Author Topic: The case of Madeleine McCann  (Read 580330 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

guest154

  • Guest
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #945 on: July 19, 2012, 08:35:PM »
Of course you are right Mat but physiologically, perhaps being able to see the apartment gave them a false sense of security.

Yeah that's a good point.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #946 on: July 19, 2012, 08:47:PM »
Funny thing about the night Maddie went missing - none of the other members iof the so called tapas group knew that the McCanns had left the patio door on the poolside of the apartment open until just before the 9:30pm check, when two group members volunteered to go and check apartment 5A on behalf of the McCanns...

Key feature in my opinion relating to her disappearance...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

guest154

  • Guest
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #947 on: July 19, 2012, 08:48:PM »
Mike, by left the doors open do you mean unlocked or open as in not closed?

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #948 on: July 19, 2012, 09:06:PM »
Mike, by left the doors open do you mean unlocked or open as in not closed?

My understanding is that the McCanns had always left the patio door which leads out on  to the veranda unlocked (but pulled too) when they went out to wine and dine at the poolside tapas bar, and that they did not alert anyone to this fact, and no-one amongst their group suspected them of doing it,  until just before 9:30pm, on the evening that Maddie went missing. This came about because one of the volunteers asked for the key to the apartment and he was told by Kate McCann that there was no need for use of such a key because the patio door on the pool side of the apartment (which could just about be seen from where the McCanns were situated) had been left unlocked and could be slid open? You then had the check made by the two volunteers, and the contradictory accounts about whether they went into the apartment, or listened at the patio door?  One thing is for sure and that is that Maddie was not taken from the apartment by anyone using the patio door visible from the poolside tapas restaurant...

Now...

If Maddie had already been taken by the time these two volunteers offered to go and check the McCann apartment at about 9:30pm, how strange that any would be abductor would know not to use the unlocked patio doors on the poolside of the building, considering that no-one knew this to be true, until Kate told one of the two volunteers at about 9:30pm, and that as a result of this information being passed by Kate to the volunteer, that he should go along to the apartment with another and return saying that everything was tickety boo, with the McCann kids at that time? Oddly, the other volunteer did not return back to the tapas bar, until much later, which begs the question did this volunteer play any role in Maddies disappearance? If Maddie was in bed inside apartment 5a at the time of the 9:30pm check, then one of the two volunteers was away from the tapas bar at about the right moment when Maddie was taken after the so called 9:30pm check...
« Last Edit: July 19, 2012, 09:10:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #949 on: July 19, 2012, 09:14:PM »
I have personally stood on the veranda by the aforementioned patio doors (of apartment 5a) and looked back across to where the tapas bar restaurant was / is situated and even at night you would be able to see any activity if anyone went into the apartment through these patio doors from the vantage point of where the McCanns claim they were when the 9:30pm check was made or undertaken - and it is rather peculiar that neither parent claims they saw either of the two volunteers enter the apartment via the unlocked patio doors?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

guest154

  • Guest
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #950 on: July 19, 2012, 09:17:PM »
My understanding is that the McCanns had always left the patio door which leads out on  to the veranda unlocked (but pulled too) when they went out to wine and dine at the poolside tapas bar, and that they did not alert anyone to this fact, and no-one amongst their group suspected them of doing it,  until just before 9:30pm, on the evening that Maddie went missing. This came about because one of the volunteers asked for the key to the apartment and he was told by Kate McCann that there was no need for use of such a key because the patio door on the pool side of the apartment (which could just about be seen from where the McCanns were situated) had been left unlocked and could be slid open? You then had the check made by the two volunteers, and the contradictory accounts about whether they went into the apartment, or listened at the patio door?  One thing is for sure and that is that Maddie was not taken from the apartment by anyone using the patio door visible from the poolside tapas restaurant...

Now...

If Maddie had already been taken by the time these two volunteers offered to go and check the McCann apartment at about 9:30pm, how strange that any would be abductor would know not to use the unlocked patio doors on the poolside of the building, considering that no-one knew this to be true, until Kate told one of the two volunteers at about 9:30pm, and that as a result of this information being passed by Kate to the volunteer, that he should go along to the apartment with another and return saying that everything was tickety boo, with the McCann kids at that time? Oddly, the other volunteer did not return back to the tapas bar, until much later, which begs the question did this volunteer play any role in Maddies disappearance? If Maddie was in bed inside apartment 5a at the time of the 9:30pm check, then one of the two volunteers was away from the tapas bar at about the right moment when Maddie was taken after the so called 9:30pm check...

