21 July 2009

The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part II



G – Appreciation and Juridical Frame

From the analysis of the elements that are part of the files, this first conclusion emerges immediately:

When the GNR officers arrived on location, several people had already touched the window and entered Madeleine’s and her siblings’ bedroom, and later on, when the PJ arrived at the apartment to collect traces, the space had already been rummaged through and contaminated due to the entrance of all of those people and to the fact that everything had been touched, thus rendering inviable, right away, the collection of important elements for the investigation.

In the drama of the moment, nobody – parents, friends of the parents, resort management and personnel – was cold and lucid enough to preserve the crime scene, preventing that rummaging and the consequent contamination of traces from happening, while it is common knowledge that it is any person’s responsibility to preserve crime scenes – apart from a legal demand: article 171 number 2 of the Penal Process Code – thus avoiding that traces can be erased or altered, therefore the collectable evidence had already lost much of its indicative value. Hence the lack of evidential elements that were collected during that initial phase, so much so that the only latent fingerprints that were collected, with the number of elements that are necessary to perform a positive identification, were individualised as belonging to the missing child’s mother and to a GNR officer (pages 885 and 1520), thus immediately rendering the collection of important data for the investigation inviable.

It was only when members of the Polícia Judiciária arrived, at around 0.10 a.m., following a request for their presence, that measures were taken to make the collection of residues and the preservation of the event’s location possible.

It further results from the files that, despite the fact that the ‘Ocean Club’ resort’s crèche offers a complimentary dining out service from 7.30 until 11.30 p.m., at an additional cost, apart from another babysitting service with no defined schedule [22], the members of this group of friends with children chose to do their own checking on the children during dinner. During a first phase, each couple took turns among them to check on their own children, and as the days went by, they started to ask one of the members that got up, to listen whether there was any noise in their apartment, as Jane Tanner mentioned during questioning on the 10th of May 2007 [23], with the exception of the David and Fiona Payne couple, who possessed an intercom system to watch over their children Lilly Payne and Scarlett Payne.

It is extracted from the files that the McCanns and their friends checked to verify if all was well with their children, as can be concluded from what the members of this group declared, and also derives from the testimony of Jerónimo Tomás Rodrigues Salceda, a waiter at the Tapas [24], who stated that he “noticed, because it was evident, that some of the group’s members sometimes went outside of the restaurant to do something, which by and by he realised was to “check” on the children. Nevertheless, he was always convinced that those children were in a space that belonged to the Luz Ocean Club…”

Nevertheless, it can also be concluded from the files that this surveillance with the periodicity that was mentioned above was not the one that is alleged in the files, which leaves unexplained why, on that night, the procedures were altered in the sense of reducing the checking intervals.

In effect, this group of friends was enjoying a short holiday period, therefore perfectly relaxed and it would be normal that, having dinner, inclusively with an entertainment service available [25], they were not very concerned with anything that might happen to their children during that dinner period.

It is so much so that Kate herself mentions that on Thursday morning, the 3rd, Madeleine questioned her about the reason why they didn’t come to her room, given the fact that the twins had cried [26], as was also mentioned by Gerald.

Pamela Fenn, who resides on the residential block’s first floor, above the apartment that was occupied by the McCann family, clarified that on the 1st of May 2007, two days before her disappearance, at around 10.30 p.m., she heard a child crying, which from the sound would be MADELEINE and that she cried for an hour and fifteen minutes, until her parents arrived, at around 11.57 p.m.

This shows that the parents were not persistently worried about their children [and] that they didn’t check on them like they afterwards declared they did, rather neglecting their duty to guard those same children, although not in a temerarious, or gross, manner.

If said guard duty had been observed, in the possibility of this being an abduction, as was insistently mentioned and continues to be mentioned and is admissible to have happened, its occurrence might eventually have been rendered inviable.

