The Truth of the Lie English Narration 1
0:00 This is a video based on the book which Amaral wrote while still a serving police officer during the months after he was dismissed from the Madeleine McCann case for his misconduct, and which was published three weeks after he resigned from the force. At that time he claimed that besides any financial gains, his main motive for publishing was to clear his name and defend his thesis.
0:18 The film states that this Amaral version of events is repudiated by Madeleine’s parents. Oddly it does not mention that this version of events is also repudiated by the final Police Report and by the Attorney General archival report. It is not in fact supported by anyone who was involved in the case. It began life as merely the thesis of the man who coordinated the case for the first five months but was then dismissed from the case because he was talking unwisely to journalists about it. The investigation continued for a further nine months at the end of which the above-mentioned full reports were produced which do not confirm this thesis.
0:45 The text tells us that the aim of the documentary if for light to be shed on the case. But that is not what the documentary proceeds to do. It merely offers the opinion of one man with carefully chosen clips and discussions etc to support that single opinion.
1:00 Goncalo Amaral then introduces himself and states (according to the translation) that he “has been an investigator with the police for 27 years”. That is deceptive. It should state that “was an investigator”. A small detail but one which suggests carelessness.
1:07 He goes on to say that he coordinated the McCann investigation. He does not tell us that he was dismissed from the case for misconduct, nor that he was during the whole case an arguido (later convicted criminal) in an investigation related to a similar missing child case.
1:16 Amaral then proceeds to tell us that he will PROVE that “the child was not abducted and that she died in the holiday apartment in Praia da Luz”. A bizarre claim when neither the full forces of the Policia Judiciara (after Amaral was dismissed from the case) nor anyone else has managed to do any such thing. The reports of the PJ and AG were clear that there was no proof as to what happened.
1:29 Amaral tells us that we will discover the whole truth of what happened which many people want to cover up. Very dramatic and sensationalist. But will we?
1:46 Video of Kate and Gerry making appeal.
2:44 Start of drama reconstruction of scene which voiceover tells us we “were got to accepting as the only possible” version, implying this version was forced upon the police. It shows an extremely dark Apartment car park with abductor clambering over the wall towards Apt 5A and then opening the shutters.
2:58 The question is asked about this version, “Is it the true one or does this version hide a crime that many want to conceal?”
3:04 Amaral claims there is a need to silence the case, to stifle it. He cites as his evidence for this that English policemen are forbidden from speaking out, that other witnesses like Martin Smith are “somewhat afraid”. And he then says “several persons” without telling us who or how they back up his point. But he forgets that English policemen are forbidden from speaking about any case they are involved in lest such conversations might create legal difficulties or make the investigation more difficult. In the UK we have a system of official comments and press conferences. And though Amaral tells us Martin Smith was “somewhat afraid” he doesn’t tell us if this fear was of being wrong or more dramatically of dark consequences for his speaking out. Which was it? Why not tell us? And why not tell us who the others were and why he has mentioned these several persons and what involvement they have in anything. The dramatic effect has been created with these short phrases but absolutely no light has been shed as had been promised.
3:20 The dramatic effect continues with the statement that “This is a case where some people are still afraid or they are even prevented from speaking”. Unfortunately that is all we have. The dramatic effect. Amaral gives no facts whatsoever to back up this conspiracy type theory. Its odd when his aim was stated as shedding light on the matter that he doesn’t bother to do so.
3:27 Screen title, “The reconstruction”. One could almost get the impression from the use of the definite article instead of the indefinite that this was some kind of official reconstruction instead of just being a TV mock up.
3:33 Voice-over explains that the TV company (“we”) took Amaral to the crime scene to “show what happened to Madeleine McCann”. If only that were possible? Nobody else has shown what happened before or since. Let’s see what Amaral manages to show us.
3:40 onwards. We are told that the ‘reconstitution’ (reconstruction) will tell us who told the truth and who didn’t. We are told that we are going to find out what happened on the night of the disappearance. No element of doubt there. We are simply going to be told.
3:55 We are then told that “strangely” the judicial investigation was never able to carry out the ‘reconstitution’ of what happened. But Amaral was present at the meetings were this was discussed and where the PJ took the decision not to hold a reconstruction. He tells us that it would have been too difficult considering the family to be suspects “as well as the risk of flight”. But he forgets to mention that another problem that was discussed was that it would have inconvenienced other holidaymakers.
4:10 More dramatic effect. “Since the beginning the PJ was pressured not to investigate this case like any other case. There was media exposure, a political and diplomatic climate that made the investigation much more difficult”.
Well what on earth did he expect? When a little girl has gone missing does he not understand that public exposure of the fact is necessary? Does he not understand the basics of diplomatic concern for a family in the position of having a missing daughter? Does he mean that not being able simply to do things behind closed doors was looked on as “pressure” by him and his team?
Unfortunately Amaral makes this dramatic statement but does not develop it. He offers absolutely nothing as evidence to defend the statement. What I (and I am sure others from countries such as the UK and USA) see as the normal practices of the media giving massive publicity to a missing child and the diplomatic service helping a family whose child has gone missing, Amaral has turned into a dramatic mystery.
4:20 Picture of Madeleine followed by TV mock up of child playing Madeline walking hand in hand with an adult. We are told the last time Madeleine was seen was at 17.30 on May 3rd. Kate picked her up from the crèche, the exit records showing the time. Gerry was playing tennis just a few hundred metres away. Tennis court records show Gerry left there at 7pm.
