I accept that although i was under the impression it was said that Gerry's reaction was to go in full on organisational mode in rallying the media and the UK government into action which doesn't tally with the traumatised terrified and mentally exhausted picture you paint.
That being said though the crucial thing from an investigative point of view is the belief threshold you are prepared to accept between anguish and suspicion as to such a change in the point of entry into the apartment in that last visit, particularly if there are other statements and/or actions which also arouse suspicion.
And that's the heart of the case at the moment between those who believe in the abduction theory and those who do not.
And i can't see that ever changing or being resolved until fresh evidence comes to light.
I disagree, particularly concerning the early statements, because I don't feel that people are taking into account the context.
These initial statements were to get the ball rolling. The police were under pressure as well, don't forget.
I doubt that any of them (witness, interpreter or police officer) could have imagined that the
hoi poloi would be poring over every imaginable possible "discrepancy" six years later.
None of these statements are verbatim. There is no way of checking what they actually said, as opposed to what appeared in those statements.