That's interesting. That's actually...compelling.

I have personally stood on the veranda by the aforementioned patio doors (of apartment 5a) and looked back across to where the tapas bar restaurant was / is situated and even at night you would be able to see any activity if anyone went into the apartment through these patio doors from the vantage point of where the McCanns claim they were when the 9:30pm check was made or undertaken - and it is rather peculiar that neither parent claims they saw either of the two volunteers enter the apartment via the unlocked patio doors?

From the tapas bar what windows/doors are there that wouldn't be in sight?

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #951 on: July 19, 2012, 09:28:PM »
That's interesting. That's actually...compelling.

From the tapas bar what windows/doors are there that wouldn't be in sight?

The door and the all the windows on the road side of the apartment, and the window on the gable end of apartment 5a...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #952 on: July 19, 2012, 09:33:PM »
Lets look at this from a different perspective - we have the second volunteer staying behind at his own apartment to look after a sick child at about the time Maddie goes missing from apartment 5a - and his partner just so happens to be the witness who claims she saw a long haired zombie type of a man carrying off a child in his arms earlier in the evening in the general direction of Robert Murats villa? She is also absent at the time Kate leaves the tapas bar to do her 10pm check at the time she discovers Maddie to have been taken - "They have taken her, Maddie is gone"...
« Last Edit: July 19, 2012, 09:35:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Patti

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13193
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #953 on: July 19, 2012, 09:36:PM »
It was Matthew Oldfield that checked on Madeleine about 9:30 before Kate's check just before 10pm. Matthew did not enter the room, he sees the twins, but does not see Madeleine.  If only he had entered the bedroom.

When Kate entered the apartment, she experienced, what I would call a vortex when she was about to close the bedroom door, it slammed shut. This is important, because it means there has to be two open windows or doors...in the apartment, but she claimed to have closed the patio door too. She then enters the bedroom and the shutter was up and the window open....

The served a purpose, but it was forensically proved that the window had not been used. The window was opened for a reason....for an escape by an abductor. This method is used by any tactical team...It was also used by the WHF team raid.  :) :) :)

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #954 on: July 19, 2012, 09:37:PM »
Lets look at this from a different perspective - we have the second volunteer staying behind at his own apartment to look after a sick child at about the time Maddie goes missing from apartment 5a - and his partner just so happens to be the witness who claims she saw a long haired zombie type of a man carrying off a child in his arms earlier in the evening in the general direction of Robert Murats villa? She is also absent at the time Kate leaves the tapas bar to do her 10pm check at the time she discovers Maddie to have been taken - "They have taken her, Maddie is gone"...

Lo and behold, it is these persons who thrust Robert Murat into the fray, by claiming that they had seen him hanging around the apartment block on the night Maddie went missing -  a fact consistently denied by Murat...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #955 on: July 19, 2012, 09:46:PM »
It was Matthew Oldfield that checked on Madeleine about 9:30 before Kate's check just before 10pm. Matthew did not enter the room, he sees the twins, but does not see Madeleine.  If only he had entered the bedroom.

When Kate entered the apartment, she experienced, what I would call a vortex when she was about to close the bedroom door, it slammed shut. This is important, because it means there has to be two open windows or doors...in the apartment, but she claimed to have closed the patio door too. She then enters the bedroom and the shutter was up and the window open....

The served a purpose, but it was forensically proved that the window had not been used. The window was opened for a reason....for an escape by an abductor. This method is used by any tactical team...It was also used by the WHF team raid.  :) :) :)

Vortex could only have been created or generated because two windows, or a window and a door was open at the same time. I know this to be true, because whilst I was staying in the next apartment block which had a very similar design to the layout inside apartment 5a, I carried out and conducted experiments to see what could have caused the vortex which Kate McCann describes having occurred. The fact is, that if the bedroom window had been open when Kate first opened the unlocked patio door to enter the apartment at the time of her 10pm check, the bedroom door would almost certainly have slammed shut at that stage or time. Similarly, if the door on the roadside of the apartment had already been open when Kate entered apartment 5a via the unlocked patio door, the bedroom door would again have slammed shut by the dynamics of the vortex, aforementioned...

Fact is...

