Justice 4 ALL Madeleine McCann Family
You need to be a member of this forum in order to view its entire contents.
We welcome applications to join the forum from genuine caring compassionate people that wish to support Mr Mrs McCann in their never ending resolve to finding their daughter Madeleine and bringing her back home where she truly belongs.

All applicants are checked out so people with no sense, no moral compass, no rationality and only half a brain cell and even less grip on reality and who are devoid of all logic - need NOT apply!
This also applies to ex-members, who no longer want to be members, yet spend their lives viewing this forum and telling people they no longer want to be members.
This is said without prejudice with no one in particular in mind.

Window Debate

Page 5 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by clairesy on Fri Jan 22, 2010 9:02 pm

etoile brillante wrote:Hello, I did not read all the discussion, please excuse me. I think that maddie it is made remove(kidnap) by the door, and that the kidnapper specially(deliberately) left the fenetre opened to persuade has a removal(kidnapping) by somebody having no keys.

I like that!!! That makes sense.Would also explain why they found no breaking and entry :) The abductor takes her through the door with keys but leaves the scene in such a way it suggests their entry and exit route was through the window.

So they deliberately left the window that way to throw the police of the track.But instead of the police seeing the window being left open as clue they turn it around and just because they cannot find finger prints of an abductor on the window they suggest the parents are guilty.Little do they know that the abductor actually set the scene that way for them and that the window was left open solely to cause a distraction fro the real entry and exit route.

I think thats possible.

The only problem with that is that Jane tanner saw a guy/woman walking with Madeleine across the top of the road,Madeleine's head was in the crock of the persons left arm.So it means she was somehow switched.She had to have been switched because if the abductor had picked her up out of bed and walked out then her head would have still be in the crock of the abductors right arm.

BUT....what if someone who as keys was involved?? what if they were the ones who opened the door, went into the appartment to take Madeleine(madeleine possible knew them) and then hand her over to the abductors outside the door??

If a cleaner or member of staff had got caught by one of the tapas inside the appartment they could easily have explained themselves away by saying they had come to fix something or to do something.I know it was late but im sure the mccanns would have been more shocked to see a stranger i there than member of staff(if they had been caught in the act!)

That person who has the keys could of picked Madeleine up....walked back to the door...handed her over to the abductor and then locked up again.

Also it would have been easily done because those who have previously been into the appartments have known exactly where the children were sleeping.So it would have been a case of straight in and straight out.

Because they would have left no indication of a break in they had to leave the apartment window open to suggest that a possible stranger to the appartments with no keys had got in somehow and took her.

Police find no finger prints on the window only kates.The only other prints were that of a cop(which i find really odd to)

Maybe a cleaner or someone with gloves??if a cleaner had been involved and didn't want to look suspicious
getting caught by the mccanns perhaps they actually entered the apparts
wearing cleaning uniform and/or gloves?

Do the waiters there wear little white gloves? I know some waiters do.

Still think murat somehow fits in here .I cannot let this man drop from my mind.Never have been able to and probably never will be able to.

Someone is on the payroll.
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

LET'S KEEP IT SIMPLE!!

Post by Royal on Fri Jan 22, 2010 11:21 pm

Firstly I do not think more than one person was involved in the actual abduction, unless another person was waiting out of sight in a vehicle? But there has never been any sighting or evidence of a third person being involved which leads me to think maybe he was a local man and that Madeleine could still be hidden away somewhere locally! Assuming just one man WAS involved and had the use of dupicate keys? there would be neither sense nor reason for him to open the window, what on earth for? In such a situation 'speed' would be of the essence so he would have opened the door, entered the bedroom, grabbed the child and rushed out again, which firmly brings into question the use of keys and the front door theory? "Why would he then, having a child in his arms, have bothered to close and lock the door behind him?" I very much doubt it, he would have left the scene ASAP! And where would he have obtained the keys from in the first place? even 'stupid' Amaral's lot will have looked into that possibillity. No, the fact is he probably furtively checked out the secluded the building in the dark, found the shutter and window unlocked and climbed inside, then lifting Maeleine from her bed left by the same means leaving both the window and shutter open on his way out! What could be more simple? Gerry and Kate have said that that the children are sound sleepers so Madeleine probably slept through the whole thing, and even if she partially awoke 'in the dark' she would confidently have assumed it was her parents carrying her and dozed off again. Why would she think otherwise? The only other logical alternative to this perplexing mystery is that he entered through the Patio window and 'then' left through the window to avoid being seen carrying the child, but I do not for one minute believe in the "door" theory it just does not make any sense, far to complicated!
Alroy.