It is further added that Kate, after noticing that the bedroom’s window and shutters were open and Madeleine was missing, headed for the Tapas Restaurant asking for help, suggesting that an abduction had taken place, it is incomprehensible, or only comprehensible in a state of panic, that she once again abandoned, this time only the twins, while the Tapas was close enough to shout for help, - although Matthew Oldfield refers [27] that from the restaurant table there was very tenuous visibility, taking into account the distance at which they were from the apartments, and vision being hampered by a transparent linoleum that covered the area where the tables were located.

Finally, the fact that, despite all that confusion and all that noise, the twins continued to sleep, as mentioned by GNR Officer José Maria Baptista Roque, a member of the patrol that was first to arrive at the apartment “the children never woke up, remaining in a ventral decubitus position, not moving during the search and afterwards” [28], remains unexplained. Nevertheless, a Team from the Criminal Police Lab, on the 4th of May 2007, eliminated the existence of any product that could have been ministered to the missing child, in order to maintain her in a state of unconsciousness, as well as the presence of blood traces.

On the other hand, it also results that none of the parents was inside the apartment when Madeleine disappeared and that their behaviour until the moment of the disappearance was perfectly normal, not manifesting any kind of preoccupation or any other similar feeling, contrary to what happened after that moment when the state of panic was notorious.

While it is an unavoidable fact that Madeleine disappeared from Apartment 5A of the ‘Ocean Club’, the manner and circumstances under which this happened are not – despite the numerous diligences made in that sense -, therefore the range of crimes that were indicated and referred to during the inquiry remains untouched.

It seems evident to us and because the files contain enough elements for such, that the crime of exposure or abandonment according to article 138 of the Penal Code can be eliminated from that range:

“1 – Whoever places another person’s life in danger,

a) By exposing her in a location where she is subject to a situation from which she, on her own, cannot defend herself against; or

b) Abandoning her without defence, whenever the agent had the duty to guard her, to watch over her or to assist her;”

This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim’s life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim’s behalf. In the case of the files and facing the elements that were collected it is evident that none of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.

The parents didn’t even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.

Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty – the disappearance of Madeleine – due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.

Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.

The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics’ conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.

To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media before the polices was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.

Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child’s death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the ‘Ocean Club’ resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal."


in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4639-4645 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)

Related:

The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part I
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part II
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part III
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part IV
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part V
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part VI
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part VII
The Archiving of the Madeleine McCann Process: One Year On - Part VIII

PDF File via Expresso


31 comments:

  1. I watched again "Anatomy of a Mistery" RTP, made by Sandra Felgueiras, that still can be watched on McCannfiles.
    It was made around October, November 2007, not yet two years ago.
    What a terrible difference we can see in Mitchell.
    He aged a lot, since that time.
    Could the Mccanns be the reason?
    I bet they are.
    Mitchell could be living under a terrible pressure.
    Maybe he believed in the abduction when he got involved in this case, right in the beginning. Or maybe he knew the truth but he did not expect to get a bad name like he did. He must have thought the noise would take a short time and people would forget it.
    Getting aged like he did does not come only from normal tiredness.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Congratulations Astro
    As usual you make brilliant and well founded analysis.
    That’s my conviction also, but nobody seems to care, out in that Mccan support circle.
    Or should I ad our corrupt Public Ministry, also?”

    Dears Astro and Joana keep being our voice about this matter (I know it's a heavy burden), because you're the only ones we can trust.

    Beijinho

    Luz

    ReplyDelete
  3. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1201002/Giving-GMTV-improved-marriage-better-mother-says-Fiona-Phillips.html


    Fionna Phillips another one who bragged about leaving her children in a hotel room ...does not look too great since leaving GMTV. Maybe it is the Mccann spell that ages all that go near them.



    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  4. Its strange a few people mention the Maccann spell, I do believe people can drag you down,and there is nothing worse than a liar.
    Nothing good ever comes from lies and don't the Macccans know it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_15143.shtml



    Odd how parents whose children are truly abducted want nothing to do with the Mccanns..The mother of Yeremi Vargis also refused any connection with the odd couple.



