Re: Dr Martin Roberts - NO WAY OUT

by russiandoll Fri Jul 12, 2013 1:21 am

Dr. Martin Roberts
11 July 2013

NO WAY OUT (AT ALL)

According to the Irish Independent, an Irish couple 'could hold the key to solving Madeleine McCann case.'

That would be the Smiths, would it not?

Martin Smith described a man carrying a child with their head against his left shoulder and arms hanging down alongside the body. The child was wearing light coloured or pink pyjamas.

Aiofe Smith described a man carrying a child in light trousers, white or light-pink, that may have been pyjamas. She also had a light top, with long sleeves.

Peter Daniel Smith does not remember her clothing very well but believes it was light summer clothing, light in colour.

As the whole world knows, Jane Tanner also saw a man carrying a child dressed in pyjamas that night - 'the pyjamas had a pinky aspect to them so you presume a girl.'

Pink pyjamas to left and right. Was Madeleine wearing one pair, or both? Or neither? She certainly was not dressed in the clothes described by Aiofe Smith, having been 'taken' whilst wearing her short-sleeved Disney patterned 'Eeyore' Pyjamas.

With two pairs of Marks and Spencer Eeyore pyjamas at liberty to meander about the Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, that week, if one wished to choose between the Smiths' or Jane Tanner's sighting being genuine, the non-matching aspect of the description given by Aiofe Smith would suggest Tanner's was the more likely. There again, a description based largely, if not entirely, upon a view of the child's feet is hardly likely to be definitive. Perhaps Madeleine was nowhere on the streets that night after all, in the arms of a stranger or otherwise. She most certainly was not wandering the streets unattended.

"There's no way she... she could have got out on her own." Said Gerry McCann. And he was absolutely right about that. Kate McCann has since indirectly confirmed (Madeleine, p.130) that the front door to their apartment was locked that night, whilst Rachael Oldfield (nee Mampilly) has given a police statement (15.5.2007) in which she points out that the patio door, locked or unlocked, was screened by its own shutters - in the lowered position:

'The window shutters of the McCann's apartment were closed. The patio door that they used to enter the apartment also had its shutter closed. In order to enter they had to raise the shutter.'

An observation given support by the Tapas Group's two hand-written timelines, which state, 'all shutters down', the second time in underlined capitals for emphasis, no less. All of which casts a very dubious light on a statement to camera made by Gerry McCann during the May 2009 documentary, 'Madeleine Was Here':

GM: "Part of the reason we ended up coming through the back was the noise coming through the front door. We didn't want to disturb them. Stupid, now, isn't it."

Even accepting that it was only 'part of the reason', one has to wonder how unlocking and/or opening an apartment door could be considered a noisy pursuit; especially when compared to the clatter which would necessarily result from having to raise a metal shutter some two metres from the floor, simply in order to access said apartment from the opposite end. Stupid now? Stupid then.

It seems that there was indeed no way she (Madeleine) could have got out on her own.

And if that's one remark that does not now require explanation, the following sworn statements by both parents of the missing child could definitely benefit from clarification:

GM (4.5.07) - The window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains drawn open.

KM (4.5.07) - At around 10pm, the witness...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.

GM (15.5.07) - He is certain that, before leaving home, the children's bedroom was totally dark, with the window closed, but he does not know it was locked, the shutters closed but with some slats open, and the curtains also drawn closed.

KM (6.9.07) - The window to Madeleine's bedroom remained closed, but she doesn't know if it was locked, shutters and curtains drawn, and that was how it remained since the first day, night and day. She never opened it.

And so the story continues:

KM (Madeleine Was Here – Channel 4) - the curtains of the bedroom which were drawn,... were closed, ... whoosh ... It was like a gust of wind, kinda, just blew them open..."

KM (Madeleine) – "On our arrival we had lowered the blind-style shutters on the outside of the windows, which were controlled from the inside, and closed the curtains. We left them that way all week."

"As I ran back into the children's room the closed curtains flew up in a gust of wind."

Self-evidently a lone abductor fleeing the scene of the crime via the window, and with both hands full, cannot have closed the curtains behind him. He must therefore have drawn them back, before handing Madeleine to a confederate waiting outside, then closed them again before making his own escape via the front door he couldn't unlock, or the patio within earshot of the conversationalists beneath. At least he did not have to contend with those shutters, which Gerry himself will have raised on entering the apartment earlier, and probably left up in case Matthew Oldfield or Russell O'Brien should stop by afterwards. But would someone so security conscious as to close ALL the shutters on exiting their apartment, leave them in the 'up' position following a return visit in the interim? Perhaps Gerry lowered them again after all, giving the abductor another obstacle to overcome. Or perhaps, and more likely, apartment 5A was as secure as Fort Knox from the outset that night, as it would have been on previous nights, and as Rachael Oldfield implied. Small wonder that nothing of value was taken.

by Who?What?Where? Fri Jul 12, 2013 3:23 am

The thing that I find most worrying, now, is that some people are starting to be fed and , possibly, even believe, that a "solution" to this case will make any real difference.

