D. Overnight bag and associated bits for me. If Chandler is used he will need a car but it will be arranged by him. Chandler will also arrange his own burner phone. Selection of low level disguises to alter superficial GISS.
Method:
Reconnaissance and Preparation
• Reccy done by me and D out as a couple [no one takes too much notice of a pretty bloody average M&F couple wandering about a holiday resort; dress unobtrusively but similar to most other tourists of same age group as us]. Low level disguises. D with dark hair plus extensions me with unremarkable tosh and as usual I will be using several different styles of spectacles as I consider them a fashion accessory as well as a necessity. Chosen correctly, frame styles will alter the perceived shape of the face and head.
• During the reccy we note:
1. The parents dine with their friends in the evening leaving the subject in an unsecured apartment.
2. The rear patio door is not secured allowing entrance to be effected by anyone. But there is a faff with child security gates and full drapes.
3. Front door ? It can be dead bolted or latched but there is no way of knowing which has been done at any time. Our best guess is it left latched only.
4. We are conversant with the lock type having the ability and tools to pick the lock if necessary.
5. There is an ad hoc system of checking on the children by the parents during the dining period.
6. The dining period is consistently in excess of two hours usually starting around 20:30.
7. A check is made on the child routinely at 21:00 after which the checks appear random rather than timed.
8. The windows to the apartment are shuttered. The shutters are not for security as they are not fitted with hasps staples and locks. Our knowledge of roller shutters tells us they can be raised from the outside but cannot be maintained in the raised position unless wedged.
9. Effecting entry via the shutters presupposes the window behind the shutter has been left open.
10. We consider effecting entrance via the shuttered window to be fraught with potential problems any one of which will leave us exposed so reject the idea.
11. The resort has a protocol for reporting missing children the timescale of which will give us, we estimate 1 hour from the time the subject is found to be missing plus response time by the police say 75 minutes top whack.
12. Working on the assumption the police will operate on the normal ripples on the pond principle they will begin searching close in working outwards. They may however alert the border post at the Guardiana Bridge so going into Spain by road will be a risk from the timing aspect.
13. We decide to go east as that is the obvious choice giving the opportunity for double bluff if the police think we will not do it!
Preparation
• The client is alerted, via the intermediary, the drop off will be at Santa Luzia waterfront. The act of drop off concludes the contract. Drive time 75 minutes.
• D and I decide having Chandler along is a good backstop move.
• Chandler is in and will arrange his own burner phone and car.
• I rent a typical holiday hatchback from the Europcar desk at Faro Airport for a two day hire arranging the drop to be at Vila Real Santo Antonio.
• I arrange a single hotel room in Vila Real Santo Antonio.
• Check train times VRSA to Faro and Tavira to Faro.
• The car rentals will be effected using bent IDs and credit card accounts.
Action Plan
• The snatch will be made between 21:15 and 21:50
• Chandler will park up in Luz and walk round to car park in front of 5A
• D and I are parked up reversed in, motor running. Average M & F holiday couple in average holiday rental car just leaving or just returning.
• The default position is AOK. The burner phones will only be used if there is a need to abort. If used the phones will be wiped disassembled wearing nodder gloves, then scattered.
• Chandler walks by front of 5A turns right and downhill past apartment side entrance. D follows wearing fleece with OC logo and sling bag.
• C and D both have sight AOK. C walks to OC Reception D enters apartment by patio door.
• D effects snatch using tape and cable ties as required. Leaves through front door if only latched.
• If dead bolted and key not present, D makes decision to either pick lock or leave via patio doors.
• Chandler has entered OC reception to obtain leaflets on whatever comes to mind hanging around long enough to check no one is heading toward apartment side entrance.
• On agreed time out duration Chandler continues downhill returns to his car and is in the wind.
• D returns to car with child and we head to Santa Luzia.
• Effect handover.
• D dropped off in Tavira to catch train west using cash for ticket.
• I continue to VRSA and check into hotel.
• I return the car following day and catch the train to Faro.
• All three of us return to wherever independently, meeting up afterward only when essential.
[I'll refrain from detailing the other snatch theory where the subject winds up in the lawless hinterland but alot of it will be common to above].
The Burglary Which Has Gone Wrong Theory:
• Sentence for burglary if caught and convicted 5 years ish
• Sentence for kidnap if caught and convicted 20 years ish
On that basis why would any burglar take a child instead of the easily negotiable goods and cash he went in for? Bearing in mind ca 80% of burglaries remain unsolved but a kidnapping?
The burglary has gone wrong and on the way in and out (unless the exit route was out front) the burglar makes time to reinstate doors gates and drapes……..was he under some kind of contractual reinstatement clause?
The Random Snatch Theory.
• I’ll just pop in here to see if there is a child ………
Close.
p.s feel free to be abusive, hold it up to ridicule and shoot holes in it.
In fact the more you do the better I will enjoy it.
-
What was the point of all that? 3 different theories all with abduction as part of the plot. Or was it entering the apartment as part of the plot linking them together?
-
What was the point of all that? 3 different theories all with abduction as part of the plot. Or was it entering the apartment as part of the plot linking them together?
Your sort of response was the reason for it.................... @)(++(*
-
Your sort of response was the reason for it.................... @)(++(*
Explain the true purpose please otherwise I recommend that the thread is closed.
-
I feel the idea of an abduction secondary to an attempt to assist is more likely. Someone finds Madeleine wandering or even injured and makes an effort to render assistance but with the presence of the PJ on the scene later keeps her hidden from then on.
-
Explain the true purpose please otherwise I recommend that the thread is closed.
The purpose has been stated quite clearly but if you want to stand on your dignity and have a mardy then recommend the thread is closed it's no skin off my nose squire.
-
The purpose has been stated quite clearly but if you want to stand on your dignity and have a mardy then recommend the thread is closed it's no skin off my nose squire.
Is this the purpose you speak of "Start Point: Most, well many, things are possible but the question of probable vs improbable is never far away." Are we to consider probable verse improbable aspects of each theory?
-
I was going to tack this onto the end of an existing thread but Cerberus said that thread was so old I should consider starting a new one. Oh well in for a penny and all that.
Here is another theory; or two or three or four.
Start Point: Most, well many, things are possible but the question of probable vs improbable is never far away.
The Pre-planned Snatch Theory
Any pre-planned snatch will have a similar framework cum activity list including but not limited to as we say.
The theory is contingent on certain items being a given i.e.:
1 There was abduction.
2 Abduction was commissioned by a rich type who specifically wanted MBM.
3 MBM was a heavy sleeper witness GM and MO both entering and leaving the apartment without awakening her, according to their statements.
4 According to the timeline drawn up by T9 there were two 10 minute slots after 21:15 when abduction could be effected.
Expressed in the first person with names for ease of identification, following the plot and it’s more fun that way.
Here we go then:
I am the contractor:
I am approached in the usual way by an intermediary with the usual hypothetical tale.” A certain person wishes to receive a young person to form part of their family it is said you may know how this may be effected and could put me in touch with etc…………”. I agree to meet a few hours later. I agree to meet after a bit of mucking about checking credentials etc. So a deal is agreed 50% fee up front 50% fee on completion paid into a numbered account. That is 50% in my bank before I even roll out of bed. The fee is mega nay giga-high based on the risk and potential sentencing for kidnap. I have the option to call it off at any time no fuss no muss returning the fee deposit less reasonable expenses.
What ? Kidnap a nominated female child aged about four years.
Where? Luz
When ? Between 28th April 2007 and 5th May 2007
Who ? In house staffing; [bearing in mind the potential repercussions keep staffing to a minimum. No bought in resources as they have an inherent failing, to whit: they can be bought but the unknown is how long they will remain bought. We don’t have enough time for a good bit of coercion/blackmail].
so:
Self + Dolores + Chandler (maybe ?).
How? Target timing: 3 days reccy; 1 day preparation, 1 day execution. Tight!
Equipment: First pass: 2 burner phones, pick locks,1 holiday rental car from a big name company preferably a small hatchback. Two rolls of tape and a slack handful of cable ties. Fabric sling bag and fleece with OC logo for D. Overnight bag and associated bits for me. If Chandler is used he will need a car but it will be arranged by him. Chandler will also arrange his own burner phone. Selection of low level disguises to alter superficial GISS.
Method:
Reconnaissance and Preparation
• Reccy done by me and D out as a couple [no one takes too much notice of a pretty bloody average M&F couple wandering about a holiday resort; dress unobtrusively but similar to most other tourists of same age group as us]. Low level disguises. D with dark hair plus extensions me with unremarkable tosh and as usual I will be using several different styles of spectacles as I consider them a fashion accessory as well as a necessity. Chosen correctly, frame styles will alter the perceived shape of the face and head.
• During the reccy we note:
1. The parents dine with their friends in the evening leaving the subject in an unsecured apartment.
2. The rear patio door is not secured allowing entrance to be effected by anyone. But there is a faff with child security gates and full drapes.
3. Front door ? It can be dead bolted or latched but there is no way of knowing which has been done at any time. Our best guess is it left latched only.
4. We are conversant with the lock type having the ability and tools to pick the lock if necessary.
5. There is an ad hoc system of checking on the children by the parents during the dining period.
6. The dining period is consistently in excess of two hours usually starting around 20:30.
7. A check is made on the child routinely at 21:00 after which the checks appear random rather than timed.
8. The windows to the apartment are shuttered. The shutters are not for security as they are not fitted with hasps staples and locks. Our knowledge of roller shutters tells us they can be raised from the outside but cannot be maintained in the raised position unless wedged.
9. Effecting entry via the shutters presupposes the window behind the shutter has been left open.
10. We consider effecting entrance via the shuttered window to be fraught with potential problems any one of which will leave us exposed so reject the idea.
11. The resort has a protocol for reporting missing children the timescale of which will give us, we estimate 1 hour from the time the subject is found to be missing plus response time by the police say 75 minutes top whack.
12. Working on the assumption the police will operate on the normal ripples on the pond principle they will begin searching close in working outwards. They may however alert the border post at the Guardiana Bridge so going into Spain by road will be a risk from the timing aspect.
13. We decide to go east as that is the obvious choice giving the opportunity for double bluff if the police think we will not do it!
Preparation
• The client is alerted, via the intermediary, the drop off will be at Santa Luzia waterfront. The act of drop off concludes the contract. Drive time 75 minutes.
• D and I decide having Chandler along is a good backstop move.
• Chandler is in and will arrange his own burner phone and car.
• I rent a typical holiday hatchback from the Europcar desk at Faro Airport for a two day hire arranging the drop to be at Vila Real Santo Antonio.
• I arrange a single hotel room in Vila Real Santo Antonio.
• Check train times VRSA to Faro and Tavira to Faro.
• The car rentals will be effected using bent IDs and credit card accounts.
Action Plan
• The snatch will be made between 21:15 and 21:50
• Chandler will park up in Luz and walk round to car park in front of 5A
• D and I are parked up reversed in, motor running. Average M & F holiday couple in average holiday rental car just leaving or just returning.
• The default position is AOK. The burner phones will only be used if there is a need to abort. If used the phones will be wiped disassembled wearing nodder gloves, then scattered.
• Chandler walks by front of 5A turns right and downhill past apartment side entrance. D follows wearing fleece with OC logo and sling bag.
• C and D both have sight AOK. C walks to OC Reception D enters apartment by patio door.
• D effects snatch using tape and cable ties as required. Leaves through front door if only latched.
• If dead bolted and key not present, D makes decision to either pick lock or leave via patio doors.
• Chandler has entered OC reception to obtain leaflets on whatever comes to mind hanging around long enough to check no one is heading toward apartment side entrance.
• On agreed time out duration Chandler continues downhill returns to his car and is in the wind.
• D returns to car with child and we head to Santa Luzia.
• Effect handover.
• D dropped off in Tavira to catch train west using cash for ticket.
• I continue to VRSA and check into hotel.
• I return the car following day and catch the train to Faro.
• All three of us return to wherever independently, meeting up afterward only when essential.
[I'll refrain from detailing the other snatch theory where the subject winds up in the lawless hinterland but alot of it will be common to above].
The Burglary Which Has Gone Wrong Theory:
• Sentence for burglary if caught and convicted 5 years ish
• Sentence for kidnap if caught and convicted 20 years ish
On that basis why would any burglar take a child instead of the easily negotiable goods and cash he went in for? Bearing in mind ca 80% of burglaries remain unsolved but a kidnapping?
The burglary has gone wrong and on the way in and out (unless the exit route was out front) the burglar makes time to reinstate doors gates and drapes……..was he under some kind of contractual reinstatement clause?
The Random Snatch Theory.
• I’ll just pop in here to see if there is a child ………
Close.
p.s feel free to be abusive, hold it up to ridicule and shoot holes in it.
In fact the more you do the better I will enjoy it.
Somewhat over-elaborate, but there are interesting points to contemplate.
If Madeleine was snatched as part of a contract, how did the purchaser connect to the snatchers and specify the details of the child to be snatched? (I don't mean 'by phone'. If one want a child snatched, one has to know child-snatchers, and explain one is willing to exchange a child for cash. How does one find some child-snatchers?)
The bank accounts angle also interests me. Thus far, I cannot see anyone who got wealthy when Madeleine disappeared, though money flowed into the Find Madeleine coffers, and various people got large sums from the media. What I am not seeing is someone getting wealthy from the direct activity of child snatching. There is no cash trail, as far as I can see.
-
Somewhat over-elaborate, but there are interesting points to contemplate.
If Madeleine was snatched as part of a contract, how did the purchaser connect to the snatchers and specify the details of the child to be snatched? (I don't mean 'by phone'. If one want a child snatched, one has to know child-snatchers, and explain one is willing to exchange a child for cash. How does one find some child-snatchers?)
The bank accounts angle also interests me. Thus far, I cannot see anyone who got wealthy when Madeleine disappeared, though money flowed into the Find Madeleine coffers, and various people got large sums from the media. What I am not seeing is someone getting wealthy from the direct activity of child snatching. There is no cash trail, as far as I can see.
There is probably a great deal going on behind the scenes that just isn't know about.
However if there was money to be made from kidnapping a child I doubt very much if it went into locally building a new pool or a new villa even buying new wheels without other visible means of funding.
Also if the authorities are not allowed to carry out a 'forensic' evaluation of suspect's accounts or search their homes ... there is not the slightest possibility of any discrepancies being uncovered.
In my opinion your reference to money flowing into Madeleine's coffers is a demeaning one and totally out of context. As any money changing hands due to the sale of a little girl would not happen openly and above board but is of necessity a very dark business indeed.
Don't delude yourself that there is a corner of the world where fortunes are not made using such practices and don't delude yourself if that was Madeleine's fate, she will ever be the last victim.
Snip
Met detectives reportedly requested the men’s bank details and asked local officers to quiz the trio and search their homes.
But the judge who dealt with the requests ‘did not consider Scotland Yard’s arguments valid,’ local sources said.
A spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office in Portugal said: ‘The content of the requests formulated by the British authorities is confidential.’
