The one big argument

I know that if, on one of the occasions I've taken small children on holiday, I went into their bedroom to find one of them missing and a window/shutter forced open I would call the local police immediately, whether or not I'd witnessed the actual abduction. I would know whether or not it was likely the child itself had decided to exit the room via the window/shutters and if not, it would be obvious that someone had broken in and stolen the child. I would also want to run around shouting their name, but I'm not sure I'd be actually 'searching' for the child, given that I'd assume they were long gone, but I'd be searching for support and information from people in the local area and alerting them to the fact that my child had been taken away by a stranger. I'd be grateful to have as many people involved as possible in the hope that if others knew about it they might have useful information, but calling the police would be my FIRST response.

Kate says she was certain Madeleine had been 'taken' and she claims the shutters were up and the window was open. This being the case, a phone call to the police should have been made immediately, since the police are more resourced to locate an abductor (and abductee) than the parents, their friends and local helpers. I can't locate hard evidence of when they decided to call the police, but have read in many places that the first logged call from the Ocean Club was at 10.41pm. If this is true, I can't understand the delay of 40 minutes, nor can I understand what they were looking for during those 40 minutes. Were they hoping that the 'abductor' had let go of Madeleine and she was now wandering around on her own? or that the abductor was still in the area with Madeleine? or that Madeleine had managed to get away from her captor? or that she hadn't been 'taken' after all and the window and shutter business was her doing? What were they searching for?

Wintabells wrote:I know that if, on one of the occasions I've taken small children on holiday, I went into their bedroom to find one of them missing and a window/shutter forced open I would call the local police immediately, whether or not I'd witnessed the actual abduction. I would know whether or not it was likely the child itself had decided to exit the room via the window/shutters and if not, it would be obvious that someone had broken in and stolen the child. I would also want to run around shouting their name, but I'm not sure I'd be actually 'searching' for the child, given that I'd assume they were long gone, but I'd be searching for support and information from people in the local area and alerting them to the fact that my child had been taken away by a stranger. I'd be grateful to have as many people involved as possible in the hope that if others knew about it they might have useful information, but calling the police would be my FIRST response.

Kate says she was certain Madeleine had been 'taken' and she claims the shutters were up and the window was open. This being the case, a phone call to the police should have been made immediately, since the police are more resourced to locate an abductor (and abductee) than the parents, their friends and local helpers.  I can't locate hard evidence of when they decided to call the police, but have read in many places that the first logged call from the Ocean Club was at 10.41pm. If this is true, I can't understand the delay of 40 minutes, nor can I understand what they were looking for during those 40 minutes. Were they hoping that the 'abductor' had let go of Madeleine and she was now wandering around on her own? or that the abductor was still in the area with Madeleine? or that Madeleine had managed to get away from her captor? or that she hadn't been 'taken' after all and the window and shutter business was her doing? What were they searching for?

I believe they left it to MW staff to contact the police, which given the language difference, is perhaps understandable, but you would have thought that one of them, or at least one of their friends would have made absolutely sure that the call was made immediately.

I'm looking at the back of the dustjacket of Kate's bewk right now and the red dress picture is on it, and beside it the rather pretty, and maybe even quite likely, age-progressed picture of Madeleine as she might have looked when she was 6: the one with the pink Alice band. (Other age-progressed pics seem very odd, or a funny colour to me.) FWIW that classic red dress picture, seen on so many posters, fliers, T-shirts etc, is labelled 'Madeleine aged 3 1/2, taken January 2007'. If it really was taken then, and it was a favourite close up of her, I can see why they used it. However she looks more like 2 1/2 in it. I do know pics taken of children on different days can look very different, including different hair colour due to changes by the sun or simply by the passage of time.

In the BBC Crimewatch 'mini-drama', I do not call it a reconstruction, the fiction that the much older looking tennis balls pic of M was posted up everywhere is promoted, and I don't think that is true. There is a carefully managed shot of a woman posting up the tennis photo. The video makes it clear that the family were all together playing tennis and that the tennis photo was the last photo taken of her. Huh???? In the book the much discussed pool photo is said to be the last one taken of her. Also, If you read Kate's account, she clearly says that it was NOT a 'family' tennis session on the late afternoon in question, it was a men's tennis session, and she and the children stayed in 5A... where they were conveniently visited by Mr Payne.

Why is Redwood not interested in all the discrepancies between the book and the BBC TV Crimewatch video? Hundreds of thousands of people bought the book and read it, and will find the mis-matches very odd, as they will those various comments made in TV in interviews which 'do not compute'.