If anyone really believes that, then I am sorry to be the one to tell you, with all of the time and logical effort that some of you have put in, but it won't. Not in the short term, at least. Maybe our descendant's will see the benefit? Who knows?

The structure that any of us find ourselve's living under, can only ever, be as strong as the foundation upon which it is built. The foundation of this system is seriously flawed. Even if the real truth of what happened to Madeleine, finally, comes out, it won't change anything, in the short term.

The flaw's will still remain, in the foundation.

by AndyB Fri Jul 12, 2013 10:47 am

Popcorn wrote:What bothers me most from a balance point of view is the fact that SY's involvement came about - as I recall - as a result of David Cameron's old buddy Rebekah Brooks putting pressure on him to get the Yard to review the case after an 'open letter' from Kate McCann appeared in the Sun

I share your concern so I wonder if its significant that, the day after SY announced the investigation, while other newspapers were headlining with it, the Sun's front page was silent about the case.

by Montclair Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:11 am

So, according to the Tapas group's statements, they all had the shutters down on all the windows. I would like to know how in the hell the McCanns were able to open the roll down shades from the outside before entering by the patio door. It's impossible, they can only be pulled up or closed from the inside by using the strap and even if they tried it would make a lot of noise. Just that statement would be enough to ring bells for any policeman.

by Guest Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:22 am

AndyB wrote:
Popcorn wrote:What bothers me most from a balance point of view is the fact that SY's involvement came about - as I recall - as a result of David Cameron's old buddy Rebekah Brooks putting pressure on him to get the Yard to review the case after an 'open letter' from Kate McCann appeared in the Sun
I share your concern so I wonder if its significant that, the day after SY announced the investigation, while other newspapers were headlining with it, the Sun's front page was silent about the case.

Really? No, 'It's the Sun wot swung it'? That is a bit surprising. What's happened to all those colourful old-style News International tabloid editors? (Oh, I remember, two of them - Cameron's old pals - are currently awaiting trial.)

by plebgate Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:25 am

Thanks for that info. AndyB, I had not realised that about the Sun.

Having stopped using most of the online papers, I did for a while start looking again, but I am afraid I had to "boycott" The Sun some weeks back as I was disgusted that in on line articles there were pics of nude men just about covering their private areas, story about a relatively new male celeb pictured - also with nothing on, again, just about covering his private . I believe the paper is nothing more than a soft porn rag and decided I would not click on their site again. No clicks, reduced advertising revenue. These papers are in a lot of family homes every day, yet nobody seems to complain and anything goes by the looks of things.

Just a week or so before I had read that The Sun were thinking of doing away with the Page 3 topless girls, don't know if they have but I can't understand why this rubbish needs to be in a daily "newspaper".

It is not a paper I would have chosen to serialise a book about a missing little girl.

by Me Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:30 am

Now that's interesting, i did not know the patio door had shutters on them or that one of the group had seen them down.

Do we know how they open and if they can be opened from the outside?

by **PeterMac** Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:41 am

Dr Martin Roberts - NO WAY OUT - Page 6 Notwpa10

" />
Shows shutters open, with the left hand one (the opening door one) slightly down from the top
Dr Martin Roberts - NO WAY OUT - Page 6 <a href=

Dr Martin Roberts - NO WAY OUT - Page 6 Dm021010

" />
Shows right hand shutter fully down.
And no. They can't be opened successfully fro the outside. They would jam up into the housing about a metre off the floor, and the one in the bedroom did.
See video at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IeuMzyaCnnY

by Guest Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:46 am

Me wrote:Now that's interesting, i did not know the patio door had shitters on them or that one of the group had seen them down.

Do we know how they open and if they can be opened from the outside?

According to Rachel the shutters including patio shutter were all down in McCanns apartment.....

