Why was the window open ?

[AnneGuedes]

No mother is going to "lose" one child somehow then leave the other two unprotected in exactly the same place the first one allegedly went missing from whilst she runs off to raise the alarm!

Except if she suspects not an abduction but a wandering off of the missing one,  because the twins are in cots, incapable to get out.

[C.Edwards]

No mother is going to "lose" one child somehow then leave the other two unprotected in exactly the same place the first one allegedly went missing from whilst she runs off to raise the alarm!

Except if she suspects not an abduction but a wandering off of the missing one,  because the twins are in cots, incapable to get out.

Ah but remember, Anna, Kate KNEW that Madeleine had not "woken and wandered".  One day she may even tell us just how she KNEW!

[peter claridge]

No mother is going to "lose" one child somehow then leave the other two unprotected in exactly the same place the first one allegedly went missing from whilst she runs off to raise the alarm!

Except if she suspects not an abduction but a wandering off of the missing one,  because the twins are in cots, incapable to get out.

But they weren't in their cots.

[AnneGuedes]

No mother is going to "lose" one child somehow then leave the other two unprotected in exactly the same place the first one allegedly went missing from whilst she runs off to raise the alarm!

Except if she suspects not an abduction but a wandering off of the missing one,  because the twins are in cots, incapable to get out.

Ah but remember, Anna, Kate KNEW that Madeleine had not "woken and wandered".  One day she may even tell us just how she KNEW!

I'm afraid this was wishful thinking. To admit Madeleine could have woken (or rather never got asleep) and got out of her bed (that's how her bed looks like) was unbearable because that was the logic consequence of the crying episode story and Kate should have known, actually she knew somehow since she mentioned the episode at the Tapas bar and justified the open door.

[Luz]

Raising the shutter would not secure entry if the window was originally closed.  This woud tend to support the argument that the intruder entered the apartment by either the main door or the patio door.

Did you know that a maintenance man repaired one of the shutter pullcords in another bedroom just days before the abduction?   He needed the apartment key in order to do this repair.

I think we all accept the possibility - even probability - of spare/duplicate keys.  Where I have an issue with this is that it wasn't discussed as a possibility early on.  I'm sure the police investigated the likelihood and it appears they never really entertained it as that significant based on the lack of coverage on the subject in official or semi-official sources.  It only seems to be treated as a real possibility on what could be classified as "pro" websites and it's easy to understand why.

It would have been very easy in the early days for any of the OC staff, the police, the T9 themselves to say, "there's a distinct possibility that someone with a spare key may have been involved" and yet it's just not mentioned... instead we have broken/jemmied shutters and/or patio doors.

Only once that all starts running out of steam - and as I've said before, fairly early in 2009 from memory - does it start to gather momentum as a "theory" to explain how the comings and goings could have been achieved.

That which is not Impossible is Possible.

It remains possible (in fact probable) that rogue and lost keys existed.

EXACTLY.
But these creatures can't see probability when it includes the MCCs.

[Heriberto Janosch]

Hello,

Maybe you find this two links of any help regarding the 5A window.

http://espacioexterior.blogspot.com.es/2013/04/could-madeleine-mccann-be-abducted-in.html

http://espacioexterior.blogspot.com.es/2012/10/the-abduction-of-madeleine-mccann-report.html

Heri.

Those videos are so inaccurate and misleading as Madeleine was not in the bed next to the window and secondly she weighed a heck of a lot more than a stuffed sack.  No wonder there is so much nonsense being promoted about this case when rubbish like this is being promoted.

The "rubbish" videos are neither inaccurate nor misleading if you read properly in what context they were made.

Nobody knows if the glass panes were locked or not. If they were not locked, this is my hypothesis:

May 3rd. 2007: between 21:40 and 21:49 approximately (or maybe between 21:15 and 21:19 approximately) the abductor took Madeleine without entering the apartment 5A, opening the window from the outside. Awakened by the noise and/or light from the opening, believing was one of her parents, Madeleine went to the window (in the floor, not in the bed aside the window), somewhat somnolent and very tired, and was taken.

I am sure taking a 4 years old somnolent toddler is as easy as taking this sack. I had no a better dummy, but it can be repeated even with a toddler.

http://espacioexterior.blogspot.com

Also, this demonstrates that if the glass panes were not locked (and nobody knows) the "break-in" is possible leaving the window as Kate found it, and without damaged.

