Re: Dr Martin Roberts - NO WAY OUT

by **PeterMac** 12.07.13 15:51

Which is interesting as we can then go back to the first thing Gerry told the police. Might he have been telling the truth ?
And believe that everything subsequent that was trying to retro-fit as he realised he had painted himself into a corner.
He entered by the front door, using his key

So the patio door and shutters were down, because a witness says so, and in any event the story about serially abandoning the children in an unlocked apartment is not totally convincing
The front door was locked, because he himself says so
The children's window and shutters were down and locked, because he walked past them and does not report them in any other state.

ERGO . . . well work it out for yourselves.

by joyce1938 12.07.13 16:03

peter mac ,you have hit the nail on the head . Now can we expect sy detectives to work it out ?if not why not ? joyce1938

by **PeterMac** 12.07.13 16:40

Back to basics, perhaps.

Left the children every night for a week in an unlocked apartment . . . No. I don't think that is credible. Not one of the other parents even raised an eyebrow
Checked them every half hour . . . Not on the evidence we have, and suspicion about Quiz nights at Chaplin's, and waiters' statements, Mrs Fenn, and so on
Difficult child, screaming, wandering about during the night . . . On Kate's and the families admission, yes
Sedated . . . One their own admission, almost certainly
Dispute between the parents . . .anger . . . On Kate's own admission, yes
Abduction . . . Almost certainly not even possible within any time frame, let alone the one provided by GM and JT

Which moves us towards something else.

by worriedmum 12.07.13 17:39

but didn't the police say they found the key on the table?

by russiandoll 12.07.13 17:55

Gerry said in a statement that the shutters were down and the window was closed but he was not certain that it was locked, hence my earlier q to PeterMac about if as he has seen the window up close, he thinks it possible that a closed but unlocked window could be slid open from outside, by getting purchase on the frame. I doubt it, so do not know how they ever suggested entry could be gained by that window, able to raise and leave shutters raised or not.
Closed or locked acc to Gerry, he never once said partly open.

So that leaves the patio or front door as entry point, and the patio shutters were down, so no go there.
Front door, locked for sure.
So a key was used as no force was applied , there was no break -in.

Who had a key?
I doubt very much that there would have been lots of copies as with an apartment owned by a holiday company, this was a privately owned apartment and for security reasons I doubt that cleaners and other people had spares. There was probably one that had to be picked up from and dropped off at an office.

imo.

goes to the core of police thinking....who had access and opportunity?

by Praiaaa 12.07.13 18:45

This has been very useful to people like me who have not realised the significance of the shutters - to reduce the ingress/egress as articulated by ' Me' is very helpful. Would so love to go to PdL myself and see the practicalities - Petermac, thanks for doing it for us!

by Guest 12.07.13 19:23

PeterMac wrote:Back to basics, perhaps.

Left the children every night for a week in an unlocked apartment . . . No. I don't think that is credible. Not one of the other parents even raised an eyebrow
Checked them every half hour . . . Not on the evidence we have, and suspicion about Quiz nights at Chaplin's, and waiters' statements, Mrs Fenn, and so on
Difficult child, screaming, wandering about during the night . . . On Kate's and the families admission, yes
Sedated . . . One their own admission, almost certainly
Dispute between the parents . . .anger . . . On Kate's own admission, yes
Abduction . . . Almost certainly not even possible within any time frame, let alone the one provided by GM and JT

Which moves us towards something else.

***
If in doubt, think murder ... ?

by stumo 12.07.13 20:11

Châtelaine wrote:
PeterMac wrote:Back to basics, perhaps.

Left the children every night for a week in an unlocked apartment . . . No. I don't think that is credible. Not one of the other parents even raised an eyebrow
Checked them every half hour . . . Not on the evidence we have, and suspicion about Quiz nights at Chaplin's, and waiters' statements, Mrs Fenn, and so on
Difficult child, screaming, wandering about during the night . . . On Kate's and the families admission, yes
Sedated . . . One their own admission, almost certainly
Dispute between the parents . . .anger . . . On Kate's own admission, yes
Abduction . . . Almost certainly not even possible within any time frame, let alone the one provided by GM and JT

Which moves us towards something else.

***
If in doubt, think murder ... ?

murder? Damn, i was thinking alien abduction...

by suzyjohnson 12.07.13 22:12

I'm not so sure about the patio shutters being down, and think that Rachel might have been mistaken here, for the following reasons

Rachel went to the Tapas about 8.40pm and, unlike GM, KM, JT, MO and ROB, did not say she returned to the apartments at any time until after MM was reported missing.

She states in her rogatory interview, ' ..... we went out the front, the patio doors were locked, we went out the front door, locked that, erm through the car park and walked down the road ..........'

Rachel may have just assumed the McCann's were also using the front door of their apartment, it may have been that her own patio shutters were down. Because Rachel went to the Tapas via her front door, she would have had to glance backwards when passing the McCann's apartment to see if their patio shutter was also down.

