So how did the abductor enter and leave the apartment?

[Redblossom]

Yes.  Five prints belonging to one individual.  Windows are cleaned but the frames are rarely cleaned to the extent that finger prints are removed completely.   In any event one doesn't open a window by touching the glass and that is the only part a cleaner will routinely clean.

Red, we aren't looking for the 'ordinarily', we are looking for the unique situation and if an abductor gained access via the shutter his or her prints would be on the outer frame unless he used gloves in which case there wouldn't be any prints to find.   

What is surprising though is that Gerrys prints aren't on the frame since he claims to have played with them in order to establish if they could be raised from the outside.

Im not going to go round the houses Angelo, I said my piece in my previous posts on the fingerprint issue

There were prints found on the outside of the shutters, smudged/incomplete, they were most probably Gerrys and Dianes

IF any abductor opened them then he used gloves, as no alien prints were found on the window
End of the day, if anyone wanted to get in or out, the window would be the last place IMO, nothing stopping these so called mastermind abductors who watched the place for days and were so organised to just drilling through the front door keyhole, snatching the child and leaving same way in seconds, rather than fumbling with shutters that wouldnt stay up if opened from outside, but, oh they might have reached in once they raised them and used the internal mechanism to make sure they stayed up, thats IF the the actual window was open for them to get in! And of course, no sign of damage on the window. Then these highly organised masterminds who planned it meticulously all week and knew their movements, decide to strike at the exact same time Gerry is doing a check, and then, after gotten away with it, and gotten away with making a racket in the dead peace of the night opening that shutter, then flounder and have one of them wandering the streets 45 minutes later and along the same route they were spotted the first time, carrying a child, risking being spotted again! And knowing! A 9.30 check will have been made so the alarm would have been  raised.

The whole Jane Tanner, Jez Wilkins chatting at the side whilst Madeleine is being abducted just does not ring true or right

Computer says no and the question remains why they INSIST this was the time when they have no evidence to say it was over and above eg the Smith sighting which is miles more credible in so many ways, and of course, neither sightings might have been of Madeleine. Jane Tanner saw in her own words * a pair of feet and the bottom of the pyjamas* and nothing else. the Smiths saw a blonde girl wearing long sleeved pyjamas (not short sleeved) and trousers.

[Redblossom]

Mr McCann said he shut the window. If you can open, force and shut shutters and windows with words, why would you open, force and shut them in reality ?

Thinking about this for a few minutes Anne


 

[Benice]

- Five prints (Kates) were identified, not one.
- Windows get cleaned regularly so there will be no dozens of different prints at any one stage, and if there were are you also suggesting thry were wiped by the forensics lady?? i hope not LOL. no one said they touched the window that night except for Kate, BUT the only oddity is that Gerry told the maintenance manager that he had shut the window, because it was cold for the other children sleeping,but none of his prints were found but its very possible he took care and used some material so as not to contaminate evidence any further 
- The shutters will not have prints on them ordinarily as they are opened and closed without touching them at all,from a pulley mechanism from inside the flat
- Re unusable prints, none were on the window of the kids bedroom, three were on the outside of the shutters,but they are accounted for by Gerry and Diane webster testing the shutters, I believe the much used patio door glass had a few though, unusable ones that is, but as I said earlier, all were mentioned in the fingerprints report, useable or not, along with their locations

Edited

When it comes to fingerprints on the window - one would expect (as this was important) that the cleaners would have been specifically asked by the PJ if they had cleaned the windows,  and if so, when.        I have not come across a statement which throws any light on this.    Has anyone else?

Kate and Gerry closed the shutters and window the day they arrived and left them like that for the rest of the week - and so Kate's fingerprints could have been there since that time.

Most people open windows by using the handle, so it's not that surprising if no other prints were found on the actual window pane.     On the other hand  Kate had been in that apartment for 6 days, and so it would not be at all surprising to find her fingerprints anywhere - especially in the children's bedroom  IMO.

Were the window handles forensically tested? 

[sadie]

End of the day, if anyone wanted to get in or out, the window would be the last place IMO, nothing stopping these so called mastermind abductors who watched the place for days and were so organised to just drilling through the front door keyhole, snatching the child and leaving same way in seconds,SNIP/-

I agree about the front window not being useed, Red, but with keys obviously around (burglaries via front doors in nearby flats, without any damage to the doors or locks in the weeks before) then the hidden dark front door would be the obvious choice of any break in merchant

Jane Tanner saw in her own words * a pair of feet and the bottom of the pyjamas* and nothing else. the Smiths saw a blonde girl wearing long sleeved pyjamas (not short sleeved) and trousers.

Pyjamas

Martin Smiths statement
— She was wearing light-coloured pyjamas. He cannot state with certainty the colour. She was not covered by any wrap or blanket. He cannot confirm whether she was barefoot but in his group, they spoke about the child having no cover on her feet.


Aoife Smiths statement
— She was wearing light trousers, white or light pink, that may have been pyjamas. She does not remember if they were patterned as it was dark. The material was lightweight/thin and could have been cotton.
— She also had a light top, with long sleeves. She did not see it well because the individual had his arms around the child. She is not sure if the child's top was the same colour as her trousers, saying only that it was very light. The fabric was the same as the trousers.


Peter Smiths statement
— He does not remember her clothing very well but thinks it was lightweight summer clothing, light in colour. He does not remember if she was covered with any wrap or blanket. He cannot affirm if she was barefoot.