Royal
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 858
Location : Manchester
Registration date : 2008-08-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by Sabot on Fri Jan 22, 2010 11:33 pm

You don't need a key to open these doors from the inside. Entering by the Patio Door is a distinct possibility.

I do believe that Madeleine was passed to another person, simply because of the way in which the child was being carried when seen by Jane Tanner. The first abductor could simply have gone off in another direction.

There are several reason for why the window could have been opened.

I went through it all in my head last night, having Madeleine passed through the window, and it all made perfect sense, even down to passing her out head first so that her arms and legs wouldn't catch on the window edges.

Sabot
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 764
Location : France
Registration date : 2009-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by etoile brillante on Sat Jan 23, 2010 1:35 am

We can carry(wear) a 3-4-year-old child of a single arm to close a door...

Either he(it) entered by this door and has to give madeleine by the WINDOWS has somebody else?
avatar
etoile brillante
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 76
Location : france
Registration date : 2009-12-31

http://etoilebrillante6.forumpro.fr/forum.htm

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by Sabot on Sat Jan 23, 2010 1:52 am

etoile brillante wrote:We can carry(wear) a 3-4-year-old child of a single arm to close a door...

Either he(it) entered by this door and has to give madeleine by the WINDOWS has somebody else?

The child Jane Tanner saw was being carried across two arms, this suggests the child being handed to another person after being picked up out of bed.
After that, the second abductor would have wanted to get away quickly. In fact, he was nearly caught.

The abductor would then have changed the mode of carrying, once out of sight, and before being seen by The Smiths.

The first abductor could even have caught up with the second and then changed over again.

Those children have to have been sedated by one of the abductors.

Sabot
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 764
Location : France
Registration date : 2009-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Sat Jan 23, 2010 1:54 am

Sabot wrote:
etoile brillante wrote:We can carry(wear) a 3-4-year-old child of a single arm to close a door...

Either he(it) entered by this door and has to give madeleine by the WINDOWS has somebody else?

The child Jane Tanner saw was being carried across two arms, this suggests the child being handed to another person after being picked up out of bed.
After that, the second abductor would have wanted to get away quickly. In fact, he was nearly caught.

The abductor would then have changed the mode of carrying, once out of sight, and before being seen by The Smiths.

The first abductor could even have caught up with the second and then changed over again.

Those children have to have been sedated by one of the abductors.


Totally agree with you Sabot.
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by Sabot on Sat Jan 23, 2010 2:07 am

I just don't understand why the morons and The PJ can't see this, Tink.

There is or are predators out there who steal children. They will do it again, eventually. If not already.

There is something disgustingly sick about individuals who would rather blame the parents, and without a scrap of evidence.

Conscience is a funny thing. It is far more likely to bite them on the bum than Karma ever will.

Sabot
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 764
Location : France
Registration date : 2009-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by May on Sat Jan 23, 2010 3:14 am

I agree, I too believe that Madeleine was carried out of the front door. Even when locked, this front door can be opened from the inside. In fact in the official files, a previous holidaymaker said in his statement that when they were staying in this apartment, they left the key in the lock when inside to prevent the maid from walking in on them. She still managed to gain entry, so all in all they are strange locks! I think the window was opened for up to four reasons.
1. The abductor checked from this window that the road outside was clear rather than just walking out of the door, which is recessed.
2. To allow the smell of maybe what was used to sedate Madeleine to escape and also to protect himself
3. To make it look like this was the exit route
4. To hand over Madeleine to an accomplice (thought I still think he used the door).
avatar
May
Master
Master

Number of posts : 498
Registration date : 2008-07-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by clairesy on Sat Jan 23, 2010 6:39 am

If there was just one abductor(which i doubt very much) ive been thinking about how madeleines head could have been switched from arm to arm without disturbing her.