    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  6. They are a very strange couple. The way they stayed in Portugal for 4 months what for what was the purpose of that. Madelaine was already dead. Answers please on a postcard.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "When the GNR officers arrived on location, several people had already touched the window and entered Madeleine’s and her siblings’ bedroom, and later on, when the PJ arrived at the apartment to collect traces, the space had already been rummaged through and contaminated due to the entrance of all of those people and to the fact that everything had been touched, thus rendering inviable, right away, the collection of important elements for the investigation.
    In the drama of the moment, nobody – parents, friends of the parents, resort management and personnel – was cold and lucid enough to preserve the crime scene, preventing that rummaging and the consequent contamination of traces from happening"...


    I can understand that the parents who have just found their child missing (or seriously injured, or worse, dead) get in a state of panic and have no head to think rationally, but, what about their friends, most of them trained professionals, doctors in medicine? Surelly at least one would have realized how vital it was to keep things untouched! Aren't doctors trained to preserve any possible evidence, for instance, in cases of rape?
    Can anyone imagine any of them attending to a victim of rape in hospital and tell her to go and get a good shower, get all cleaned up, have a nice cup of tea, ..."you'll feel much better dear, you'll see..."?


    "Nevertheless, a Team from the Criminal Police Lab, on the 4th of May 2007, eliminated the existence of any product that could have been ministered to the missing child, in order to maintain her in a state of unconsciousness, as well as the presence of blood traces."

    Now, this is news to me! What does this mean? That the police could not find any such products INSIDE THE APARTMENT, or does it mean that the twins were indeed submitted to blood tests the following day?
    And what about the NO blood traces?! Were there or were there not traces of blood found behind the sofa and on a wall? I'm confused...

    ReplyDelete
  8. http://nigelnessling.wordpress.com/2008/05/10/hello-world/


    xxxxxxxxxx


    Have just seen on the 3As Nigel Nessling is trying to have the 3As closed which means he will also be gunning for you Joana....

    He seems to have the idea that madeleine is still alive and holds some mystic powers for our future....Here is one of his ramblings and his cult followers,,,,



    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  9. 'Anonymous said...
    They are a very strange couple. The way they stayed in Portugal for 4 months what for what was the purpose of that. Madelaine was already dead. Answers please on a postcard.

    22/07/09 17:11'

    Perhaps the expensive legal team (paid from the family Company set up with Joe Public's cash) needed time to find legal loopholes regarding not being charged with child neglect or more in the UK. I would like to know who told them that their actions were well within the bounds of responsible parenting. Imo if they did not have the Fund then the circumstances they would have found themselves in would be very different from the situation they find themselves in now.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Watching well on the mirror today, I noticed I have a lot more winkles now than I used to have before.
    How come, if I never met Mitchell?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anon: "Nevertheless, a Team from the Criminal Police Lab, on the 4th of May 2007, eliminated the existence of any product that could have been ministered to the missing child, in order to maintain her in a state of unconsciousness, as well as the presence of blood traces."

    Now, this is news to me! What does this mean? That the police could not find any such products INSIDE THE APARTMENT, or does it mean that the twins were indeed submitted to blood tests the following day?
    And what about the NO blood traces?! Were there or were there not traces of blood found behind the sofa and on a wall? I'm confused..."

