shutter repair/ washing machine instructions

by russiandoll Sat 07 Jan 2012, 10:31 am

this should clarify things :

"On Tuesday 1 May, after my tennis lesson, two maintenance workers came
to have a look at our washing machine, which I couldn’t get to operate.
Gerry had also managed to break the window shutter mechanism in our
bedroom shortly after we’d arrived, in spite of the sign asking guests
to be gentle with it. What can I say? It’s the Gerry touch...The two men
looked at the washing machine first. Once they’d established that the
problem was something simple – not quite as simple as me not having
pressed the ‘on’ button, but not much more complicated than that – I
went to meet Gerry, whose lesson had started at ten-fifteen, leaving
them to fix the shutter. "

Wonder just how shortly after arrival their bedroom shutter was damaged and why no request for repair until 1st May. I would like to know what Gerry had done to break the shutter mechanism, maybe it is on a document as I would think maintenanace men would state the nature of the repair undertaken.

by Pershing36 Sat 07 Jan 2012, 10:38 am

Was this the shutter that was mistakenly thought to have been forced open?

by russiandoll Sat 07 Jan 2012, 10:48 am

The McCanns immediately claimed 3 May that the shutter in the children's bedroom had been forced. Their family in UK went so far as to claim it had been "jemmied".
The shutter repair May 1st was to the one in the adults' bedroom. Given all I have read about this case, I wonder [reasonably imo!] if the damage was caused when one of them was attempting to find out about its ease or difficulty of opening. It was I believe the mechanism for opening/closing which was broken. I would like to know how the maintenance men found it and how they thought the damage had occurred. Why would Gerry have been heavy handed if there was a request to be gentle with it?
I would think the maintenance men were interviewed by the police, given the McCann's claims of a forced shutter a couple of days later in the other bedroom. I am sure there is a document in the files with the date of repair to the shutter in Kate and Gerry's room.

by Pershing36 Sat 07 Jan 2012, 10:55 am

I suppose a very cynical person could suggest that the shutter had be broken before the 3rd and the maintenance men messed up that persons plan. prisoner

by **PeterMac** Sat 07 Jan 2012, 10:59 am

I think you are talking about the wrong shutter. The broken one is in G&Ks bedroom, i.e. the room overlooking the garden, the lane, the wall, the pool and the Tapas bar (if you stand on a chair).

by Guest Sat 07 Jan 2012, 11:14 am

There's an earlier topic on the blinds and washing machine.

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

That previously unseen photo of Moa's resembles the child in the Halloween costume

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] but in my opinion it possibly isn't Madeleine.

by Guest Sat 07 Jan 2012, 11:21 am

russiandoll wrote:
I would think the maintenance men were interviewed by the police, given the McCann's claims of a forced shutter a couple of days later in the other bedroom. I am sure there is a document in the files with the date of repair to the shutter in Kate and Gerry's room.

There are two statements from the maintenance men who fixed the shutter and showed Kate how to use a washing machine...

Both say they attended on 1st May and repaired blind in the parents room:

. Questioned, the deponent states that in the scope of his functions and the day before the disappearance of the child, he only came into contact with the mother of the same, whose name he does not know;
. This happened on Tuesday, the first of May, in the sequence of a service that he had to carry out in the apartment where this family was staying, also known as Block G5, Letter A;
. This serviced was carried out between 10H00 and 11H00, together with his colleague who is named Mario, and consisted of the repair of a blind in the room of the parents of the minor;
. In this sequence, the deponent and his colleague also taught the mother of the child how to operate the washing machine;
. The woman in question was alone in the apartment;
. The only places of the apartment where the deponent and his colleague entered was the kitchen and the parent's bedroom;

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

This one goes into more details about what was wrong with the shutter - the pull handles - and this is a common problem with heavy handed tourists... if the blinds required heavy initial force to open from the inside, can't see how they can be opened from the outside:

When asked about the events being investigated he says that he only saw the girl's mother once. This happened during the exercise of his functions, and after instruction from his superiors he went to apartment 5 A.

His services had been requested because the shutters in the bedroom at the back of the apartment, facing the Tapas restaurant were damaged and with the aim of providing the mother with instructions regarding the operation of the washing machine. When asked, he said that the damage to the blinds was centred on the pull-handle, limiting their opening. He says that this kind of damage is quite frequent, given the fact of the need for some initial force to raise the shutter, sometimes associated with a lack of knowledge of the mechanism on the part of some of the tourists, who keep applying force, contrary to what is required, and which results in the violent destruction of the respective handles.

