Yvonne Martin - how much information did she really uncover?

[Robittybob1]

Would you have reported yourself for writing an anonymous letter?

The fact that she owned up to writing an anonymous letter and explained the reason she wrote it shows rather an honest disposition IMO.

[Brietta]

Probably none but that isn't exactly the point is it ?
There are two distinct issues to be considered one of which is the business of the line manager, his authority outside that of line manager being irrelevant, the other isn't.
It depends whether or not Ms Martin presented herself as acting in a friendly unofficial capacity to give limited assistance, or presented herself as acting in an official capacity on behalf of some organisation or other.
Were I her line manager I would want to know all about the latter, up front, because of the potential liability it could attach to the organisation.

I think the whole scenario is totally surreal from start to finish.

I rather think she presented herself in an official capacity ... I base that on the fact she was showing her accreditation at every stage of her involvement and acting accordingly.

[Brietta]

The fact that she owned up to writing an anonymous letter and explained the reason she wrote it shows rather an honest disposition IMO.

The fact that she chose to write an anonymous letter in the first instance is in my opinion reprehensible and unprofessional.

Who was she describing, anyway?  Who had a scar above and below his left eye?

[Robittybob1]

The fact that she chose to write an anonymous letter in the first instance is in my opinion reprehensible and unprofessional.

Who was she describing, anyway?  Who had a scar above and below his left eye?

I have yet to see a high resolution photo of David Payne to know if that was consistent with him or not.
Yvonne must have had a moment where she stood face to face with this person and noticed scar.  In a photographic line up she was able to identify David Payne.


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/YVONNE-WARREN-MARTIN.htm
"Photographic Recognition File

On 13th June, 2007 at the Portimao DIC, Yvone Warren Martin appeared before me, José Monteiro, Inspector, in order to proceed with photographic recognition.

When asked, she described the suspect and she was shown photographs of various individuals who made up the McCann couple holiday group.

Upon visualising the photographs, she recognised David Anthony Payne, an individual who appeared in several photographs, as being the person she referred to in her statements and who she supposedly had known on another occasion."

[sadie]

The fact that she owned up to writing an anonymous letter and explained the reason she wrote it shows rather an honest disposition IMO.

Honourable people do not write anonymous letters.  They do not hide under anonimity, especially on such a sensitive, possibly incriminating, matter as that.   

AIMHO

[Robittybob1]

Honourable people do not write anonymous letters.  They do not hide under anonimity, especially on such a sensitive, possibly incriminating, matter as that.   

AIMHO

OK so we differ in opinion over that issue.  I have no way of proving it one way or the other.

I thought Google might be my friend  Google: Do Honourable people write anonymous letters?
Well there was the situation where the anonymous letter is sent to the person concerned.

"Anonymous Letter Writing
To receive anonymous mail is deeply disturbing. The victim whether angry or tearful has received a letter from a coward. Such correspondence has been called ‘hate mail’ or ‘a poison pen letter’; the person guilty of the act, a character assassin, whose deed causes much distress and anguish to the victim.
The majority of anonymous letter writers are mild or pronounced paranoiacs, suffering from a condition that is not easy to detect. It is a state of mind that has a distorted concept of reality.
From my own observations, these writers are sick individuals. Within their make up there is a weak streak which is inter linked with dishonesty and anyone who writes anonymously, even though purporting to have the receiver’s welfare at heart, has a problem. At first hand I have witnessed the mental distress that has led to sorrow and illness. Families have been split, communities splintered, and an atmosphere of fear and suspicion invades what, once was, a closely knit community"
So it definitely can be viewed quite negatively.

[Robittybob1]

https://www.crimestoppers-nz.org/speak-up/its-anonymous

Through Crimestoppers  reports are made anonymously and the fact it is anonymous is not considered bad in any way.
"What we mean by anonymous
Anonymous means no-one will ever know you contacted Crimestoppers to pass on information about crime.
We know our guarantee to never ask for your name or record your call is vitally important to you.

It makes it easier for you to come forward and break the silence around criminal activity.

Anonymous means
You will never be asked for your name.
Your call will not be recorded.
Your call or secure online web form will not be traced.
You will not have to make a statement to the police.
You will not appear in court.
We create a report from the information you give us. Our call takers will make sure it contains nothing that might identify you, eg if the call is about your neighbour we will not mention this. We don’t even make a note of your gender.

We understand how hard it can be to call, which is why all our call takers are trained to help you tell us everything you know.

We pass on any useful information to the relevant authorities, making sure your identity cannot be discovered."


So we have two views but the major difference is one is an anonymous report to a policing agency and the other in a personal situation.