    According to what was revealed at the time in several TV programes, in Portugal, the Forensic Team did not find traces of blood with nacked eyes, because the flat was immaculated clean and tied ( A surprise for the police because normally in holidays, parents with 3 kids so small will spend the time enjoying the holidays and not cleaning or tieding the flat-STRANGE AND SUSPICIOUS. Because with nacked eyes it was hard to find the blood, they decide to use UV light and bring the english dogs in to help them. A normal procedure in any crime investigation and the result was not a surprise for the police ( PJ and British police) they find traces of blood in the locations made public already.
    Regarding the medicines... which the police looked for to see if anyone can have a sedative effect... it was strange for the police aswell, how a couple of doctors with small children did not have any medicine in the flat, not even the normal calpol used for fever. Normally all parents, even if they are not doctors, travel with a small emergency kit of medicines which include normal calpol or any other with same effect. The police was not looking for the calpol night, even because in Portugal, the calpol night was not available because of her danger sedative effects. ANNOTHER STRANGE BEHAVIOR- THE MCCANN'S TRAVEL TO A FOREIGNER COUNTRY WITH 3 BABYS WITHOUT AN EMERGENCY KIT - Hard to believe... then, why there is no any medicine in the flat? why they get ride of them and why they did not give permission for the police to do a blood test to the twins, even because they did not wake-up after all the noise. The normal behavior for any parent which have a suspicion of one child being abducted, is asking the other sibilings which lived in the same room, to be checked in the hospital, for drugs, rape, etc. They avoid any check-up in the twins, this is why they bring the Embassador to Praia da Luz so quickly. This behavior was very criticised by portuguese public and from the very beginning the public start looking to that couple with surprise and suspicion. Every day they walk annother step in what seems the wrong way for two innocent parents of a child victim of an abduction. They did not help the police or Madeleine, from the first minute. BLAMING THE POLICE, AMARAL, THE RESOT OR PORTUGAL IS THE MOST RIDICULOUS ACTION THEY DID. I WAS OUT OF PORTUGAL AND I HEARD ON THE SAME NIGHT AS MADELINE DISAPPEARED, IN RTP INTERNATIONAL, THE NEWS AND THE APPEAL OF THE POLICE ABOUT A LITTLE BRITISH GIRL MISSED IN THE ALGARVE. THE APPEAL CROSSED THE WORLD ON THE SAME NIGHT, MAKING THE MCCANN'S AND ALL PROS SO STUPID WHEN THEY COMPARE PORTUGAL WITH A THIRD WORLD AND TIED THE PJ IN AN INCOMPETENCE BAG. We are in a group when we heard the news. I remember our comments about the case. We all had that feeling... poor girl and poor PJ investigating what since the beginning shows up as a SAGA. The time passed and we are true... poor girl and poor police, are the only two victims which missed something.

    ReplyDelete
  12. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5877849/10-notorious-unsolved-crimes.html



    Many months ago the Telegraph told us maddie died from sedation..They seem to have had a change of heart though and now blame the haples PJ...They go on to say that the mccanns have released a photo of what maddie may look like now and I use the word MAY.

    The Telegraph are very bright and helpful to the mccanns they have not released the new photo but maddie looking cute in her fairy outfit....duh



    IRONSIDE


    At least one good thing has come out of this saga 'as this photo aged of maddie is only a MAY there will be no more sightings unless of course arranged by the mccanns...so we have slipped into looking for the non existant bogeyman.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Correction about my comment:

    my wrinkles.

    How come if I never met the Mccanns?

    ReplyDelete
  14. It is summer... time for rest and for holidays... No SIGHTS OF MADDIE AGED 6 OR 4, no SIGHTS OF POTENTIAL ABDUCTORS.
    Are the Mccann's saving money for their 5 stars holidays? YES!!!!
    In Holidays, the public are busy enjoying their rest and they care less about what hapenned to Maddie. THE MCCANN'S KNOW THAT AND SAVE MONEY ON SIGHTS OF MADDIE AND ABDUCTORS.

    In September the BOGGYMAN'S will be back to childs nightmares and to front newspaper pages.

    ReplyDelete
  15. http://littlemorsals.blogspot.com/

    Sasha
    Little Morsals has some videos of a weekly program called "Hauntings"..although I do not believe as such I do have an open mind..Carla Baron..John Oliver..and Patrick Burns...will do a background search on them and see if they are known as frauds.


    But for the moment for me the interest is the program takes us around PDL and other places of interest. You get the feel of the church and Chaplins right next door plus interviews with the locals. What a lovely place PDL is.

    What throws me and stops me believing is Carlas "visions" are of maddie laughing and playing on the beach...when we all know that she spent most of her time there in the creche.