The later Sky programme was not quite so bad. Redwood for once sounded at one point as if he were speaking from the heart, rather than as Mr Woodentop. He said: 'It is never too late. This case has gone on quite long enough.' or something near to it as dammit. Hear hear to that!

comperedna wrote:'Hiding in plain sight'... the only option now...

YES!!!!!  100% agree. It is way to late to be quiet about it. One thing they seriously misjudged, and that was Amaral going the full distance and seeing them in court!!!

fred wrote:

comperedna wrote:'Hiding in plain sight'... the only option now...

YES!!!!!  100% agree. It is way to late to be quiet about it.  One thing they seriously misjudged, and that was Amaral going the full distance and seeing them in court!!!

I'm sure they thought Amaral would go the way of UK newspapers and give up in the face of the McCanns' super expensive legal machine.

jassi wrote:

Wintabells wrote:I know that if, on one of the occasions I've taken small children on holiday, I went into their bedroom to find one of them missing and a window/shutter forced open I would call the local police immediately, whether or not I'd witnessed the actual abduction. I would know whether or not it was likely the child itself had decided to exit the room via the window/shutters and if not, it would be obvious that someone had broken in and stolen the child. I would also want to run around shouting their name, but I'm not sure I'd be actually 'searching' for the child, given that I'd assume they were long gone, but I'd be searching for support and information from people in the local area and alerting them to the fact that my child had been taken away by a stranger. I'd be grateful to have as many people involved as possible in the hope that if others knew about it they might have useful information, but calling the police would be my FIRST response.

Kate says she was certain Madeleine had been 'taken' and she claims the shutters were up and the window was open. This being the case, a phone call to the police should have been made immediately, since the police are more resourced to locate an abductor (and abductee) than the parents, their friends and local helpers.  I can't locate hard evidence of when they decided to call the police, but have read in many places that the first logged call from the Ocean Club was at 10.41pm. If this is true, I can't understand the delay of 40 minutes, nor can I understand what they were looking for during those 40 minutes. Were they hoping that the 'abductor' had let go of Madeleine and she was now wandering around on her own? or that the abductor was still in the area with Madeleine? or that Madeleine had managed to get away from her captor? or that she hadn't been 'taken' after all and the window and shutter business was her doing? What were they searching for?

I believe they left it to MW staff to contact the police, which given the language difference, is perhaps understandable, but you would have thought that one of them, or at least one of their friends would have made absolutely sure that the call was made immediately.

Agree with all that is said here. Of course you would phone the police immediately if you found a window open, curtains flying about and your daughter not in any of the beds. There would be a phone in the room connected to reception I would imagine (there usually is) so Kate should have used this and told reception (who we know speak English) and then told reception to fetch Gerry for fear of leaving the twins exposed.

Okay I know we don't always keep a level head when in a panic and no amount of training as a doctor necessarily means you wouldn't panic where your own child is concerned but, for heaven's sake, we all know even in a panic the first thing we do is fly to the phone and, in this day and age, phones are a part of us; we certainly know Kate had a mobile in the apartment, if not on her person, and I am sure a bedside corded telephone straight through to reception would have been available. Unless anyone can show me how a 3/4 year old can open a window of that size and climb out of it, I'll not believe she left that way of her own accord, so an abduction by someone else, if indeed the window was open, would have been blindingly obvious, even to an idiot.

iagree with ljc family - since 2007 i have become a nannan and although i tried to think what my own family would think i now know how i would feel too as a nannan - ive said from the start that i dont think everyone was in the loop and also not all children was left as madeleine and the twins - what was dw thinking off ? also big thing for me too was contacting family during the night - what can they do and also what if madeleine had turned up somewhere wandered off and as for cw saying they havent done anything wrong words fail me

The article below appeared in Independent.ie, online version of Irish newspaper in 2007. It throws the open window theory out the window if you pardon the pun. Clarrie said it, so it must be true !





McCann family reverse story over break-in 'evidence'
Email
Print
Font Size
221 Share
SHANE HICKEY – 25 OCTOBER 2007

THE spokesman for the family of Madeleine McCann has reversed a statement made in the early days of the search for the missing child.

Speaking to RTE's 'Prime Time', Clarence Mitchell said she could "easily" have been kidnapped by an abductor who did not leave the trail of a break-in.

However, in the early part of the hunt, friends and family members told journalists that the shutter on the apartment where the McCanns were staying had been broken.

Mr Mitchell made his comments when questioned by a 'Prime Time' team in a report on the disappearance to be screened tomorrow. "There was no evidence of a break-in," said Mr Mitchell.

"I'm not going into the detail, but I can say that Kate and Gerry are firmly of the view that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out the window as their means of escape, and to do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with anything. They got out of the window fairly easily."

Of the criticism that the McCanns left their children by themselves on four evenings while they went for dinner, Mr Mitchell said there was a cultural difference between Britain and Portugal.

"It is a British approach to get your children washed, bathed and in bed early in the evening if you can so you can have something of the evening to yourself. That is the British way of doing things. It doesn't mean it's wrong. It doesn't mean it's right," he said.

"Nobody feels more guilty than Gerry and Kate over the decision they took jointly to leave their children in that position that night. And they will never forgive themselves. They've said this often.

"Nobody feels more guilty than they that Madeleine was alone when she was taken. However, they felt they had a perfectly proper system of checking (her in place)."

cass wrote:iagree with ljc family - since 2007 i have become a nannan and although i tried to think what my own family would think i now know how i would feel too as a nannan - ive said from the start that i dont think everyone was in the loop and also not all children was left as madeleine and the twins - what was dw thinking off ? also big thing for me too was contacting family during the night - what can they do and also what if madeleine had turned up somewhere wandered off and as for cw saying they havent done anything wrong words fail me

I'm with LJC and you, cass. Family is the reason they continue. If one of my children 'lost' one of my grandchildren, and gave up, I'd want to know why??

I think one of the reasons why they have remained in the public eye is they need to show the twins that they never gave up 'searching'.

Being made arguidos has perhaps left them feeling they need to show the world that they're innocent.

It's possible that they believe that if Madeleine's body were to be found there would be absolutely no evidence linking them to her disappearance.

LJC wrote:

jassi wrote:

Wintabells wrote:I know that if, on one of the occasions I've taken small children on holiday, I went into their bedroom to find one of them missing and a window/shutter forced open I would call the local police immediately, whether or not I'd witnessed the actual abduction. I would know whether or not it was likely the child itself had decided to exit the room via the window/shutters and if not, it would be obvious that someone had broken in and stolen the child. I would also want to run around shouting their name, but I'm not sure I'd be actually 'searching' for the child, given that I'd assume they were long gone, but I'd be searching for support and information from people in the local area and alerting them to the fact that my child had been taken away by a stranger. I'd be grateful to have as many people involved as possible in the hope that if others knew about it they might have useful information, but calling the police would be my FIRST response.

Kate says she was certain Madeleine had been 'taken' and she claims the shutters were up and the window was open. This being the case, a phone call to the police should have been made immediately, since the police are more resourced to locate an abductor (and abductee) than the parents, their friends and local helpers.  I can't locate hard evidence of when they decided to call the police, but have read in many places that the first logged call from the Ocean Club was at 10.41pm. If this is true, I can't understand the delay of 40 minutes, nor can I understand what they were looking for during those 40 minutes. Were they hoping that the 'abductor' had let go of Madeleine and she was now wandering around on her own? or that the abductor was still in the area with Madeleine? or that Madeleine had managed to get away from her captor? or that she hadn't been 'taken' after all and the window and shutter business was her doing? What were they searching for?

I believe they left it to MW staff to contact the police, which given the language difference, is perhaps understandable, but you would have thought that one of them, or at least one of their friends would have made absolutely sure that the call was made immediately.

Agree with all that is said here.  Of course you would phone the police immediately if you found a window open, curtains flying about and your daughter not in any of the beds. There would be a phone in the room connected to reception I would imagine (there usually is) so Kate should have used this and told reception (who we know speak English) and then told reception to fetch Gerry for fear of leaving the twins exposed.  

Okay I know we don't always keep a level head when in a panic and no amount of training as a doctor necessarily means you wouldn't panic where your own child is concerned but, for heaven's sake, we all know even in a panic the first thing we do is fly to the phone and, in this day and age, phones are a part of us; we certainly know Kate had a mobile in the apartment, if not on her person, and I am sure a bedside corded telephone straight through to reception would have been available. Unless anyone can show me how a 3/4 year old can open a window of that size and climb out of it, I'll not believe she left that way of her own accord, so an abduction by someone else, if indeed the window was open, would have been blindingly obvious, even to an idiot.

Maybe they didn't know how to dial out for the police and just dialed the desk to call the police - I could see that - what strikes me as odd is the length of time waited to do so if you "knew" because of the window being open that she'd been taken. Everyone knows and it's been known for years that first hour is the golden hour when you will find the child alive - if she's to be found alive. After that it is less likely. So you would not go around looking for her in the bushes etc as if she had gotten up and wandered on her OWN. you would be acting on the instinct of get the police here immediately. You don't wait 40 minutes and say "we've let her down" - that is a very odd utterance from a person who knows her child to have been taken. And if you know they're taken because the window is open therefore providing access to your twin babes you do not LEAVE it open and leave the kids and run to the bar. Would you not at least shut and lock that window, I would never leave my remaining kids in that scenario. We've let her down, so now let's let the twins down too.

All that running and shouting was according to mrs carpenter at 930 and then at ten thirty the hue and cry goes up according to mrs fenn, the timelines don't add up - and I doubt if they called the desk much before that. The desk would not wait to call the police after being told the child was abducted from her bed.

Could someone have found her gone walkabout at 930, been too ashamed to call the front desk after having been warned by staff not to leave the kids, thinking she had just left the apt on her own to find mummy- since she had woken and cried before when parents did not come - they went about calling for her and looking, and only resigned themselves to her being gone, or realized she was actually gone, an hour later?

I cannot imagine waiting to make that call if I KNEW, because the window was open, that she'd been kidnapped.

Reading through some of the Mark Warner employee witness statements, it seems that GNR may have been contacted much earlier than 10:40.

From Vitor Manuel dos Santos, Housing Departmental Manager:
 
"In regards to the disappearance, on the 3rd of May, 2007, he remembers that around 22H00/22H15, he received a telephone call from the receptionist—Helder, who informed him that John Hill wanted to speak to him urgently in regards to a child who had gone missing and that the G.N.R. who had already been contacted, had yet to arrive. He added that he had already called them various times and was told that they would arrive as soon as possible as they were taking care of a robbery in Odiaxere. The receptionist asked whether he could contact the P.S.P., but he told him no, as this area was covered by the G.N.R."
 
And from Helder Jorge Samaio Luis, Receptionist Ocean Club:
 
"He knows about the situation that happened at the Ocean Club concerning the disappearance of a little given that on the day in question (03/05/2007) he was on duty and was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant between 09.30 and 22.00 who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared.
 
That he immediately contacted the GNR in Lagos, shortly after this the child’s father and John Hill arrived at the reception and he phoned the GNR again.
 
He then contacted the head of reception Vítor Santos and informed him of the situation."

Interesting. So Kate says on her ten PM check she alerted everyone however it was actually at 930? That fits the evidence of Mrs Campbell and maybe the hue and cry wasn't getting hysterically loud until later so that mrs fenn noticed it.

jinvta wrote:Reading through some of the Mark Warner employee witness statements, it seems that GNR may have been contacted much earlier than 10:40.

From Vitor Manuel dos Santos, Housing Departmental Manager:
 
"In regards to the disappearance, on the 3rd of May, 2007, he remembers that around 22H00/22H15, he received a telephone call from the receptionist—Helder, who informed him that John Hill wanted to speak to him urgently in regards to a child who had gone missing and that the G.N.R. who had already been contacted, had yet to arrive. He added that he had already called them various times and was told that they would arrive as soon as possible as they were taking care of a robbery in Odiaxere. The receptionist asked whether he could contact the P.S.P., but he told him no, as this area was covered by the G.N.R."
 
And from Helder Jorge Samaio Luis, Receptionist Ocean Club:
 
"He knows about the situation that happened at the Ocean Club concerning the disappearance of a little given that on the day in question (03/05/2007) he was on duty and was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant between 09.30 and 22.00 who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared.
 
That he immediately contacted the GNR in Lagos, shortly after this the child’s father and John Hill arrived at the reception and he phoned the GNR again.
 
He then contacted the head of reception Vítor Santos and informed him of the situation."

Matthew Oldfield statement.

so Fiona, I think, asked me to go and phone the Police, so I actually went down the route to where she would have gone for Nursery drop off, which his back to the, to the main reception essentially, so I went down that route looking for her at that time and I asked the reception to phone the Police, and that must have been about five past, it’s difficult to know what time it was at that time, but maybe about ten past ten, five past ten, ten past ten”.
00.51.10 4078 “Quite quick then?”
Reply “Yeah, sort of pretty much, you know, straight away, erm, I think it was only, but then it was a kind of, it was surreal when you got there, I said, you’ve got to phone the Police, you know, a child’s been taken, and they went, oh no, she’s probably just sort of woken up and he thought she’s probably sort of wandered off or something like that and you thought, yeah, maybe you’re right, maybe you’re right, erm, can you please, it was sort of, it was kind of, it was sort a weird kind of lack of urgency, you know, he’d ring, but you had to sort and stand there and say, ring now, ring now, so I don’t know if they rang at that point, but certainly, erm, you know, I certainly asked them to,

He certainly asked them to, but doesn't know if/when they did call? I'd say he shared the odd "lack of urgency" - and I think Oldfield is weaving a story here, which I think is BS and after the fact, trying to make it seem like no one showed up, no one called, the police were lazy, the staff was lazy - by the point of these interviews the game was clearly to point the finger at the staff and PJ and direct attention away from themselves and their checking system.