//www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2622233/British-police-leading-hunt-Madeleine-McCann-banned-searching-homes-burglary-suspects.html#ixzz5355itr39
-
There is probably a great deal going on behind the scenes that just isn't know about.
However if there was money to be made from kidnapping a child I doubt very much if it went into locally building a new pool or a new villa even buying new wheels without other visible means of funding.
Also if the authorities are not allowed to carry out a 'forensic' evaluation of suspect's accounts or search their homes ... there is not the slightest possibility of any discrepancies being uncovered.
In my opinion your reference to money flowing into Madeleine's coffers is a demeaning one and totally out of context. As any money changing hands due to the sale of a little girl would not happen openly and above board but is of necessity a very dark business indeed.
Don't delude yourself that there is a corner of the world where fortunes are not made using such practices and don't delude yourself if that was Madeleine's fate, she will ever be the last victim.
Snip
Met detectives reportedly requested the men’s bank details and asked local officers to quiz the trio and search their homes.
But the judge who dealt with the requests ‘did not consider Scotland Yard’s arguments valid,’ local sources said.
A spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office in Portugal said: ‘The content of the requests formulated by the British authorities is confidential.’
//www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2622233/British-police-leading-hunt-Madeleine-McCann-banned-searching-homes-burglary-suspects.html#ixzz5355itr39
Frankly, I find your reply to be crass in the extreme. I have never reported a post, but if you repeat this, I will have no choice but to make an exception.
'The trio' are not wealthy by any standards. I can take you to meet all 3, if you would care to stop pontificating and face up to reality. I know where they live. I know what they eat. I know what they drink.
If they made money from Madeleine's disappearance, they are still sitting on their nest egg 11 years on.
I really don't care about your opinion of money flowing into the Find Madeleine Fund. It did. Fact.
As to why these men's houses should be searched and their bank records analysed? Please get real.
-
"One theory is that the burglars raided the McCanns’ flat and were panicked into snatching the youngster when she woke up.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2622233/British-police-leading-hunt-Madeleine-McCann-banned-searching-homes-burglary-suspects.html#ixzz535Mn7mFs "
I still think a more probable outcome is they desisted from their burglary when Madeleine woke up and she went to find her mum over at the Tapas, and for some reason she didn't get that far.
There was Kate's evidence of an attempted break in, no evidence found by the PJ of anyone going through the window. Once the front door has been opened by Madeleine someone else closed it after her and left via the patio door. For the front door appears to have been closed when Kate did her check.
-
Frankly, I find your reply to be crass in the extreme. I have never reported a post, but if you repeat this, I will have no choice but to make an exception.
'The trio' are not wealthy by any standards. I can take you to meet all 3, if you would care to stop pontificating and face up to reality. I know where they live. I know what they eat. I know what they drink.
If they made money from Madeleine's disappearance, they are still sitting on their nest egg 11 years on.
I really don't care about your opinion of money flowing into the Find Madeleine Fund. It did. Fact.
As to why these men's houses should be searched and their bank records analysed? Please get real.
I'm not terribly sure which part of my post has offended you; I did not raise the present situation in Luz ... you did; I did not raise the issue of bank accounts etc ... you did; I did not drop money donated to Madeleine's fund into the mix ... you did.
There were arguidos named and questioned by the Policia Judiciaria in 2014 in relation to Madeleine's disappearance ... that is a fact.
That was hardly anything to do with me so why on earth you have gone of on one on that is beyond mysterious to me.
Allegedly Scotland yard were not allowed to search their dwellings nor allegedly were Scotland Yard allowed to see their bank accounts.
Have I got that wrong ... or is that exactly what the cite I have provided says?
You leap to the defence of three men involved in criminal activities who the police wished to question as suspects in a missing child case ... that is fine by me if that is what you wish to be seen doing.
Snip
The Portuguese Attorney General has received a formal International Letter of Request from British detectives investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
It is thought officers from the Met want to locate and question three burglars who were operating in Praia da Luz after mobile records revealed they had made an unusually high number of phone calls to each other shortly after the little girl disappeared.
Joana Marques Vidal confirmed the letter, which was sent on 10 January had been passed to a Portuguese court for consideration, ITV reports.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/24/madeleine-mccann-news-three-burglars-face-questioning-portuguese-authorities-met-request_n_4657584.html
Please be my guest and report away ... I certainly am agog to discover what you find "crass in the extreme" about my post to precipitate your reaction.
-
Snip
Also if the authorities are not allowed to carry out a 'forensic' evaluation of suspect's accounts or search their homes ... there is not the slightest possibility of any discrepancies being uncovered.
Snip
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/request-to-investigate-gerry-s-accounts-is-dis-08--t9456.html (http://themaddiecasefiles.com/request-to-investigate-gerry-s-accounts-is-dis-08--t9456.html)
-
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/request-to-investigate-gerry-s-accounts-is-dis-08--t9456.html (http://themaddiecasefiles.com/request-to-investigate-gerry-s-accounts-is-dis-08--t9456.html)
Francs Kennah, a senior official at the 'UK Central Authority', clarifies that after pondering over the coercive measures, the cabinet does not see a motive to concede the requested authorisation, considering that the request is not justified and seems disproportionate. The British authorities solicit a new clarification from Portugal, but it is not sent and the process is archived a little over a month later.
If the PJ could not be bothered to clarify the request what did they expect
-
Based on all the evidence I think abduction by a stranger is by far the most probable thing that happenend.
AS to exactly how and why....who knows. To me its like watching magician on TV...we see something that is difficult if not impossible to explain but we know it happenend. When we find out how it was done we realise how simple it was.
-
I'm not terribly sure which part of my post has offended you; I did not raise the present situation in Luz ... you did; I did not raise the issue of bank accounts etc ... you did; I did not drop money donated to Madeleine's fund into the mix ... you did.
There were arguidos named and questioned by the Policia Judiciaria in 2014 in relation to Madeleine's disappearance ... that is a fact.
That was hardly anything to do with me so why on earth you have gone of on one on that is beyond mysterious to me.
Allegedly Scotland yard were not allowed to search their dwellings nor allegedly were Scotland Yard allowed to see their bank accounts.
Have I got that wrong ... or is that exactly what the cite I have provided says?
You leap to the defence of three men involved in criminal activities who the police wished to question as suspects in a missing child case ... that is fine by me if that is what you wish to be seen doing.
Snip
The Portuguese Attorney General has received a formal International Letter of Request from British detectives investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
It is thought officers from the Met want to locate and question three burglars who were operating in Praia da Luz after mobile records revealed they had made an unusually high number of phone calls to each other shortly after the little girl disappeared.
Joana Marques Vidal confirmed the letter, which was sent on 10 January had been passed to a Portuguese court for consideration, ITV reports.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/24/madeleine-mccann-news-three-burglars-face-questioning-portuguese-authorities-met-request_n_4657584.html
Please be my guest and report away ... I certainly am agog to discover what you find "crass in the extreme" about my post to precipitate your reaction.
Most of your post was offensive, as is most of this one.
Assuming OG requested bank details, and house searches, (and allegedly DNA), then Portuguese authorities seemingly deemed these requests to be of insufficient merit to authorise them.
If you have evidence these 3 men were operating in a burglary ring, produce it.
If you have evidence these 3 men made abnormally high numbers of calls to each other before/after Madeleine disappeared, produce it.
The men were made arguidos, but current best information is they are no longer of interest.
Quite why you think it is OK to imply that 3 readily identifiable individuals abducted Madeleine for money, when there is no evidence to support it, is beyond the pale.
Any implication that the McCanns dunnit, without any supporting evidence, would disappear faster than a bolt of lightning.
There is nothing to suggest this trio benefited from Madeleine's disappearance. If you think there is, then kindly stop alleging and start producing some evidence thereof.
I have deliberately avoided talking to the trio, on the basis that AFAIK they are still bound by judicial secrecy laws. If the case gets archived, talking to them is on my to-do list. I'm intrigued as to what evidence was put to them that OG thought might implicate them.
-
Most of your post was offensive, as is most of this one.
Assuming OG requested bank details, and house searches, (and allegedly DNA), then Portuguese authorities seemingly deemed these requests to be of insufficient merit to authorise them.
If you have evidence these 3 men were operating in a burglary ring, produce it.
If you have evidence these 3 men made abnormally high numbers of calls to each other before/after Madeleine disappeared, produce it.
The men were made arguidos, but current best information is they are no longer of interest.
Quite why you think it is OK to imply that 3 readily identifiable individuals abducted Madeleine for money, when there is no evidence to support it, is beyond the pale.
Any implication that the McCanns dunnit, without any supporting evidence, would disappear faster than a bolt of lightning.
There is nothing to suggest this trio benefited from Madeleine's disappearance. If you think there is, then kindly stop alleging and start producing some evidence thereof.
I have deliberately avoided talking to the trio, on the basis that AFAIK they are still bound by judicial secrecy laws. If the case gets archived, talking to them is on my to-do list. I'm intrigued as to what evidence was put to them that OG thought might implicate them.
You would have to admit that a burglary gone wrong is a possible scenario either in the abduction or just the waking of Madeleine. If there was evidence of phones calls around that time and from the reports Heriberto Janosch had done that analysis and OG must have agreed. OK it isn't that much evidence but why make them arguidos if they are not willing to examine them fully?
-
You would have to admit that a burglary gone wrong is a possible scenario either in the abduction or just the waking of Madeleine. If there was evidence of phones calls around that time and from the reports Heriberto Janosch had done that analysis and OG must have agreed. OK it isn't that much evidence but why make them arguidos if they are not willing to examine them fully?
It most certainly isn't and they appear to be no longer of any interest to OG.
-
You would have to admit that a burglary gone wrong is a possible scenario either in the abduction or just the waking of Madeleine. If there was evidence of phones calls around that time and from the reports Heriberto Janosch had done that analysis and OG must have agreed. OK it isn't that much evidence but why make them arguidos if they are not willing to examine them fully?
I have no problem with Heri. I have had the pleasure of meeting him face-to-face and I would be happy to do so again.
The sequence of events as I understand it is as follows.
Heri developed his potential burglary gone wrong scenario. Heri communicated this to OG. Heri outlined his theory here, without naming names. OG made 3 men living in Luz arguidos.
I have no idea whether OG was acting on Heri's communication, or whether they got to much the same place under their own steam. I am not privy to the internal workings of OG. I only get to see the external activities they undertake. Plus FOIs.
From memory, Heri documented 4 communications between the trio on 2 May and 3 May 2007. On 3 May 2007, 3 communications could possibly be tied to movements of the McCanns and the Tapas 7. I happen to know that these 4 communications can be tied to something much more mundane. Obviously, I cannot prove which alternative is correct, or whether there is a 3rd explanation.
So what I know is 3 men residing in Luz contacted each other by phone. 4 times in 2 days.
If that is what it amounts to, then forensic scrutiny of their bank accounts and search warrants for their homes is laughable.
I have no problem with them being made arguidos, though I am very curious as to why this passed Portuguese approval. Thus far, it sounds like much ado about nothing.
Slarti has published a link showing that access to the McCann accounts was denied by UK authorities, seemingly because it was not proportionate. That sounds fair to me.
Suggesting that the Portuguese should have dragged this trio over the coals sounds like cobblers.
-
I have no problem with Heri. I have had the pleasure of meeting him face-to-face and I would be happy to do so again.
The sequence of events as I understand it is as follows.
Heri developed his potential burglary gone wrong scenario. Heri communicated this to OG. Heri outlined his theory here, without naming names. OG made 3 men living in Luz arguidos.
I have no idea whether OG was acting on Heri's communication, or whether they got to much the same place under their own steam. I am not privy to the internal workings of OG. I only get to see the external activities they undertake. Plus FOIs.
From memory, Heri documented 4 communications between the trio on 2 May and 3 May 2007. On 3 May 2007, 3 communications could possibly be tied to movements of the McCanns and the Tapas 7. I happen to know that these 4 communications can be tied to something much more mundane. Obviously, I cannot prove which alternative is correct, or whether there is a 3rd explanation.
So what I know is 3 men residing in Luz contacted each other by phone. 4 times in 2 days.
If that is what it amounts to, then forensic scrutiny of their bank accounts and search warrants for their homes is laughable.
I have no problem with them being made arguidos, though I am very curious as to why this passed Portuguese approval. Thus far, it sounds like much ado about nothing.
Slarti has published a link showing that access to the McCann accounts was denied by UK authorities, seemingly because it was not proportionate. That sounds fair to me.
Suggesting that the Portuguese should have dragged this trio over the coals sounds like cobblers.
In my opinion you have absolutely no objection whatsoever to Madeleine McCann's disappearance being investigated just so long as it does not concern involving local Portuguese residents allegedly domicile in the locale at the time.
Bit unrealistic I think, but there you are.
The old adage about investigating those closest to a missing child is superseded by casting the net wider when these have been eliminated from the inquiry.
As far as constituting individuals as arguidos goes ... that can now only be approved if evidence is produced in support ... the evidence was produced ... it was sufficient for the Portuguese authorities ... perhaps??
But we really don't know ... bearing in mind those interviewed may have requested the status for themselves and had permission granted.
-
I'm not terribly sure which part of my post has offended you; I did not raise the present situation in Luz ... you did; I did not raise the issue of bank accounts etc ... you did; I did not drop money donated to Madeleine's fund into the mix ... you did.
There were arguidos named and questioned by the Policia Judiciaria in 2014 in relation to Madeleine's disappearance ... that is a fact.
That was hardly anything to do with me so why on earth you have gone of on one on that is beyond mysterious to me.
Allegedly Scotland yard were not allowed to search their dwellings nor allegedly were Scotland Yard allowed to see their bank accounts.
Have I got that wrong ... or is that exactly what the cite I have provided says?
You leap to the defence of three men involved in criminal activities who the police wished to question as suspects in a missing child case ... that is fine by me if that is what you wish to be seen doing.
Snip
The Portuguese Attorney General has received a formal International Letter of Request from British detectives investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
It is thought officers from the Met want to locate and question three burglars who were operating in Praia da Luz after mobile records revealed they had made an unusually high number of phone calls to each other shortly after the little girl disappeared.
Joana Marques Vidal confirmed the letter, which was sent on 10 January had been passed to a Portuguese court for consideration, ITV reports.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/24/madeleine-mccann-news-three-burglars-face-questioning-portuguese-authorities-met-request_n_4657584.html
Please be my guest and report away ... I certainly am agog to discover what you find "crass in the extreme" about my post to precipitate your reaction.
They were arguidos that answered all questions and were cleared. If you don't then face the consequences.
-
In my opinion you have absolutely no objection whatsoever to Madeleine McCann's disappearance being investigated just so long as it does not concern involving local Portuguese residents allegedly domicile in the locale at the time.
Bit unrealistic I think, but there you are.
The old adage about investigating those closest to a missing child is superseded by casting the net wider when these have been eliminated from the inquiry.
As far as constituting individuals as arguidos goes ... that can now only be approved if evidence is produced in support ... the evidence was produced ... it was sufficient for the Portuguese authorities ... perhaps??
But we really don't know ... bearing in mind those interviewed may have requested the status for themselves and had permission granted.