[Redblossom]

There is no reason to think anyone left  the windows unlocked, people in general do lock their windows and doors, any idea that the window was left open in that flat before being let out to the Mccanns is pure speculation, therefore the theory that an alleged abductor got in this way is based on speculation 

[Luz]

Hello,

Maybe you find this two links of any help regarding the 5A window.

http://espacioexterior.blogspot.com.es/2013/04/could-madeleine-mccann-be-abducted-in.html

http://espacioexterior.blogspot.com.es/2012/10/the-abduction-of-madeleine-mccann-report.html

Heri.

Those videos are so inaccurate and misleading as Madeleine was not in the bed next to the window and secondly she weighed a heck of a lot more than a stuffed sack.  No wonder there is so much nonsense being promoted about this case when rubbish like this is being promoted.

The "rubbish" videos are neither inaccurate nor misleading if you read properly in what context they were made.

Nobody knows if the glass panes were locked or not. If they were not locked, this is my hypothesis:

May 3rd. 2007: between 21:40 and 21:49 approximately (or maybe between 21:15 and 21:19 approximately) the abductor took Madeleine without entering the apartment 5A, opening the window from the outside. Awakened by the noise and/or light from the opening, believing was one of her parents, Madeleine went to the window (in the floor, not in the bed aside the window), somewhat somnolent and very tired, and was taken.

I am sure taking a 4 years old somnolent toddler is as easy as taking this sack. I had no a better dummy, but it can be repeated even with a toddler.

http://espacioexterior.blogspot.com

Also, this demonstrates that if the glass panes were not locked (and nobody knows) the "break-in" is possible leaving the window as Kate found it, and without damaged.

Are you for real?

Suggestion: erased, because I don't want to have my ears pulled. :(

[Heriberto Janosch]

There is no reason to think anyone left  the windows unlocked, people in general do lock their windows and doors, any idea that the window was left open in that flat before being let out to the Mccanns is pure speculation, therefore the theory that an alleged abductor got in this way is based on speculation

This is pure speculation in this type of windows:

... people in general do lock their windows and doors ...

Do you know that in this type of window people left the shutter down but no too much leaving gaps between the bars, and the glass panes closed but not too much (not locked) leaving a slight (one centimeter or so) gap, to ventilate the room?

And in this particular case, we do not know, so we can not asign a "likelihood" to this event ... My hypothesis is based on (a) shutter down and (b) glass panes closed but NOT LOCKED ... So it could be opened from the outside without damaged (a break-in without damage).

I invite you to get a similar window and do the test. 

[Heriberto Janosch]

Are you for real?

This is not a valid/logic counter-argument ...

[Rachel Granada]

Are you for real?

This is not a valid/logic counter-argument ...

Ignore the denigrators, Heriberto.  You have made a very valid contribution to this forum.

[amaraltheofficeboy]

"Why was the window open ?"

Why was the door a jar?

[Redblossom]

It is  only a rare possibility that the window would have been left unlocked. A flat occupied by two parents and three kids one would assume they would make sure the window was closed and locked , then again the Mccanns left their kids alledgedly in an unlocked apartment via the patio doors, I suppose unlocked open windows wouldnt have bothered them either!!!!
You go out of your holiday flat and lock everything. Indeed, Gerry says he locked the flat when he went out every day, but they left it unlocked at night with their kids in there that theynever checked on physically? For three hours plus?Come on!

[icabodcrane]

"Why was the window open ?"

Why was the door a jar?

Glad you brought up the door that Gerry thought was open much wider than they  had left it, because something has been bothering me about that

Gerry went to check on his children at 9.05pm ... correct ?

As far as he was aware  no-one had been to the apartment since he and Kate had left at 8.30pm ...  correct ? 

So the first thing he notices when he goes into the apartment is the fact that the door to the children's bedroom is open much wider than he and Kate had left it half an hour before

He thinks maybe Madeleine had woken and gone into their room

He  establishes that she hadn't,  and that all three children are asleep in their room

...  and then what  ? 

He now knows that Madeleine hadn't left the room,  and that there is no explanation for the open door

Is he worried ?  ...  does he think that maybe someone had been in the apartment  ?  ...  a burglar perhaps ?  ...  does he search the apartment and look for any missing items ?

Nope,  he just looks down at his sleeping daughter, thinking how beautiful she is,  and then goes to the loo before setting back off to the restaurant  ...  the unexplained wide open door  not concerning him in the least 

Isn't that strange 

[amaraltheofficeboy]

"Isn't that strange"

there was no question mark behind that so I will take it as a statement of you opinion.

I can't answer your other questions.

Thankyou for calling the helpline you calls are appreciated.