On the same afternoon the family friends had tea at the Paraiso restaurant. CCTV there shows the men left at 16.30 and the women fifteen minutes later. David Payne met up with Gerry at the tennis court. According to Payne’s statement he asked Gerry where Kate was and he then headed to the McCann apartment arriving about 18.30.
Amaral tells us that later testimonies differ. He claims that Gerry said David stayed at the apartment for 30 minutes but Kate said it was only 30 seconds.
Actually, that is not what Gerry said at all. Gerry did not say that David stayed at the apartment for 30 minutes. That is simply one possible interpretation of what Gerry meant. What Gerry actually said was, “DAVID went to visit KATE and the children and returned close to 19H00”.
If a senior policeman automatically takes that statement as meaning that David definitely remained at the flat for a whole 30 minutes when, for example it would take at least five minutes to walk there and back via the car park entrance (which is what the images suggest Amaral believes was the route) or when there is no information as to whether David returned to his own apartment or met anyone on the way and chatted to them, then it’s a sorry situation. The reality is that Gerry does not indicate how long David stayed at the McCann apartment as Amaral claims but only how long David stayed away from the tennis court.
Looking at David Payne’s statement we can see that in fact Payne did go elsewhere. He changed for tennis during this thirty minutes. And when he returned with the others (Russell, David and Matthew had left the restaurant early to ensure time for tennis) they tried to make up a foursome with Gerry who refused, having already played for an hour. They then roped in one of the professionals for a game.
What Amaral has said regarding David Payne is simply not backed up by the evidence given by the witnesses. It is a total fabrication to claim as Amaral does that Payne remained at the apartment for 30 minutes.
Is this another indication that Amaral has simply not bothered to read the Police files before this documentary was made or is it an indication that he is being deliberately deceptive?
5:44 The video takes us forward to 8.40pm and states that shortly after this time the nine English friends went to the Tapas bar. The video correctly states that the restaurant is 50 metres from the apartments where the children were alone.
5:58 In Apt 5A Madeleine and the twins were sleeping. At around 10.00, Kate raised the alarm. Madeleine was not in the room. At around 10.40 the GNR in Lagos received a call saying a girl had disappeared from the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz.
Oddly, Amaral then focuses for a couple of minutes on a very minor detail of what the GNR officers found at the scene. He doesn't mention who was present, anything about windows, doors, access, search underway or other issues. Instead he focuses only on a matter not even mentioned by witnesses at all till July and October respectively.
6:25 Amaral tells us that according to the testimony of the Ocean Club manager when the GNR arrived Gerry threw himself on the ground at the officers feet like a praying Arab, completely out of control over his daughter’s disappearance.
A mock-up of this is shown and followed by a line of text on the screen above a witness statement. That text reads “colocendo-se como se fosse um Arabe a rezer, e deu dois gritos de raiva”.
But neither of the OC Managers mentions any such thing. Indeed and quite bizarrely, Amaral’s team never got round to questioning Emma Knight the Client Manager who spent much of that first night with the McCanns and dealt with them regularly over the following months. She was not interviewed till the Rogatories. I wonder how Amaral would explain that failure.
The line of text on the screen does not, as Amaral claims, come from the OC Manager’s statement at all. It comes from Silvia Batista’s statement (she was director of maintenance services known as housekeeper in UK parlance), a small detail but indicative of carelessness.
Nor do the words on the screen from Batista’s statement match what Amaral told us - that Gerry was “completely out of control”. Batista says that on kneeling Gerry let out two shouts of/in anger (dois gritos de raiva” . Again a small difference but again indicative of a careless attitude to the need for accuracy.
It ought to be noted that Silvia Batista made three separate statements to the PJ on the 7th and 15th of May and on the 26th of July. It was not till the third statement that she made any comment at all about this unusual action by Gerry McCann.
6:40 Mock-up of two actors kneeling on bed.
This is a complete misinterpretation of the witness statements.
Firstly, though Amaral claims it was mentioned by the “officers”, it is in fact mentioned by only one of the GNR officers who were first to reach Praia da Luz that night.
Again there is an oddity (see thread in main discussion area) regarding the reporting of this event. As with Silvia Batista it is only at the third interview months after the event (in this case in October) that any mention is made of any kneeling at all. Others may, like me, wonder why all three of these people given six previous opportunities between them, made absolutely no reference to the kneeling. I can’t explain it.
Even allowing for the fact that Amaral has again misrepresented the the statement’s origin he has gone on with this dramatic mock-up to alter what was said by the officer.
Officer Roque’s statement says “After the search, he noticed a situation that seemed unusual to him, when at a determined moment, the girl's parents kneeled down on the floor of their bedroom and placed their heads on the bed, crying. He did not notice any comments or expression from them, just crying. He says that at the main reception the father also knelt down, placing his head on the floor and crying. He did not hear the father say anything.”
The images on screen are simply wrong. The officer said they kneeled on the floor (as people were often taught to do as children when praying) while the images show the couple in a very odd position on the bed itself. Yet again there is no care for accuracy in representing what the officer actually said. The scene may look dramatic but has no basis in reality.
6:48 Amaral tells us that on being informed of the situation by the GNR he immediately set in motion the appropriate measures. Searches were carried out in the region, the Spanish authorities were warned and the borders were controlled.The largest search ever in Portugal was organised.