I am not interested in debating your opinion of me.
I have no qualms in finding - the local Portuguese guilty - the local ex-pats guilty - the McCanns guilty - one or more of the T7 guilty - or finding Smellyman.
I have problems with ludicrous ideas like 'seal Luz off', 200kph on the EN125, and house searches where there is insufficient evidence.
Bin them!
-
I am not interested in debating your opinion of me.
I have no qualms in finding - the local Portuguese guilty - the local ex-pats guilty - the McCanns guilty - one or more of the T7 guilty - or finding Smellyman.
I have problems with ludicrous ideas like 'seal Luz off', 200kph on the EN125, and house searches where there is insufficient evidence.
Bin them!
they might be ludicrous to you but perhaps some of the things you have said on here are ludicrous to others.....
as for the link by slarti it showed tht the pj were asked for further clarification re the request for the mccanns financial records.....but the pj failed to respond...blame where its due
-
They were arguidos that answered all questions and were cleared. If you don't then face the consequences.
You really do not know that ... unless you have a cite to back it up?
-
I am not interested in debating your opinion of me.
I have no qualms in finding - the local Portuguese guilty - the local ex-pats guilty - the McCanns guilty - one or more of the T7 guilty - or finding Smellyman.
I have problems with ludicrous ideas like 'seal Luz off', 200kph on the EN125, and house searches where there is insufficient evidence.
Bin them!
Bin them indeed since apparently no-one else has an interest ... you appear to be the only one to have raised these issues.
-
I am not interested in debating your opinion of me.
I have no qualms in finding - the local Portuguese guilty - the local ex-pats guilty - the McCanns guilty - one or more of the T7 guilty - or finding Smellyman.
I have problems with ludicrous ideas like 'seal Luz off', 200kph on the EN125, and house searches where there is insufficient evidence.
Bin them!
Look at how the investigation turned onto Robert Murat and the amount of investigation he received. Do you ever wonder about the same happening to you? From memory you weren't in PdL in May 2007 is that right?
You might say "I have no qualms in finding - the local Portuguese guilty - the local ex-pats guilty - the McCanns guilty - one or more of the T7 guilty - or finding Smellyman" but I can't imagine anyone really being chuffed at the idea of becoming an arguido.
-
they might be ludicrous to you but perhaps some of the things you have said on here are ludicrous to others.....
as for the link by slarti it showed tht the pj were asked for further clarification re the request for the mccanns financial records.....but the pj failed to respond...blame where its due
As the link said, the PT had clarified why they wanted the information and the UK asked for further clarification. It would appear that SY didn’t manage to clarify their request enough to get it fulfilled by the PT.
-
Somewhat over-elaborate, but there are interesting points to contemplate.
If Madeleine was snatched as part of a contract, how did the purchaser connect to the snatchers and specify the details of the child to be snatched? (I don't mean 'by phone'. If one want a child snatched, one has to know child-snatchers, and explain one is willing to exchange a child for cash. How does one find some child-snatchers?)
The bank accounts angle also interests me. Thus far, I cannot see anyone who got wealthy when Madeleine disappeared, though money flowed into the Find Madeleine coffers, and various people got large sums from the media. What I am not seeing is someone getting wealthy from the direct activity of child snatching. There is no cash trail, as far as I can see.
You would appear to be the only one wishing to explore the beginning and some peripheral details which are of relevance.
I can understand your view of "over elaborate" when compared with the paucity of detail and joining of non existent dots in some theories which appear to have currency. If it was a planned snatch as some suggest then the "how" is somewhat relevant would you not say ?..... then logically extend the "how".
I would prefer more people were shooting holes in my text. ............ 8(0(*
-
As the link said, the PT had clarified why they wanted the information and the UK asked for further clarification. It would appear that SY didn’t manage to clarify their request enough to get it fulfilled by the PT.
Francs Kennah, a senior official at the 'UK Central Authority', clarifies that after pondering over the coercive measures, the cabinet does not see a motive to concede the requested authorisation, considering that the request is not justified and seems disproportionate. The British authorities solicit a new clarification from Portugal, but it is not sent and the process is archived a little over a month later.
So point out where it states that the PJ sent clarification...it doesnt
-
Francs Kennah, a senior official at the 'UK Central Authority', clarifies that after pondering over the coercive measures, the cabinet does not see a motive to concede the requested authorisation, considering that the request is not justified and seems disproportionate. The British authorities solicit a new clarification from Portugal, but it is not sent and the process is archived a little over a month later.
If the PJ could not be bothered to clarify the request what did they expect
Initially, the authorities requested a clarification from the Portuguese Public Ministry, which better explained the reasons for the request: to identify if there was an unknown motive behind Maddie's disappearance and if eventually there was an individual or individuals who might be responsible for her disappearance.
The English authorities did not accept the clarification from Portugal, and in their reply letter, sent on the 16th of June, they manifest their concern with the motives that led the Portuguese authorities to request information about bank operations over a period of six months, from Maddie's father's Mastercard credit card. The period covered by the request started on the 1st of April, approximately six weeks before the child's disappearance.
Despite the official explanation from the Portuguese authorities, the English police also considered an unofficial explanation that was offered by the investigative team that traveled to England. At that point in time, the Leicestershire police was told that Gerry McCann had been seen drawing money from an automatic cash machine and talking on the phone.
-
That is great "Despite the official explanation from the Portuguese authorities, the English police also considered an unofficial explanation" Two types of explanation - one official and the other unofficial and they are different!
-
That is great "Despite the official explanation from the Portuguese authorities, the English police also considered an unofficial explanation" Two types of explanation - one official and the other unofficial and they are different!
Two perfectly legitimate reasons IMO.
-
Two perfectly legitimate reasons IMO.
But then couldn't they just make up any excuse "unofficially" to get into someone's bank account?
-
"One theory is that the burglars raided the McCanns’ flat and were panicked into snatching the youngster when she woke up.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2622233/British-police-leading-hunt-Madeleine-McCann-banned-searching-homes-burglary-suspects.html#ixzz535Mn7mFs "
I still think a more probable outcome is they desisted from their burglary when Madeleine woke up and she went to find her mum over at the Tapas, and for some reason she didn't get that far.
There was Kate's evidence of an attempted break in, no evidence found by the PJ of anyone going through the window. Once the front door has been opened by Madeleine someone else closed it after her and left via the patio door. For the front door appears to have been closed when Kate did her check.
Given that even a low level burglar knows his business and the sentences associated with being caught why would the burglar place himself in the position of increased exposure by knocking over the joint, as you might say, at night with a child in occupation rather than in daylight when the place is empty thereby reducing the risk?
I don'tknow about Portugal but England is this:
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/item/domestic-burglary/
Other aggravating factors include:
Child at home (or returns home) when offence committed
Offence committed at night
I am sure there is an expert on Portuguese law here who has the answer with cite at their fingertips.
-
But then couldn't they just make up any excuse "unofficially" to get into someone's bank account?
Whose bank account are we considering here?
Mine as "the contractor wot dunnit" was is any one of a dozen countries who would tell you to sit on a sharp stick if you asked. My client could have been anyone anywhere..........always given that you go for the pre-planned snatch.
-
It most certainly isn't and they appear to be no longer of any interest to OG.
There is no appear,they are not no longer subject of further investigation.
Mark Rowley assistant commissioner of the MET.
The team has looked at in excess of 600 individuals who were identified as being potentially significant to the disappearance. In 2013 the team identified four individuals they declared to be suspects in the case. This led to interviews at a police station in Faro facilitated by the local Policia Judiciária and the search of a large area of wasteland which is close to Madeleine's apartment in Praia Da Luz. The enquiries did not find any evidence to further implicate the individuals in the disappearance and so they are no longer subject of further investigation.
There was no burglary gone wrong that can be linked to an alleged abduction.imo.
-
Given that even a low level burglar knows his business and the sentences associated with being caught why would the burglar place himself in the position of increased exposure by knocking over the joint, as you might say, at night with a child in occupation rather than in daylight when the place is empty thereby reducing the risk?
I don'tknow about Portugal but England is this:
https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/item/domestic-burglary/
Other aggravating factors include:
Child at home (or returns home) when offence committed
Offence committed at night
I am sure there is an expert on Portuguese law here who has the answer with cite at their fingertips.
While we wait for an expert...
I can't see anything resembling those particular aggravating factors.
2007 Penal Code
CAPÍTULO II
Dos crimes contra a propriedade
Artigo 203.o
Furto
1 - Quem, com ilegítima intenção de apropriação para si ou para outra pessoa, subtrair coisa móvel alheia, é punido com pena de prisão até 3 anos ou com pena de multa.
2 - A tentativa é punível.
3 - O procedimento criminal depende de queixa.
Artigo 204.o Furto qualificado
98
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
1 - Quem furtar coisa móvel alheia:
a) De valor elevado;
b) Colocada ou transportada em veículo ou colocada em lugar destinado ao depósito de objectos ou transportada por passageiros utentes de transporte colectivo, mesmo que a subtracção tenha lugar na estação, gare ou cais;
c) Afecta ao culto religioso ou à veneração da memória dos mortos e que se encontre em lugar destinado ao culto ou em cemitério;
d) Explorando situação de especial debilidade da vítima, de desastre, acidente, calamidade pública ou perigo comum;
e) Fechada em gaveta, cofre ou outro receptáculo equipados com fechadura ou outro dispositivo especialmente destinado à sua segurança;
f) Introduzindo-se ilegitimamente em habitação, ainda que móvel, estabelecimento comercial ou industrial ou espaço fechado, ou aí permanecendo escondido com intenção de furtar;
g) Com usurpação de título, uniforme ou insígnia de empregado público, civil ou militar, ou alegando falsa ordem de autoridade pública;
h) Fazendo da prática de furtos modo de vida; ou
i) Deixando a vítima em difícil situação económica;
é punido com pena de prisão até 5 anos ou com pena de multa até 600 dias. 2 - Quem furtar coisa móvel alheia:
a) De valor consideravelmente elevado;
b) Que possua significado importante para o desenvolvimento tecnológico ou
económico;
c) Que por sua natureza seja altamente perigosa;
d) Que possua importante valor científico, artístico ou histórico e se encontre em colecção ou exposição públicas ou acessíveis ao público;
99
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
e) Penetrando em habitação, ainda que móvel, estabelecimento comercial ou industrial ou outro espaço fechado, por arrombamento, escalamento ou chaves falsas;
f) Trazendo, no momento do crime, arma aparente ou oculta; ou
g) Como membro de bando destinado à prática reiterada de crimes contra o
património, com a colaboração de pelo menos outro membro do bando;
é punido com pena de prisão de 2 a 8 anos.
3 - Se na mesma conduta concorrerem mais do que um dos requisitos referidos nos números anteriores, só é considerado para efeito de determinação da pena aplicável o que tiver efeito agravante mais forte, sendo o outro ou outros valorados na medida da pena.
4 - Não há lugar à qualificação se a coisa furtada for de diminuto valor.
Pure googlish, I'm afraid.
CHAPTER II
Of crimes against property
Article 203
Theft
1 - Who, with illegitimate intention of appropriation for himself or for another person, subtract something alien from others, shall be punished with imprisonment for up to 3 years or with a fine.
2 - The attempt is punishable.
3 - Criminal procedure depends on complaint.
Article 204 Qualified theft
98
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
1 - Whoever steals another's mobile thing:
a) Of high value;
(b) placed or carried in a vehicle or placed in a place intended for the storage of objects or carried by passengers using public transport, even if the subtraction takes place at the station, gare or pier;
c) It affects the religious cult or the veneration of the memory of the dead and that is in place destined to the cult or in cemetery;
d) Exploring situations of special weakness of the victim, disaster, accident, public calamity or common danger;
e) Closed in a drawer, safe or other receptacle equipped with a lock or other device specially designed for its safety;
f) Introducing illegitimately in housing, even if mobile, commercial or industrial establishment or closed space, or there hiding with the intention of stealing;
g) With usurpation of title, uniform or insignia of public, civil or military employee, or alleging false order of public authority;
h) Making the practice of stealing a way of life; or
i) Leaving the victim in difficult economic situation;
shall be punished with imprisonment up to 5 years or with a fine of up to 600 days. 2 - Whoever steals another's mobile thing:
(a) of a considerably high value;
(b) which has significant significance for the technological development or
economic;
c) that by its nature is highly dangerous;
d) That it possesses important scientific, artistic or historical value and is in a collection or exhibition public or accessible to the public;
99
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
e) Penetrating into housing, even if mobile, commercial or industrial establishment or other enclosed space, by break-in, escalation or false keys;
f) Bringing, at the time of the crime, an apparent or hidden weapon; or
g) As a member of the gang destined to the repeated practice of crimes against
with the collaboration of at least one other member of the band;
is punished with imprisonment from 2 to 8 years.
3 - If in the same conduct more than one of the requirements referred to in the previous paragraphs, only the one that has the strongest aggravating effect is considered for the purpose of determining the applicable penalty, the other one or others being valued as a penalty.
4 - There is no place to qualify if the thing stolen is of small value.
-
There is no appear,they are not no longer subject of further investigation.
Mark Rowley assistant commissioner of the MET.
There was no burglary gone wrong that can be linked to an alleged abduction.imo.
Im happy to accept that Rowley is telling the truth...are you...he also says the Mccanns are not suspects
-
Im happy to accept that Rowley is telling the truth...are you...he also says the Mccanns are not suspects
Cite for Rowley actually using those words.
-
Whose bank account are we considering here?
Mine as "the contractor wot dunnit" was is any one of a dozen countries who would tell you to sit on a sharp stick if you asked. My client could have been anyone anywhere..........always given that you go for the pre-planned snatch.
In our case I thought we were looking at Gerry and 3 or 4 local guys living in and around PdL.
-
There is no appear,they are not no longer subject of further investigation.
Mark Rowley assistant commissioner of the MET.
There was no burglary gone wrong that can be linked to an alleged abduction.imo.
It depends on evidence. "The enquiries did not find any evidence" If new evidence came up that could change.
-
Cite for Rowley actually using those words.
Rowley also said Maddie was abducted....I'm happy to accept Rowley is telling the truth and it seems you are too
-
It depends on evidence. "The enquiries did not find any evidence" If new evidence came up that could change.
Of course it could. New evidence could lead to all sorts of ......... coming out of the woodwork, or from under stones
-
Of course it could. New evidence could lead to all sorts of ......... coming out of the woodwork, or from under stones
You forgot to mention me.
-
Im happy to accept that Rowley is telling the truth...are you...he also says the Mccanns are not suspects
Cite for Rowley actually using those words.
Rowley also said Maddie was abducted....I'm happy to accept Rowley is telling the truth and it seems you are too
Thought as much,Rowley has not uttered those words about McCanns not being suspects.
I'll decide what I believe, not you,thanks all the same.
-
Thought as much,Rowley has not uttered those words about McCanns not being suspects.
I'll decide what I believe, not you,thanks all the same.