When questioned, he says that he never works alone, he is always part of a team of two. The other individual is his colleague, Luis Ferro, who accompanied him in the execution of the repairs mentioned above.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

there is a copy of the maintenance slip at the top of this statement and it shows 1st may:

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

by monkey mind Sat 07 Jan 2012, 1:00 pm

Interestingly, whilst in her book she mentions the shutter repair and washing machine/blinds on Tue 1/5/07 as we know there is almost nothing about the previousday the 30th. In her diary on the other hand, which was allegedly written much earlier, it is not the same, here is her entry for Mon 30 th April....

Monday 30.04.2007
Breakfast apartment? apartment cleaning
Kids clubs:
Tennis 09.15-10.15 K
G 10.15-11.15
*? washing machine / blinds
Lunch - our apartment then → balcony F and Dave
Kids club?? beach
+ / - 16.00 K run 25 min.
16:30 Tennis lessons
High tea
18:30? tennis night for women
Recreational area
Afternoon: K and J Supermarket
Rest. - everyone

The question is why does this entry about the washing machine/blinds appear on the 30th? I note the "?" at the start of the line so maybe she wasn't sure of the date? But then almost four years later when writing her book she gets it right so she has obviously referred to the statements of the maintenance men, thus explaining how their stories seem to develop according to the PJ, as new info comes in so does their memories seemingly improve.

Also, note in this diary entry that at the end there is a kind of addendum "Afternoon K and J supermarket". No "?" before or after this entry. This was the afternoon that Maddie was according to the creche sheets booked in and out in a fifteen min period in the afternoon. So where was Madeleine and who was she with that afternoon? She makes no mention of her being with "K and J" that afternoon.

And what was Gerry up to this fine day? There is no mention of him at all in her book as I recall and in her diary the simple entry "G 10.15- 11.15" presumably for tennis. For the rest of the day there is nothing known of his activities, he could have been anyhwere, doing anything. And IF Madeleine ever did attend the creche that week, for some reason she was whipped in and out that afternoon and we have no explanationas to why.

Everything points to something happening on the 30th but what? Was it the day she died? Or was it the day the body was moved to a safer hiding place? In light of other evidence, I'm leaning toward the latter.....

by Smokeandmirrors Sat 07 Jan 2012, 1:10 pm

A cynic might speculate that one could easily try very hard to break a shutter, and have it on record that they are breakable if one were to later rely on a broken shutter for a mysterious purpose. But one would have to be very cynical indeed and not familiar with the rules of what you are allowed to think regarding such matters.

by Pershing36 Sat 07 Jan 2012, 1:19 pm

I remember reading somewhere that they were warned about how easy these shutters were to break, so they did it anyway. Think it was a sign or something, being very cynical a person could then exploit this very well documented weakness.

by jd Sat 07 Jan 2012, 1:21 pm

Good find Monkey Mind. I too think that the question mark for the washing machine / blinds is because she is unsure of the date, but this also says this is an important factor to need to make sure of the correct date. Probably had to refer to the statements from the maintenance men first!

I haven't read 'the bewk'...can't bring myself. Comparing other days, does she mention Maddie much? On the 30th April she doesn't at all and its all what she, gerry and her friends did. It reads the mccanns hardly spent any time together with their kids except for tea, putting to bed and taking to creche. Poor kids!

by Pershing36 Sat 07 Jan 2012, 1:27 pm

jd wrote:Good find Monkey Mind. I too think that the question mark for the washing machine / blinds is because she is unsure of the date, but this also says this is an important factor to need to make sure of the correct date. Probably had to refer to the statements from the maintenance men first!

Were the blinds definitely reported by them? A cleaner or something could have reported the fault, we know about the washing machine.

by monkey mind Sat 07 Jan 2012, 1:30 pm

Further to my previous post. Note the "apartment cleaning" in the diary. What kind of sane person cleans an apartment two days after arriving and on the day the cleaners are due in?

Remember, the PJ believed that M died in that apartment and that there was evidence it had been cleaned up. Was the entry on the 30th about washing machine/blinds a freudian / forensic linguistics slip?

Was this the day she wanted to clean the blinds but couldn't because when she went to do it either she didn't know how to work the machine or it didn't work so she had to wait until the next day, when the maintenance men had been?