[quote]RACHEL MAMPILLY OLDFIELD WITNESS STATEMENT 15 May

The window shutters of the McCann's apartment wereclosed The patio door that they used to enter the apartment also had its shutter closed. In order to enter they had to raise the shutter

by Me Fri Jul 12, 2013 11:51 am

So, if what Rachel said was true how did Gerry enter the apartment by the patio at 9:05 then?

by Montclair Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:10 pm

You can only raise the roll shutters from the outside if they are not closed all the way and you can get your hand under them. And they will only open as much as the total space opened between each slat and then when you let go they fall back down. The whole mechanism can only be operated with the straps inside the house which pull the shutters up and around the roll inside the wall or the box. These shutters are very effective in that it makes it impossible for someone to get in unless they smash them and make a hell of a racket. This is the first time that I have seen Rachel Mamphilly's regarding the shutters and I am surprised that this was not followed up.

by Me Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:14 pm

Montclair wrote:You can only raise the roll shutters from the outside if they are not closed all the way and you can get your hand under them. And they will only open as much as the total space opened between each slat and then when you let go they fall back down. The whole mechanism can only be operated with the straps inside the house which pull the shutters up and around the roll inside the wall or the box. These shutters are very effective in that it makes it impossible for someone to get in unless they smash them and make a hell of a racket. This is the first time that I have seen Rachel Mamphilly's regarding the shutters and I am surprised that this was not followed up.

This third party account of the shutters being down coupled with Gerry's " i came in through the front door" then replaced with "er no now i remember that i came in through the patio doors" should throw up a massive red flag with SY.

It's truly unbelievable stuff!

by russiandoll Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:15 pm

Regardless of how the mechanism for the patio-door shutters worked, can you imagine any adult leaving a 3 year old child who could leave her bed and wander around, going to doors and finding that she could not get out and seeing the shutters down at that patio door?
If it was the case that the shutters were down on that door and that they and the patio door closed and locked from inside, with the main door the exit for their walk to the tapas bar, then I am convinced that none of the McCann children were in 5a that evening.

btw.Peter, you are photographed trying to lift the shutters and I presume leave them in a raised position.
I see the handle on the inside of the window. If the window was closed but maybe unlocked as claimed by Gerry, can it be opened from outside by getting some kind of purchase on the frame or was it [ if you tried] or would it be in your opinion, impossible to open from outside if it was firmly closed?

I have tried to open the transoms on my kitchen window from outside, impossible, but these are not sliding. Does the fact the 5a bedroom windows were sliding windows make a difference?It makes for a very insecure apartment if you do not lock them , if that's the case.

ETA This third party account of the shutters being down coupled with Gerry's " i came in through the front door" then replaced with "er no now i remember that i came in through the patio doors" should throw up a massive red flag with SY.

It's truly unbelievable stuff!

It certainly is, especially as it is crucial information and it was not delivered asap but a week later.

by jozi Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:18 pm

Me wrote:Now that's interesting, i did not know the patio door had shutters on them or that one of the group had seen them down.

Do we know how they open and if they can be opened from the outside?

From what was discussed before, the blinds are inside the patio window and had to be raised from the inside as the explanation given by the tapas on how this would work was, open the patio door and raise the blinds before entering. This would only work ( IMP ) depending on which side the pulley was on, in order for it to be operated. I have patio doors with blinds and I cannot raise the blinds from the outside as one side of all patio doors is permanently fixed, my pulley is on the fixed side for safety, if it was on the sliding door side it would be dangerous to anybody coming in and out of the door ? I do not know if anybody found out which side of the patio door the pulley was on though !!!

by Liz Eagles Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:25 pm

jozi wrote:
Me wrote:Now that's interesting, i did not know the patio door had shutters on them or that one of the group had seen them down.

Do we know how they open and if they can be opened from the outside?

From what was discussed before, the blinds are inside the patio window and had to be raised from the inside as the explanation given by the tapas on how this would work was, open the patio door and raise the blinds before entering. This would only work ( IMP ) depending on which side the pulley was on, in order for it to be operated. I have patio doors with blinds and I cannot raise the blinds from the outside as one side of all patio doors is permanently fixed, my pulley is on the fixed side for safety, if it was on the sliding door side it would be dangerous to anybody coming in and out of the door ? I do not know if anybody found out which side of the patio door the pulley was on though !!!

These aren't blinds. They are security shutters. They are on the outside of the windows. The pulley mechanism is on the inside of the building in a housing unit above the door/window. The strap to pull the window/door shutter is to the side of the interior of the window/door and has a clip which comes into effect when the sash is released - no chance of the shutter falling - also no chance of forcing the shutter open from the outside without a lot of noise and the shutter would not remain open it would have to be wedged up. The shutters make a noise when opened or closed. These are common shutters in continental Europe.

by jozi Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:37 pm

aquila wrote:
jozi wrote:
Me wrote:Now that's interesting, i did not know the patio door had shutters on them or that one of the group had seen them down.