You can believe what you want it's not really important.....but if you are going to quote Rowley then it's a bit hypocritical to accept some things he says as facts and simply reject what you don't like. ...such as the fact he said however she left the a party she was abducted....that clearly shows he ruled out the parents
-
In our case I thought we were looking at Gerry and 3 or 4 local guys living in and around PdL.
Oh I see......... Have we gone UDI then ?
-
While we wait for an expert...
I can't see anything resembling those particular aggravating factors.
2007 Penal Code
CAPÍTULO II
Dos crimes contra a propriedade
Artigo 203.o
Furto
1 - Quem, com ilegítima intenção de apropriação para si ou para outra pessoa, subtrair coisa móvel alheia, é punido com pena de prisão até 3 anos ou com pena de multa.
2 - A tentativa é punível.
3 - O procedimento criminal depende de queixa.
Artigo 204.o Furto qualificado
98
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
1 - Quem furtar coisa móvel alheia:
a) De valor elevado;
b) Colocada ou transportada em veículo ou colocada em lugar destinado ao depósito de objectos ou transportada por passageiros utentes de transporte colectivo, mesmo que a subtracção tenha lugar na estação, gare ou cais;
c) Afecta ao culto religioso ou à veneração da memória dos mortos e que se encontre em lugar destinado ao culto ou em cemitério;
d) Explorando situação de especial debilidade da vítima, de desastre, acidente, calamidade pública ou perigo comum;
e) Fechada em gaveta, cofre ou outro receptáculo equipados com fechadura ou outro dispositivo especialmente destinado à sua segurança;
f) Introduzindo-se ilegitimamente em habitação, ainda que móvel, estabelecimento comercial ou industrial ou espaço fechado, ou aí permanecendo escondido com intenção de furtar;
g) Com usurpação de título, uniforme ou insígnia de empregado público, civil ou militar, ou alegando falsa ordem de autoridade pública;
h) Fazendo da prática de furtos modo de vida; ou
i) Deixando a vítima em difícil situação económica;
é punido com pena de prisão até 5 anos ou com pena de multa até 600 dias. 2 - Quem furtar coisa móvel alheia:
a) De valor consideravelmente elevado;
b) Que possua significado importante para o desenvolvimento tecnológico ou
económico;
c) Que por sua natureza seja altamente perigosa;
d) Que possua importante valor científico, artístico ou histórico e se encontre em colecção ou exposição públicas ou acessíveis ao público;
99
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
e) Penetrando em habitação, ainda que móvel, estabelecimento comercial ou industrial ou outro espaço fechado, por arrombamento, escalamento ou chaves falsas;
f) Trazendo, no momento do crime, arma aparente ou oculta; ou
g) Como membro de bando destinado à prática reiterada de crimes contra o
património, com a colaboração de pelo menos outro membro do bando;
é punido com pena de prisão de 2 a 8 anos.
3 - Se na mesma conduta concorrerem mais do que um dos requisitos referidos nos números anteriores, só é considerado para efeito de determinação da pena aplicável o que tiver efeito agravante mais forte, sendo o outro ou outros valorados na medida da pena.
4 - Não há lugar à qualificação se a coisa furtada for de diminuto valor.
Pure googlish, I'm afraid.
CHAPTER II
Of crimes against property
Article 203
Theft
1 - Who, with illegitimate intention of appropriation for himself or for another person, subtract something alien from others, shall be punished with imprisonment for up to 3 years or with a fine.
2 - The attempt is punishable.
3 - Criminal procedure depends on complaint.
Article 204 Qualified theft
98
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
1 - Whoever steals another's mobile thing:
a) Of high value;
(b) placed or carried in a vehicle or placed in a place intended for the storage of objects or carried by passengers using public transport, even if the subtraction takes place at the station, gare or pier;
c) It affects the religious cult or the veneration of the memory of the dead and that is in place destined to the cult or in cemetery;
d) Exploring situations of special weakness of the victim, disaster, accident, public calamity or common danger;
e) Closed in a drawer, safe or other receptacle equipped with a lock or other device specially designed for its safety;
f) Introducing illegitimately in housing, even if mobile, commercial or industrial establishment or closed space, or there hiding with the intention of stealing;
g) With usurpation of title, uniform or insignia of public, civil or military employee, or alleging false order of public authority;
h) Making the practice of stealing a way of life; or
i) Leaving the victim in difficult economic situation;
shall be punished with imprisonment up to 5 years or with a fine of up to 600 days. 2 - Whoever steals another's mobile thing:
(a) of a considerably high value;
(b) which has significant significance for the technological development or
economic;
c) that by its nature is highly dangerous;
d) That it possesses important scientific, artistic or historical value and is in a collection or exhibition public or accessible to the public;
99
ASSEMBLEIA DA REPÚBLICA
e) Penetrating into housing, even if mobile, commercial or industrial establishment or other enclosed space, by break-in, escalation or false keys;
f) Bringing, at the time of the crime, an apparent or hidden weapon; or
g) As a member of the gang destined to the repeated practice of crimes against
with the collaboration of at least one other member of the band;
is punished with imprisonment from 2 to 8 years.
3 - If in the same conduct more than one of the requirements referred to in the previous paragraphs, only the one that has the strongest aggravating effect is considered for the purpose of determining the applicable penalty, the other one or others being valued as a penalty.
4 - There is no place to qualify if the thing stolen is of small value.
Best we flag one down I think!
http://portugalresident.com/police-crackdown-on-a-new-trend-in-burglaries
There appears to be a differentiation between robbery and burglary.
I do like Google translate:
"Whoever steals another's mobile thing:"
"subtract something alien from others"
The main thrust of my point "Why take additional risks" is covered in the linked article and nicking kids as a byproduct seems to be wholly absent.
-
Best we flag one down I think!
http://portugalresident.com/police-crackdown-on-a-new-trend-in-burglaries
There appears to be a differentiation between robbery and burglary.
I do like Google translate:
"Whoever steals another's mobile thing:"
"subtract something alien from others"
The main thrust of my point "Why take additional risks" is covered in the linked article and nicking kids as a byproduct seems to be wholly absent.
Yes, I'll have a look further down the code to see if there's anything specific about burglary. The next article was about swindling, and I didn't look any further. I'll check.
-
Found it... quite a bit further on for some reason.
Googlish again. It's translating roubo as theft, but when I checked burglary as an individual word, it came up with roubo. I personally find it easier to decipher Portuguese than googlish. lol
It seems to deal more with the use of violence in a robbery. I checked right down to the end of the chapter, and I can't find anything else.
Artigo 210.o
Roubo
1 - Quem, com ilegítima intenção de apropriação para si ou para outra pessoa, subtrair, ou constranger a que lhe seja entregue, coisa móvel alheia, por meio de violência contra uma pessoa, de ameaça com perigo iminente para a vida ou para a integridade física, ou pondo-a na impossibilidade de resistir, é punido com pena de prisão de 1 a 8 anos.
2 - A pena é a de prisão de 3 a 15 anos se:
a) Qualquer dos agentes produzir perigo para a vida da vítima ou lhe infligir, pelo menos por negligência, ofensa à integridade física grave; ou
b) Se verificarem, singular ou cumulativamente, quaisquer requisitos referidos nos n.os 1 e 2 do artigo 204.o, sendo correspondentemente aplicável o disposto no n.o 4 do mesmo artigo.
3 - Se do facto resultar a morte de outra pessoa, o agente é punido com pena de prisão de 8 a 16 anos.
Artigo 211.o
Violência depois da subtracção
As penas previstas no artigo anterior são, conforme os casos, aplicáveis a quem utilizar os meios previstos no mesmo artigo para, quando encontrado em flagrante delito de furto, conservar ou não restituir as coisas subtraídas.
Article 210
Theft
1 - Who, with an illegitimate intention of appropriation for himself or for another person, to subtract, or constrain the one that is handed over to him, a thing that is alien to, through violence against a person, a threat with imminent danger to life or to integrity physical, or putting it in the impossibility of resisting, is punished with imprisonment from 1 to 8 years.
2 - The penalty is imprisonment of 3 to 15 years if:
(a) any of the agents would endanger the life of the victim or inflict, at least negligently, a serious physical offense; or
(b) whether any requirements referred to in Article 204 (1) and (2) are met, individually or cumulatively, and the provisions of paragraph 4 of that Article are applicable.
3 - If this results in the death of another person, the agent shall be punished with imprisonment from 8 to 16 years.
Article 211
Violence after subtraction
The penalties foreseen in the previous article are applicable, as applicable, to those who use the means provided for in the same article, in order to preserve or not to restitute the subtracted things when found in flagrante delicto.
-
Oh I see......... Have we gone UDI then ?
Typical reply.
What does UDI mean?
"
UDI Unified Display Interface
UDI United Defense Industries, Inc. (stock symbol)
UDI Unrestricted Digital Information
UDI Under the Direct Influence
UDI Utility Data Institute
UDI Unidentified Drinking Injury
UDI Usuário de Drogas Injetáveis (Portuguese)
UDI Uniform Device Interface (Intel/Unix)
UDI United Dairymen of Idaho
UDI U-Drive-It
UDI Unità di Documentazione e Informazione per la Ricerca Agraria
UDI Unidad de Información (Spanish: Information Unit)
UDI Unit Drill Instructor
UDI Unique Data Item
UDI Universal Digital Interface (television)
UDI User-Defined Interface
UDI Urban Development Institute of Canada
UDI User-Driven Innovation (product creation)
UDI Urban Development Initiatives (various locations)
UDI Union des Démocrates et Indépendants (French: Union of Democrats and Independents)
UDI Unione Donne in Italia (Italian: Union of Italian Women)
-
What some posters seem to be trying to show is taht the abduction of a child is unlikely....but we already know that...but in these circumstances , given all the facts,...stranger abduction is highly likely...imo
-
There may be new laws now, but don't forget I'm looking at the 2007 version as that's what we're discussing.
Those are the only two that I can find that seem pertinent (others are damage to property, swindling, car theft, defrauding, etc.)
-
What some posters seem to be trying to show is taht the abduction of a child is unlikely....but we already know that...but in these circumstances , given all the facts,...stranger abduction is highly likely...imo
This one occasion you will have to check your spelling?
-
This one occasion you will have to check your spelling?
why
-
You can believe what you want it's not really important.....but if you are going to quote Rowley then it's a bit hypocritical to accept some things he says as facts and simply reject what you don't like. ...such as the fact he said however she left the a party she was abducted....that clearly shows he ruled out the parents
If Madeleine was removed from the apartment then whoever did it is the abductor.
No theory is ruled out as Rowley confirms here.
(http://i63.tinypic.com/23rl835.png)
-
why
I read a post where you were asking whether abduction was different from abduction. Can't even find it now.
-
@ Alice
I haven't fully read your OP yet, so I'll get back to the rest when I have.
Although Article 203 deals more with theft, one or two seem to include the idea of burglary:
e) Penetrando em habitacão, ainda que móvel, estabelecimento comercial ou industrial ou outro espaço fechado, por arrombamento, escalamento ou chaves falsas;
And Article 210 is about violent robberies. (One of the charges Cristovão was up for, incidentally.).
So, no, I can't see anything about night-time being an aggravating factor. There are several in 210 about using or threatening violence; putting someone's life in danger, even by negligence; violating the victim's personal integrity (I presume that covers sexual assault); and if the victim dies as a result.
So... yes, I can see that breaking in and threatening or harming someone in the process evidently is worse than when the abode is empty, but I can see several possibilities.
a) the would-be burglar(s) didn't realise anyone was at home.
b) did know, but assumed young children would either be asleep or at least wouldn't resist. On the other hand, anyone lucid would worry that they could scream the place down, and there could be a concern that Madeleine might have been able to identify him / them. By the same token, someone intelligent might assume that little credence would be given to testimony by an under-4-yearold.
c) smellyman or equivalent, who knew the kids were home, but who may have been so out of it as to not realise or care about the length of a sentence if caught. In at least some of the accounts, smellyman didn't seem to care that the parents were at home asleep.
d) either a would-be burglar or a relatively lucid smellyman (or a combination of the two) harmed or killed her, which could be a reason for removing her from the flat.
-
You would appear to be the only one wishing to explore the beginning and some peripheral details which are of relevance.
I can understand your view of "over elaborate" when compared with the paucity of detail and joining of non existent dots in some theories which appear to have currency. If it was a planned snatch as some suggest then the "how" is somewhat relevant would you not say ?..... then logically extend the "how".
I would prefer more people were shooting holes in my text. ............ 8(0(*
I am excluding the McCanns, because involvement on their part does not fit with my understanding of abduction.
This leaves 3 possibilities.
Burglary gone wrong. The snatch was not intentional. The 'how' is working out how the burglars got entry to the house. There are umpty possibilities here, which I won't explore. You have to work out 'why' the burglars felt the need to snatch Madeleine.
Short-term pre-planned abduction. In other words, the operation began after Madeleine arrived in Luz. I have worried away at that one. There are lots of people who came into Madeleine's acquaintance after her arrival. The Millennium crew. The Tapas crew. Anyone in Luz who saw her in those 6 days. The nannies. Multiple other guests. All one has to do now is work out how she was tracked to 5A. Plus how the operation was carried out. Plus motivation.
Long-term pre-planned abduction. This gives you intel prior to the arrival of Madeleine. Your intel is that 7 girls and 1 boy, all under 4, will arrive on 28 Apr 2007. A lot of people had access to that intel. You know roughly where the children are to be located. Fewer people had access to that intel, but it is more than one. You know when, how and where the children will arrive. Again, more than one person had access to that intel. You take photos on arrival. (Some of the T9 could have had access to photos before arrival, of course). You circulate said photos, and at that point one or two of the children are deemed to be suitable targets.
The snatch squad goes into motion, casing the crime scene. Perhaps they notice during this that the McCanns are leaving the patio doors unlocked at night. They enter by that route, open the window and raise the shutter, simply to add confusion. They leave with Madeleine, either by the patio doors or by the front door. Amongst other things, this obscures the possibility of intel, thereby protecting the source of the intel.
There are two culprits here, who should have received cash for the snatch. First, the booking trail. If it actually occurred this way, none of the Luz suspects seems to have benefited financially, AFAIK. Second, the snatch squad. Unless someone was checking vast numbers of bank accounts I don't see how this could be done.
-
@ Alice
I haven't fully read your OP yet, so I'll get back to the rest when I have.
Although Article 203 deals more with theft, one or two seem to include the idea of burglary:
e) Penetrando em habitacão, ainda que móvel, estabelecimento comercial ou industrial ou outro espaço fechado, por arrombamento, escalamento ou chaves falsas;
And Article 210 is about violent robberies. (One of the charges Cristovão was up for, incidentally.).
So, no, I can't see anything about night-time being an aggravating factor. There are several in 210 about using or threatening violence; putting someone's life in danger, even by negligence; violating the victim's personal integrity (I presume that covers sexual assault); and if the victim dies as a result.