Cleaning holiday apartment blinds a couple of days after arriving on holiday is a signe of.....

a) Obsessiv cleanliness?
b) Insanity?
c) In light of all else something far more suspicious?

Answers on a postcard please (note, entries containing two of the above three options rather than just one will not be automatically disqualified)....

by monkey mind Sat 07 Jan 2012, 1:43 pm

Smokeandmirrors wrote:A cynic might speculate that one could easily try very hard to break a shutter, and have it on record that they are breakable if one were to later rely on a broken shutter for a mysterious purpose. But one would have to be very cynical indeed and not familiar with the rules of what you are allowed to think regarding such matters.

The same ficticious cynic, might also, if he were planning to stage a rather cynical abduction and the centre piece of his plan were a forced shutter, might want to find out ow to do such a thing. And then, the same cynic, some days later, when returning to put the finishing touches to his plan the piece de resistance, may not have been able to carry it through because there was someone wheeling a kiddy around in the street just outside the window. Or is this too cynical????

by sammyc Sat 07 Jan 2012, 1:51 pm

(C) is the answer monkeymind. I know because I have an obsession with cleaning yet I wouldn't go as far as cleaning blinds in a holiday apartment and I can categorically state that (b) does not apply to me.

by Guest Sat 07 Jan 2012, 2:20 pm

PeterMac wrote:I think you are talking about the wrong shutter. The broken one is in G&Ks bedroom, i.e. the room overlooking the garden, the lane, the wall, the pool and the Tapas bar (if you stand on a chair).

i remember reading that the dogs picked up a smell in a garden or flower bed ? Was that near the repared window shutter ?

by Pershing36 Sat 07 Jan 2012, 4:05 pm

monkey mind wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:A cynic might speculate that one could easily try very hard to break a shutter, and have it on record that they are breakable if one were to later rely on a broken shutter for a mysterious purpose. But one would have to be very cynical indeed and not familiar with the rules of what you are allowed to think regarding such matters.
The same ficticious cynic, might also, if he were planning to stage a rather cynical abduction and the centre piece of his plan were a forced shutter, might want to find out ow to do such a thing. And then, the same cynic, some days later, when returning to put the finishing touches to his plan the piece de resistance, may not have been able to carry it through because there was someone wheeling a kiddy around in the street just outside the window. Or is this too cynical????

Or the cynical person may have thought he could have broken the shutter in advance and thinking it would have stayed broken. Reported it as the point of entry to the press, only to find out later it had been repaired. ooops

Better change the diary entry. shame on you

by **PeterMac** Sat 07 Jan 2012, 4:23 pm

Moa wrote:
PeterMac wrote:I think you are talking about the wrong shutter. The broken one is in G&Ks bedroom, i.e. the room overlooking the garden, the lane, the wall, the pool and the Tapas bar (if you stand on a chair).
I remember reading that the dogs picked up a smell in a garden or flower bed ? Was that near the repared window shutter ?

I believe it was directly below it. Someone may be able to confirm.

by Pershing36 Sat 07 Jan 2012, 4:31 pm

I don't know about MW apartments, but I assume they are better than most things I have stayed in. For security on holidays I always close shutters and windows when I go out only to usually find them wide open when I get back because I assume the cleaners like the room airy and cool. Even in the USA I always turn the air con off when I go out to save electricity to find it on full blast when I return.

by monkey mind Sat 07 Jan 2012, 4:32 pm

Pershing36 wrote:
monkey mind wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:A cynic might speculate that one could easily try very hard to break a shutter, and have it on record that they are breakable if one were to later rely on a broken shutter for a mysterious purpose. But one would have to be very cynical indeed and not familiar with the rules of what you are allowed to think regarding such matters.
The same ficticious cynic, might also, if he were planning to stage a rather cynical abduction and the centre piece of his plan were a forced shutter, might want to find out ow to do such a thing. And then, the same cynic, some days later, when returning to put the finishing touches to his plan the piece de resistance, may not have been able to carry it through because there was someone wheeling a kiddy around in the street just outside the window. Or is this too cynical????

Or the cynical person may have thought he could have broken the shutter in advance and thinking it would have stayed broken. Reported it as the point of entry to the press, only to find out later it had been repaired.

Better change the diary entry.

Yes, but on realising it had been repaired, it would have to be reforced again would it not? No one's going to believe entry was forced when there was no forced entry, and next to no one who (knows the facts) does, least of all the PJ. But it can't be done too early incase it is noticed and out trot the maintenance men or whoever. Leave it until the last minute.