    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  16. If you have never met the maccanns's Thank God you could have ended up woosh woosh gone without a trace. Lucky Lucky you.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anon I think your winkles or "wrinkles" even 'come from frowning in disbelief at the mccanns next tactic. Then followed by bashing the board to post a reply in disgust. These facial movements can turn into a permanent scowl...Look at the mccanns and how they have aged in just two years..Kate looks nearer 50 and mccann well...no comment...Just look back to the days of June and July when they thought all was going to plan and the days after the arguido status..aged in front of our eyes.

    Maybe we could all do with a dash of Botox before this case is over...Before too long we will know each other in the street by our worn out faces....Mccann Fatigue....



    IRONSIDE

    ReplyDelete
  18. Are we supposed to believe that an abductor exited the apartment through a small window with a considerable drop, and the child remained in a deep sleep?

    The childs bed was tested by the Portuguese forensics and showed negative to substances such as chloroform/ether.

    ReplyDelete
  19. ANON: "The childs bed was tested by the Portuguese forensics and showed negative to substances such as chloroform/ether."

    THE CHILDS BED WAS TESTED BY THE FORENSICS DR. AND SHOWED NEGATIVE TO MADELEINE. NO TRACES OR SIGNS OF THE LITTLE GIRL IN THE BED AND THE BED WAS TOO TIED FOR AN ABDUCTOR TO TAKE A CHILD IN A QUICLY AND RUSHED WAY. REMEMBER... GERRY SAID THE ABDUCTOR REST LESS THEN 5 MINUTES INSIDE THE FLAT. HE WAS THE SUPER MAN.... I THINK, THE GIRL DID NOT SLEEP ON THAT BED THAT NIGHT...

    ReplyDelete
  20. If it was a case of chloroform or other things similar to it, it was not used on Maddie's bed.
    Maddie's bed was not used that evening or night.
    In my opinion, she never reached her room after being bathed.
    She stayed in the bathroom and living room.
    And she probably died in the living room.
    I still wonder where the blood came from.
    At first I thought it could have come as result of an improvised tracheotomy.
    But in this case, her pyjama T-shirt would have had blood spots.
    We don't know how much blood she lost and where it came from.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Re McCann's taking medicines on holiday to Portugal.

    From Police interview with Gerry McCann:

    'When questioned, he states that none of his children takes any kind of medication regularly in England.
    --- When they travelled on holiday to Portugal they brought several medicines, namely Calpol, Nurofen, for fevers and pains, both for adults and children, Losec for gastric problems that he occasionally suffers from, and an anti-histamine called Terfenadine for hay fever. He did not give any of these medicines or any others to the children while on holiday in Portugal.
    ---- When asked at what time he went to check on the children the night Madeleine disappeared, he recalls that this was around 21:04 according to his watch. He remembers that once inside the apartment he was surprised that the door to the children's room was slightly more open than how they had left it when he and Kate left for dinner.

    However, it could not have been Madeleine who had opened the door after waking and getting up, eventually to go to her parents' room.

    On this occasion, the three children were lying in their beds asleep, he is sure of this.

    Moreover, he says that with respect to Madeleine she was in the same position where he had left her at the beginning of the night.

    Madeleine was lying down on her left side, completely uncovered, i.e. lying on top of the covers with the soft toy and blanket, both pink, next to her head; he does not know if they were in the position that can be seen in the photograph attached to the files.'

    End

    A.Miller

    cntd

    Cntd

    ReplyDelete
  22. Is it possible that Madeleine came across these medicines and perhaps overdosed, fell and was injured?

    Is it not also strange that on this cold evening, that the child was lying on top of the bedclothes and not tucked up?

    It would only be natural (to me anyway as a parent)if when looking in on a sleeping child, to go over to the bed, make sure they are covered well and comfortable. Even when they are, it is natural still to go over and adjust the covering ever so slightly, despite it not being necessary. It is just something a parent does.

    What I cannot understand, is this:

    That Gerry McCann stood for a couple of minutes looking at Madeleine thinking how beautiful she was and how lucky that he was to have her, yet he did not go to the child and cover her, not even with the sheet. He left her, on a cold night, lying on top of the bedclothes -'WHERE HE HAD LEFT HER' he stated. He also said she had not moved, that she had remained in same position as he had left her at the BEGINNING of the night.

