So how did the abductor enter and leave the apartment?

[sadie]

They had full view of the patio and steps up to the patio doors.  They were only 50 metres away.  They were within earshot.  Had any of the children yelled them they would have heard.

It was illuminated by the nearby street lamp which was in line with the steps and patio.   The sitting room light was left on.  The patio doors were closed and an attempt was made to close the curtains over these doors.  Now I have tried very very hard and I am unable to close the curtains inside the room when I slide my patio doors closed from the outside.  Can you fully close your curtains from outside when you close your patio doors Faith?

So here we have a situation where the curtains are partially open with a light on in the room.   Anyone trying to get in would be silhouetted in that gap by the lights inside.  No abductor would risk that in full view.  So the Mccanns would feel completely safe.    Think about it Faith.

In the sleepy little place that PdL was it felt safe.

Amaral himself, when he was trying to prove his theory that no abductor went into the apartment, said that no abductor would dare to go in via the patio doors cos Kate and Gerry were too close and overlooked the patio doors

[John]

They had full view of the patio and steps up to the patio doors.  They were only 50 metres away.  They were within earshot.  Had any of the children yelled them they would have heard.

It was illuminated by the nearby street lamp which was in line with the steps and patio.   The sitting room light was left on.  The patio doors were closed and an attempt was made to close the curtains over these doors.  Now I have tried very very hard and I am unable to close the curtains inside the room when I slide my patio doors closed from the outside.  Can you fully close your curtains from outside when you close your patio doors Faith?

So here we have a situation where the curtains are partially open with a light on in the room.   Anyone trying to get in would be silhouetted in that gap by the lights inside.  No abductor would risk that in full view.  So the Mccanns would feel completely safe.    Think about it Faith.

In the sleepy little place that PdL was it felt safe.

Amaral himself, when he was trying to prove his theory that no abductor went into the apartment, said that no abductor would dare to go in via the patio doors cos Kate and Gerry were too close and overlooked the patio doors

It is actually possible to go in the small gate and up the steps to the patio without being seen from the tapas bar.  All one had to do was to crouch down as they went up the steps.

The street light only lit the gate and a few steps at the bottom, the remained of the steps were in darkness.

[Eleanor]

This is obvious to some, John, and what I first thought many moons ago.  The abductor wouldn't even have had to open the patio door very far to crawl in.  And I don't suppose he would have been standing on his dignity.
After that he simply had to hand Madeleine through the window to an accomplice, and leave by the same route, or leave by the door.
And in case anyone is wondering, a PJ Officer was filmed climbing in the window.

[icabodcrane]

I agree with John and Eleanor  (  and their previous two posts above  ) 

If there was an abduction then the secluded and darkened  entrance up the steps and through the already unlocked patio doors is the only logical conclusion to draw

No need for a  'duplicate key'  ... and no need for an open window

See,  I keep coming back to that open window  ...  if there had been an abduction,   (using the most logical quick  entry and exit through  the  unlocked patio doors )   it simply would not  have been opened 

It just wouldn't

[Benice]

I agree with John and Eleanor  (  and their previous two posts above  ) 

If there was an abduction then the secluded and darkened  entrance up the steps and through the already unlocked patio doors is the only logical conclusion to draw

No need for a  'duplicate key'  ... and no need for an open window

See,  I keep coming back to that open window  ...  if there had been an abduction,   (using the most logical quick  entry and exit through  the  unlocked patio doors )   it simply would not  have been opened 

It just wouldn't

Even if they did get in via the patio door, the most logical exit would be through the front door.

Before doing that they may have opened the window/shutters to see out -  to make sure the coast was clear - and if the abductor did go in via the patio door then he would have no way of knowing what was going on at the front of the apartment - while he was round the back and inside - and so would need to find out.     

There was no way you could do that check from the front door because it was recessed so far back and so you couldn't see the whole area in front of the apartment from there.   But you could from the window.


 



 

[Eleanor]

Excellent point, Benice.  Or to communicate with an accomplice.

[icabodcrane]

Excellent point, Benice.  Or to communicate with an accomplice.

But then both you and Benice are unecessarily complicating things 

An abduction could,  most simply,  and efficiently,  have  been accomplished by a swift entrance and exit through the secluded path to the already unlocked patio doors

Why not take that as a starting point,  at least  ?  ...  why the need to introduce complexities that are not necessary for an abduction to have taken place  ? 

[Eleanor]

The abductor could not have left by the patio door,  He was seen by Jane Tanner leaving from the front, and Gerry was near the gate talking.

[icabodcrane]

The abductor could not have left by the patio door,  He was seen by Jane Tanner leaving from the front, and Gerry was near the gate talking.

That's  problem Eleanor

Instead of looking at the possibility of abduction with open minds,  there seems  to be a determined effort to make it  'fit'   the precise 9.15pm abduction that the McCanns, themselves, insist on

[Benice]

Excellent point, Benice.  Or to communicate with an accomplice.

TY  Eleanor, - Yes I agree.  I'm of the firm belief that more than one person was involved in this abduction.

[stephen25000]

Ah, the magical mysterious non-proven abductor.

As real as Uri Gellar  can bend spoons by thought.

[Benice]

That's  problem Eleanor

Instead of looking at the possibility of abduction with open minds,  there seems  to be a determined effort to make it  'fit'   the precise 9.15pm abduction that the McCanns, themselves, insist on

I accept JT's timing/sighting because I believe she is telling the truth.   I believe that because no-one can come up with a  reason why she should lie which is even remotely credible.      It may be that her times are not accurate down the last second and may be a few minutes adrift but that doesn't make any significant difference to anything.

There is no need to try to make anything 'fit' - SY have already done that with their forensic analysis of the timelines.

[Eleanor]

There were three possible exits from that appartment.  One seems more likely than the others.

[stephen25000]

I accept JT's timing/sighting because I believe she is telling the truth.   I believe that because no-one can come up with a  reason why she should lie which is even remotely credible.      It may be that her times are not accurate down the last second and may be a few minutes adrift but that doesn't make any significant difference to anything.

There is no need to try to make anything 'fit' - SY have already done that with their forensic analysis of the timelines.

What forensic analysis ?

If SY had even the simplest clue, this case would be over.

[icabodcrane]

I accept JT's timing/sighting because I believe she is telling the truth.   I believe that because no-one can come up with a  reason why she should lie which is even remotely credible.      It may be that her times are not accurate down the last second and may be a few minutes adrift but that doesn't make any significant difference to anything.

There is no need to try to make anything 'fit' - SY have already done that with their forensic analysis of the timelines.

That is not an accurate statement

Scotland Yard have said that there was an opportunity for an abductor to have struck that night  (  without specifying the most likely time for it have, possibly,  occured )    ...  they, most certainly,  have not said that the man Jane Tanner saw was,  or might even  be  'likely'  to have been an abductor

It is misleading to suggest that they have