The only thing i can think of would be that perhaps Madeleine did wake just after she was picked up...maybe the abductor had to shuffle her a little in their arms ending up with her in an upright position before being able to get to lay back down again.But i cant see that.I would imagine Madeleine would have cried out.Unless she knew them.

Other than that the only other way that would have been possible(and i have done it with my own child many many times) and that would be that instead of picking Madeleine up the way we imagine they might of.They stood beside her and twisted their own body so that their left arms picked up the childs head and the right arm picking up her body.If you can picture it you will see what i mean.Ive done it with my own child and sometimes passing a child over you will see the other person twisting their arms around so they receive the child the way they feel comfy holding them.I normally do it if im laying her down though not picking her up.If i have carried my daughter to bed asleep with her head in my right arm i find that when im beside her bed she is facing the wrong way and i cannot put her head on her pillow.So i have to sort of lean right over and twist myself so that i can turn her head to the pillow side.Am i making sense lol.

It is possible that the abductor could of picked her up that way.
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

DOORS, LOCKS, KEYS, WINDOWS?

Post by Royal on Sat Jan 23, 2010 6:41 am

Hi there Sabot, as you may have guessed I do not agree the front door was used so I hope you are not calling me a Moron? I'm sure you are not.... are you? I believe it had to be one method or the other in order to perform the abduction and certainly not both. The obvious method would be to either enter through the Patio door and leave via the window, or, enter and leave by the window, I don't believe the front door enters into it at all. I understand the front door key was left in the lock for most of the time as they used the Patio door mostly, and only when they left the the complex completely did they use the front door. I do not think the front door can be unlocked from the outside if the key has been left in the Mortice lock. From my experience of locks I would say that would be impossible. However had the intruder entered through the Patio door or the window the intruder could have unlocked the door from the inside using the key already in situ and left by that means, BUT, I believe the door was still locked and the key was still in the lock after the intruder had left, so how could that possibly be? And again, even were that the case why would he have bothered to open the window which has been suggested, pass Madeleine out of the window to an accomplice when it would have been so much easier to just walk out of the open door. No, none of it makes any sense to me!
Alroy.

Royal
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 858
Location : Manchester
Registration date : 2008-08-09

Back to top Go down

CLAIR

Post by Royal on Sat Jan 23, 2010 6:48 am

Hello Clair, it's a long time since my children were young, but I have often seen my grandchildren picked up from their sleeping bed by lifting them under the armpits and then either laying them against the shoulder or in a more relaxed cradling position. This procedure is certainly not uncommon!
Alroy.

Royal
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 858
Location : Manchester
Registration date : 2008-08-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by clairesy on Sat Jan 23, 2010 7:06 am

Hi alroy

im thinking of a more twisted way though of picking them up and laying them down though lol.ive done it myself if my daughter as been sleeping.
In order to pick her up or lay her down without moving her position i find myself twisting myself about to carry her in a way thats comfy for me.
I use my right arm for the head,so if her head was by my left arm i would have to twist so that my right arm picks her head up.Not sure im making sense though lol
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

CLAIR

Post by Royal on Sat Jan 23, 2010 7:30 am

I think I get the idea Clair, what surpises me though is how children can sleep through almost anything, lifting them up, tossing them around, doesn't seem to bother them does it. But who knows how Madeleine was picked up or even if she was drugged or not. Mind you Clair, we have to be careful what we say when we discuss drugs and use of, remember, the nasti anti's went on quite a bit about how they suspected Kate & Gerry over sedated the children before going out partying! Obviously a load of cods wallup but they mad e big issue of it at the time Madeleine disappeared. In fact it often amazes me all the ridiculous ideas they actually came up with at the time, like for instance hiding Maddie in the Freezer for a couple of days and then sneaking her body out to goodness knows where after dark!
Alroy.