[Robittybob1]

Just another message from the Crimestoppers website:
"You can pass on information to Crimestoppers about any crime or criminal activity that has already happened, even if it’s a while ago, or that is being planned.
There are times when you might not feel comfortable about passing on what you know to the police or other authorities. That’s why Crimestoppers exists – to provide you with an anonymous route to give information about crime.

Some of the things you might want to tell us about are:
murders (including ones that happened a while ago)
people who grow, manufacture or sell drugs
gang or other organised criminal activity
family violence and sexual crimes
youth crime
violence against women, children and the elderly
abductions
serious assaults and violence
illegal weapons
robberies
thefts of vehicles and from vehicles
burglary and receiving of stolen property
scrap metal theft
stock theft
fraud
arson
people wanted by the police
serious traffic offending like repeated drunk or drugged driving
illegal activity at work
immigration crime, such as people smuggling or human trafficking
underage prostitution
illegal gambling
criminal misuse of identities
criminal misuse of computers
something that could affect New Zealand’s national security
environmental crime like fish poaching or illegal dumping of waste
someone who is doing graffiti, tagging or other property damage
anything else you don’t want to speak to the police or other authorities about directly
Sometimes the police will appeal for public help to solve serious cases like murders, armed robberies, abductions and violence. They will ask people to contact them with information, or to contact Crimestoppers anonymously.

Often police just need one key piece of information to help solve the crime.  That’s where Crimestoppers comes in – helping people to pass on what they know to police, not who they are."


Anonymous is good!

[Robittybob1]

It's not clear why he seemed familiar to her. His face or his name? She didn't seem to remember the context, either.

She'd worked in Plymouth at some point, and there WAS a David Payne who was a child rapist (not the T9 one), released from prison in 2008. It's not clear where these offences occurred, but it may well have been in the south of England as it was a scandal when people discovered that he was living in Weymouth after his release.

She noticed that he had a southern accent, and together with the name plus her perception that her presence wasn't overly appreciated at the time, it may have rung a vague bell, if his conviction had been in the news, or if she'd had some form of contact with the social services involved in that case.

https://theukdatabase.com/2012/03/12/david-payne-weymouthchippenhamchippenham/

Whether that was the trigger or not, I find it to be a plausible potential explanation.

It was only later that she was told it was David Payne so she recognised him for some other reason other than his name.

[Robittybob1]

In my opinion Ms Martin is an archetypal disaster tourist anxious to get as close to the action as possible.

If she was involved in child protection why did she show absolutely no concern for Madeleine's siblings or the other children in the party?

In my opinion she had absolutely no locus in interfering with a distraught mother by trying to usher her away from her support group as she waited for information about her missing daughter.

Concern for the children as per her alleged training, yes ... but she didn't actually show any, did she?

She had only heard about the McCann's plight that morning.  Did Sky News detail that there was 4 families with 8 kids in the group in that first news bulletin? You seem to be expecting Yvonne to know far more than was divulged IMO.

[Robittybob1]

The "anonymous letter" could simply have been an online statement via Crimestoppers.

The "anonymous letter" could simply have been LIKE an online statement via Crimestoppers.

[Robittybob1]

She did a fair bit of attacking herself, don't you think.  Or was that okay?

It was the McCanns and David Payne's reaction to her presence that brought out her suspicions IMO after understanding her statement.

[Robittybob1]

I've often wondered if she got mixed up with Murat (who does seem to have a scar on the left side of his face).



Speaking with a Southern English accent
Wearing light trousers, cream or beige coloured, and a dark polo shirt.



And, unless DP changed clothes between when she met him and when he was photographed by the media, DP was wearing a striped t-shirt, and RM was wearing a dark blue polo.

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/lagos-portugal-a-recent-picture-of-british-national-robert-murat-in-picture-id74154589

Would you say Murat has a round face?

[slartibartfast]

It was the McCanns and David Payne's reaction to her presence that brought out her suspicions IMO after understanding her statement.

IMO it gave the impression of not wanting outsiders closely involved.

[Robittybob1]

How could she have "cleared" them? Who's "them" and of what?

For some, she was an interfering busybody; for others she may have been trying to help figure out where the child could be in the context of the general chaos and limited news of that morning, despite what may be perceived as a heavy-handed approach.

In her experience missing kids were 99.9% due to the actions of the parents, and friends of the family.  Knowing that (or at least motivated by that)  she might appear to be heavy handed but she was looking for signs of a parental/friends involvement.
The fact that the PJ didn't clear that ground has been a criticism of the PJ investigation.