Do we know how they open and if they can be opened from the outside?

From what was discussed before, the blinds are inside the patio window and had to be raised from the inside as the explanation given by the tapas on how this would work was, open the patio door and raise the blinds before entering. This would only work ( IMP ) depending on which side the pulley was on, in order for it to be operated. I have patio doors with blinds and I cannot raise the blinds from the outside as one side of all patio doors is permanently fixed, my pulley is on the fixed side for safety, if it was on the sliding door side it would be dangerous to anybody coming in and out of the door ? I do not know if anybody found out which side of the patio door the pulley was on though !!!
e outsid
These aren't blinds. They are security shutters. They are on the outside of the windows. The pulley mechanism is on the inside of the building in a housing unit above the door/window. The strap to pull the window/door shutter is to the side of the interior of the window/door and has a clip which comes into effect when the sash is released - no chance of the shutter falling - also no chance of forcing the shutter open from the outside without a lot of noise and the shutter would not remain open it would have to be wedged up. The shutters make a noise when opened or closed. These are common shutters in continental Europe.

Sorry (my mistake ) I thought they meant blinds on the inside ? If its the security shutters on the outside then they cannot be opened from outside as been proved by the jemmied shutters in the bedroom. What good are they anyway if they can be opened from the outside? They are after-all security shutters !

by Liz Eagles Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:44 pm

jozi wrote:
aquila wrote:
jozi wrote:
Me wrote:Now that's interesting, i did not know the patio door had shutters on them or that one of the group had seen them down.

Do we know how they open and if they can be opened from the outside?

From what was discussed before, the blinds are inside the patio window and had to be raised from the inside as the explanation given by the tapas on how this would work was, open the patio door and raise the blinds before entering. This would only work ( IMP ) depending on which side the pulley was on, in order for it to be operated. I have patio doors with blinds and I cannot raise the blinds from the outside as one side of all patio doors is permanently fixed, my pulley is on the fixed side for safety, if it was on the sliding door side it would be dangerous to anybody coming in and out of the door ? I do not know if anybody found out which side of the patio door the pulley was on though !!!
e outsid
These aren't blinds. They are security shutters. They are on the outside of the windows. The pulley mechanism is on the inside of the building in a housing unit above the door/window. The strap to pull the window/door shutter is to the side of the interior of the window/door and has a clip which comes into effect when the sash is released - no chance of the shutter falling - also no chance of forcing the shutter open from the outside without a lot of noise and the shutter would not remain open it would have to be wedged up. The shutters make a noise when opened or closed. These are common shutters in continental Europe.

Sorry (my mistake ) I thought they meant blinds on the inside ? If its the security shutters on the outside then they cannot be opened from outside as been proved by the jemmied shutters in the bedroom. What good are they anyway if they can be opened from the outside? They are after-all security shutters !

There are loads of posts on here about the shutters in other topics. I had the same shutters as do many people on the forum. PeterMac went to PDL and demonstrated how the shutters operate on the bedroom window of 5a. I think we're getting off topic (it's easy to do). Can someone point to the relevant shutter thread?

by Guest Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:45 pm

Just a bit more info on the shutters. The News of the World did their own investigation, this is what they said about the shutters.......

And our team heard for themselves how much noise an intruder would have made— reinforcing the theory that this was not an opportunistic snatch but carefully planned.

When the bedroom shutter is opened by a pull-cord it makes a loud piercing creak that could easily have woken the youngsters or alerted Pamela Fenn, the woman living upstairs.

This is crucial evidence as it shows the difficulty of entering the property by the window and suggests the likelihood that the kidnapper gained access by the front door or even the rear patio doors.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id21.html

Statements from the Gordon's who stayed in 5a.....

Statement of Saleigh Gordon:
“The bedroom shutters made a lot of noise and I find it difficult to understand that opening them would go un-noticed. The bedroom overlooked the parking area and was also overlooked by other apartments from which I think that if anyone had opened the shutters from outside, somebody would have noticed”

Statement by Paul Anthony Gordon:
“We used to open the shutters during the day and would close them again at night. The shutters made a lot of noise when we closed them. They have an internal cord as mechanism for opening and closing them.”

by Guest Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:48 pm

Yes there are loads of posts on shutters aquila, but sometimes it doesn't hurt to revisit does it. For example some here were not aware of Rachel Oldfields statement that the patio door shutters were down. Here is a thread on the shutters.......