    His statement suggests to me that Madeleine was already asleep/unconscious when HE put her ON the bed.

    He doesn't speak about putting his child 'to bed' as parents would, or tucking her up for the night.

    He said - She was 'WHERE HE HAD LEFT HER' as though a parcel.

    I don't know of any parent, who on a cold night or any other, who would just lay their child on top of the bedclothes, not covering even lightly with a sheet, unless extremely hot weather. And I do not know of any parent who would when checking on their child, at this later time, when the night would have grown colder, not THEN going over to the bed to cover the child.

    If, as the McCann's stated, they believe the intruder came in through the window, and the breeze outside was strong, strong enough as Kate suggested, to whoosh curtains wide open, the room would have been significantly colder when Gerry went on his visit to apartment.

    This 'father' did not cover his daughter with the bedclothes.

    Something is not right.

    The child had not moved either, in what - 1 and a half, to two hours, from when they had first put the children to bed at the BEGINNING of the night?

    She had lain in the cold room for this length of time and Gerry did not think to cover her?

    If you ask me, he is either one thoughtless uncaring son of a bitch, or he is lying through his teeth!

    Actually probably both!

    I wonder if he also noticed if the twins were still lying in the same postion which he had left them at the beginning of the night? Or if he had covered them? Did he go over to the cots to make sure they were cosy enough on this cold evening.

    As for the medicines they took with them? If they were NOT there in the apartment when the police searched. They had been removed beforehand.

    Who removed them?

    The intruder or the distraught parents of the missing child?

    Why would an intruder remove them?

    Why would distraught parents of a missing child think to remove the medicines?

    No, neither makes sense!

    Why would Kate McCann hope that the alleged abductor would give Madeleine her pink blanket (blankie) when, like cuddle cat, it was not NOT taken from the apartment by the alleged abductor?

    Curioser and curioser!

    Sr Amaral's book could not have been more aptly titled!

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  23. Gerry McCann's statement:

    'When questioned, he states that from the first moment, after the first fruitless searches, he thought that Madeleine had been abducted and it was this information that he gave to everyone to whom he spoke. He reached such a conclusion because he DID NOT THINK IT POSSIBLE THAT SHE HAD GONE OUT ON HER OWN OR OPENED THE BLINDS AND THE WINDOW IN THE ROOM.'

    ----

    This too is odd. As Fiona Payne stated in her statement to Leicestershire police, that she and Kate discussed (in reference to McCann's leaving patio door unlocked) whether it was better to leave it unlocked so that if Madeleine woke, she could get out!


    So why would Gerry and Kate reach the conclusion, so quickly that someone had taken their daughter, when they both knew that they had purposely left the door unlocked?

    Fiona Payne stated, that Kate told her it was so that Madeleine was able to get out?

    If this is so, then the McCann's MUST have known that Madeleine was able to/had strength, to open the unlocked patio door. Else to leave it unlocked for the purpose of Madeleine getting out would have been pointless.

    Why would Kate McCann 'introduce' an unlocked patio door into the dinner table conversation on the night of the 3rd?

    Why on this night for the first time would they tell Matt Oldfield to ENTER their apartment and check on their children?

    Gerry was miffed, earlier in the evening that Oldfield had DARED to take it upon himself to listen at their bedroom window at 5a. And Oldfield stated that he felt annoyed at Gerry's attitude towards him checking.

    Yet, less than 30 minutes later they, McCann's, tell him it is okay to go INSIDE the apartment?

    Why? What changed in that short period of time that they did a 'U' turn on Oldfield being anywhere near apartment?

    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  24. It all depends on what we believe.

    Was Gerry initially annoyed at Oldfield doing an impromtu check at the window, in case Oldfield saw something which he should not?

    Or,

    Was Oldfield 'set-up' later, being allowed to go to the apartment to check, the reason being that he should discover Madeleine to be missing. But he did not check properly?

    Or, as I believe:

    The patio door was NEVER left unlocked.

    The window was NEVER jemmied open.

