Madeleine McCann

[caz]

No two crimes are the same. What the Aleisha McPhail case showed however was that this type of offender is spontaneous and may have a completely different reason for entering a property. But they are opportunists. It showed that this type of crime is possible. I would not expect every facet of the Campbell case to correspond with the McCann case but those who dismiss the burglar turned abductor based on it being too audacious or risky, requiring sedation of the child or nothing being stolen need only look at that case to see how it can occur.

I would also suggestsuggest much more likely an abductor knew Luz very well. I would certainly be much more convinced that someone in the locality who lived there would be much more capable of hiding a body than Gerry McCann who was in the country less than a week.

If the abductor knew the location very well, as a popular family holiday resort, then surely he must have had snatching a child up there at the top of his wish list. Isn't it rather unlikely that he went to that apartment with only petty theft in mind, and was taken by surprise to find a winning lottery ticket instead?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

These type of offenders tend to be spontaneous or in the moment. I am minded of the horrific murder of Aleisha McPhail in Scotland. I have mentioned this before. Initial motive was robbery, crime was the murder of a six year old girl.

'Alesha, from Airdrie, North Lanarkshire, was three days into a stay with her grandparents on the Isle of Bute when Campbell entered their unlocked home at approximately 02:00 am. The teenager had previously bought cannabis from Alesha's father Robert, who lived in the house, and initially went to steal the drug.'

'Intending to steal cannabis, Campbell left his house at 01:54 armed with a kitchen knife.He entered the MacPhail property, roughly a five-minute walk away, where MacPhail's room was closest to the front door. When he found the sleeping girl, Campbell saw a "moment of opportunity", later claiming, "All I thought about was killing her once I saw her." He lifted a drowsy MacPhail from her bed, left the house without anyone noticing, and walked with her along the ocean shore. The child awoke in his arms during this walk and asked who he was; Campbell replied that he knew her father and was taking her home. He carried MacPhail to a secluded location then raped and murdered her. He threw his clothes into the sea, went home for a shower, then returned to the murder site to retrieve his phone.'

My own 'theory' is that someone intent on burglary saw an opportunity and like Campbell in the Aleisha McPhail case was so disturbed and evil that this was an opportunity he could not pass. It to my mind is probably that the man seen by the Smiths was carrying Madeleine just as Campbell had carried poor Aleisha McPhail. I think this may play into your point in regards a crying child as well. Could an awakened Madeleine have been pacified by someone saying I am taking you to mummy or daddy. Kate did state that Madeleine was totally shattered after being collected from the Creche and looked so drained and tired. As I say children on holidays particularly after 3-4 days get to a stage of exhaustion where they haven't stopped all week and then just sleep like logs. A very tired and sleepy 4 year old being told she is being taken to her mummy may not put up much of a struggle?

Hi Sunny,

One difference in the case of Madeleine, if she was abducted by an opportunist child abuser, whose original intention had been burglary until he found the three sleeping children, is that he couldn't know that this one had been so tired that she would remain asleep, or be easy to pacify if she woke in his arms, while he was carrying her through the streets at an hour when holiday makers were still very much up and about. He couldn't know if one of those holiday makers might recognise the child, while seeing him as a stranger. There was even a risk of bumping into a friend or family member returning to their apartment, and he could hardly run with a child, as he could with stolen money or other valuables, if the occupants were on their way back and could arrive at any moment. I just think a vehicle would better explain how a child abductor was able to get away and leave no trace of how he did it, where he went and what he did with Madeleine. It's like they both disappeared into thin air, so let's hope the German suspect will finally provide some answers.

Love,

Caz
X

[cobalt]

'More likely an entry point with the front door used as the escape route. Of course that is not to say the perp didn't climb out the window just that I find it more inconceivable than entering the apartment via the window(particularly if this was someone with a history of break ins- and unaware of the open patio doors).'

The window entry/exit has been dismissed by the PJ for a number of reasons already stated. The police would have investigated previous burglaries in the vicinity and established without much difficulty if a thief had entered via the window of an apartment since a trace is inevitably left. In the case of the McCann residence no trace was found to support that possibility. Therefore it was quite properly dismissed, and little wonder since none of the previous burglaries had involved wriggling out of a window with a four year old child.

Originally the window being forced lay at the heart of the abduction claim, but when that was proved to have been impossible then the McCann version changed to the patio door being unlocked. So the very originators of the abduction theory have long abandoned that notion. It tends to resurface every time some private investigator or retired police detective has identified a 'strong suspect' and is looking for a story to sell to the media. There have been around half a dozen of these over they years and they have led nowhere.