Damn that buggy boy!!

by monkey mind Sat 07 Jan 2012, 4:44 pm

Pershing36 wrote:I don't know about MW apartments, but I assume they are better than most things I have stayed in. For security on holidays I always close shutters and windows when I go out only to usually find them wide open when I get back because I assume the cleaners like the room airy and cool. Even in the USA I always turn the air con off when I go out to save electricity to find it on full blast when I return.

Pershing 36, perhaps in your case when you returned to find the shutters and windows wide open having closed them yourself, well perhaps you were in fact burgled, entry was forced time and again and each time the burglar or gang of burglars didn't actually find anything to their liking despite switching on the air conditioner to keep cool and comfortable whilst perusing?

The exact opposite of what we are supposed to believe had happened in this case in fact!

Only when one considers the two cases, the explanation for your one makes a lot more sense than this other nonsense.

by Pershing36 Sat 07 Jan 2012, 4:49 pm

monkey mind wrote:

Damn that buggy boy!!

Yeah I see your cynical persons point, but why report entry as a forced (apparently GM heavy handed), broken shutter if they knew it had been repaired and they had failed to stage it again?

My cynical source was on the lines of they assumed it was still broken, reported it to press, only to find out later from the PJ it was not broken. When was the diary released/read. Surely if it had been broken in advance then repaired they would have to cover this avenue strongly as it would have been a sure sign of planning.

by monkey mind Sat 07 Jan 2012, 5:11 pm

Pershing36 wrote:
monkey mind wrote:

Damn that buggy boy!!

Yeah I see your cynical persons point, but why report entry as a forced (apparently GM heavy handed), broken shutter if they knew it had been repaired and they had failed to stage it again?

My cynical source was on the lines of they assumed it was still broken, reported it to press, only to find out later from the PJ it was not broken. When was the diary released/read. Surely if it had been broken in advance then repaired they would have to cover this avenue strongly as it would have been a sure sign of planning.

The problem I have with that is that it appears the shutters broken earlier in the week were in the parents' bedroom rather than that of the children, which doesn't fit with the comments we have heard from K about the wind from the window in the childrens' room blowing the door shut. That would make even less sens thanit did if they thought their own bedroom window was still broken.

by Guest Sat 07 Jan 2012, 5:14 pm

PeterMac wrote:
Moa wrote:
PeterMac wrote:I think you are talking about the wrong shutter. The broken one is in G&Ks bedroom, i.e. the room overlooking the garden, the lane, the wall, the pool and the Tapas bar (if you stand on a chair).
I remember reading that the dogs picked up a smell in a garden or flower bed ? Was that near the repared window shutter ?
I believe it was directly below it. Someone may be able to confirm.

Yes it was directly below the bedroom.:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

5A:

From 8.30pm to 9.20pm, the dogs go through.
8.20pm: The cadaver dog, "marks," the couple's wardrobe area in the bedroom.
8.22pm: The cadaver dog, "marks" an area behind the sofa in the sitting room near the window overlooking the road.
From 8.47pm to 9.20pm, the blood detecting dog goes through.
8.10 (should it be 9.10?) The dog, "marks" an area of floor behind the sofa in the sitting room, near the window overlooking the road.

5B: 9.24 to 9.27pm: The cadaver dog did not alert on anything.

5D: 9.29 to 9.34pm: The cadaver dog did not alert on anything.

5H : 9.35 to 9.38pm : The cadaver dog did not alert on anything.

4G : 9.42 to 9.45pm : The cadaver dog did not alert on anything.

Garden belonging to apartment 5A (with access via the balcony and the steps):

9.49 to 10pm: The cadaver dog "marks" an area of the garden immediately below the window.

Subsequently, as previously determined, there proceeded the collection of various hairs from the ground of the pathway in the garden area next to the window of the couple's bedroom, they having been encased in a paper package referenced as trace evidence number 25.

After the above there proceeded the collection of several branches of the climbing plant in the garden they having been encased in a paper package referenced as trace evidence number 21 and of possible fibres on a wall of the apartment garden, next to the climbing plant, using six Crystal-Tabs appropriate for this they having been referenced as trace evidence number 26.

So the dog alerted to the corner of the mccann bedroom by the wardrobe - in the video of the dogs Martin Grimes says this could be the scent concentrated there because of airflow in the apartment.