Jez Wilkins saw GM leaving by the gate of his apartment approx. 9.10pm. If 5A's patio shutters were down at this point, what possible reason would GM have to be round the back of his apartment at this time? Besides the fact that an abductor wouldn't have been able to get in, GM himself wouldn't have been able to get in, or out, because of the shutters.

As I am trying to work this out step by step it gets more complicated -

Perhaps GM went round to 5A at 9.05pm, entered by the front door, and then raised the patio shutters himself for some purpose, so that he could leave by the back door? Why would he do this?

It couldn't have been because of an intention to say that someone had accessed the apartment through the patio doors, because, initially he tried to say that GM and KM checked via the front door.

What would be the purpose in opening the bedroom window if the intention had been to say that someone had gone in through the patio doors? In that case,the window would be the means of exiting 5A but not entering.

GM would have had no reason to be at the back of 5A if the shutters were down, therefore, if GM opened them it must have been just prior to seeing JW outside the gate. Is it possible that after seeing JW, GM decided to add in the open window because he then realised the abductor would have no way of getting out?

Other reasons why GM might open the patio door shutters at 9.05pm would be either to let himself discretely out of the back door or to facilitate someone else going into the apartment that evening. In either of these cases I would like to know, if that were his intention, then why would he have closed the (noisy) shutters that evening in the first place?

DP and KM both state that DP called on KM at the apartment around 6.30 - 7pm that evening. He was standing by the open patio doors talking to her. Even if this evidence is untruthful, why would GM close the shutters just to open them again shortly after, were GM and KM sitting there in the dark drinking wine before they went to the Tapas? If they were trying to deal with a terrible accident, is it likely that they would have put the shutters down?

by suzyjohnson 12.07.13 22:20

One further thought regarding patio doors, it seems as though it was usual for the McCanns to leave their patio doors open at night, remember Mrs Fenn said that on the Tues the crying stopped when she heard the patio doors opening.

by Guest 12.07.13 22:36

suzyjohnson wrote:One further thought regarding patio doors, it seems as though it was usual for the McCanns to leave their patio doors open at night, remember Mrs Fenn said that on the Tues the crying stopped when she heard the patio doors opening.

Do you mean open as unlocked or shutters up suzy?

by suzyjohnson 12.07.13 22:58

candyfloss wrote:
suzyjohnson wrote:One further thought regarding patio doors, it seems as though it was usual for the McCanns to leave their patio doors open at night, remember Mrs Fenn said that on the Tues the crying stopped when she heard the patio doors opening.

Do you mean open as unlocked or shutters up suzy?

Candyfloss, I mean it couldn't be the case that the McCanns always used the front door if Mrs Fenn heard them arriving back on the Tues and opening the patio doors. And they couldn't have opened the patio doors from the outside if the door was locked or the shutters were down could they?

by worriedmum 12.07.13 23:10

I thought Mrs Fenn heard the patio doors being opened-BUT- she couldn't say whether it was someone entering or some-one leaving. She just knew that the crying stopped after she heard the doors, IIRC.

by Nina 12.07.13 23:28

It maybe looked as though the shutters were down at the patio door if the curtains were shut and they had a light coloured lining. Someone did say the curtains were closed I'm sure because we discussed the fighting to get through door and closed curtain. Does anyone remember ?

by **PeterMac** 12.07.13 23:39

worriedmum wrote:but didn't the police say they found the key on the table?

One everyone was inside, and the doors were all opened and unlocked, then obviously, Yes. They have go to be somewhere.
It is what you do in a holiday flat. You go in and put the keys in an obvious position, so that either of you can find them again when you go out. Often there is a convenient and specially designated hook by the door. Otherwise the fruit bowl on the table just inside the door,, if there is one, or on the work top nearest to the door.
This is normal, and would indicate that Gerry had in fact entered using his key , as he stated.
As had Kate ! !

by suzyjohnson 12.07.13 23:47

PeterMac wrote:
worriedmum wrote:but didn't the police say they found the key on the table?
One everyone was inside, and the doors were all opened and unlocked, then obviously, Yes. They have go to be somewhere.
It is what you do in a holiday flat. You go in and put the keys in an obvious position, so that either of you can find them again when you go out. Often there is a convenient and specially designated hook by the door. Otherwise the fruit bowl on the table just inside the door,, if there is one, or on the work top nearest to the door.
This is normal, and would indicate that Gerry had in fact entered using his key , as he stated.
As had Kate ! !

And so what about Oldfield?

by **PeterMac** 13.07.13 0:03

suzyjohnson wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
worriedmum wrote:but didn't the police say they found the key on the table?
One everyone was inside, and the doors were all opened and unlocked, then obviously, Yes. They have go to be somewhere.
It is what you do in a holiday flat. You go in and put the keys in an obvious position, so that either of you can find them again when you go out. Often there is a convenient and specially designated hook by the door. Otherwise the fruit bowl on the table just inside the door,, if there is one, or on the work top nearest to the door.
This is normal, and would indicate that Gerry had in fact entered using his key , as he stated.
As had Kate ! !

