Reply "No, it was just, you could just see the shape and bits of breathing".
No, would be a strong answer but he then goes on to answer outside the boundaries of the question, making it sensitive.
He was asked if he remembered which way the children were facing.
He then tells us what YOU could see ( not what he actually saw)
Note the pronoun he uses.
He doesn't tell us what he could see, he tells us what you (we) could see.
He distances himself from what he could see ( as an aside kate uses the distancing pronoun you a lot rather than the expected I)
Just is used to minimise downwards.
Next he tells us the shape (singular) not the shapes (plural) which you would expect if he was referring to the twins.
Notice the article he uses.
He talks about THE SHAPE and not THEIR SHAPES.
He is talking about something he saw in the singular
He then talks about BITS OF BREATHING
This is unexpected and concerning.
Bits of breathing would imply perhaps breathing problems, struggling to breathe or perhaps the last few breathes of a dying child.
The expected would be i saw them breathing, or i saw the twins breathing since he was allegedly doing the check on the mccanns children, except this isn't what he is actually telling us.
Instead he tells us he saw a shape with bits of breathing.
This man is a doctor, surely even he must have realised something was wrong if he was presented with a patient who was a shape (under a blanket) and presenting with bits of breathing?
Reply "I mean, I, for some reason I imagine that the children's heads were towards the, towards the window, but I don't know whether that's just because I assume that's the way I would put them down
Note here the pronoun he uses, he has changed from YOU to I,taking ownership of the statement.
Note he doesn't tell us what he saw, only what he assumed he saw.
Note the qualifiers he uses (qualifiers are words that when removed, do not change the meaning of the sentence.
Here we have REASON, IMAGINE and ASSUME.
Why does he feel the need to tell us that for some reason he imagined their heads were towards the window?
Surely if he checked as claimed then the would have been able to see if the blankets were at the top or the bottom of the cots covering presumably their feet and bodies.
If he wasn't sure of the bedding was messed, then why not rearrange the bedding to cover the children appropriately?
As written in his statement we have 3 qualifiers and the pronoun I repeated four times, thrice out of the first 7 words making it sensitive.
We also have TOWARDS THE repeated twice again making it sensitive.
The alleged check of the children immediately prior to kate and her 'finding Maddie missing' is sensitive to oldfield.
Did the check even take place?
If it did was it in apartment 5a?
If it wasn't 5a which apartment was it (remember he described a different apartment)