You are correct, Red, the statement of Aoife says long sleeves and Madeleines pyjamas according to pictures had short sleeves. 

Seems there was nothing on either Madeleines nor this little girls feet

To me, if this is Madeleine, and I think it is, then something happened to cause a change of clothes, or additional clothing being added.  Maybe she was blue with cold, maybe the chloroform(if administered) caused her to vomit down herself and her clothes were changed? 

I have said it over and over that a scream was heard coming from the Staff quarters just about 50 metres north of Peter Smiths sighting on the same road.  This was according to a poster on the 3A's.

I think she was taken in there, and a member of OC staff helped out ... probably the lifter.  Clothes were added or changed.



I think that phone calls were made from there.  After the pick up failed, I think ?bundleman headed there. for advice/ instructions ... or to inform the boat moored outside the harbour gates at Lagos, to set out.   The abduction was completed and pick up required. 
.... and that is where so much time elapsed ... waiting for the boat to come and pick up.  Need not be that particular boat, but interest has been showed in it ... maybe because it purportedly had a connectioon to Sergey malinka ....and he seems to have raised the PJ's antennae

The sailing distance would be less than 6 miles.  IIRC the speed limit after dark is 10 mph (that might be nautical miles per hour, have forgotten)  A man in a hurry would easily exceed that and could be there in under half an hour


These are only my thoughts and I await tbem being pulled apart.


However, I think I know where they sailed to and it fits into sightings with perfect timings

That is all I am saying


Over to you

[sadie]

heights

Martin Smiths statement
— Regarding the description of the individual who carried the child he states that: he was Caucasian, around 175 to 180m in height. [Approx 5'9"- less than 5'11"]

Aoife Smiths statement
 — (1) the individual was male, Caucasian, light-skinned, between 20/30 years of age, of normal physical build, around 1,70/1,75 metres in height.  [Approx 5'7" -5'9"]. 

Peter Smiths statement
— The description of the individual who carried the child was: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 cm tall. [approx 5'9" to less tha 5'11"]


Aoife met the man on level ground so height would be easier to assess imo.  The others saw him coming down the hill towards them, which might make him appear taller.  Because of this and also because Aoife proved herself very observant, I favour about 1.75 metres = approx 5'9"


I have met Gerry and he cut an impressive figure.  I would think he is about 6'1" to 6'2" tall.

The height difference is too great between the man seen by the Smiths and Gerry Mccann,

The man the Smiths saw was NOT Gerry Mccann.  No way could Gerry be described as Aoife did ... as maybe only 5'7" tall.  That is a small man.  Gerry is a big man  It surprised me, just how tall he is.

No wonder Amaral decided that the Smiths man was NOT Gerry.

[sadie]

I'm wondering if the above two posts are too much for the [ censored word] to tackle.  Too many facts?


Albeit followed by a theory, which builds on the facts ...  only a theory but it fits the facts ... and might be right? 

[John]

Some very well researched and developed thoughts indeed Sadie.

Could it be that the [ censored word] appear to be running out of steam as one by one their theories evaporate just as bundleman did?

As there appears to be two different threads converging I suggest we get back to the specific topic ie.  "So how did the abductor enter and leave the apartment?"

[Angelo222]

Are you snarling at me Angelo?

Have I said something that I ought not?  Cos I dont know what it is.

Sorry Sadie, didn't intend it to look like a snarl but a wide grin. 

[Angelo222]

The whole Jane Tanner, Jez Wilkins chatting at the side whilst Madeleine is being abducted just does not ring true or right.

So now you are accusing an independent witness of inventing stories Red?   Where will it end? 

[faithlilly]

So now you are accusing an independent witness of inventing stories Red?   Where will it end? 

I don't think that's what Red is saying at all. Tell me Angelo, is it forum etiquette for admin to put words into a posters mouth?

[faithlilly]

Some very well researched and developed thoughts indeed Sadie.

Could it be that the [ censored word] appear to be running out of steam as one by one their theories evaporate just as bundleman did?

As there appears to be two different threads converging I suggest we get back to the specific topic ie.  "So how did the abductor enter and leave the apartment?"

Tell you what John shall all us '[ censored word]' and leave you all to it ? How long do you think the supporters would stick around with us gone ?

[John]

Tell you what John shall all us '[ censored word]' and leave you all to it ? How long do you think the supporters whole stick around with us gone ?

Feel free, the truth will endure in your absence!

[faithlilly]

Feel free, the truth will endure in your absence!

Truth is a moveable feast as has been ably demonstrated on this forum John. 

[DCI]

So lets see??   Only one finger print was identified even though dozens of people have opened and closed the window and the shutter.  You forget about the several others which were unusable.

Its ever likely, no fingerprints were any good. No glove, and her fingers are all over the shutter. I hope that not a roll of selotape she's using  



Now what hapenned to these 2 print results? You can't tell me there was no result from those! Oh and where's all that lichen gone?



Height of wall from car park side. How tall is Donal Macintyre?

[John]

Truth is a moveable feast as has been a not demonstrated on this forum John. 

Sorry but you are so wrong. 

This forum prides itself on exploring and reporting the facts which eventually lead to the truth as has already been seen in cases such as Bamber, Proud, Hall and Craigie to name but some. 

We are not interested in fantasy theories or bizarre speculations.  The truth never changes, only some peoples perspective of it!