Royal
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 858
Location : Manchester
Registration date : 2008-08-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by clairesy on Sat Jan 23, 2010 9:40 am

hi alroy,

I know what you mean,but i think the antis will find anything to try and prove the mccanns guilty of something,even if it means digging deep and twisting the things they say,trying to psycho analyze the things kate or gerry say to paint a picture of two monster parents who are covering something up here.

I think the reason a child sleeps through being carried around is because their weight is distributed evenly when they are lifted by someone who is a lot bigger than they are.If you imagine trying to life an adult in their sleep you would probably wake them because they aint supported properly.But if you were to roll an adult over in their sleep you might not wake them as easily because they are still supported properly by whatever it is they are led on.Not sure, just a thought.

I think there was definitely more than one person involved in h er abduction.If there was only one person it sort of throws out any involvement by anyone else.And i believe that there are a few people involved.Im not sure how many were there at the actual scene when she was taken,maybe two but definitely not one.I also think Murat and his little gang bang are aware of a lot more than they let on.I think the reason he was made arguido was to protect him and nothing more.They had 3 arguidos...and out of all 3 of them one person had soooo many negative factors pointing to him being involved yet they failed to investigate him and turned onto the parents instead.Thats odd.

I think the reason for Murat being made arguido were different to the reasons the mccanns were made arguidos.

I think the mccanns were made arguidos as part of the plan.
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by etoile brillante on Sun Jan 24, 2010 1:18 am

I do not know if you raised(found) it, but there was a repair made on this windows for the start of the holiday of mc. Certainly unimportant, but has knowledge, another doubtful coicidence.
avatar
etoile brillante
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 76
Location : france
Registration date : 2009-12-31

http://etoilebrillante6.forumpro.fr/forum.htm

Back to top Go down

WINDOW REPAIRS

Post by Royal on Sun Jan 24, 2010 1:36 am

etoile brillante wrote:I do not know if you raised(found) it, but there was a repair made on this windows for the start of the holiday of mc. Certainly unimportant, but has knowledge, another doubtful coincidence.

No, I was not aware of that Etoile, but thanks for pointing it out, may or may not be relevant?
Alroy

Royal
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 858
Location : Manchester
Registration date : 2008-08-09

Back to top Go down

THE WINDOW.

Post by Royal on Sun Jan 24, 2010 2:07 am

Hiya Clair, you say that if there was only one person involved it would throw out the involvement of anyone else? Of course it would, but that is the point of suggesting there was only one person simply becuase there is absolutely NO real evidence of other parties being involved, none at all. Yes there are and have been plenty of 'suppositions' and theories but not the slightest shred of evidence that a third party was involved in the actual abduction itself, and yes, likewise there is nothing to say others were NOT involved, some sort of paedophile ring or the police even, but one can only go on known facts, not theories and conjectures! That does not however dictate that it's wrong for people to put forward their theories and ideas, that is what open debate is all aboout. So, let's first look at it from my point of view which is that only 'one' person believed to be the kidnapper was actually seen by witnesses carrying a child at the time Madeleine went missing. Supposing that man was a local pervert who just happened to be passing and decided to try out one or two apartment windows, perhaps even with robbery in mind, and having found the McCann's shutter and window to be unlocked climbed inside, still with robbery intent in mind, but then saw the children lying there in bed. Being a sexual pervert or paedophile he changed his plans and took Madeleine instead. As a burglar he would have been wearing gloves and therefore left no fingerprints, the fact the window had no other marks or prints is another matter. Accoring to Tanner and Smiths descriptions the abductor was of slender build, certainly not fat or 'podgy' and would therefor have had not problem climbing in and out of the window which, according to photographs is amply large enough to allow this. As I said before he may even have actually entered by the Patio door and left by the window? What then has happened since is open to conjecture?
Alroy.