So... yes, I can see that breaking in and threatening or harming someone in the process evidently is worse than when the abode is empty, but I can see several possibilities.
a) the would-be burglar(s) didn't realise anyone was at home.
b) did know, but assumed young children would either be asleep or at least wouldn't resist. On the other hand, anyone lucid would worry that they could scream the place down, and there could be a concern that Madeleine might have been able to identify him / them. By the same token, someone intelligent might assume that little credence would be given to testimony by an under-4-yearold.
c) smellyman or equivalent, who knew the kids were home, but who may have been so out of it as to not realise or care about the length of a sentence if caught. In at least some of the accounts, smellyman didn't seem to care that the parents were at home asleep.
d) either a would-be burglar or a relatively lucid smellyman (or a combination of the two) harmed or killed her, which could be a reason for removing her from the flat.
a) Are these the burglars who have been casing the joint for a few days or another set ?
b) I concur with your last sentence. Any brief who could not drive a coach and pair through the ID of a suspect by a four year old should not be paid in washers. My favourite option would be coldcocking the kid and legging it or similar( tongue in cheek only partway)
c) Smelly bin man is an irrelevance. Right now its the how not the who and the how is yet to be established.
d) See second sentence of c) above.
As usual we wind up debating the middle without considering the beginning.
-
a) Are these the burglars who have been casing the joint for a few days or another set ?
b) I concur with your last sentence. Any brief who could not drive a coach and pair through the ID of a suspect by a four year old should not be paid in washers. My favourite option would be coldcocking the kid and legging it or similar( tongue in cheek only partway)
c) Smelly bin man is an irrelevance. Right now its the how not the who and the how is yet to be established.
d) See second sentence of c) above.
As usual we wind up debating the middle without considering the beginning.
Ok, but I still haven't read your full OP. I found that there was a lot to unpack and discuss and I didn't have time to read it carefully. Will do.
-
@Alice
Taking your first scenario first.
The Pre-planned Snatch Theory
Any pre-planned snatch will have a similar framework cum activity list including but not limited to as we say.
The theory is contingent on certain items being a given i.e.:
1 There was abduction.
2 Abduction was commissioned by a rich type who specifically wanted MBM.
3 MBM was a heavy sleeper witness GM and MO both entering and leaving the apartment without awakening her, according to their statements.
4 According to the timeline drawn up by T9 there were two 10 minute slots after 21:15 when abduction could be effected.
Your imagined scenario that follows of how that could possibly work is quite possibly tongue-in-cheek, but quite well thought out, nonetheless, although there could be variations.
On point 2, however, I don't think I've ever come across a real case in which so-called "elites" have ordered the abduction of a specific child.
I do feel hampered by the fact that it's hard to trace any cases which haven't made international headlines in languages that I don't understand.
Nonetheless, the closest would be the murky Dutroux case, in which various other people in authority may have profited in some way, but still not that a specific child was targeted as opposed to an opportunistic one of a child who may have fitted a general description likely to appeal.
There have been a few other alleged cases, but the only sources I found led back to conspiracy theorists' blogs, with little to back up the assertions.
There is, of course, the abuse in the Jersey and other cases of children in care, but that was different again.
Organised gangs do snatch children for a variety of human trafficking purposes, but I've never heard of one in Western Europe targetting a specific child. That doesn't mean that it couldn't have been a first... ore one that I simply haven't heard of.
I guess that where that scenario falls down for me is that she was specifically targeted, as opposed to any little girl fitting a general descriptionn. On the other hand, if someone had spotted her and knew that that she'd be unattended... who knows?
In any sleepy village or even a large city in which young children are free to play outside would seem to be a far more likely target.
If someone had told me about the Fritzl case before I'd read the news, I'd have thought that they'd been reading too many Stephen King novels... yet it happened. With similar situations coming to light later.
Perhaps I'm wrong, but the idea and the planning involved to target her specifically is a scenario for the back-burner for me at the moment.
-
I think these two need to be taken together as they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.
The Burglary Which Has Gone Wrong Theory:
• Sentence for burglary if caught and convicted 5 years ish
• Sentence for kidnap if caught and convicted 20 years ish
On that basis why would any burglar take a child instead of the easily negotiable goods and cash he went in for? Bearing in mind ca 80% of burglaries remain unsolved but a kidnapping?
The burglary has gone wrong and on the way in and out (unless the exit route was out front) the burglar makes time to reinstate doors gates and drapes……..was he under some kind of contractual reinstatement clause?
The Random Snatch Theory.
• I’ll just pop in here to see if there is a child ………
Close.
p.s feel free to be abusive, hold it up to ridicule and shoot holes in it.
In fact the more you do the better I will enjoy it.
Just off the top of my head:
- There was the Bath (?) case of a burglar who noticed an open door and snatched a young girl from her bath, raped her and dumped her alive.
- The guy in the Meredith / Knox case who presumably had broken in to nick whatever he could, but ended up raping and murdering poor Meredith.
- The Dickinson case in which a guy entered a dorm of sleeping adolescents, raped and murdered a girl without anyone else waking up.
- The Smart case in which she was taken from her bed (but obviously older).
- A fairly recent French case (according to the last I heard, but which may now have been debunked, so a caveat there) in which a young girl was apparently taken from her bed, by someone who'd climbed into the open French windows left open during a heatwave while the rest of the family was asleep, wrapped her in her bedsheet and passed her out through the window. A neighbour apparently woke up due to the noise of a child screaming in her garden.
- And, finally, the unresolved cases of smellyman, and / or anyone else who wasn't the same but who committed assaults in the area.
-
- There's also the W&W theory, with some opportunistic perp grabbing her once out.
That seems to have been widely discarded as implausible by most people, but I don't see how that can be totally eliminated as impossible.
-
- There's also the W&W theory, with some opportunistic perp grabbing her once out.
That seems to have been widely discarded as implausible by most people, but I don't see how that can be totally eliminated as impossible.
No one has said it's impossible but the final report from the pj said it's highly unlikely which makes me think they have good reason to say that
-
No one has said it's impossible but the final report from the pj said it's highly unlikely which makes me think they have good reason to say that
I know.
The McCanns didn't think so, the PJ didn't find it likely, and seemingly the Met doesn't either.
There may be good reasons, but I'm not sure what would exclude the possibility.
I find it unlikely as well, but I don't see how it would be impossible.
I'd agree that I know of no child of that age who would even think to close a verandah door if wandering out. Rob seems convinced that the front door would have been difficult for her and it wouldn't have slammed shut...
I've been shut out of my place more often than I care to remember. Normally, it won't quite click shut unless there's a draft.
Just checked again. My door has a similar mechanism, but has a bevel the long of the inside. I can't remember if the 5A one did or not now.
-
- There's also the W&W theory, with some opportunistic perp grabbing her once out.
That seems to have been widely discarded as implausible by most people, but I don't see how that can be totally eliminated as impossible.
Maybe it is the point John made on the other thread that you can't have meaningful cadaver odour findings and the woke and wander theory working hand in hand. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8922.msg439131#msg439131 punch line: "she couldn't have died in 5a and still walked out of it".
-
I know.
The McCanns didn't think so, the PJ didn't find it likely, and seemingly the Met doesn't either.
There may be good reasons, but I'm not sure what would exclude the possibility.
I find it unlikely as well, but I don't see how it would be impossible.
I'd agree that I know of no child of that age who would even think to close a verandah door if wandering out. Rob seems convinced that the front door would have been difficult for her and it wouldn't have slammed shut...
I've been shut out of my place more often than I care to remember. Normally, it won't quite click shut unless there's a draft.
Just checked again. My door has a similar mechanism, but has a bevel the long of the inside. I can't remember if the 5A one did or not now.
Could you write the following sentence again Carana so I understand it better please? "Just checked again. My door has a similar mechanism, but has a bevel the long of the inside. I can't remember if the 5A one did or not now."
5A had a bevelled latch bolt and a rectangular block behind that. Were they operating as a single piece on closing the door or not?
-
Could you write the following sentence again Carana so I understand it better please? "Just checked again. My door has a similar mechanism, but has a bevel the long of the inside. I can't remember if the 5A one did or not now."
5A had a bevelled latch bolt and a rectangular block behind that. Were they operating as a single piece on closing the door or not?
Sorry, I wasn't clear. The inside (looking at the door mechanism from the latching perspective of where the door actually meets the door frame looks very similar.
By bevelling, I meant a strip of wood alongside the full edge of the part of the lateral part of the door viewed from my inside perspective from top to bottom.
-
- There's also the W&W theory, with some opportunistic perp grabbing her once out.
That seems to have been widely discarded as implausible by most people, but I don't see how that can be totally eliminated as impossible.
There are hundreds of accounts of little children leaving their homes in the middle of the night and managing to cover considerable distances under their own steam.
I've not read of one case case of a child being killed on the road as a result. I've not read of one wandering child being lifted from the street and maltreated in any way.
I have read of miraculous near misses and the generosity of strangers in time and effort of ensuring the safety of these wanderers.
Why would a little child wandering the dark streets of Praia da Luz be expected to vanish as a result? In a RTA there would be some evidence. Had she fallen into a drain or roadworks ... they were searched weren't they? ... she would have been found. Had she wandered far enough to die of exposure somewhere, some trace would have been found.
In my opinion Madeleine vanished from within the apartment as a result of third party intervention.
-
Sorry, I wasn't clear. The inside (looking at the door mechanism from the latching perspective of where the door actually meets the door frame looks very similar.
By bevelling, I meant a strip of wood alongside the full edge of the part of the lateral part of the door viewed from my inside perspective from top to bottom.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2318.jpg lower right photo shows end view of the latch bolt. It all depends whether the two pieces move together or not.
I still didn't get what you meant by bevelled but if it is the full length of the door we must be talking about different things.
-
There are hundreds of accounts of little children leaving their homes in the middle of the night and managing to cover considerable distances under their own steam.
I've not read of one case case of a child being killed on the road as a result. I've not read of one wandering child being lifted from the street and maltreated in any way.
I have read of miraculous near misses and the generosity of strangers in time and effort of ensuring the safety of these wanderers.
Why would a little child wandering the dark streets of Praia da Luz be expected to vanish as a result? In a RTA there would be some evidence. Had she fallen into a drain or roadworks ... they were searched weren't they? ... she would have been found. Had she wandered far enough to die of exposure somewhere, some trace would have been found.
In my opinion Madeleine vanished from within the apartment as a result of third party intervention.
I would think that if Madeleine left the apartment, she would have left through the patio doors as that was the normal route she left with her mother.
IMO Madeleine didn't leave the apartment, as the curtain of the patio door was closed the gates were closed, it was dark and she had no shoes on.
IF she had left through the patio doors she would have seen the lights of the Ocean Club she would have heard talking and laughter and would have made her way to the Ocean Club, but I don't think she did IMO.
-
There are hundreds of accounts of little children leaving their homes in the middle of the night and managing to cover considerable distances under their own steam.
I've not read of one case case of a child being killed on the road as a result. I've not read of one wandering child being lifted from the street and maltreated in any way.
I have read of miraculous near misses and the generosity of strangers in time and effort of ensuring the safety of these wanderers.
Why would a little child wandering the dark streets of Praia da Luz be expected to vanish as a result? In a RTA there would be some evidence. Had she fallen into a drain or roadworks ... they were searched weren't they? ... she would have been found. Had she wandered far enough to die of exposure somewhere, some trace would have been found.
In my opinion Madeleine vanished from within the apartment as a result of third party intervention.
I find that incredible, in that if there are so many cases of wandering kids and so many near misses that there has never been an actual accident involving car verses wandering child.
-
@Alice
Taking your first scenario first.
The Pre-planned Snatch Theory
Any pre-planned snatch will have a similar framework cum activity list including but not limited to as we say.
The theory is contingent on certain items being a given i.e.:
1 There was abduction.
2 Abduction was commissioned by a rich type who specifically wanted MBM.
3 MBM was a heavy sleeper witness GM and MO both entering and leaving the apartment without awakening her, according to their statements.
4 According to the timeline drawn up by T9 there were two 10 minute slots after 21:15 when abduction could be effected.
1) Your imagined scenario that follows of how that could possibly work is quite possibly tongue-in-cheek, but quite well thought out, nonetheless, although there could be variations.
On point 2, however, I don't think I've ever come across a real case in which so-called "elites" have ordered the abduction of a specific child.
I do feel hampered by the fact that it's hard to trace any cases which haven't made international headlines in languages that I don't understand.
Nonetheless, the closest would be the murky Dutroux case, in which various other people in authority may have profited in some way, but still not that a specific child was targeted as opposed to an opportunistic one of a child who may have fitted a general description likely to appeal.
There have been a few other alleged cases, but the only sources I found led back to conspiracy theorists' blogs, with little to back up the assertions.
There is, of course, the abuse in the Jersey and other cases of children in care, but that was different again.
2) Organised gangs do snatch children for a variety of human trafficking purposes, but I've never heard of one in Western Europe targetting a specific child. That doesn't mean that it couldn't have been a first... ore one that I simply haven't heard of.
3)I guess that where that scenario falls down for me is that she was specifically targeted, as opposed to any little girl fitting a general descriptionn. On the other hand, if someone had spotted her and knew that that she'd be unattended... who knows?
In any sleepy village or even a large city in which young children are free to play outside would seem to be a far more likely target.
If someone had told me about the Fritzl case before I'd read the news, I'd have thought that they'd been reading too many Stephen King novels... yet it happened. With similar situations coming to light later.
4) Perhaps I'm wrong, but the idea and the planning involved to target her specifically is a scenario for the back-burner for me at the moment.
1) Not so much tongue in cheek as "how would I plan this with minimum risk". The main problem being that people with those peculiar skill sets are not hanging on hooks just waiting to be lifted down.
2) Organised gangs would more likely target railway and bus stations in large border towns Trieste for example.
3) and 4) I am with you on both particularly 4)
-
I find that incredible, in that if there are so many cases of wandering kids and so many near misses that there has never been an actual accident involving car verses wandering child.
I'm sure it must happen Robitty, just I've never heard of it. Any woke and wandered incident I've read or heard of has ended with the safe recovery of the child.
-
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2318.jpg lower right photo shows end view of the latch bolt. It all depends whether the two pieces move together or not.
I still didn't get what you meant by bevelled but if it is the full length of the door we must be talking about different things.
Yes, I think we're talking about different things. I was talking about the door structure, and you about the triangular mechanism.
I just had another look at mine.
Looking yet again at my door mechanism. From one angle, there's a triangular bit, with a flush rectangular bit just behind it. From another angle, it looks as if the rectangular bit behind the triangular bit sticks out, but it doesn't in reality.
-
I'm sure it must happen Robitty, just I've never heard of it. Any woke and wandered incident I've read or heard of has ended with the safe recovery of the child.
OK I put these terms into Googla and got pages of results: wandering + child + hit + by + vehicle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Wang_Yue
-
Yes, I think we're talking about different things. I was talking about the door structure, and you about the triangular mechanism.
I just had another look at mine.
Looking yet again at my door mechanism. From one angle, there's a triangular bit, with a flush rectangular bit just behind it. From another angle, it looks as if the rectangular bit behind the triangular bit sticks out, but it doesn't in reality.
When you push the triangular piece into the lock does the rectangular bit move with it or remain in place?
