Moving the cot

by **PeterMac** 12.09.14 19:45

I have just seen this on You tube
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

IF any of this is correct then consider this.

Normally one of the twins' cots is in the parents bedroom - perfectly plausible
Madeleine and the other twin sleep in the children's bedroom - perfectly plausible
Madeleine dies in some way and is place din the blue bag in the cupboard - perfectly plausible
For several reasons the parents do not wish the twin to be in the presence, and so move the cot out and into the children's bedroom - perfectly plausible
(as she observes yo have to collapse those cots to get them out of a door, so this means some planning and joint effort)
Kate cannot bring herself to sleep in the same room and sleeps in the bed under the window - perfectly plausible, and photographic evidence supports this
Madeleine's bed is not slept in - perfectly plausible, and photographic evidence supports this

However, that pushes the date of discovery of the body into the Wednesday, possibly late evening on return from dinner.
What night was the blow out on Anis ? It is on another thread.

(All that does to my preferred scenario is move the death to early evening Wednesday, the finding of the body late evening Weds
but everything else is as before.)

by palm tree 12.09.14 20:50

Seems to fit. Km in the book tells us they moved the cot shortly after arrival, 5A cleaner states that one cot was in the parents bedroom on the Wednesday when she had cleaned it. In the children's bedroom, the bed under the window was made as not slept in. Thursday the photos show both cots now in the children's bedroom and the bed under the window had been used by km!
IMO

by Bishop Brennan 13.09.14 8:47

IMO, discovery of the body on Wednesday night has always seemed to provide the most logical timeframe. The cot movement / Kate spending the night in the kids room does appear to back it up. That then gave Gerry all night to work out what the 'plan' would be, and how many (if any) of the T7 would have to be informed to help. It also gave Kate all night and the following day to try to compose herself sufficiently to pull off the cover-story.

The following day (thursday) saw a schedule unlike any previous day, with the McCanns keeping entirely to themselves until Gerry's afternoon tennis. Gerry had all morning to move the blue bag when dressed for tennis but unable to attend due to his 'torn tendon' - which would recover by mid-afternoon.

by worriedmum 13.09.14 10:18

Interestingly, I seem to remember a poster in a previous thread pointing out how one of the cots did not seem to have been properly assembled..
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by inspirespirit 13.09.14 10:21

I think the timescale is the key to this case. However, I can't get my head around the fact that if it happened before the 3rd, how come they got it so wrong. You would have thought 9 intelligent people would be able to work out a plan and stick to it without so many anomalies.

by XTC 13.09.14 22:44

worriedmum wrote:Interestingly, I seem to remember a poster in a previous thread pointing out how one of the cots did not seem to have been properly assembled..
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I think one of the cots legs have to pull outwards.

The other one looks a bit archaic.

The Paynes had one ( there were three ordered I think on arrival) therefore one should have landed at the Payne's apartment.

From the PJ's scene of crime shots the parent's bedroom. Two single beds pushed towards each other suggest to me that a gap was deliberately created for something.

Maybe a cot?

Think simulation?

Opinion though.

by Guest 13.09.14 23:12

worriedmum wrote:Interestingly, I seem to remember a poster in a previous thread pointing out how one of the cots did not seem to have been properly assembled..
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

You're got going to see anyone breathing in the right-most cot.

by **Hobs** 14.09.14 0:57

I still don't understand why the unmade bed is supposed to have been the one kate allegedly slept in and the made bed with the neat turned back corner was the one Maddie allegedly slept in.

Looking at the scene and given that we know( allegedly) 3 children slept in that bedroom, the obvious conclusion would and should be that Maddie slept in the bed under the window and the twins slept in the cots.

The bed by the door was not slept in on the night Maddie was allegedly abducted.

The only things that imply Maddie slept in the tidy bed are kate and gerry telling us this was the case and the blanket and cuddlecat places so tidily at the top of the bed.

Why did they claim Maddie was abducted from the bed by the door which was undisturbed and not the untidy bed by the window which looked like it had been slept in?

Having Maddie sleeping in the bed by the window would have been far more believable than her sleeping in the bed by the door.

It would have been even more believable if the blanket and cuddlecat had been on the bed by the window.

Instead we are told Maddie was in the bed by the door, a bed which was perfectly made and undisturbed despite kate and the twins being on the bed telling stories and singing songs.

Why are they selling us this story which clearly is unbelievable rather than the bed under the window which would be believable?

i would have been doing tests on the bedding from the bed under the window as well as tests on all the bedding both in the childrens bedroom and the mccanns bedroom.

I would also be checking all the other apartments to see which fitted oldfields description of the aoartment and which apartments if any had the high shelf in the bedroom.

by canada12 14.09.14 1:11

I've had a thought that if all three children were given something to make them sleep each night, it would have been prudent of the parents to ensure that none of them were able to accidentally fall out of bed as a result.

So I've wondered if perhaps both twins shared one cot, and Madeleine was put to sleep in the second cot. Or, Madeleine was in the bed beside the window, and the cots beside the bed ensured she wouldn't fall out.

I think the reason why the parents are adamant that Madeleine was in the bed beside the door is because it allows them and their friends to waffle about whether or not they actually saw Madeleine. If she was in the bed by the window, she could be seen in direct line of sight from the open door. No waffling, simple yes or no. She was either there, or she wasn't.

One other thing worth noting about the kids' bedroom. The bed closest to the door has been moved. If you look at the photo of the room there's a headboard affixed to the wall behind where the dresser is. The way the room should have looked is that the bed beside the door should be where the dresser is.

Whether they moved it to make room for the cots or for some other reason, who knows?

by Guest 14.09.14 8:08

Something else about those cots.
They are inappropriate for children
as old as the twins were.
One not even well assembled.
The risks are enormous.

On waking, the child will try to stand up.
Being that big, the cot will turn over,
or collapse if not put together right.
Were those cots used to shield the twins from
falling out of bed?

I don't know about separating the twins at bedtime.
They're twins. The twins I knew ended up sleeping together
in one of their two beds untill they were seven or even older.

And really, forget the notion that Madeleine could have
slept in one of those cots.
For reasons stated above.

They were sedated, that night of the third.
Put into those cots in that state and still sleeping when they
were taken to the Payne's flat later on.

All my opinion
parapono

by bobbin 14.09.14 9:04

canada12 wrote:I've had a thought that if all three children were given something to make them sleep each night, it would have been prudent of the parents to ensure that none of them were able to accidentally fall out of bed as a result.

So I've wondered if perhaps both twins shared one cot, and Madeleine was put to sleep in the second cot. Or, Madeleine was in the bed beside the window, and the cots beside the bed ensured she wouldn't fall out.

I think the reason why the parents are adamant that Madeleine was in the bed beside the door is because it allows them and their friends to waffle about whether or not they actually saw Madeleine. If she was in the bed by the window, she could be seen in direct line of sight from the open door. No waffling, simple yes or no. She was either there, or she wasn't.

One other thing worth noting about the kids' bedroom. The bed closest to the door has been moved. If you look at the photo of the room there's a headboard affixed to the wall behind where the dresser is. The way the room should have looked is that the bed beside the door should be where the dresser is.

Whether they moved it to make room for the cots or for some other reason, who knows?

The door opens to the right.
The bed on the left wall would be in DIRECT sight. The bed by the window would be more difficult to see.
Any light from the hall would lighten the left hand bed.
Only light from open shutters and window, letting light in from the outside, would enable the other bed to be visible.

Kate tells us that the curtains were closed until they 'whooshed'.
On this account alone, the room was not lit from the outside street lighting, so Maddie's bed would be the first one she could see.

If she could see the twins, and indeed, if the fantasist Matthew Oldfield could see the twins' backs moving with breathing, then he and Jane Tanner should share the FIRST PRIZE in the FANTASIST OF THE YEAR category of the "PULL (the other one) IT'S A" 'SHEER FANTASY' prize.

by **PeterMac** 14.09.14 9:27

bobbin wrote:
Kate tells us that the curtains were closed until they 'whooshed'.
On this account alone, the room was not lit from the outside street lighting, so Maddie's bed would be the first one she could see.

If she could see the twins, and indeed, if the fantasist Matthew Oldfield could see the twins' backs moving with breathing, then he and Jane Tanner should share the FIRST PRIZE in the FANTASIST OF THE YEAR category of the "PULL (the other one) IT'S A" 'SHEER FANTASY' prize.

Kate tells us that the curtains were closed until they 'whooshed'.
But she told the police that they were wide OPEN.

“At around 10pm, the witness came to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed, but unlocked, as already said, and immediately noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did.” [4]

Gerry’s statement of 4th May does contain hearsay evidence, but as husband and wife they have obviously spoken between themselves, and the statement can be taken at face value.

“At 10pm, his wife Kate went to check on the children. She went into the apartment through the door using her key and saw right away that the children’s bedroom door was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains drawn open. The side door that opens into the living room, which as said earlier, was never locked, was closed.” [5]

In Gerry’s 10th May statement we find
“The deponent ran into the apartment accompanied by the rest of the group who, at the time, were seated at the table. When he arrived at the bedroom he first noticed that the door was completely open, the window was also open to one side, the shutters almost fully raised, the curtains drawn back, MADELEINE’s bed was empty but the twins continued sleeping in their cots. He clarifies that according to what KATE told him, that was the scenario that she found when she entered the apartment.

So
• in the original statements the curtains were drawn back, or fully open.
• in the police photos they are half drawn.
• In the subsequent explanation they are fully closed

by Guest 14.09.14 9:36

Hobs wrote:I still don't understand why the unmade bed is supposed to have been the one kate allegedly slept in and the made bed with the neat turned back corner was the one Maddie allegedly slept in.

Looking at the scene and given that we know( allegedly) 3 children slept in that bedroom, the obvious conclusion would and should be that Maddie slept in the bed under the window and the twins slept in the cots.

When my daughter was almost exactly the same age as M at the time of her disappearance we stayed in a hotel room that had a children's bunk bed. The first hour after bedtime every night was spent with her deciding which bunk to sleep in, excitedly switching between the two before she finally fell asleep in one or the other.

If we were staying in 5A I think it's entirely possible we could have put her to sleep in one bed only to find her in the other one the next morning. Of course, she isn't fitted with the patented McCann on/off switch.

by Monty Heck 14.09.14 12:56

worriedmum wrote:Interestingly, I seem to remember a poster in a previous thread pointing out how one of the cots did not seem to have been properly assembled..
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

It's difficult to imagine that this was a set up the McCs decided to live with for their week long stay. The room is too crowded with furniture - to open a drawer or wardrobe door a cot would have to be moved. Opening or closing curtains/shutters etc would mean negotiating between cots and standing on the far bed or reaching awkwardly across to do so. As far as cleaning of the room and making up beds each day are concerned, this would be plain awkward. It's a very cramped space indeed for getting 3 under 4s dressed/undressed and settling them to sleep. All of this might be understandible if born of necessity but this was apparently done by choice as there was space enough in the oher bedroom for one of the cots. Neither room could have accommodated more than one cot comfortably. This arrangement seems wholly inconvenient to the occupants of the apartment and must have been a headache for the cleaner, who would certainly have remembered whether she had to struggle around cots and beds to get her work done or not. Her testimony that one of the cots was in the parents' room on the Wednesday morning is, IMO, more compelling than claims that this is how room was set up for the duration of the holiday.

by palm tree 14.09.14 22:57

If Madeleine was in the cupboard, that would be right beside Madeleines bed, separated by a wall. If km couldn't sleep in that room that night, then it's possible she would have preferred the bed furthest away whilst also preferring to pull both cots as far away as possible. Although, the door looks to be held open by one of the cots, so someone could have moved the cots before the pics were taken.
IMO

by kimHager 18.09.14 16:29

Didn't the mccanns say in a few or at least one occasion that the twins were tucked in bed beside Maddy? I saw it somewhere perhaps the PJ files..will check..but if that night they were by Maddy...and weren't the twins or specifically Sean's shirt have cadaverine on it alerted by dogs...would make sense if she passed away in a cot ( bedding gone from cots) hmmm

by woodbine 18.09.14 16:42

Hi,

I've been a long-time reader of this forum. Finally decided to get involved, rather than continuing to bore all around me with my doubts about this mystery. Keep up the work, justice for Maddie!

I was under the impression that GA was sure that Maddie died on the night that the alarm was raised, but a lot of theories I am reading at the moment are discussing the mystery from the point of view that she died earlier in the week. Lack of photographs & dna, cadaver odour, the change of daily routine etc all point towards this for sure.

The only problem I have with this idea, is that surely given at least 24 hours of pre-planning time, the mccanns could have staged a more fool-proof fake-abduction. And one which didn't involve making all members of the tapas gang look like negligent parents.

"We went to the supermarket, Maddie ran off down another aisle. She turned a corner and we never saw her again."

"We went to sleep and when we woke up she was gone. Look at this jimmed shutter"

"I was perfecting my forehand stroke, when a corsa pulled up, a man dragged her into the back of the car and sped off. I wasn't able to get a license plate because my forehand has quite a substantial follow-through."

Given enough time, wouldn't they at least make sure the bloody window was open, break a lock, or plant a footstep? Wouldn't they dispose of a bag had they used it to transport a body?

To me, I can only assume that the accident happened on the night the alarm was raised, and that not much time was available to them. Otherwise the sheer stupidity of their attempted cover-up is unreal. Maybe that is where the quote comes from, something along the lines of 'this is the biggest cock-up in history" - CM?

by bobbin 18.09.14 16:53

woodbine wrote:Hi,

I've been a long-time reader of this forum. Finally decided to get involved, rather than continuing to bore all around me with my doubts about this mystery. Keep up the work, justice for Maddie!

I was under the impression that GA was sure that Maddie died on the night that the alarm was raised, but a lot of theories I am reading at the moment are discussing the mystery from the point of view that she died earlier in the week. Lack of photographs & dna, cadaver odour, the change of daily routine etc all point towards this for sure.

The only problem I have with this idea, is that surely given at least 24 hours of pre-planning time, the mccanns could have staged a more fool-proof fake-abduction. And one which didn't involve making all members of the tapas gang look like negligent parents.

"We went to the supermarket, Maddie ran off down another aisle. She turned a corner and we never saw her again."

"We went to sleep and when we woke up she was gone. Look at this jimmed shutter"

"I was perfecting my forehand stroke, when a corsa pulled up, a man dragged her into the back of the car and sped off. I wasn't able to get a license plate because my forehand has quite a substantial follow-through."

Given enough time, wouldn't they at least make sure the bloody window was open, break a lock, or plant a footstep? Wouldn't they dispose of a bag had they used it to transport a body?

To me, I can only assume that the accident happened on the night the alarm was raised, and that not much time was available to them. Otherwise the sheer stupidity of their attempted cover-up is unreal. Maybe that is where the quote comes from, something along the lines of 'this is the biggest cock-up in history" - CM?

If Maddie had died on the Thursday pm or evening there is nothing to stop the McCs planning more calmly and doing the abduction on the Friday night.
They weren't leaving till the Saturday and had no problem staying in PdL for months anyway.
I am certain the cleaning, bleaching, scrubbing of blood between floor tiles, etc. must have necessitated more time than that following a Thursday incident.
In terms of why have they made such a mash of it all. Well, that's because it's the McCs we are talking about. They are pathetic actors, they know they are lying, they are so dumb they don't realise people can 'read' their shifting eyes, their sniggers, their inappropriate behaviour at every twist and turn.
I don't think it would matter what day they tried to play their 'abduction' out, they would co*k it up.
For this reason, I think any day can have been the last day and it's not restricted to Thursday.
As tigger said on a thread earlier today, the only indication other than the McCs own words, that Maddie was abducted or according to Amaral died, on the Thursday, is Goncalo Amaral, repeating the Police view of the death.
This was based on the information gleaned at the time, and since then, much more info has become available or been re-scrutinised.
Thursday is not set in stone and it's the other features that indicate another day, such as signs of 'pre-preparation' of scene, story, materials, relatives' jemmied shutters etc.

by Praiaaa 18.09.14 17:03

bobbin wrote:
woodbine wrote:Hi,

I've been a long-time reader of this forum. Finally decided to get involved, rather than continuing to bore all around me with my doubts about this mystery. Keep up the work, justice for Maddie!

I was under the impression that GA was sure that Maddie died on the night that the alarm was raised, but a lot of theories I am reading at the moment are discussing the mystery from the point of view that she died earlier in the week. Lack of photographs & dna, cadaver odour, the change of daily routine etc all point towards this for sure.

The only problem I have with this idea, is that surely given at least 24 hours of pre-planning time, the mccanns could have staged a more fool-proof fake-abduction. And one which didn't involve making all members of the tapas gang look like negligent parents.

"We went to the supermarket, Maddie ran off down another aisle. She turned a corner and we never saw her again."

"We went to sleep and when we woke up she was gone. Look at this jimmed shutter"

"I was perfecting my forehand stroke, when a corsa pulled up, a man dragged her into the back of the car and sped off. I wasn't able to get a license plate because my forehand has quite a substantial follow-through."

Given enough time, wouldn't they at least make sure the bloody window was open, break a lock, or plant a footstep? Wouldn't they dispose of a bag had they used it to transport a body?

To me, I can only assume that the accident happened on the night the alarm was raised, and that not much time was available to them. Otherwise the sheer stupidity of their attempted cover-up is unreal. Maybe that is where the quote comes from, something along the lines of 'this is the biggest cock-up in history" - CM?
If Maddie had died on the Thursday pm or evening there is nothing to stop the McCs planning more calmly and doing the abduction on the Friday night.
They weren't leaving till the Saturday and had no problem staying in PdL for months anyway.
I am certain the cleaning, bleaching, scrubbing of blood between floor tiles, etc. must have necessitated more time than that following a Thursday incident.
In terms of why have they made such a mash of it all. Well, that's because it's the McCs we are talking about. They are pathetic actors, they know they are lying, they are so dumb they don't realise people can 'read' their shifting eyes, their sniggers, their inappropriate behaviour at every twist and turn.
I don't think it would matter what day they tried to play their 'abduction' out, they would co*k it up.
For this reason, I think any day can have been the last day and it's not restricted to Thursday.
As tigger said on a thread earlier today, the only indication other than the McCs own words, that Maddie was abducted or according to Amaral died, on the Thursday, is Goncalo Amaral, repeating the Police view of the death.
This was based on the information gleaned at the time, and since then, much more info has become available or been re-scrutinised.
Thursday is not set in stone and it's the other features that indicate another day, such as signs of 'pre-preparation' of scene, story, materials, relatives' jemmied shutters etc.

by palm tree 18.09.14 21:55

For all we know, the bed under the window could have been Maddies, as all we have is k&g told us so.
IMO

by cloak'ndagger 18.09.14 22:01

palm tree wrote:For all we know, the bed under the window could have been Maddies, as all we have is k&g told us so.
IMO

I have always thought that Maddie slept in the bed under the window because it fits with the way Jane says Maddie was being carried by the ''abductor'' and she says in the video ''I carried''.

Kate says she slept in the bed under the window. Was she trying to prempt DNA found in that bed?

by kimHager 18.09.14 22:07

Was the bed under the window the one with a semen stain on the coverlet? I'm sure I read that one bed had semen on it.might be a food reason to switch beds...Kate or Gerry must have known what would be found.
As for the bed being moved around in kids room, was blood found on the walls or a bloody footprint I'd read....if true wouldn't it definitely be a crime scene and shouldn't more forceful action be taken to secure the apartment?Just my opinion

by palm tree 19.09.14 9:38

I can remember reading about a partial footprint containing blood had been found just outside the children's bedroom. I wonder what became of that? I also remember about a footprint on the boot of their hire car which was consistent with lifting a heavy object into the boot, what happened with that one? Even more, km claimed she had been attacked by a pack of dogs whilst jogging and was bitten on the ankle? All this makes me wonder what exactly is in the pj files that have been held back, and also how they still haven't been brought to justice a long time ago? This case is full of questions that need answering and there's nothing to stop k&g answering those now, unless they've something to hide that is!
IMO

by NickE 19.09.14 10:14

From Textusa 2011:

The bed Madeleine was reported to have slept in was not the bed under the window, which is the bed referred to in this report. I presume this would be the bed Kate said she slept in after her argument with Gerry.
It was reported in 24 Horas that the cleaners had washed sheets, blankets and pillowcases in theMcCanns’ apartment after they left.

If this was the normal procedure between guests, can we assume that the bedding had been washedtwice since the saliva/semen was deposited?
If it wasn’t the normal procedure, why was it carried out following the McCanns’ departure?

The report continues “Autosomic STR’s were obtained from the following vestigios: root of 1 of the hairs collected from the bedroom floor of the Burgau apartment (Vg3), and in the lower zone of the fibre from the car boot. Table 1 also includes the profile of the spot from the counterpane, already sent previously."

The report then identifies 3 male DNA samples. On September 4th Goncalo Amaral (3252/3) sent 3 unidentified male profiles to the INML to check with the British database, delivered on the 9th and analysed on October 4th.

He was taken off the investigation on Oct 3rd, but this line of enquiry was continued by Paulo Rebelowhen he took over the investigation on October 8th.

On 12.12.07.he asks for a forensic examination from the INML of ; “ A natureza da mancha (encontrada na colcha de uma das camas do apartamento 5A…) e que permitiu a indentificacao pelaletra L. “

I’ll refer to them as Male 1, Male 2 and Male 3.

Male 3 is profile L, so I’ll call him Leo, to make it easier to see him as a person and not a letter Male1sample is found in the car boot (the car rented by the McCanns) (1)

Male 2 is found in Burgau (Vg3) (2)

Male 3 = Leo is found on the bedspread and also hair roots - 1 at entrance to bedroom at Ocean Club, 2 in the entrance hall, 4 on the floor next to the window= 8 samples in total.

So, can Craig be the source of the 8 samples? The stain on the bedcover is now said to be his saliva, but what about the 7 hair roots?
Rebelo sent the 3 profiles for analysis and asked for the profiles of two other guests, Neil Berry andRajinder Raj Singh Balu to be compared.

There is no result of this in the PJ files, as far as I have discovered.

Any more info about this?

by kimHager 19.09.14 14:10

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This article in the McCann files Did mention a footprint and that the walls in the children room was painted over blood specks on the wall....idk its always bizzare with k and g . I don't know if the blood could have been maddys then it goes to reason she either had a blow to the head? Or something gruesome in the room perhaps being taken to the living room and laid on the floor behind the sofa as they ( my opinion) worked to save her and didn't? That would make me wonder if the cleanup missed the bedroom wall/ floor in the haste to clean up? Who painted the walls also wasn't quiet clear to me.my opinion