Royal
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 858
Location : Manchester
Registration date : 2008-08-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by Sabot on Sun Jan 24, 2010 2:19 am

I think we all agree that it would not have been difficult for someone to get into and out of that appartment. There were several means available.

I don't honestly know if I would have left my children alone under those circumstances, but it certainly would not have occured to me that one of my children might be stolen.

To add. Mrs Fenn disturbed a burglar some short time before the disappearance of Madeleine. He appears to have gained access to her appartment with a key. Just how many copies of keys are there kicking around Praia da Luz?

Sabot
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 764
Location : France
Registration date : 2009-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by kazcut on Sun Jan 24, 2010 3:50 am

regarding the window shutter it could have had many reasons to be open.
what if someone was in side the apartment when gerry went in ,they opened the shutter to talk to someone who was also outside .[maybe someone having a fag ]

ive often wondered if it was malinka taking her [he had very just cut hair when the press got to him ]


there is a reason it was open weater for light ?could be anything but its so anoying that people say its impossible it wasnt open when no one was there .

and im sure no one would bat an eye lid if someone opened a shutter on holiday ,you hear that noise all the time

kazcut
Learner
Learner

Number of posts : 134
Location : uk
Registration date : 2010-01-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by kazcut on Sun Jan 24, 2010 3:51 am

Sabot wrote:I think we all agree that it would not have been difficult for someone to get into and out of that appartment. There were several means available.

I don't honestly know if I would have left my children alone under those circumstances, but it certainly would not have occured to me that one of my children might be stolen.

To add. Mrs Fenn disturbed a burglar some short time before the disappearance of Madeleine. He appears to have gained access to her appartment with a key. Just how many copies of keys are there kicking around Praia da Luz?

do you remember the 4 page article from the news of the world ,lots of talk about the famous skeleton keys in pdl

kazcut
Learner
Learner

Number of posts : 134
Location : uk
Registration date : 2010-01-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by Sabot on Sun Jan 24, 2010 4:23 am

No, Kazcut, I don't remember that article, but it doesn't surprise me in the least.

Sabot
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 764
Location : France
Registration date : 2009-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by kazcut on Sun Jan 24, 2010 4:48 am

Sabot wrote:No, Kazcut, I don't remember that article, but it doesn't surprise me in the least.

ive tried to find but as we now know there are thousands of articles ,

kazcut
Learner
Learner

Number of posts : 134
Location : uk
Registration date : 2010-01-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by clairesy on Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:16 am

the notw amongst other papers also run the story of a nanny who disturbed a child abductor 6 months before was snatched.It was n the same apartment and he was trying to climb in through the window to get to the child.

So the window is big enough for someone to climb them :)
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by Sabot on Sun Jan 24, 2010 5:21 am

These details coming out now are all driving me mad. How on earth must Kate and Gerry feel.

The Pj were a disgrace.

Sabot
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 764
Location : France
Registration date : 2009-10-25

Back to top Go down

WINDOWS & DOORS

Post by Royal on Sun Jan 24, 2010 7:54 am

Quite true, I remember both reports about Mrs Fen and the other intruder incident, it makes one wonder just how many more attempts were made to abduct a child from the OCean Club previously, and many possibly not even been reported, after all holiday makers come and go all the time at holiday establishments. Come to think of it even if some incidents had been reported at the camp offices they would probably do nothing about it as they wouldn't want the bad publicity would they! It seems to have been well established that areas of Portugal have established paedophile rings and maybe quite a few who act independently, loners who regularly scour these holidys establishments in the hope of snatching some unsuspecting child.
Alroy.

Royal
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 858
Location : Manchester
Registration date : 2008-08-09

Back to top Go down

Re: Window Debate

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum