Lying in the Sun

By Which Exit...

By Which Exit Did She Leave?



" If your saying, is it theoretically possible that Madeleine left the apartment, then yes!

Do we believe it, and do we think she was capable of leaving the apartment the way it was found, and by which exit did she leave?   Then absolutely NOT!"


Gerry McCann

(Lisbon interview with Sandra Felgueiras, where Ms Felgueiras asked McCanns if they were sure Madeleine hadn't left the apartment on her own)


McCann, McCann, McCann, of course it is theoretically possible that Madeleine left the apartment, of course it is.  Most things are theoretically possible.

As to whether the McCanns
believe she was capable of leaving the apartment the way it was found?

The answer to that rather depends on:

  • Whether the way Kate McCann claims to have found the apartment was the truth of matters or a lie, a staged scene?

If a lie, a staged scene, they are hardly going to say that they believe she could have left of her own accord!

So many untruths told, so many holes in her story that a staged scene is really what will get the votes of most, the police, forensic experts already having suggested this to be the case.  Her account just simply does not add up.  The whooshing curtain story, too ridiculous for words, as is all else she came up with!

Let us say Kate McCann told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  It's a huge stretch of the imagination when based on what is already known, I understand, but let us just say she did, that she was as honest as the day is long in her account, and all else she has said in interviews, her book, her diary, since the world heard of Madeleine's disappearance.

If we start with deciding what Gerry McCann meant by the way the apartment was 'found' by his wife Kate McCann.

Let us take it to mean he felt that Madeleine was not capable of opening a window or a shutter as that is how Kate McCann claims to have found the apartment - with an open window and shutter.

  • Was she, Madeleine capable of standing on the bed which was located under the bedroom window?   Probably!
  • Was she capable from that height to reach the cord which opened the shutter?  Probably!
  • Was she capable, did she have the strength to pull the cord so as to raise the shutter?  Depends on the effort required, it might have been effortless for a child days from her 4th birthday to do so.
  • Would she have been able to slide open the window?  Again depends on the extra height standing on the bed would have given her in reaching for the window handle.  McCanns said they didn't lock the window.  Presumably then if the child could reach it, she could slide it open.

(McCanns not locking the windows/doors demonstrates once again their complete and total lack of concern for their children's safety that they would not have checked the shutters the windows whilst staying in this apartment to secure them and not just when going out for the evening, but generally is quite unbelievable with such young children)

  • Would she have, once she negotiated the window, the shutter, then have exited by the open window?

I wouldn't think so.

She would have to have been able to climb up to the frame of the open window, which isn't likely, but if she did, I would not imagine that she had a safe exit, but rather falling to the ground below, becoming injured.  And had she become injured in this way, depending on the time this happened, those checking on their own kids, Tanner, O'Brien and Oldfield would have seen the child lying outside below the bedroom window.

I think pretty safe to say that Madeleine McCann did not open the bedroom window and shutter, and that SOMEONE else did!

A
sleepy little girl waking in the night alone, afraid would go look for her parents before she would try to open a shuttered window.

But was that someone else an intruder?

NOT likely!

It was established by police forensics that the window was NOT opened from the outside, that it was not jemmied open, that it had been opened from the inside.

And without stating all of the details once more, we all know that NO INTRUDER would have gone to the bother of opening that window to create a red herring as Kate McCann suggested.  Why would they? Absolutely no reason in the world to do so.  It is a complete nonsense.

But what interests me most about McCanns comment IS that he asks - 'Do we BELIEVE that she was capable of leaving the apartment by the way it was found, AND BY WHICH EXIT DID SHE LEAVE?

If he/they don't believe that she was capable of having opened the window/shutter - the implication is that they believe someone else opened them, and if someone else opened them - WHY does he then ask - 'by which exit did she leave' as though Madeleine left of her own accord, not through an open window but through an open door?

Would the child open the window then leave by the door, and none of those checking children noticed the open window and shutter?

NO!  Not a chance in hell!

Would those checking have missed an open window when doing their checks if that window was opened by an intruder?

NO!  Not a chance in hell!

Would an intruder who had gotten in to the apartment
through a door (and we know NO intruder opened that window from outside to gain access that it was opened from inside, evidence confirms this, and Clarence Mitchell the McCann spokesperson had to, due to said evidence, rather reluctantly acknowledge this FACT.  Indeed he was left with no choice but to make a public statement to retract the McCanns version - that the window/shutter had been jemmied from outside!) then have any need to open a window?

A big fat NO!  Hell a big FAT NO!

So WHO other than an intruder would have had access to the McCann apartment, and could have opened that window and shutter?

The McCanns and their buddies - that's who!

Which of them could it have been and why?    That's the $64 million question! 

McCann asks -
and by which EXIT?

Now that is something I have asked myself many times in the past, and included in blogs - WHICH EXIT WAS USED TO REMOVE MADELEINE McCANN FROM APARTMENT 5A?

It certainly was NOT through that bedroom window!

And since the time the window was ruled out by authorities from Kate McCanns fantastic tale, never have the McCanns, their many and varied Private Detectives/Clarence Mitchell come up with an answer a theory as to by WHICH EXIT Madeleine was removed?

Interesting that McCann should query by which exit
Madeleine may have left the apartment - surely he should be querying WHICH EXIT was used to remove her from the apartment if he doesn't already know!

IF McCanns still 'believe' in Tanner's sighting as being the alleged intruder (and the fact they keep the image on their website would suggest they do or rather suggests they are putting two fingers up at police authorities for having 'almost' ruled out this sighting as being the alleged abductor) then it follows THEY MUST believe that the alleged intruder left by the front door as that is the direction this man was seen coming from!

It's funny old world isn't it.  Because the McCanns and Tanner when they came up with this story of jemmied window/shutter/seeing man come from the direction of the McCann front door, where located also, is the bedroom window where McCann kids slept - they didn't account for police forensics discovering that the shutter had NOT BEEN JEMMIED - which, if they continued with plugging the Tanner sighting, rather left them with the alleged intruder having gotten out of the FRONT DOOR.   

But how did the guy do that?

Now we know McCann in his FIRST police witness statement told police that BOTH HE AND HIS WIFE KATE McCANN, entered the apartment (on their separate checks of their children) by the FRONT LOCKED DOOR.  They had to use their key to unlock it.

IF the door was LOCKED then how did the alleged intruder exit by the FRONT DOOR?

We know also, that there was NO DAMAGE to the FRONT DOOR.  It had not been jemmied open either.

What to do?  What to do?  They now know the police have confirmed the window/shutter was not jemmied.   So how did the intruder get in with that FRONT DOOR being locked too?

Kate McCann had told her fantastic tale of the window/shutter jemmied open, and never must we forget those whooshing curtains.

Gerry McCann had given police his FIRST witness statement where he told them the FRONT DOOR WAS LOCKED, and that he AND his wife had used their key to unlock it to gain entry.

They now know police have stated window/shutter was NOT JEMMIED.  FRONT DOOR WAS NOTJEMMIED - NEITHER DAMAGED IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER!

Abracadabra, ALL CHANGE, they now have:

  • Need for the intruder to have gained access by some other route other than the window or the front door.
  • A front door that Gerry McCann now states he and his wife Kate Healy McCann DID NOT enter by, and dear old Gerry is now UNABLE to confirm whether he locked said front door or not after leaving for the tapas bar to meet their buddies on night of 3rd May 2007!
(Oh lordy, lordy, if that is not enough for any police force to become suspicious I don't know what is!  
Not to mention we now have two parents who claim not to have a clue if ANY of the windows in the apartment were locked, don't know if the shutters were fully locked, and don't know either if they locked the front door.  ALL THEY KNOW FOR CERTAIN NOW IS THAT THE PATIO DOOR WAS UNLOCKED.   HOW CONVENIENT IS THAT
)

  • And of course the unlocked patio door was introduced to the tale.   
Well Gerry McCann had CHANGED HIS STORY, HIS POLICE WITNESS STATEMENT SEVEN DAYS AFTER TELLING POLICE HE ENTERED BY THE FRONT LOCKED DOOR USING HIS KEY - he had to gain access to the apartment somehow, and he was hardly going to say he climbed in the bedroom window.

All that was left was the patio door, and the BIG problem there was:

  • to have entered by the patio door he had to have left it unlocked as it could only be locked from inside.  And, by saying they left it unlocked it showed GROSS NEGLIGENCE on their part, that the safety of their children was of no concern to them.  It showed that they had left their children in the most dangerous of position, arguably more so than in their FIRST STORY as they had added another element of danger to that which already existed (their first tale, the patio door was locked)   But it seems that is the way it had to be NOW THAT THE FRONT DOOR and WINDOW had been ruled out by police as having been jemmied open or damaged in any way - they were left with no other option.
What would make these parents change their story from having left their kids in a LOCKED HOLIDAY APARTMENT where they gained access by a front locked door using their key TO having left them in an UNLOCKED ONE where the parents now entered by an unlocked patio door? 

STINKS doesn't it?


There was Gerry McCann telling police one story, and Kate McCann telling them another about those doors!

SEVEN days after telling their tales - Gerry McCann brings his tale in line with hers (
regarding the patio door)

What they were left with though was an alleged INTRUDER WHO DIDN'T GAIN ACCESS BY FRONT DOOR NOR THE WINDOW (and IF that front door was locked (as in McCanns first story) then that intruder couldn't exit that front door - unless of course he had a key, and if he had a key HE HAD NO NEED TO OPEN THE DARN WINDOW!

An alleged intruder who we would have to assume therefore gained access by the unlocked patio door, and left by same route.

But, lordy, lordy, that has its problems too -  IF the McCanns are still insisting Tannerman is or MAY be their 'man' WHY was he coming from the direction of the front door/bedroom window/shutter?

UP THE CREEK WITHOUT A PADDLE WITH THEIR TALES IF YOU ASK ME!

And it is folks my opinion that the reason the McCanns, their PI's have NEVER come up with any theory as to how the alleged intruder exited the apartment is due to them snookering themselves with the stories they have told.

  • IF Kate McCann had not first told police of an open window and shutter - a story which grew feet and legs as time went by.
  • IF Gerry McCann had not first told the police that both he and his wife Kate McCann had entered by the front LOCKED DOOR USING THEIR KEY - a story he changed SEVEN days after Madeleine was reported as missing.
  • IF THEY had BOTH stated from the off that the patio door was unlocked and made claim that their alleged intruder enter/exit by this route...

Then maybe, just maybe, their story of an unlocked patio door might have had the littlest possibility of a ring of truth.  

AS it stands the story is a crock load of shit.

And that WINDOW/SHUTTER is the ONE THING that snookers them EVERY TIME! 

No matter how one tries it cannot, due to it not being jemmied open, FIT anywhere in their story!

As to why Kate McCann told police she had entered by an unlocked patio door? - Because if she had said she had entered by the front locked door (as Gerry McCann told police she had) then she would HAVE TO HAVE SEEN THE OPEN SHUTTER AND WINDOW, BEFORE the time that she said she had first noticed it - at WHOOSH TIME!

And as for Clarence Mitchell, DESPITE having to retract the McCanns story of a jemmied window, the scumbag STILL insisted that the alleged intruder LEFT THROUGH THE OPEN WINDOW, carrying Madeleine, unseen, and without leaving any trace!

He told us, Gerry and Kate are of the FIRM BELIEF the intruder left by the window.  

FORENSICS EXPERTS ARE OF THE FIRM BELIEF NO ONE WENT THROUGH THE OPEN WINDOW!

Gerry and Kate McCann have told us LOTS OF THINGS, MOST NOT TRUE - Mitchell, does he think for a minute because the McCanns said it is their firm belief that somehow makes it true?

Yeah right Pinky!  Bunch piss takers.

I FIRMLY BELIEVE THE WINDOW WAS NEVER OPEN?  Doesn't mean I'm right, but I can FIRMLY BELIEVE IT IF I CHOOSE TO.  But I don't JUST CHOOSE TO.  I base my firm belief on the FIRM BELIEF OF THE FORENSICS TEAM!

That statement by Pinky is desperation if ever I heard desperation.

He/they know the alleged intruder could not have left by the front door as IT WAS LOCKED.

He/they know they cannot change Kate's story of an open window so she came up with her 'red herring story' and Mitchell his 'Kate and Gerry are of the FIRM BELIEF story!

He/they know they cannot have the alleged intruder leaving by the unlocked patio door, NOT if they want it to tie neatly with Tanner's sighting (which they still hold dear on their website) as completely the wrong direction!

So, yeah, I reckon that is why the duo and their PI's have never explained to the 'general public' (as Gerry McCann likes to refer to y'all) HOW IN HELL THE INTRUDER GOT IN OR OUT if not by that window or front door!

The only way that I can see for anyone to have removed Madeleine from the apartment is, if the person who removed her was part of the holiday group or someone "invited in" had permitted access, shall we say by the McCanns!

Op Grange, DCI Redwood, they have never explained how any intruder gained access to Apartment 5A either?

Could it be because they know there was no intruder?

  • They know the window was not jemmied.
  • They know Gerry McCann changed his story about which door he used to access the apartment (and hell who believes a doctor this McCann who claimed to have been checking on his kids all week long more than once per evening and yet on the night his kid vanished, he FORGOT which door he used to access apartment to do so?  It was ONLY AN HOUR BETWEEN HIM BEING THERE AND THE KID BEING REPORTED AS MISSING.   How in hell could he have forgotten?  But he somehow miraculously remembered SEVEN DAYS AFTER THE EVENT, SO CHANGES HIS POLICE WITNESS STATEMENT!   We are to believe he remembered everything else, the bedroom door being open which attracted his attention, his 'proud daddy moment' and he cannot fuckin' remember how he got in the apartment to see the open bedroom door or to have his proud daddy moment.   Pull the other one!)
  • They know that front door was not jemmied and most probably locked as per McCanns first police witness statement.
  • They have 'almost' ruled out Tannerman sort of replacing him with crecheman.

But most interesting is that Redwood said the alleged intruder struck just before Kate McCanns check of her children and shortly after Oldfield's alleged check.

More crucially though DCI Redwood NEVER at any time stated how he, his team believe the alleged intruder gained access, or by WHICH EXIT DID MADELEINE LEAVE THE APARTMENT?

Could that be because the story doesn't FIT is a crock load of shit and he/they know it?

If they or anyone else is gonna tell the world this kid was abducted, they are gonna have to come up with some solid/tight explanation as to how this guy/gal got in and out of that apartment at the time Redwood is suggesting she was removed.

And they are gonna have to come up with a route which the alleged intruder took from when leaving the patio door side of the building (and as the story stands now they are left with nothing but the unlocked patio door much as that is a crock load of shit also - it is all they have left to work with, if they are basing matters on the tales told by McCanns/Oldfield - their patio door expert) to tie him in with Smithman sighting - that is of course if Smithman is really who the DCI thinks carried off Madeleine.  Grange can only work with an unlocked patio door as being the way the alleged intruder entered/exited the apartment.  So where was this abductor where did he conceal himself before heading over to the patio door entrance, in between Oldfield's and Kate McCanns check?

Redwood knows the score.  Operation Grange know the score.  I have no doubt about that.

But I still have niggling doubts as to what they are going to do with WHAT THEY ALREADY KNOW - THAT IS ALL those INCONSISTENCIES IN THE STATEMENTS GIVEN BY THE McCANNS AND THEIR BUDDIES?

A thought to finish:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-holiday-firm-pulls-4915169

'Officers from the Metropolitan Police's Operation Grange, who are investigating her disappearance, flew out to the Algarve early last month to question witnesses.

They are keen to establish if there are any inconsistencies in statements.'

No need to question witnesses to establish the inconsistencies in the McCann/their buddies statements - all there in black and white!

Wonder what additional information these other witnesses were able to give the Met about the McCanns and their buddies, the inconsistencies in their statements which would further those inconsistencies which the Metropolitan Police already know of and which the Portuguese Police IDENTIFIED SEVEN YEARS AGO -  THE INCONSISTENCIES WHICH WERE THE REASON THE GROUP REFUSED TO RETURN TO PORTUGAL TO ASSIST POLICE, THE REASON THEY DID NOT HELP MADELEINE! 

For all of this group to NOT RETURN, TO NOT HELP THIS MISSING CHILD - one can only take from that they either DIDN'T GIVE A FUCKIN' TOSS ABOUT THE CHILD, or they KNEW she was NOT ALIVE!


l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com
4th January 2014


Website Builder