It is very unlikely that the McCanns' patio door was unlocked at all. No other Tapas member ever claimed they were so reckless and when Gerry McCann made his 'check' around 9pm he said he entered by the front door courtesy of a key. This was around the time he struck up a conversation with Jez Wilkins which would be in that area. The only other confirmation we have of their patio door being unlocked was the Oldfield visit at around 9.30 but there has to be doubt whether that visit ever took place.

[rjpalmer]

But I think your pictures clearly show the shutters could be opened and that the window was not very high.

The picture comes from a 15-second video on YouTube, showing the shutters being opened. They make a bit of a racket, but I suppose if the burglar went slowly...

(1) Peter Mac raising shutters McCann's apartment 5a PDL - YouTube

[Sunny Delight]

Abby-- I think you have the wrong window. I've read it's only about 1 meter off the ground. The red X is the door, the window is to the right of it. There is a low wall that separates the back of the building from the street.





The problem of exiting this window, according to a UK detective, is that it is not wide enough for a grown man to do it without going through sideways. If he has to throw his leg up and over while holding a small child with both hands, he might fall on his face. Maybe.

It would be a very difficult exit whilst carrying a 4 year old. More likely an entry point with the front door used as the escape route. Of course that is not to say the perp didn't climb out the window just that I find it more inconceivable than entering the apartment via the window(particularly if this was someone with a history of break ins- and unaware of the open patio doors). But I think your pictures clearly show the shutters could be opened and that the window was not very high. Thanks for those.

[Abby Normal]

Abby-- I think you have the wrong window. I've read it's only about 1 meter off the ground. The red X is the door, the window is to the right of it. There is a low wall that separates the back of the building from the street.





The problem of exiting this window, according to a UK detective, is that it is not wide enough for a grown man to do it without going through sideways. If he has to throw his leg up and over while holding a small child with both hands, he might fall on his face. Maybe.

hi rj
thanks! I was always under the impression the window in question was around the corner from the one in your photo, closer to where the green arrow is. if you are correct, then i stand corrected, and its actually an ideal spot for an intruder to try and get in, in terms of location as its close to the ground and also the low wall in front would partially hide the person.
however, i still doubt anyone went through it because of the security blinds, the police found no evidence it was, and that there were unlocked doors. but thanks again for correction.

[Sunny Delight]

hi sunny
if you look at pictures of the window from tje outside it looks like it is at least 8 feet from the ground, and thats the bottom of the window. for someone to get into that window they would need a ladder or something to stand on. and of course with the metal security blind, it makes outside access even more difficult to get into. plus that side of the building is right next to a public road, mere feet, and ajacent to another more busy looking street...the apartment and the window are actually on a corner. so someone would have to contend with trying to get into a high up window from what looks like a very public street location. I highly doubt anyone went through that window.

Hi Abby, are you referring to the McCanns apartment or the apartment which was the target of a robbery directly above the McCanns a few weeks before their stay? The McCanns apartment as rj's photos show was very much ground level.

[rjpalmer]

hi sunny
if you look at pictures of the window from tje outside it looks like it is at least 8 feet from the ground, and thats the bottom of the window. for someone to get into that window they would need a ladder or something to stand on.

Abby-- I think you have the wrong window. I've read it's only about 1 meter off the ground. The red X is the door, the window is to the right of it. There is a low wall that separates the back of the building from the street.





The problem of exiting this window, according to a UK detective, is that it is not wide enough for a grown man to do it without going through sideways. If he has to throw his leg up and over while holding a small child with both hands, he might fall on his face. Maybe.

[cobalt]

'The continual parroting of the PJ line from their initial investigation that the window did not open from outside is patently wrong and been proven so since.'

By whom? And the issue is not whether the window could open in any case; it is not even whether a person could enter through it: it is whether a person entered through this particular window on this particular evening. And the answer is resoundingly clear: no one did.

In reply to rjpalmer who wrote: Are you certain that you are remembering this correctly? Is there a source for Payne saying this visit lasted 30 minutes?

I am wrong and happy to be corrected. I don't think Payne said anything to the PJ about the length of his visit, but when questioned by the UK police Payne judged his visit to have lasted between 3 and 5 minutes. This is close enough to Kate McCann's memory of 30 seconds to make no difference, as are whether he entered the apartment or stayed at the patio door.