If the latter you should not be able to close the door properly from outside without a key
-
OK I put these terms into Googla and got pages of results: wandering + child + hit + by + vehicle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Wang_Yue
I remember that case. It was a very shocking video. But Wang Yue was run over in the afternoon and not as a child who had wakened and wandered into the night.
-
I remember that case. It was a very shocking video. But Wang Yue was run over in the afternoon and not as a child who had wakened and wandered into the night.
I gave up looking through the hundreds of results.
-
When you push the triangular piece into the lock does the rectangular bit move with it or remain in place?
If the latter you should not be able to close the door properly from outside without a key
Groundhog day!
I once posted the comics for such locks but no one believed them as the scuttlebutt has it that at 37.0909° N, 8.7591° W absolutely everything different following no known standard ...... @)(++(*
I am put more in mind of Laputa really. [Mods note Dean Swift style not Spanish]
-
Groundhog day!
I once posted the comics for such locks but no one believed them as the scuttlebutt has it that at 37.0909° N, 8.7591° W absolutely everything different following no known standard ...... @)(++(*
I am put more in mind of Laputa really. [Mods note Dean Swift style not Spanish]
Have you heard of the term "modification". If you look through the previous occupants of 5A you will see the tenants had troubles with the locking of the front door. It seemed to suggest the possibility that the lock had been altered from the standard.
Amaral and his security adviser Alexandre Simas described the reason why the lock could not be opened with a card. It was not the standard reason. I propose the fact that Mr Simas describes the non standard method of security being used in that apartment confirms that the lock had been modified.
Here is the transcript:
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.nz/2009/04/maddie-truth-of-lie-documentary.html
"43.28 – With the help from one of the major experts from the Scientific Police, who worked for the Polícia Judiciária, Alexandre Simas, Gonçalo Amaral intends to prove, first, that it was impossible for the child to be abducted, starting by demonstrating that the indications prove that the apartment’s window and door were not forced.
43.47 - How does one open a door like this, without the key?
Alexandre Simas
Expert (Former Polícia Judiciária)
43.51 – This type of apartment door, normally there are only three possibilities: to extract the lock’s cannon, which didn’t happen, or it would have been reported; a false key, a copy or one that was used without permission; or using a malleable material, as long as it’s not locked, it’s introduced, and it makes the lock go back inside. But when it goes in, even if it did, it would hit this screw. If it hits the screw, no matter how much I force it, it doesn’t jump to open the lock for me.
44.33 – If the door wasn’t opened without a key, the window doesn’t bear any traces of having been forced, either."
-
it would hit this screw. If it hits the screw, no matter how much I force it, it doesn’t jump to open the lock for me. Those rim locks were not designed to depend on a rightly positioned screw to yield security from being picked with a malleable card.
-
Have you heard of the term "modification". If you look through the previous occupants of 5A you will see the tenants had troubles with the locking of the front door. It seemed to suggest the possibility that the lock had been altered from the standard.
Amaral and his security adviser Alexandre Simas described the reason why the lock could not be opened with a card. It was not the standard reason. I propose the fact that Mr Simas describes the non standard method of security being used in that apartment confirms that the lock had been modified.
Here is the transcript:
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.nz/2009/04/maddie-truth-of-lie-documentary.html
"43.28 – With the help from one of the major experts from the Scientific Police, who worked for the Polícia Judiciária, Alexandre Simas, Gonçalo Amaral intends to prove, first, that it was impossible for the child to be abducted, starting by demonstrating that the indications prove that the apartment’s window and door were not forced.
43.47 - How does one open a door like this, without the key?
Alexandre Simas
Expert (Former Polícia Judiciária)
43.51 – This type of apartment door, normally there are only three possibilities: to extract the lock’s cannon, which didn’t happen, or it would have been reported; a false key, a copy or one that was used without permission; or using a malleable material, as long as it’s not locked, it’s introduced, and it makes the lock go back inside. But when it goes in, even if it did, it would hit this screw. If it hits the screw, no matter how much I force it, it doesn’t jump to open the lock for me.
44.33 – If the door wasn’t opened without a key, the window doesn’t bear any traces of having been forced, either."
Why so anxious not to consider the possibility that a key had been used?
-
Why so anxious not to consider the possibility that a key had been used?
If you have a key it would make it more of an inside job. Where do you get a key from in a hurry? And the key was a special type with two sets of pins (hard to get).
Who would have a key?
-
Have PJ or OG ever suggested that a key was used?
-
Have PJ or OG ever suggested that a key was used?
From what Alexandre Simas says you can't rule out the use of a key, but if a key was used it really points the finger back to an OC employee or former OC employee and that had been considered to a specific person except his alibi stacked up. "a 40-year-old heroin addict named Euclides “Toni” Monteiro from Cape Verde, who was fired by the Ocean Club" https://www.thedailybeast.com/portuguese-police-name-dead-addict-as-madeleine-mccann-suspect
-
No one has said it's impossible but the final report from the pj said it's highly unlikely which makes me think they have good reason to say that
True, but the final phase of the initial investigation was a race against time and - IMO - was tying up loose ends as to whether the McCanns should be charged or not.
PT reopened the case, but hasn't said much about it aside from a rare public statement that the McCanns weren't suspects.
I could be wrong, but logic tells me that both the UK and PT are interested in smellyman.
At the end of the day, there may be no connection, but at least the other families may get some closure.
-
True, but the final phase of the initial investigation was a race against time and - IMO - was tying up loose ends as to whether the McCanns should be charged or not.
PT reopened the case, but hasn't said much about it aside from a rare public statement that the McCanns weren't suspects.
I could be wrong, but logic tells me that both the UK and PT are interested in smellyman.
At the end of the day, there may be no connection, but at least the other families may get some closure.
As I understand it Smelly man had a history of entering people's apartments.
-
Why so anxious not to consider the possibility that a key had been used?
Exactly
why is everyone so anxious to disallow the use of a key on the front door?
That front door in its recess was absolutely private. No one passed it. No-one could see it, because it was so deeply recessed and so damned dark there that i wonder that even the apartment tenants liked to go in via that entrance after dark.
So easy to obtain a key from various staff members, take a copy and cast ones own key .... and what about the set of keys that allegedly were 'lost' by one member of maintenance staff?
It is almost as though there is a trend to take the eye of any interested party off the Very obvious point of entry (imo) .... and the very obvious way out too.
Open with a key, leave the key in the lock and upon departing pull the doot to, usingt the key as a puller.
Hey ho, NO fingerprints, quick and a near silent job. In and out in a flash, and Tannerman coming from the right direction
The front door was used IMO
AIMO
-
If you have a key it would make it more of an inside job. Where do you get a key from in a hurry? And the key was a special type with two sets of pins (hard to get).
Who would have a key?
Who would have a key?
Reception staff
Maintenance workers
Cleaners
Senior overseeing staff
The flat owner
Previous holiday makers possibly
.... and there would be spares.
Also, so easy to 'borrow' a key and cast another one. I could do it easily
or possibly even vanish one of the keys copies.
The way in and out was almost certainly via the front door
AIMO
-
From what Alexandre Simas says you can't rule out the use of a key, but if a key was used it really points the finger back to an OC employee or former OC employee and that had been considered to a specific person except his alibi stacked up. "a 40-year-old heroin addict named Euclides “Toni” Monteiro from Cape Verde, who was fired by the Ocean Club" https://www.thedailybeast.com/portuguese-police-name-dead-addict-as-madeleine-mccann-suspect
Nah, a red herring IMO
He is almost certainly the "Fall guy"
-
When you push the triangular piece into the lock does the rectangular bit move with it or remain in place?
If the latter you should not be able to close the door properly from outside without a key
They move together. I have to slam it to shut (if there's a draft, it will slam on its own). I normally use the key to shut it as slamming it obviously makes a racket. The habit of using a key also helps me to make sure that I actually, erm, have one on me. lol
What I found intriguing is that depending on the angle, it looks the same as the photo of the 5A one (ie as if the rectangular bit isn't flush), and then from a different angle, it does. So I'm still not sure if 5A could be closed without a key or not.
-
They move together. I have to slam it to shut (if there's a draft, it will slam on its own). I normally use the key to shut it as slamming it obviously makes a racket. The habit of using a key also helps me to make sure that I actually, erm, have one on me. lol
What I found intriguing is that depending on the angle, it looks the same as the photo of the 5A one (ie as if the rectangular bit isn't flush), and then from a different angle, it does. So I'm still not sure if 5A could be closed without a key or not.
I think what you are saying is very significant.
-
it would hit this screw. If it hits the screw, no matter how much I force it, it doesn’t jump to open the lock for me. Those rim locks were not designed to depend on a rightly positioned screw to yield security from being picked with a malleable card.
Somewhere on here, I posted a still of him shoving the card in. I'm not sure what screw he's talking about. Is it the screw of the plate that wasn't screwed in properly? Or was he talking about something else.
The reason for asking is he was using the full width of the card, so part of it could have come across a screw that wasn't flush. But if the card had been cut in half (or some other malleable object), would it have still necessarily hit this "screw" or not?
-
Groundhog day!
I once posted the comics for such locks but no one believed them as the scuttlebutt has it that at 37.0909° N, 8.7591° W absolutely everything different following no known standard ...... @)(++(*
I am put more in mind of Laputa really. [Mods note Dean Swift style not Spanish]
lol I must have missed that post.
-
Who would have a key?
Reception staff
Maintenance workers
Cleaners
Senior overseeing staff
The flat owner
Previous holiday makers possibly
.... and there would be spares.
Also, so easy to 'borrow' a key and cast another one. I could do it easily
or possibly even vanish one of the keys copies.
The way in and out was almost certainly via the front door
AIMO
Cast in what?
-
Cast in what?
There are model casting kits that come complete with the casting material.
When I was a kid, an older friend used to cast model soldiers then paint them. I think he used lead. Lead would be rather maleable, but I think it would be fine for a key used one off. The beauty of it is that it would melt at a lower temperature than some metals and would be, I should think, pretty easy to get hold of with so many derelict buildings around.
But if you are truly interested, slarti, why not google for home casting kits.
-
Where are we at then nearly 100 posts on?
Precis.
Start point: For there to have been abduction the subject and object must occupy the same space and time.
To satisfy that condition in our discussion either the object left the building or the subject entered the building.
The consideration is “the how” could that be effected and still satisfy certain criteria.
So far the Planned Snatch does not have many legs or supporters so can be sidelined for a while.
As one poster has correctly identified random snatches burglaries etc can be rolled into one for the purposes of only considering “the how”.
So we are left with those possibilities plus woke and wandered.
The archiving report as we are frequently reminded says and I paraphrase “woke and wandered is highly unlikely”. We should also be cognisant of the words of A.C Rowley in this respect. For the purposes here my definition of highly unlikely is:
When you use the phrase "highly unlikely", you mean that something is “very unlikely,” or it's almost sure not to happen.
So anything to do with a planned snatch or woke and wandered is now sitting quietly in the “Foinavon Paddock”; more of that later maybe.
Well we don’t have much left now do we?
In fact if we accept the “no evidence of break in” from the original investigation [paraphrased as per ] then
=>
The perp being someone with a key or lock picks going in through the front door
or
a very tidy someone going in through the patio doors reinstating the site to its original condition after himself/herself, as has been pointed out by another poster elsewhere.
-
1)Have you heard of the term "modification". 2)If you look through the previous occupants of 5A you will see the tenants had troubles with the locking of the front door. 3) It seemed to suggest the possibility that the lock had been altered from the standard.
Amaral and his security adviser Alexandre Simas described the reason why the lock could not be opened with a card. It was not the standard reason. I propose the fact that Mr Simas describes the non standard method of security being used in that apartment confirms that the lock had been modified.
Here is the transcript:
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.nz/2009/04/maddie-truth-of-lie-documentary.html
"43.28 – With the help from one of the major experts from the Scientific Police, who worked for the Polícia Judiciária, Alexandre Simas, Gonçalo Amaral intends to prove, first, that it was impossible for the child to be abducted, starting by demonstrating that the indications prove that the apartment’s window and door were not forced.
43.47 - How does one open a door like this, without the key?
Alexandre Simas
Expert (Former Polícia Judiciária)
43.51 – This type of apartment door, normally there are only three possibilities: to extract the lock’s cannon, which didn’t happen, or it would have been reported; a false key, a copy or one that was used without permission; or using a malleable material, as long as it’s not locked, it’s introduced, and it makes the lock go back inside. But when it goes in, even if it did, it would hit this screw. If it hits the screw, no matter how much I force it, it doesn’t jump to open the lock for me.
44.33 – If the door wasn’t opened without a key, the window doesn’t bear any traces of having been forced, either."
1) No what is it?
2) Cite
3) Why would you think a lock had been modified just because you had a problem making it work?
Personally I would contact the estate managers or if I had toolkit handy reach for a silicone spray then check the key cutting for noticeable wear and possibly strip and clean the lock if it was p*****g with rain and I was short laughs.
-
Where are we at then nearly 100 posts on?
Precis.
Start point: For there to have been abduction the subject and object must occupy the same space and time.
To satisfy that condition in our discussion either the object left the building or the subject entered the building.
The consideration is “the how” could that be effected and still satisfy certain criteria.
So far the Planned Snatch does not have many legs or supporters so can be sidelined for a while.
As one poster has correctly identified random snatches burglaries etc can be rolled into one for the purposes of only considering “the how”.
So we are left with those possibilities plus woke and wandered.
The archiving report as we are frequently reminded says and I paraphrase “woke and wandered is highly unlikely”. We should also be cognisant of the words of A.C Rowley in this respect. For the purposes here my definition of highly unlikely is:
When you use the phrase "highly unlikely", you mean that something is “very unlikely,” or it's almost sure not to happen.
So anything to do with a planned snatch or woke and wandered is now sitting quietly in the “Foinavon Paddock”; more of that later maybe.
Well we don’t have much left now do we?
In fact if we accept the “no evidence of break in” from the original investigation [paraphrased as per ] then
=>
The perp being someone with a key or lock picks going in through the front door
or
a very tidy someone going in through the patio doors reinstating the site to its original condition after himself/herself, as has been pointed out by another poster elsewhere.
anyone entering through the patio door would close curtain and door behind them not because they were tidy but because they did not want to arouse suspicion ...they could have then left through the front door
-
As I understand it Smelly man had a history of entering people's apartments.
Yes and the occupants said there was no evidence of a break in. I would have liked to have asked Amaral when he said there was no abduction as the door was'nt forced, how did the burglars and the sex attacker get in Mr. Amaral.
-
1) No what is it?
2) Cite
3) Why would you think a lock had been modified just because you had a problem making it work?
Personally I would contact the estate managers or if I had toolkit handy reach for a silicone spray then check the key cutting for noticeable wear and possibly strip and clean the lock if it was p*****g with rain and I was short laughs.
It would be a matter of studying the particular "Italian style" rim lock in use at Ocean Club Gardens. You would need to work out how to stop the latch bolt deadlock plunger moving at the same time as the latch bolt.
Modification is a possibility. as well as lack of lubrication.