The bedroom has patio doors which lead to a small patio area shared with the living room - see first photo. This show the view towards the bedroom patio doors from outside the lounge patio doors. On the right is the bedroom and you can just see the patio doors and shutters. It's these shutters that were broken...

The second photo shows the garden for 5a. It is private and has a wall around it. You can see the stairs on the right (covered by the purple flowered bush) and the lounge patio doors show above the purple bush. Then to the left with the yellow and white flowers and the bush climbing up to the top of the wall is the area under the bedroom patio doors and patio. Looking at the video of the dog in this area, which was shot at night unfortunately, it looks like was right in those bushes and he alerted to the area by the wall. Looks like it was quite a well hidden area, good for hiding things...

From the above report it also looks like they recovered some forensic evidence for testing.

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

by Pershing36 Sat 07 Jan 2012, 5:15 pm

Yes the point of exit. Doesn't mean somebody always leaves the same way they entered.

by monkey mind Sat 07 Jan 2012, 5:41 pm

Pershing36 wrote:Yes the point of exit. Doesn't mean somebody always leaves the same way they entered.

No, in a genuine break in people don’t always leave by the way they entered. But unless I got this wrong I’m not aware that there was ever any suggestion that entry had been gained through the parents’ bedroom window it was the childrens’ one wasn’t it? Why else would K’s fingerprints have been found on the bottom outside of those shutters in a manner indicating she had reached through the window to the outside and tried to lift them up. Nor am I aware of any indication that the patio doors were open thus allowing wind to blow the bedroom door shut. The theory has to fit the facts and not vice versa.

by russiandoll Sat 07 Jan 2012, 7:05 pm

can't see on the photo just posted due to shrubs and foliage....wondering if a child got access via patio door and tried to look over the balcony/veranda area , there is a high-ish looking wall.
Is a fall possible here on to the paved area of the garden?

by russiandoll Sat 07 Jan 2012, 7:10 pm

In another section, [trip to Sagres I think], some time ago, I posted about this date, it sticks out like a sore thumb in the book due to the lack of any detail about activities, when there are about 15 pages devoted to quite boring descriptions of what became routine events between 28 April and 2 May.
The one day when the routine changed would be the most interesting for a reader, yet nothing is talked about save a trip to buy a few things from a local supermarket and the usual but brief reference to the evening meal.
Madeleine was in creche for 15 minutes, unlike other days and she is unaccounted for for 2 whole hours, in the care of an adult or adults presumably, while twins remained in creche. So a case of silence being highly suspect.
A hugely significant date. But what the heck was going on we would all like to know.
And so would the police for sure.

by Guest Sat 07 Jan 2012, 8:32 pm

russiandoll wrote:can't see on the photo just posted due to shrubs and foliage....wondering if a child got access via patio door and tried to look over the balcony/veranda area , there is a high-ish looking wall.
Is a fall possible here on to the paved area of the garden?

The photos below are taken 4 May 2007 so show what the vegetation was like at the time.. (the previous photos I posted were in august 2007 when the dogs were used and the vegetation had grown a bit more - the bushes are higher and have grown through the railings on the patio wall outside the bedroom..

This shows on foto 16 the view from patio outside lounge. the wall gets lower towards the bedroom with railings. the drop on the otherside is to the garden and would be a high drop.

I think the cadaver smell in the garden was weaker - there was a strong reaction by the dog in the lounge behind the sofa.

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

by Guest Sun 08 Jan 2012, 8:58 am

monkey mind wrote:
Pershing36 wrote:Yes the point of exit. Doesn't mean somebody always leaves the same way they entered.

No, in a genuine break in people don’t always leave by the way they entered. But unless I got this wrong I’m not aware that there was ever any suggestion that entry had been gained through the parents’ bedroom window it was the childrens’ one wasn’t it? Why else would K’s fingerprints have been found on the bottom outside of those shutters in a manner indicating she had reached through the window to the outside and tried to lift them up. Nor am I aware of any indication that the patio doors were open thus allowing wind to blow the bedroom door shut. The theory has to fit the facts and not vice versa.

Kate's prints were not found on the shutter.

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

From the glass located on the inside of childs window,
5 prints were recovered, 3 from the middle finger of LH, 2 from the index finger of LH, all belonging to Kate McCann.

From outside of the external blinds, i.e., the shutter,
3 inadequate prints were found. (according to experts, they are in the opening position of someone standing inside)