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2550-the-shutters?highlight=shutters

by Liz Eagles Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:52 pm

candyfloss wrote:Yes there are loads of posts on shutters aquila, but sometimes it doesn't hurt to revisit does it. For example some here were not aware of Rachel Oldfields statement that the patio door shutters were down. Here is a thread on the shutters.......

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2550-the-shutters?highlight=shutters

Thanks Candyfloss.

by jozi Fri Jul 12, 2013 12:59 pm

The abductor did not gain access by the window as we now know the Mcs think this was a red herring ??? It was thought he must have gained access by the patio door which was conveniently left unlocked by the Mcs to allow for the checking of the children by them and other people in the group. This is a massive mistake told by the Mcs and needs further investigation by SY when they get round to questioning them again ?

by Liz Eagles Fri Jul 12, 2013 1:02 pm

jozi wrote:The abductor did not gain access by the window as we now know the Mcs think this was a red herring ??? It was thought he must have gained access by the patio door which was conveniently left unlocked by the Mcs to allow for the checking of the children by them and other people in the group. This is a massive mistake told by the Mcs and needs further investigation by SY when they get round to questioning them again ?

According to Dianne Webster's rogatory interview a large person couldn't get through the window - that stuffed things up really didn't it!

by Me Fri Jul 12, 2013 2:44 pm

jozi wrote:The abductor did not gain access by the window as we now know the Mcs think this was a red herring ??? It was thought he must have gained access by the patio door which was conveniently left unlocked by the Mcs to allow for the checking of the children by them and other people in the group. This is a massive mistake told by the Mcs and needs further investigation by SY when they get round to questioning them again ?

But the point of this thread is that rachel says in her statement (presumably as she was walking to the Tapas) that the shutter was down on the patio. So if the shutter was down on the patio Gerry had to lift it before entering via the patio door. How did he do this when it has been established this could not be done from the outside?

More importantly Gerry & Kate say that an abductor could have been in the apartment when Gerry did his check at 9:05.

So if the shutter on the patio was door when Rachel went past on her way to the Tapas, the fact the patio door was unlocked was irrelavant as the shutter was down. An intruder could not have gained access by the patio before Gerry did his 9:05 check if the shutter was in fact down.

Entry was gained either by the window (no evidence to support this and difficult for a man to get in there) or it was by the front door which required a key.

So all of a sudden the ability of an abductor to get in has decreased by two thirds of the possible entry points.

by jozi Fri Jul 12, 2013 2:54 pm

Me wrote:
jozi wrote:The abductor did not gain access by the window as we now know the Mcs think this was a red herring ??? It was thought he must have gained access by the patio door which was conveniently left unlocked by the Mcs to allow for the checking of the children by them and other people in the group. This is a massive mistake told by the Mcs and needs further investigation by SY when they get round to questioning them again ?

But the point of this thread is that rachel says in her statement (presumably as she was walking to the Tapas) that the shutter was down on the patio. So if the shutter was down on the patio Gerry had to lift it before entering via the patio door. How did he do this when it has been established this could not be done from the outside?

More importantly Gerry & Kate say that an abductor could have been in the apartment when Gerry did his check at 9:05.

So if the shutter on the patio was door when Rachel went past on her way to the Tapas, the fact the patio door was unlocked was irrelavant as the shutter was down. An intruder could not have gained access by the patio before Gerry did his 9:05 check if the shutter was in fact down.

Entry was gained either by the window (no evidence to support this and difficult for a man to get in there) or it was by the front door which required a key.

So all of a sudden the ability of an abductor to get in has decreased by two thirds of the possible entry points.

My thoughts EXACTLY

by jeanmonroe Fri Jul 12, 2013 3:09 pm

"When the bedroom shutter is opened by a pull-cord it makes a loud piercing creak that could easily have woken the youngsters or alerted Pamela Fenn, the woman living upstairs.
This is crucial evidence as it shows the difficulty of entering the property by the window and suggests the likelihood that the kidnapper gained access by the front door or even the rear patio doors."
_____________________________________________________________
Paul Gordon
We used to open the blinds during the day, returning to close them at night. When the blinds were [being] closed they would make much noise.
____________________________________________________________

THE BLINDS WOULD MAKE MUCH NOISE!

Yet Gerry and Jez standing just feet away from the blinds on a very quiet night heard NOTHING!

Probably the MUCH NOISE the shutters being RAISED while JW/GM were just feet away was drowned out by the sound of JT's flip flops, flip flopping more LOUDLY , than the shutters, as she approached them.............
But that can't be right because they didn't HEAR her flip flopping, up to and passed them, on that very QUIET night!

Log in for more topics