Cite: http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm look for 5.A. former occupants.
-
anyone entering through the patio door would close curtain and door behind them not because they were tidy but because they did not want to arouse suspicion ...they could have then left through the front door
The drapes I could maybe stretch a point for but the child gate ?
It presupposes he /she knew in advance exit through the front was on if he went in through the back.
Anyway back to the plot; it does not materially affect the comments:
Man with picklocks or key.
Or man up through patio doors and out the back/front.
They are your remaining options faites vos jeux
Having made your choice have a bash at what happens "downstream"
-
Yes and the occupants said there was no evidence of a break in. I would have liked to have asked Amaral when he said there was no abduction as the door was'nt forced, how did the burglars and the sex attacker get in Mr. Amaral.
If the occupants were in the apartment at the time surely the door would have probably been unlocked and/or the windows open ?
-
It would be a matter of studying the particular "Italian style" rim lock in use at Ocean Club Gardens. You would need to work out how to stop the latch bolt deadlock plunger moving at the same time as the latch bolt.
Modification is a possibility. as well as lack of lubrication.
Cite: http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm look for 5.A. former occupants.
You don't say? well fancy that.
-
The drapes I could maybe stretch a point for but the child gate ?
It presupposes he /she knew in advance exit through the front was on if he went in through the back.
Anyway back to the plot; it does not materially affect the comments:
Man with picklocks or key.
Or man up through patio doors and out the back/front.
They are your remaining options faites vos jeux
Having made your choice have a bash at what happens "downstream"
aS I said alice..its like watching magician on TV....what happen seems impossible...bit when you see how its done...its very simple
-
You don't say? well fancy that.
That is the way its done.
-
Trying to remember info about the assaults (smellyman & possibly other persons) first.
There's this to start with.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2611146/BREAKING-NEWS-Police-investigate-claims-five-British-girls-sexually-assaulted-Algarve-lone-intruder-hunt-smelly-pot-bellied-Madeleine-McCann-suspect.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-27122951
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve
-
aS I said alice..its like watching magician on TV....what happen seems impossible...bit when you see how its done...its very simple
In that case you can tell us how.
-
That is the way its done.
So what modification was made to this lock then? I presume you have checked against the comics that such a modification as in your mind could be effected?
-
In that case you can tell us how.
we would have to ask Penn and Teller
-
we would have to ask Penn and Teller
More Tommy Cooper.
-
More Tommy Cooper.
if you think that you dont understand the serious point I am making...imo
-
In that case you can tell us how.
I have already made the point today when g could not understand how the dna from 3 poeple could arrive at one small point......the explanation I gave re the clot to wipe was a very simple solution. it then turned out that Gerry gave an account of using a wet cloth to clean inside the car
-
if you think that you dont understand the serious point I am making...imo
I understand what you are doing.
-
I understand what you are doing.
Then you would understand that penn and teller have a tv programe where they explain how the seemingly impossible is...possible.....so tommy cooper has no relevance
-
we would have to ask Penn and Teller
And now my Lords Ladies and Gentlemen for your further enjoyment and delight, nay delectation, a veritable cornucopia of pressdeedidgitayshun prestidigitation [I never could spell that bleedin’word] illustrating how with panache and elan some geezer a man of dishonour effected entrance into a bijou residence having but two portals. Said unworthy being of evil intent.
Now I thought you were hot on evidence?
For there to have been abduction the subject and object must occupy the same space and time.
To satisfy that condition in our discussion either the object left the building or the subject entered the building.
The consideration is “the how” could that be effected and still satisfy certain criteria.
At this point any incident investigator worth his salt would be listing evidence to support the existence of each cause in order to determine if each set of causes is sufficient and necessary to cause the effect.
p.s I am not an accountant… ?{)(**
-
And now my Lords Ladies and Gentlemen for your further enjoyment and delight, nay delectation, a veritable cornucopia of pressdeedidgitayshun prestidigitation [I never could spell that bleedin’word] illustrating how with panache and elan some geezer a man of dishonour effected entrance into a bijou residence having but two portals. Said unworthy being of evil intent.
Now I thought you were hot on evidence?
For there to have been abduction the subject and object must occupy the same space and time.
To satisfy that condition in our discussion either the object left the building or the subject entered the building.
The consideration is “the how” could that be effected and still satisfy certain criteria.
At this point any incident investigator worth his salt would be listing evidence to support the existence of each cause in order to determine if each set of causes is sufficient and necessary to cause the effect.
p.s I am not an accountant… ?{)(**
madeleine is missing....the chances of the parents being involved is so small it approaches zero....w and w is highly unlikely according to those who ahve more information than you....or me......that leaves abduction. An expert,,,who visited the site said an abductor could have been in and out in 1 minute...SY beleive its possible....thats the state of play..
and im not a dental technician
-
I understand what you are doing.
thats your opinion...remember forum rules...imo you do not understand
-
madeleine is missing....the chances of the parents being involved is so small it approaches zero....w and w is highly unlikely according to those who ahve more information than you....or me......that leaves abduction. An expert,,,who visited the site said an abductor could have been in and out in 1 minute...SY beleive its possible....thats the state of play..
and im not a dental technician
(http://i67.tinypic.com/vg3qs0.png)
-
(http://i67.tinypic.com/vg3qs0.png)
and what do you think that proves....absolutely nothing
-
Exactly
why is everyone so anxious to disallow the use of a key on the front door?
That front door in its recess was absolutely private. No one passed it. No-one could see it, because it was so deeply recessed and so damned dark there that i wonder that even the apartment tenants liked to go in via that entrance after dark.
So easy to obtain a key from various staff members, take a copy and cast ones own key .... and what about the set of keys that allegedly were 'lost' by one member of maintenance staff?
It is almost as though there is a trend to take the eye of any interested party off the Very obvious point of entry (imo) .... and the very obvious way out too.
Open with a key, leave the key in the lock and upon departing pull the doot to, usingt the key as a puller.
Hey ho, NO fingerprints, quick and a near silent job. In and out in a flash, and Tannerman coming from the right direction
The front door was used IMO
AIMO
So you believe that then you would agree with the many experts and the PJ/Amaral that the shutter/window story was made up by the parents?
Which leads us to the question why would they do that? If their daughter was abducted would it matter to them at that moment how she was taken? Hmmm Im thinking not. because they did not act or behave in a way which would tie in with a child being abducted by a stranger. As an example not mentioning abduction to the police- or searching for a missing child under beds etc.
-
120 posts on.
The planned snatch remains out to pasture in the Foinavon Paddock.
The abductor entering the building without leaving a trace was by magic. Had the girl been older I would have had Zeus in the frame on that basis.
The problem seems insoluble;maybe the problem has not been properly defined ?
Time to sweep the decks clear see what drops out and start again ?................................ look there it was all the time. The primary event was misidentified.
It should be "Girl vanishes from bedroom into thin air". Now analyse cause and effect rather than use the usual storytelling technique. Determine the known causal relationships to include the actions and conditions of each effect then provide evidence to support the existence of each cause.
It'll be an eye opener for the linear thinkers if nothing else.
Catch you later.
-
So what modification was made to this lock then? I presume you have checked against the comics that such a modification as in your mind could be effected?
I will purchase an Italian style rim lock latch and see what modifications can be done. In my comprehension I need it so with the use of the key or the lever both the latch bolt and the latch bolt lock move at the same time.
But if the latch bolt is depressed manually the latch bolt lock remains extended. (In the unmodified version, if the latch bolt is depressed manually the latch bolt lock is also depressed.)
-
I don't think anyone would describe me as a linear thinker, but anyway. Just to set the ball rolling in the spirit of Alice's thread... And this is just off the top of my head before this thread degenerates....
Burglary gone wrong.
Nicks and duplicates key (possibly several while he's at it). Could be former employee, or knows / recognises someone who is e.g., maintenance or cleaning staff. Staff could keep keys with them over lunchtime in a jacket that gets hanged on a coat rack over lunch - nicks and duplicates some and puts them back in jacket.
Could have an accomplice. He or they case the village and work out the general routine of various tourists. They park near 5A, notice it's all quiet, but occupants are likely to have gone out for dinner (too early for bedtime). One enters via key, heads towards bedroom or living room, but M wakes up and is about to scream the place down. He puts his hand over her mouth to stop her, but accidentally smothers her. The choice is to run out and leave or to grab her (sentence is far heavier in the event of injury or death).
In a moment of panic, he opens the window and lifts the blind, either to signal to an accomplice, or possibly more likely because someone could work out that he'd got a key and decides to make it look as if he'd broken in via the window. Grabs her and leaves in the car.
The only thing I find odd is that the front door would have been shut again. Unless it could have slammed, or if there was a reason to avoid anyone guessing that he'd had a kesy. (I say he, but it could have been a woman or more than one person).
If he'd picked the lock (i.e., without a key), I can't think of a logical reason to open the window / shutter.
In the event of a Smellyman high on drugs or suffering from some kind of dangerous psychiatric illnness (sporadic or not), , I find it hard to imagine what any thought processes may have been. Could someone in some kind of "altered" state of mind be lucid enough to lift up the shutter from the outside and get in that way? If so, I would have thought that there would have been more traces in the window area. Lucid enough to pick a lock? Wander in via the terrace side? But then close the gates? And wander out via the front door and think to close it?
I tried to find articles about the sexual assaults, and the one that seems to give the most details (accurate or not) is from the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve
-
So you believe that then you would agree with the many experts and the PJ/Amaral that the shutter/window story was made up by the parents?
Which leads us to the question why would they do that? If their daughter was abducted would it matter to them at that moment how she was taken? Hmmm Im thinking not. because they did not act or behave in a way which would tie in with a child being abducted by a stranger. As an example not mentioning abduction to the police- or searching for a missing child under beds etc.
Of course it would.
They are intelligent people and would know that the finding of the "How" would lead to the finding of the "Who did it"
..... and that would lead to Madeleine
-
.....
The only thing I find odd is that the front door would have been shut again. .....
If I'm right about having to use the key to close the front door closing it becomes really a two hand operation. This might still be possible with a child in your arms.
What did you mean by "The only thing I find odd is that the front door would have been shut again."?
-
If I'm right about having to use the key to close the front door closing it becomes really a two hand operation. This might still be possible with a child in your arms.
What did you mean by "The only thing I find odd is that the front door would have been shut again."?
I think that's why we got back into the key discussion. Without knowing one way or the other whether it could slam shut on its own or not...
-
If I'm right about having to use the key to close the front door closing it becomes really a two hand operation. This might still be possible with a child in your arms.
What did you mean by "The only thing I find odd is that the front door would have been shut again."?
If there were two people as in sadies theory then presumably the lifter would have passed Madeleine over to Tannerman and she/he would then have two hands available to pull the door closed ... or
Imediately the lifter exited by the front door, Tannerman closed the door ... and then Madeleine was passed over to him. The lifter, who likely Madeleine knew, was maybe an employee of OC ... and her job done, she/he beetled off as fast as possible back to the Staff quarters, on Rua D'Escola.
AIMO
-
If there were two people as in sadies theory then presumably the lifter would have passed Madeleine over to Tannerman and she/he would then have two hands available to pull the door closed ... or
Imediately the lifter exited by the front door, Tannerman closed the door ... and then Madeleine was passed over to him. The lifter, who likely Madeleine knew, was maybe an employee of OC ... and her job done, she/he beetled off as fast as possible back to the Staff quarters, on Rua D'Escola.
AIMO
A possibility, Sadie, but I was trying to think of simpler scenarios.
-
If there were two people as in sadies theory then presumably the lifter would have passed Madeleine over to Tannerman and she/he would then have two hands available to pull the door closed ... or
Imediately the lifter exited by the front door, Tannerman closed the door ... and then Madeleine was passed over to him. The lifter, who likely Madeleine knew, was maybe an employee of OC ... and her job done, she/he beetled off as fast as possible back to the Staff quarters, on Rua D'Escola.
AIMO
Tannerman is history. Smithman isn't 8(>((
-
I think that's why we got back into the key discussion. Without knowing one way or the other whether it could slam shut on its own or not...
I am also thinking someone knowing the door won't slam shut could use a piece of firm plastic to depress the latch bolt and the latch bolt lock as the door is being shut but that too would be a two handed operation.
-
I don't think anyone would describe me as a linear thinker, but anyway. Just to set the ball rolling in the spirit of Alice's thread... And this is just off the top of my head before this thread degenerates....
Burglary gone wrong.
Nicks and duplicates key (possibly several while he's at it). Could be former employee, or knows / recognises someone who is e.g., maintenance or cleaning staff. Staff could keep keys with them over lunchtime in a jacket that gets hanged on a coat rack over lunch - nicks and duplicates some and puts them back in jacket.
Could have an accomplice. He or they case the village and work out the general routine of various tourists. They park near 5A, notice it's all quiet, but occupants are likely to have gone out for dinner (too early for bedtime). One enters via key, heads towards bedroom or living room, but M wakes up and is about to scream the place down. He puts his hand over her mouth to stop her, but accidentally smothers her. The choice is to run out and leave or to grab her (sentence is far heavier in the event of injury or death).
In a moment of panic, he opens the window and lifts the blind, either to signal to an accomplice, or possibly more likely because someone could work out that he'd got a key and decides to make it look as if he'd broken in via the window. Grabs her and leaves in the car.
The only thing I find odd is that the front door would have been shut again. Unless it could have slammed, or if there was a reason to avoid anyone guessing that he'd had a kesy. (I say he, but it could have been a woman or more than one person).
If he'd picked the lock (i.e., without a key), I can't think of a logical reason to open the window / shutter.
In the event of a Smellyman high on drugs or suffering from some kind of dangerous psychiatric illnness (sporadic or not), , I find it hard to imagine what any thought processes may have been. Could someone in some kind of "altered" state of mind be lucid enough to lift up the shutter from the outside and get in that way? If so, I would have thought that there would have been more traces in the window area. Lucid enough to pick a lock? Wander in via the terrace side? But then close the gates? And wander out via the front door and think to close it?
I tried to find articles about the sexual assaults, and the one that seems to give the most details (accurate or not) is from the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve
The link you provided to the Guardian article very definitely gives food for thought and highlights in my opinion the undue haste with which the police sought to clear the decks of the crime by latching on to one suspect then another two none of whom had any evidence against them to justify the police action.
As was proved when their arguido status was lifted ... but months of investigation wasted by the deflection from what had happened to Madeleine as opposed to whodunit.
All against a backdrop of a peak in burglaries in the resort in the April of 2007 and the intruder described by police as having "a very, very, unhealthy interest" in young white girls.
If burglary was rife in my opinion it was merely a matter of time until a tragedy of one sort or another occurred.
Similarly if an intruder was in the habit of gaining entry to premises attracted by the presence of young girls ... in my opinion bad and bad enough as his actions were, he was just a ticking time bomb.
Yet there is still denial about burglaries in the resort and denial of intrusion into homes and assault of little girls.
Indeed there is a "badly told story here" including ignoring the situation as it was on the ground in Luz 2007 but making it totally risible to rule out the possibility of the abduction of a child.