When Kate entered apartment 5a at the time of her 10pm check, there was no window or door open, otherwise the bedroom door would have almost certainly slammed shut, but it did not, at least not until later...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Patti

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13193
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #956 on: July 19, 2012, 09:53:PM »
Vortex could only have been created or generated because two windows, or a window and a door was open at the same time. I know this to be true, because whilst I was staying in the next apartment block which had a very similar design to the layout inside apartment 5a, I carried out and conducted experiments to see what could have caused the vortex which Kate McCann describes having occurred. The fact is, that if the bedroom window had been open when Kate first opened the unlocked patio door to enter the apartment at the time of her 10pm check, the bedroom door would almost certainly have slammed shut at that stage or time. Similarly, if the door on the roadside of the apartment had already been open when Kate entered apartment 5a via the unlocked patio door, the bedroom door would again have slammed shut by the dynamics of the vortex, aforementioned...

Fact is...

When Kate entered apartment 5a at the time of her 10pm check, there was no window or door open, otherwise the bedroom door would have almost certainly slammed shut, but it did not, at least not until later...

I have tried the same Mike....My son thinks I have lost the plot sometimes. But I did the experiment in my own home upstairs, because the downstairs doors are too heavy. I left my bedroom window open and opened my bathroom window...at first I could not get anything to happen, so I left the door ajar for a while....My son came in the front door and guess what, my bedroom door slammed shut....

Could there have been someone inside the apartment when Kate was there? Was it an intruder going back for the twins and crept out of either the front door or back door...

I'm like you with Mike there had to be another souse of air coming in...to cause the vortex... :) :) :)

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #957 on: July 19, 2012, 09:59:PM »
Vortex could only have been created or generated because two windows, or a window and a door was open at the same time. I know this to be true, because whilst I was staying in the next apartment block which had a very similar design to the layout inside apartment 5a, I carried out and conducted experiments to see what could have caused the vortex which Kate McCann describes having occurred. The fact is, that if the bedroom window had been open when Kate first opened the unlocked patio door to enter the apartment at the time of her 10pm check, the bedroom door would almost certainly have slammed shut at that stage or time. Similarly, if the door on the roadside of the apartment had already been open when Kate entered apartment 5a via the unlocked patio door, the bedroom door would again have slammed shut by the dynamics of the vortex, aforementioned...

Fact is...

When Kate entered apartment 5a at the time of her 10pm check, there was no window or door open, otherwise the bedroom door would have almost certainly slammed shut, but it did not, at least not until later...

I was very meticulous in the way I carried out these experiments, and I came to the conclusion that if Kate closed the unlocked patio door behind her when she first went into apartment 5a during her 10pm check, then of course there could be no vortex to cause the bedroom door to slam shut once she had closed the patio door, as she claimed she had done, providing the bedroom window, or another door (roadside) was not open at that time or by that stage. So in a nutshell, when Kate entered 5a, via patio door there was no window or other door open at that stage. She then closes the patio door and goes to check on her children...

As she walks inside apartment 5a, she makes her way to the bedroom door which has not slammed shut at this stage. She can see the door on the roadside of the apartment and it must have been closed otherwise she would have easily been able to see it in the open position? But let us assume that the roadside door is fractionally open and Kate did not notice this for whatever reason, and she pushed the bedroom door open and takes a peak inside and reports that she could see the twins, but did not physically see Maddie,. But what she notices is that the door is slightly open wider than when it had been set earlier when she and Jerry had gone out to eat. She resets the bedroom door and then Whooosh, the bedroom door slams shut, and she quickly opens the door to the bedroom and as she does so, the curtains fly open and she can see the window is open and the steel shutter raised...

Sorry - I just do not believe this account, it is too far fetched and can easily be exposed as untrue...
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Patti

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13193
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #958 on: July 19, 2012, 10:03:PM »
mmmmmm What about if there was a build up of air? Maybe she didn't close the patio doors?

Mike I need to ask you if you have any statements from Elliot, regarding the window at WHF?

Good night to you..  :) :) :)

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: The case of Madeleine McCann
« Reply #959 on: July 19, 2012, 10:05:PM »
mmmmmm What about if there was a build up of air? Maybe she didn't close the patio doors?

Mike I need to ask you if you have any statements from Elliot, regarding the window at WHF?

Good night to you..  :) :) :)
Night Patti ;D