The 30 minute estimation came not from Payne, but from Gerry McCann in a statement to the PJ.

However, the reason for Payne's visit remains unclear and a number of oddities arise from the two accounts. Kate McCann claims to have just got out of the shower when she heard Payne call from the patio door- I have commented earlier on the likelihood of a mother taking a shower while three young children are awake in the living room. She wrapped a towel around herself before speaking to him. Payne does not mention this in his statements, but in other areas of his testimony seems quite relaxed about verbal innuendo and Brian Rix type farcical misunderstandings.

Kate McCann times his visit as lasting no later than 6.40pm. Yet by her own account she decides to dry her hair after 7.15, which is over half an hour later and after she has read to her children. She thinks Gerry McCann probably took a bath after he returned from the tennis at 7pm.

Gerry McCann agrees that he took a bath but actually says they both took a bath after the children settled, which would be between 7.30pm and 8pm. So between 6.30pm and 8pm, Kate McCann has taken a shower, walked around with damp hair for half an hour at least, then taken a bath shortly afterwards.

[Abby Normal]

No you are correct. It was definitively shown however in the Panorama documentary that the shutters could be lifted a certain amount from the outside, not the whole way. However if the inside window was open and on occasion this did happen, as there had been burglaries using this Modus operandi, the window could be slid open and a hand could then be put through the window to manipulate the controls from the inside thus lifting it the whole way. The MET uncovered at least 5 burglaries with this MO at the Ocean Club in the months preceeding the McCanns stay. This had included the apartment directly above where the McCanns had stayed.

The continual parroting of the PJ line from their initial investigation that the window did not open from outside is patently wrong and been proven so since. Now you have a few scenarios for the open window:

- An intruder uses the same MO as previous burglaries. In through the window and out the front door.

- An intruder enters via the patio doors and uses the window to pass Madeleine to an accomplice.

- An intruder enters via the patio doors and uses the window to check the coast is clear.

- Kate opens the window to stage an abduction.

For me the most likely by far is the first option. It also links with the idea of an opportunist abduction. Unaware of the open patio doors the intruder uses the MO they are comfortable and confident with namely to use the window as the entry point.

hi sunny
if you look at pictures of the window from tje outside it looks like it is at least 8 feet from the ground, and thats the bottom of the window. for someone to get into that window they would need a ladder or something to stand on. and of course with the metal security blind, it makes outside access even more difficult to get into. plus that side of the building is right next to a public road, mere feet, and ajacent to another more busy looking street...the apartment and the window are actually on a corner. so someone would have to contend with trying to get into a high up window from what looks like a very public street location. I highly doubt anyone went through that window.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I would like to hear from those who do not accept that Madeleine was abducted between 9.05 p.m. and 10 p.m. on 3 May 2007, when approximately they think she really went missing.

Please allow me to rephrase the challenge: if Payne saw Madeleine alive at about 6 p.m., then assuming that when the McCanns went to dinner, it was too late for them to kill and hide Madeleine's body, do those who do not accept that Madeleine was abducted between 9.05 p.m. and 10 p.m. on 3 May 2007, maintain that she was killed and her body hidden at some time between 6 p.m. and 7.30 p.m.?

[Sunny Delight]

Hi Sunny
I believe you are right about the fingerprint procedure on the window , no gloves etc . I am not saying you are wrong that the window could be unlocked from the outside SD but looking at a photo, the window does appear to have what looks like a handle in the middle of the two panes on the material separating the panes with maybe a lock.
Apologies if I am wrong regarding this . Also I am sure I have seen somewhere that the shutters could be partially lifted from the outside but not locked into position at the top . Again apologies if I am wrong.

Regards Darryl

No you are correct. It was definitively shown however in the Panorama documentary that the shutters could be lifted a certain amount from the outside, not the whole way. However if the inside window was open and on occasion this did happen, as there had been burglaries using this Modus operandi, the window could be slid open and a hand could then be put through the window to manipulate the controls from the inside thus lifting it the whole way. The MET uncovered at least 5 burglaries with this MO at the Ocean Club in the months preceeding the McCanns stay. This had included the apartment directly above where the McCanns had stayed.

The continual parroting of the PJ line from their initial investigation that the window did not open from outside is patently wrong and been proven so since. Now you have a few scenarios for the open window:

- An intruder uses the same MO as previous burglaries. In through the window and out the front door.

