Was the open window and the lifted shutters simply a ruse?

[John]

Some of the stuff I have been reading lately leads me to think that the open window and the raised shutter was nothing more than a ruse simply intended to cover up for the fact that the perpetrators had a key to the apartments front door.  Whoever carried out the abduction knew very well that suspicion would fall on Ocean Club staff if the PJ ever worked it out that the abductors had effectively just walked in the front door.

All in all it seems that someone went to a lot of trouble to provide a false trail as to the means of entry and exit.  The absence of shoe tread marks on both the outer and inner sill is certainly indicative that entry and exit was not via the window.

[icabodcrane]

Unless the window was used as either the  point of entry, or the point of exit,  to accomodate an abduction,  then there is only one logical alternative

The window was opened in order to  'stage'  a break-in

[Chinagirl]

Nonsense.  John's exposition in the post above is far more logical - front door used for the abductor's entry and exit (opened with a key) and the window opened by the abductor to confuse the initial investigation.

Itt was a glaring omission on Amaral's part to have ignored the possibility of the abductor having a key.

[sadie]

Nonsense.  John's exposition in the post above is far more logical - front door used for the abductor's entry and exit (opened with a key) and the window opened by the abductor to confuse the initial investigation.

Itt was a glaring omission on Amaral's part to have ignored the possibility of the abductor having a key.

Cant understand why he would ignore the front door.  It is so obviously the means of entry.

Of course, from stuff observed earlier in posts he claimed he had worked it out the day after the event, didn't he?

Suppose he had to make his theory fit.  He is good at manipulating evidence

[sadie]

BUMPED  Good, sensible post John

Some of the stuff I have been reading lately leads me to think that the open window and the raised shutter was nothing more than a ruse simply intended to cover up for the fact that the perpetrators had a key to the apartments front door.  Whoever carried out the abduction knew very well that suspicion would fall on Ocean Club staff if the PJ ever worked it out that the abductors had effectively just walked in the front door.

All in all it seems that someone went to a lot of trouble to provide a false trail as to the means of entry and exit.  The absence of shoe tread marks on both the outer and inner sill is certainly indicative that entry and exit was not via the window.

[Mrs. B]

BUMPED  Good, sensible post John

Yes, I agree with the above.

[faithlilly]

Some of the stuff I have been reading lately leads me to think that the open window and the raised shutter was nothing more than a ruse simply intended to cover up for the fact that the perpetrators had a key to the apartments front door.  Whoever carried out the abduction knew very well that suspicion would fall on Ocean Club staff if the PJ ever worked it out that the abductors had effectively just walked in the front door.

All in all it seems that someone went to a lot of trouble to provide a false trail as to the means of entry and exit.  The absence of shoe tread marks on both the outer and inner sill is certainly indicative that entry and exit was not via the window.

He or she had their their 'false trail' John, the patio doors. Why would the take the time and risk of opening the window when the patio door was already open and virtually invisible from the tapas ?

[AnneGuedes]

He or she had their their 'false trail' John, the patio doors. Why would the take the time and risk of opening the window when the patio door was already open and virtually invisible from the tapas ?

Sure, the Moyses came back home and noticed nothing. When crossing the car park, a man getting through the door or the window would have certainly attracted their attention.
The other way was open, free and dark ! Ideal.

[faithlilly]

Sure, the Moyses came back home and noticed nothing. When crossing the car park, a man getting through the door or the window would have certainly attracted their attention.
The other way was open, free and dark ! Ideal.

Even if, as John surmises, the alleged abductor had a key, why open the window, with the danger that entailed, as you say, of being seen to set a false trail when they would have known the patio doors were open and would be considered by the police the most likely point of entry.

[AnneGuedes]

Even if, as John surmises, the alleged abductor had a key, why open the window, with the danger that entailed, as you say, of being seen to set a false trail when they would have known the patio doors were open and would be considered by the police the most likely point of entry.

Imo the shutters/window stuff was a real red herring, but not put on by a stranger.

[faithlilly]

Imo the shutters/window stuff was a real red herring, but not put on by a stranger.

You may well have something there Anne !

[Angelo222]

Nonsense.  John's exposition in the post above is far more logical - front door used for the abductor's entry and exit (opened with a key) and the window opened by the abductor to confuse the initial investigation.

Itt was a glaring omission on Amaral's part to have ignored the possibility of the abductor having a key.

Why was that??

Does anyone think that Amaral knew more than he was letting on about the possible involvement of a member of the club staff in this despicable crime?

[faithlilly]

Why was that??

Does anyone think that Amaral knew more than he was letting on about the possible involvement of a member of the club staff in this despicable crime?

No but many think the parents know more than they're letting on about this despicable crime.

[sadie]

Sure, the Moyses came back home and noticed nothing. When crossing the car park, a man getting through the door or the window would have certainly attracted their attention.
The other way was open, free and dark ! Ideal.

Totally and utterly incorrect Anne

No matter what time they came, they would cross the car park diagonally from the drive in entrance and take a straight line to the middle of the building, block number 5.  They would not even be able to see the front door of 5A for that entire route, cos it is recessed deeply back, and out of sight for the whole route.  Do you understand that Anne? 

They COULD NOT SEE the front door all the way across the car park from drive in (the only way in) to the middle of the building where all the paths to the various flats radiated from.  Unless they were into wall climbing, they had to go there and take those walled paths before getting to any of the flats

You have been there IIRC.  You should know that.

Additionally the 5A front door corner was dark.  Very dark and front door totally out of sight.  But the centre of the building and the access hall for the other flats (not 5A) were lit.  The eye goes straight to light in darkness  .... and also the route being walked.


Surely, as a University Lecturer, you have the intellect to understand this?

[DCI]

Some of the stuff I have been reading lately leads me to think that the open window and the raised shutter was nothing more than a ruse simply intended to cover up for the fact that the perpetrators had a key to the apartments front door.  Whoever carried out the abduction knew very well that suspicion would fall on Ocean Club staff if the PJ ever worked it out that the abductors had effectively just walked in the front door.

All in all it seems that someone went to a lot of trouble to provide a false trail as to the means of entry and exit.  The absence of shoe tread marks on both the outer and inner sill is certainly indicative that entry and exit was not via the window.

I'm not so sure the window wasn't used, John. Two abductors?, one going in by the back door (patio), the other round by the window. One inside could have passed Madeliene through the window, and then, come out of the front door.