    Oldfield NEVER was in that apartment.

    As for the dinner conversation between Kate McCann, Fiona Payne and the others at the table re leaving the patio door unlocked so that Madeleine could get out to come find them:


    I find it quite incredulous that any parents would have such a conversation, before heading off out to leave their children.

    I fnd it quite incredulous that they would discuss their NEGLECT of their children OVER dinner with friends.

    I find it incredulous that none of their friends immediately told them that what they were doing was dangerous and reckless (as if they would not have already known!)

    I find it incredulous that any parent would have even considered going out and leaving their children in an unlocked apartment.

    I find it incredulous that any parent would leave the apartment unlocked for the purpose of their 3year old child to get out in her pyjamas, in the dark of an evening, to go look for her parents who were out wining and dining. For their 3 year old child to wander in her bare feet down a road with vehicular traffic.

    I don't believe the McCann's did!

    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  25. I believe they had to 'invent' this story, of unlocked patio door, as they knew, and know exactly what happened to Madeleine - and NO mysterious intruder, in my opinion was involved.

    If this patio door was unlocked for any reason, be it to allow Madeleine to get out, or because it was quieter than the front door when opened (McCann's worry being that the children would wake) then WHY oh WHY did Gerry McCann enter by this so called noisy front door on his check?

    Why did he take the long route round to this front door?

    He (Gerry) entered the apartment at 9:04 he said in his statment to police, this was the time on his watch he confirmed.

    Was Oldfield not at the window listening at 9:00 approx?

    Was Gerry checking that Oldfield had not seen or disturbed something?

    You see, both McCann's have stated that their children did NOT wake on ANY of the checks during that week, that all was ALWAYS quiet.

    If entering the apartment by the front door, which they HAD been doing ALL week long - did NOT disturb their children on any occasion - WHY change to using the patio door, leaving it unlocked and further endangering their children?

    That does not make any sense.

    cntd

    ReplyDelete
  26. I don't believe this patio door was left unlocked! -

    A way for an intruder to have gained entry was needed to bolster the story to be told. The patio door, in my opinion became, an 'easy' access (story)for the intruder, when the jemmied window proved to be a non starter!

    This group of people said that the McCann's behaved normally on the evening it was discovered that Madeleine was missing (I don't use 'abducted' as I don't believe she was)yet Fiona Payne told the police that Kate was anxious, worried about the door being unlocked etc. She puts the blame for this on Gerry's shoulders stating that Gerry was more laid back than Kate, and that Kate was not altogether happy with the situation.

    Tell me, what mother who was not happy about leaving their children in an unlocked apartment, would still head on off out and leave them? A mother who was not happy would tell her hubby that she would rather stay with her children.

    What mother who had discussed at the dinner table with friends her anxiety over leaving her children in an unlocked apartment would just sit there eating drinking and being 'normal' (as some have described her demeanor - another contradiction, inconsistency) for 1 and a half hours before going to check on them?

    Kate stated in her documentary, had she not noticed the bedroom door a little more open that she would likely just have not bothered to go into the bedroom to look at the children, but would have just turned and walked back out to tapas.

    So, she was NOT happy, comfortable, was worried and anxious leaving her children in an unlocked apartment. States this over dinner to friends. Sits an hour and a half before getting off her backside to go and check. Only approaches the bedroom door when she realises it was a little more open. STILL, this anxious and worried mum, does NOT enter the bedroom until that GUST of wind caused the curtain to whoosh!

    This worried mum had NO intention of even looking at her children?

    Now why would that be?

    Perhaps because the story told is not true?

    Strangely too, she, Kate said that she knew instantly when the curtains blew open and she saw that open window that, Madeleine had been 'taken'. She continued 'and cuddle cat and her blanket were still on the bed'

    Now BEFORE the wind blew the curtains open, Kate McCann stated in her documentary, that she had gone over to Madeleine's bed as she had found it hard to see whether Madeleine was in the bed, or if what she was seeing was bedclothes.

    Surely when she went over to the bed at this point, she would have seen the cuddle cat toy and the blanket?