- An intruder enters via the patio doors and uses the window to pass Madeleine to an accomplice.

- An intruder enters via the patio doors and uses the window to check the coast is clear.

- Kate opens the window to stage an abduction.

For me the most likely by far is the first option. It also links with the idea of an opportunist abduction. Unaware of the open patio doors the intruder uses the MO they are comfortable and confident with namely to use the window as the entry point.

[rjpalmer]

David Payne's visit to the McCann apartment at around 6pm is important as corroboration that Madeleine was alive at that time. But the reason for his visit seems unclear and there are doubts it ever occurred. Mrs. McCann says it lasted 30 seconds and she was wearing a towel, having just taken a shower. But mothers generally don't take even a quick a shower out of sight and hearing of three very young children, especially since there was presumably no great urgency for her to do so. She could have waited for her husband to return.

Payne himself remembered the visit as lasting 30 minutes, but was vague as to what the children were wearing. This mix up between 30 seconds and 30 minutes sounds like a verbal miscommunication rather than a total misjudgement of time, leading to suspicion the visit was artificially constructed to confirm that Madeleine McCann was alive at a time when she was not.

Are you certain that you are remembering this correctly? Is there a source for Payne saying this visit lasted 30 minutes?

Payne stated that the visit occurred between 6.30 and 7.00 pm, but he didn't mean this was the duration of the visit, only that it occurred sometime during that span.

In his tape police interview with the PJ, which is on-line in its entirely, Payne states the visit lasted "three minutes, five maximum."

30 seconds--three minutes, that's not a huge discrepancy for two people working from memory over an insignificant event.

___

1485 "And did you actually set eyes on each individual child''
Reply "All three children I saw, yeah.'

1485 "And were they standing up' Sitting down''
Reply "Err they were generally standing up, yeah.'

1485 "Did they actually acknowledge you''
Reply "Err oh yeah, you know I'm very sure that if you'd have asked them, you know that evening or the next day they'd all say ah yeah, I popped in. You know I, you know I did know the children very well, we'd all you know, met up many times before err you know I, you know again I'd be playing with Madeleine you know in the, err the play area err you know during that week, you know lifting her up, twizzing her round and everything, I knew her that well, you know, to do that, and as I say err she'd definitely know who I was and certainly, as I say, just to reinforce that she looked very happy.'

1485 "Yeah. Was that the last time you saw Madeleine''
00:42:39 Reply "It was.'

1485 "How many minutes, you said as a matter of minutes and then you went back and then you played tennis.'
Reply "Mm.'

1485 "I'm gonna pin you down and ask you how long you think you were in there for. I know you say minutes.'
Reply "In their apartment, it, it, I'd say three minutes, five maximum.'

1485 "Three to five''
Reply "Yeah.'

The full interview:

P.J. POLICE FILES: DAVID PAYNE ROGATORY (mccannpjfiles.co.uk)

[cobalt]

'The theory was not capable of being developed because the bent detective was quite properly removed from the case.'

After considerable political pressure according to Amaral, whose book is still available in Portugal but has not, so far as I am aware, for sale in the UK. The McCanns' legal challenges in respect of Amaral were both unsuccessful.

'The parents were not investigated by the British Police because there was nothing to investigate.'

Astonishingly, given the outcome, they were not even investigated for child neglect which they had effectively admitted. Amaral speaks in detail regarding information regarding the McCanns and their friends which was not forwarded by UK police to the PJ.

'The German police are convinced that Brueckner murdered Madeleine.'

If they are 'convinced' then it is surprising they have yet to charge him with the offence. Their investigation as reported has all the hallmarks of hoping something turns up.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

The theory was taken very seriously by the PJ as the questions put to Kate McCann show clearly. The theory was not capable of being developed so the case remains unsolved, which means the PJ are in no position to pour cold water over any other theory such as child abduction. The British authorities were acting under pressure from the then PM, Gordon Brown, to help the parents rather than investigate them. The German police understandably want Breuckner banged up for life since he is due for release in a couple of years.

The theory was taken seriously by the Portuguese as long as their chief detective was a dishonest policeman who had an obsession with children being stored in refrigerators.

The theory was not capable of being developed because the bent detective was quite properly removed from the case.

The parents were not investigated by the British Police because there was nothing to investigate.

The German police are convinced that Brueckner murdered Madeleine.

That is as good a reason as it is possible to cite for not investigating the McCanns.