-
@Brietta
If I've understood correctly, Alice's thread is to work out the nuts and bolts of the how in various scenarios.
I actually tried this ages ago in trying to make Amaral's theory work. It was so popular that I think it disappeared down the plughole into total oblivion. lol
Even if anyone can work out a plausible how, there's still a problem with finding supportinng physical evidence. There was a partial forensic analysis, but it wasn't thorough. I'm not citicising the forensic people who came out and did their best with whatever they had to hand, and the emergency was to sweep the likely exits as fast as possible.
A few things went a bit haywire, a print sent to Interpol turned out (AFAIK) to be that of one of the GNR officers; hairs from the bed went AWOL; I can't find any trace of a hair-searching mission into the parents' bedroom...
On the other hand, a more thorough sweep could also have been done in the following days before the place got relet, if someone had thought to request it. That doesn't appear to have happened.
-
I could be wrong, and I have no concrete evidence to support it, but my best guess is that the UK Op Grange was about plodding through the donkey work that hadn't been done by either exhausted force at the time, and Op PT (with far fewer resources) has been concentrating on the sexual assaults and if there is any link there.
To date, whether there is any connection or not, I still haven't heard that Smellyman or NotSmellyman (if they are not the same in all cases) has been identified.
None of those reported incidents led to an abducted child, which may be why the PJ didn't twig at the time... Why on earth not is beyond me as crimes can escalate in nature, but that seems to have been the state of affairs at the time.
It could turn out that there's no connection, but those families deserve closure as well.
It makes sense to me that the UK side has been drilling down through intensive donkey work to eliminate everyone they can from their end, and that the PT side has been concentrating on the sexual assaults.
My reasoning could be wrong, but that would seem logical to me.
-
Gemma O'Doherty...Twitter
Something interesting on its way
-
Gemma O'Doherty...Twitter
Something interesting on its way
Not exactly a supporter.
-
Not exactly a supporter.
I have a feeling she is not well informed....think I might join Twitter and give her a little more info
-
I have a feeling she is not well informed....think I might join Twitter and give her a little more info
Just had a look.
Erm, Davel, that's a generous opinion. I wonder why the wording sounds just like that used by a certain "research group"?
Gemma O'Doherty
@gemmaod1
Jan 7
I will soon publish details of my investigation into the #MadeleineMcCann case including the many inconsistencies in her parents’ accounts of what happened, the Donegal links and how the British media have failed Madeleine and the public by refusing to ask hard questions
https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/949957327972683776
-
Just had a look.
Erm, Davel, that's a generous opinion. I wonder why the wording sounds just like that used by a certain "research group"?
Gemma O'Doherty
@gemmaod1
Jan 7
I will soon publish details of my investigation into the #MadeleineMcCann case including the many inconsistencies in her parents’ accounts of what happened, the Donegal links and how the British media have failed Madeleine and the public by refusing to ask hard questions
https://twitter.com/gemmaod1/status/949957327972683776
If she actually is the real deal as an investigative journalist it could prove as Davel says ... interesting.
-
Indeed. I wonder if we shall see legal moves to prevent this?
-
If she actually is the real deal as an investigative journalist it could prove as Davel says ... interesting.
Oh she's the real deal.
https://villagemagazine.ie/
-
Oh she's the real deal.
https://villagemagazine.ie/
She is the real deal but...read some of the replies on her twitter from people that have followed her...she about to ruin her reputation...imo.
Replying to @Djambo290 @gemmaod1
Gemma is a good journo but this is just retarded.
-
She is the real deal but...read some of the replies on her twitter from people that have followed her...she about to ruin her reputation...imo.
Replying to @Djambo290 @gemmaod1
Gemma is a good journo but this is just retarded.
Do you think she didn't get tweets like that from 'good catholics' when exposing the sexual abuse perpetrated at Terenure College ?
-
Do you think she didn't get tweets like that from 'good catholics' when exposing the sexual abuse perpetrated at Terenure College ?
I think she has done no proper research and is going to end up looking pretty foolish. Its like she had listened to Icke and revealed taht the world is ruled by 12 ft reptiles...
-
There's lots of inconsistencies and they are important.
-
If she actually is the real deal as an investigative journalist it could prove as Davel says ... interesting.
shes anti mccann...but using things like body language to make her point
-
I think she has done no proper research and is going to end up looking pretty foolish. Its like she had listened to Icke and revealed taht the world is ruled by 12 ft reptiles...
We shall see.
-
She is the real deal but...read some of the replies on her twitter from people that have followed her...she about to ruin her reputation...imo.
Replying to @Djambo290 @gemmaod1
Gemma is a good journo but this is just retarded.
That was along the line of my thinking; training and professionalism v the antithesis of that. Then of course there is more than one way to skin a cat on twitter, she may be a believer or she may be the epitome of her profession.
Time will tell.
-
I will purchase an Italian style rim lock latch and see what modifications can be done. In my comprehension I need it so with the use of the key or the lever both the latch bolt and the latch bolt lock move at the same time.
But if the latch bolt is depressed manually the latch bolt lock remains extended. (In the unmodified version, if the latch bolt is depressed manually the latch bolt lock is also depressed.)
You should be able to assess whether or not the modification may be done by looking at the comics.
-
I don't think anyone would describe me as a linear thinker, but anyway. Just to set the ball rolling in the spirit of Alice's thread... And this is just off the top of my head before this thread degenerates....
Burglary gone wrong.
Nicks and duplicates key (possibly several while he's at it). Could be former employee, or knows / recognises someone who is e.g., maintenance or cleaning staff. Staff could keep keys with them over lunchtime in a jacket that gets hanged on a coat rack over lunch - nicks and duplicates some and puts them back in jacket.
Could have an accomplice. He or they case the village and work out the general routine of various tourists. They park near 5A, notice it's all quiet, but occupants are likely to have gone out for dinner (too early for bedtime). One enters via key, heads towards bedroom or living room, but M wakes up and is about to scream the place down. He puts his hand over her mouth to stop her, but accidentally smothers her. The choice is to run out and leave or to grab her (sentence is far heavier in the event of injury or death).
In a moment of panic, he opens the window and lifts the blind, either to signal to an accomplice, or possibly more likely because someone could work out that he'd got a key and decides to make it look as if he'd broken in via the window. Grabs her and leaves in the car.
The only thing I find odd is that the front door would have been shut again. Unless it could have slammed, or if there was a reason to avoid anyone guessing that he'd had a kesy. (I say he, but it could have been a woman or more than one person).
If he'd picked the lock (i.e., without a key), I can't think of a logical reason to open the window / shutter.
In the event of a Smellyman high on drugs or suffering from some kind of dangerous psychiatric illnness (sporadic or not), , I find it hard to imagine what any thought processes may have been. Could someone in some kind of "altered" state of mind be lucid enough to lift up the shutter from the outside and get in that way? If so, I would have thought that there would have been more traces in the window area. Lucid enough to pick a lock? Wander in via the terrace side? But then close the gates? And wander out via the front door and think to close it?
I tried to find articles about the sexual assaults, and the one that seems to give the most details (accurate or not) is from the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve
At that particular "junction" I was not talkng to you... 8(0(*
-
LOL at least you prove that you can't handle the truth and have already made your mind up. Pathetic.
I can handle the truth ...I think its quite important. Ive looked at her twitter page...she seems big on body language as evidence...that makes me suspect her video will be poor. Ive looked at all the evidence and followed the case for ten years...she can bring nothing new to the case
-
LOL at least you prove that you can't handle the truth and have already made your mind up. Pathetic.
I must say you are very lucky to be able to post any old rubbish...imo....and not an IMO in sight...
-
I never blindly accept anything I do my own research...so tell me....based on your research...do the dogs prove maddie died in the apartment
-
I never blindly accept anything I do my own research...so tell me....based on your research...do the dogs prove maddie died in the apartment
No the dog alerts need to be corroborated.
-
No the dog alerts need to be corroborated.
good..so what evidence supports your view...there isnt any
-
At that particular "junction" I was not talkng to you... 8(0(*
LOL
-
I think that's why we got back into the key discussion. Without knowing one way or the other whether it could slam shut on its own or not...
According to the comics it can.
But that does not account for the International Band of Lock modifiers perambulating around at 37.0909° N, 8.7591° W along with all the other weirdos artisans who might just come in handy to support an unlikely tale occurrence.......... ?{)(**
-
According to the comics it can.
But that does not account for the International Band of Lock modifiers perambulating around at 37.0909° N, 8.7591° W along with all the other weirdos artisans who might just come in handy to support an unlikely tale occurrence.......... ?{)(**
Read what David Payne had to say on the matter.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DAVID-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
"Reply "Err we, you know, we ran up err to the apartment, you know, with, with err you know Kate and Gerry err and you know for me, I just wanted to know, as I say, about the access to the apartment, were those gates open, err because in my mind was that if the front door was shut there was no, you know there won't be, you know there was no way that she could have wandered out that way and nor would they have gained access in that way. Err also obviously the, the, the issue with the, the shutters had been raised, was brought up err you know on the way up as well and then I was asking about the gates being shut at that back and she said well both gates you know were shut, so in my mind, you know, that had ruled it out that Madeleine had err had wandered off."
-
So you believe that then you would agree with the many experts and the PJ/Amaral that the shutter/window story was made up by the parents?
Which leads us to the question why would they do that? If their daughter was abducted would it matter to them at that moment how she was taken? Hmmm Im thinking not. because they did not act or behave in a way which would tie in with a child being abducted by a stranger. As an example not mentioning abduction to the police- or searching for a missing child under beds etc.
Please do not twist my words to mean things that they do not.
I have stated repeatedly on here why I think the window was open and shutter raised, but especially for you I will try and remember some of them
AIMO
1) Window and shutter opened either from the inside by the lifter or from the outside by Tannerman. Heriberto Janosch demonstrated how easy it was to do this.
2) Opened a little so that in the first place they could spot Madeleine and see the layout of the room
3) To give a glow of light to the room (not much admittedly) to help the lifter. Better not to shine a torch or put the light on in the room, which then would shine like a beacon and expose what was going on.
3) To give encouragement and instructions to the lifter who was probably someone Madeleine knew. Someone who was not used to doing this sort of thing.
4) To pass any equipment needed (chloroform etc) in.
5) Tannerman was on watch outside and he could see any signals, if anyone was approaching, from the man on the balcony of block 6. With the window open, he coulod easily warn the lifter.
6) As an emergency escape route for the lifter.
7) To give the impression that Madeleine had wakened and climbed out of the window herself. This gave the abductors a good hours start because to begin with peeps would look for Madeleine walking away, rather than investigate the abductor scenario. The Golden hour and all that.
8) To take the eye of the investigators off the front door, so that questions would not be asked about how did the abductors get hold of the key = protecting someone at OC.
I feel sure there were more reasons why the shutters and window were open, but I cant remember them atm
AIMO
-
Please do not twist my words to mean things that they do not.
I have stated repeatedly on here why I think the window was open and shutter raised, but especially for you I will try and remember some of them
AIMO
1) Window and shutter opened either from the inside by the lifter or from the outside by Tannerman. Heriberto Janosch demonstrated how easy it was to do this.
2) Opened a little so that in the first place they could spot Madeleine and see the layout of the room
3) To give a glow of light to the room (not much admittedly) to help the lifter. Better not to shine a torch or put the light on in the room, which then would shine like a beacon and expose what was going on.
3) To give encouragement and instructions to the lifter who was probably someone Madeleine knew. Someone who was not usede to doing this sort of thing.
4) To pass any equipment needed (chloroform etc) in.
5) Tannerman was on watch outside and he could see any signals, if anyone was approaching, from the man on the balcony of block 6. With the window open, he coulod easily warn the lifter.
6) As an emergency escape route for the lifter.
7) To give the impression that Madeleine had wakened and climbed out of the window herself. This gave the abductors a good hours start because to begin with peeps would look for Madeleine walking away, rather than investigate the abductor scenario. The Golden hour and all that.
8) To take the eye of the investigators off the front door, so that questions would not be asked about how did the abductors get hold of the key = protecting someone at OC.
I feel sure there were more reasons why the shutters and window were open, but I cant remember them atm
AIMO
If they had a key they could close the front door behind them. And you theorise that they did close the front door rather just leave the door unlocked.
-
Read what David Payne had to say on the matter.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DAVID-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
"Reply "Err we, you know, we ran up err to the apartment, you know, with, with err you know Kate and Gerry err and you know for me, I just wanted to know, as I say, about the access to the apartment, were those gates open, err because in my mind was that if the front door was shut there was no, you know there won't be, you know there was no way that she could have wandered out that way and nor would they have gained access in that way. Err also obviously the, the, the issue with the, the shutters had been raised, was brought up err you know on the way up as well and then I was asking about the gates being shut at that back and she said well both gates you know were shut, so in my mind, you know, that had ruled it out that Madeleine had err had wandered off."
Yeah I have read it now what?
I see no mention of anything factual just him expressing his opinion with no basis for that opinion quoted.
-
Yeah I have read it now what?
I see no mention of anything factual just him expressing his opinion with no basis for that opinion quoted.
That is being unfair to David for he had been using those doors for a week. His opinion was based on the knowledge of those door. I'm sure he is saying whoever goes through them can't just pull them closed behind them.
-
That is being unfair to David for he had been using those doors for a week. His opinion was based on the knowledge of those door. I'm sure he is saying whoever goes through them can't just pull them closed behind them.
You are sure he is saying? how do you figure that out?
According to the comics one can pull the door shut so unless you have incontrovertible evidence that the locks were modified such that they cannot be pulled into the latch I'll go by what I can see in the comics thank you.
-
You are sure he is saying? how do you figure that out?
According to the comics one can pull the door shut so unless you have incontrovertible evidence that the locks were modified such that they cannot be pulled into the latch I'll go by what I can see in the comics thank you.
The comics, as you call them, are stationary drawings and don't show you how the parts work in practice.
I'm not an expert on locks, but I would not say it is impossible to modify a lock so that it "cannot be pulled into the latch".
-
The comics, as you call them, are stationary drawings and don't show you how the parts work in practice.
1)I'm not an expert on locks, 2)but I would not say it is impossible to modify a lock so that it "cannot be pulled into the latch".
Taking (1) at face value of what value does that make (2)?
You need to demonstrate it can be be done then show it was done.
Otherwise it is guessing.
The drawings show how the thing works.....
-
If they had a key they could close the front door behind them. And you theorise that they did close the front door rather just leave the door unlocked.
Yep, I do.
It took the eye of the Police off what actually happened IMO
With the open window and shutters it gave two alternative scenarios which I believe were both red herrings
i) That Madeleine had climbed out of the window and gone under her own steam, so it appeared that there was no abductor to search for!
ii) That the abductor had enterd via the window nd probably left that way too.
These two scenarios stopped the proper search and gave the abductor plenty of time to get well away IMO. The Golden Hours vanished. They also hid who had stolen / borrowed the key from OC, cos the ready thought was that the front door wasn't used, when almost certainly it was IMO
These are only theories but they fit and may be correct.