And so what about Oldfield?

Oldfield can be safely discounted in this attempt at a version of the truth. His testimony is simply not credible
It follows too blindly, like lost sheep, with the desire to please. He fits the scenario too perfectly and then at the crucial moment when it might become important - did he SEE Madeleine in her bed - he bottles out - (very wisely ! !) - and says he did not look into their room.
He exists purely to "prove" that the patio doors were unlocked.
After that, he can be discarded.

That is all he is there for.
Like JT, she has one role, which she performs perfectly. Stupidly, because she does not actually understand what she has been asked to do, and does not understand the "bigger picture' but perfectly nevertheless. Like the platoon which marched into the path of a train because the Drill Sergeant's attention was momentarily distracted . . . She did her duty.

by suzyjohnson 13.07.13 1:25

So, in your opinion, MO was never really in the apartment? And aside from GM and KM neither was anyone else that evening?

Is it at all possible that the Tapas group have been persuaded to help the McCanns without knowing the whole picture?

As an example, GM tells the group that MM died as a result of an accident? Could've happened to any one of the group .... etc

Doesn't mention to them any sedation or anything?

by sheila.edwards 13.07.13 3:52

what if,one of tappas recommended they try some kind of stronger medicine they had,that would help with sleeping and it went badly wrong ! one person or the couple would feel even more guilty than parents in that kind of situation imo !f they loaned or gave you there supply and it went BADLY wrong even with an allergic reaction as Drs what could be worse ! spin

other couples may have been told later or in panic of such a situation if it occurred. If you gave or loaned out your supply of sleeping meds,apart from fact all drs in panic/shock alone it would be hard to think straight and that could be why such inconsistencies seemed so strange from educated people !who would know egg man could not have been, even if GM on other side of rd. etc or there really was an abductor later ? who went in and out of patio doors but would he really waste time closing doors gates etc as he left with a child in his arms, I cant see that happening as main aim would be to leave sceen of crime as quickly as possible seems logical imo:spin: even if he had a key to front door would he waste time closing that even with a child in arms and leaving sceen of crime !

by marconi 13.07.13 4:17

I wonder why the cry incident ( May the 1st) did not wait up the twins. Mrs Fenn only heard Madeleine, for 75 minutes.

by aiyoyo 13.07.13 6:33

@PeterMac
Like the platoon which marched into the path of a train because the Drill Sergeant's attention was momentarily distracted . . . She did her duty.

Except that in her case, her drill sergeant was too smart trying to plan all scenarios and this one particularly backfires BIG time.

And, they end up having an egg-man, bundleman, Mrs Beckham lookalike et al.....

by Guest 13.07.13 9:53

suzyjohnson wrote:
candyfloss wrote:
suzyjohnson wrote:One further thought regarding patio doors, it seems as though it was usual for the McCanns to leave their patio doors open at night, remember Mrs Fenn said that on the Tues the crying stopped when she heard the patio doors opening.

Do you mean open as unlocked or shutters up suzy?

Candyfloss, I mean it couldn't be the case that the McCanns always used the front door if Mrs Fenn heard them arriving back on the Tues and opening the patio doors. And they couldn't have opened the patio doors from the outside if the door was locked or the shutters were down could they?

According to GM statements they used the front door up until Wednesday night, and for some reason decided to start using the back door/patio from the Wednesday and Thursday. This thread shows this........

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t5797-wednesday-2nd-may-why-did-things-change?highlight=why+did+things+change+on+2nd+may

by suzyjohnson 13.07.13 10:54

Well then, Candyfloss, this needs explaining doesn't it? By far the simplest explanation on the Tues is that the McCanns arrived back, went in through the patio doors, the child(ren) stopped crying.

by russiandoll 13.07.13 11:36

suzyjohnson wrote:So, in your opinion, MO was never really in the apartment? And aside from GM and KM neither was anyone else that evening?

Is it at all possible that the Tapas group have been persuaded to help the McCanns without knowing the whole picture?

As an example, GM tells the group that MM died as a result of an accident? Could've happened to any one of the group .... etc

Doesn't mention to them any sedation or anything?

The question surely would have been asked by the group...why does there need to be a cover up of an accident? Children and accidents go together and the usual routing is a medical assessment by a local doctor or at the nearest hospital.
Many doctors in the group, assessment by them would have resulted in treatment on the spot, no further action needed.
Or they did not have what was necessary for the situation and hospital was required.
This did not happen. So why was a cover up needed? What was it that could not be discovered?

by suzyjohnson 13.07.13 12:04

Russian Doll,

All of the group went to the Tapas, any of their children could have been injured (fatally injured) while their parents were absent. Would the threat of neglect charges (and also sympathy for the McCanns) be enough to convince the others to cover for them?

If the rest of the group had seen MM perhaps with a head injury, they would not necessarily know any additional information, that she had been sedated for example.

Is it possible that the McCanns know more than they have told the Tapas group?