    She has said that Madeleine would not go anywhere without the toy.

    So why did alarm bells NOT ring at this point?

    It is not until she searches the other rooms, and the wind blows the curtains open that she believes Madeleine has been abducted and the toy and blanket are intruduced as signigicant.

    Sorry, but 'Jackanory comes to mind.

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  27. Might also add, that the morning of Madeleine's disappearance she had told her parents that she and her brother had cried the previous evening.

    The McCann's have stated that in light of this they had agreed to 'up' increase the number of checks on the children that evening. I presume they discussed this increase in checks at the time time they decided it would be best to leave their children in an unlocked apartment, instead of the usually 'locked' one? As if!

    If they were now increasing the checks which on that night were half hourly - what on earth were the checks like on previous evenings?

    Are we really to believe that in light of a child telling her parents that she had woken and cried that they decided then to leave the door unlocked for her to get out!

    Unbelievable!

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  28. A Miller: "When they travelled on holiday to Portugal they brought several medicines, namely Calpol, Nurofen, for fevers and pains"

    Why the police did not find any medicine in the flat? Why the Mccann's ride off them? What are they affraid? or which other medicines are together with normal and unsuspicious one?
    Why the twins are not checked if her sister was taked by an unknown man which can be the most evil paedophile? Remember Mari Luz, in Spain... How much the girl suffer on a paedophile hands before she died?

    "When asked at what time he went to check on the children the night Madeleine disappeared, he recalls that this was around 21:04 according to his watch." AMAZING TO SEE THE ANSWERS OF THAT FATHER.... He WAS NOT SURE ABOUT ANYTHING RELEVANT TO FIND HER DAUGHTER BUT HE KNOWS EXACTLY THE TIME AND WAS ABLE EVEN TO DESCIB THE MINUTES SO MINUCIOUS... 21:04. Hard to believe... I have 4 children and use to check them every night before I go to bed, even when at home and I neverever check the time in my watch. Hard to believe this statment specially in holidays, when people tend to be more relaxed. He is lieing.... it is the only conclusion.

    "However, it could not have been Madeleine who had opened the door after waking and getting up, eventually to go to her parents' room." EXACTLY... CANNOT BE MADDIE WAKING UP BY HERSELF... THAT IS THE MOST INCONVENNIENT SITUATION FOR SOMEBODY WHICH WANTS TO SPREAD AN ABDUCTION THEORY. THE ABDUCTOR TAKE MADDIE....GERRY FORGOT, as a Dr. that ven if she just lied on top of the bed, she leave traces... and there was no traces or signs of her.

    Read more: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/07/archiving-of-madeleine-mccann-process_21.html#ixzz0MBkU4RQn
    Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives


    Read more: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/07/archiving-of-madeleine-mccann-process_21.html#ixzz0MBilgZQj
    Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives




    Read more: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/07/archiving-of-madeleine-mccann-process_21.html#ixzz0MBg6bUTr
    Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives

    ReplyDelete
  29. [Quote://So why would Gerry and Kate reach the conclusion, so quickly that someone had taken their daughter.....://end of qoute]]

    Though the evening before,(have we forgotten, maybe?) Madeleine had hidden herself (FOR WHAT!)outside for half an hour.
    Logically it should have been the McCnns first thought that Madeleine had walked off as the girl did the evening before. Why didnot they scream at that night: They have taken her.... also assuming on the third of May that everybody knew right away who was "her" that was taken. Why couldnot it have been Amely who was taken??

    ReplyDelete
  30. [Quote://TO DESCRIB THE MINUTES SO MINUCIOUS... 21:04. Hard to believe://end of quote]

    When I remember well didnot C.Mitchell tell us earlier that none of the involved people of the 3rd of May had a watch with him?

    ReplyDelete
  31. The flat was NOT immaculateky clean and tidy. That is a nonsense, just look at the photos taken by the police on the night of the 3rd. Completely normal, quite dishevilled. When are people going to stop reapeating myths and use their own eyes?

    ReplyDelete