UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: ShiningInLuz on September 09, 2015, 08:43:58 AM
-
Does anyone have a view on HOW SY/OG/DCI Nicola Wall should go about getting some sort of equivalent of Crimewatch out in Portugal?
I have been pondering this point for a while, as it seems one way of potentially making major progress in the case.
-
Does anyone have a view on HOW SY/OG/DCI Nicola Wall should go about getting some sort of equivalent of Crimewatch out in Portugal?
I have been pondering this point for a while, as it seems one way of potentially making major progress in the case.
I know that the Portuguese penal code has been radically modified recently and reading a copy of the laws as they (now) stand, I got the impression (perhaps mistakenly) that such a thing might (now) be possible without breaching secrecy laws.
Am I wrong about that?
-
I know that the Portuguese penal code has been radically modified recently and reading a copy of the laws as they (now) stand, I got the impression (perhaps mistakenly) that such a thing might (now) be possible without breaching secrecy laws.
Am I wrong about that?
I have no idea what the real issue was, FM.
The PT media did cover the essential content of the Crimewatch appeal, so judicial secrecy doesn't seem to be the issue.
There may have been a hiccup regarding international broadcast licensing rights.
-
Does anyone have a view on HOW SY/OG/DCI Nicola Wall should go about getting some sort of equivalent of Crimewatch out in Portugal?
I have been pondering this point for a while, as it seems one way of potentially making major progress in the case.
It is my opinion that this man whose description mirrors the description of the man seen by Jane Tanner should have been sought and ruled in or ruled out in the earlier stages of the inquiry.
Apart from the witness statements in the files there is no indication of any follow up action.
That the later description of an individual which mirrors a description given by another witness was entirely wrong does not enhance my opinion of either the earlier description or the one given in almost the same language as that used by Mr McCluskey.
-
This is a new thread.
-
Well I'd think you would have to be a moron of some sort at best to think an appeal in the place a child went missing wasn't a priority to ask for help, oh well
And it's a little bit morally criminal is it not of the BBC to refuse a replay due to licences and all that crap???
the Portuguese asked and they were refused....whose HEAD is this one on??
http://www.theportugalnews.com/news/crimewatch-aired-in-uk-ireland-netherlands-germany-but-why-not-portugal/29659
-
I agree that it's a terrible shame that it wasn't shown. Clips were made available, which I suppose is better than nothing.
And the worst thing (IMO) is CMTV then did their own version a few weeks later with... Amaral and Moita Flores as special guests.
I'm not sure if the whole thing is online, but you can get the idea from these:
Reconstituição do Caso Maddie
Ler mais em: http://cmtv.sapo.pt/atualidade/detalhe/reconstituicao-do-caso-maddie134058353.html
Reconstituição do desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann-( Ela está morta em Luz )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p7eFzO69aA
Reconstituição do desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann (Parte 1)
Forças de Segurança em Portugal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-Xv0dAJQVg
-
I agree that it's a terrible shame that it wasn't shown. Clips were made available, which I suppose is better than nothing.
And the worst thing (IMO) is CMTV then did their own version a few weeks later with... Amaral and Moita Flores as special guests.
I'm not sure if the whole thing is online, but you can get the idea from these:
Reconstituição do Caso Maddie
Ler mais em: http://cmtv.sapo.pt/atualidade/detalhe/reconstituicao-do-caso-maddie134058353.html
Reconstituição do desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann-( Ela está morta em Luz )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p7eFzO69aA
Reconstituição do desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann (Parte 1)
Forças de Segurança em Portugal
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-Xv0dAJQVg
I think the best that can be said about those videos is that they were recorded two years ago. I think the determination of the PJ in the present investigation will not have been missed; but I'm not quite sure if one CW programme would be able to combat such obduracy.
I also think that any new information or requests for assistance will require to be led by Portuguese voices.
-
I think the best that can be said about those videos is that they were recorded two years ago. I think the determination of the PJ in the present investigation will not have been missed; but I'm not quite sure if one CW programme would be able to combat such obduracy.
I also think that any new information or requests for assistance will require to be led by Portuguese voices.
I would certainly hope so. But again we're back to a PT judicial media strategy that for the moment doesn't appear to be in place.
The CMTV show set up in lieu is disgraceful, IMO.
Quite aside from the insinuations, many of the "facts" are quite simply a repeat of previous "misunderstandings" - yet presented as fact.
-
Madeleine McCann Crimewatch appeal: Parents upset at Portuguese Maddie TV snub
21:43, 19 October 2013
Updated 10:04, 20 October 2013
By Simon Wright , Ben Glaze
The Sunday Mirror can reveal that two of the country’s largest TV channels, TVI and SIC – with potential audiences of millions – made failed attempts to buy the rights
Kate and Gerry McCann have been left “saddened” and “frustrated” over the decision not to air the latest appeal to find their daughter Madeleine on Portuguese TV.
BBC1’s Crimewatch had its highest ratings last Monday as British detectives issued a fresh public request for information in the search for the little girl who went missing from Portugal’s Praia Da Luz in 2007, aged just three.
But the appeal, which was also shown in Germany and the Netherlands, failed to be screened in the country where Maddie disappeared.
A source close to Kate and Gerry said last night: “They feel it was a massive missed opportunity.”
The Sunday Mirror can reveal that two of the country’s largest TV channels, TVI and SIC – with potential audiences of millions – made failed attempts to buy the rights to the Crimewatch programme.
It is understood that a deal could not be reached due to legal reasons.
The Crimewatch broadcast prompted more than 1,000 new leads for the Metropolitan Police’s Operation Grange team.
Two viewers gave the same name for the e-fit of a prime suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCann’s holiday apartment.
Large numbers of Portuguese still believe that Kate and Gerry, both 45, from Rothley, Leicestershire, were somehow involved in their daughter’s disappearance.
They are currently suing the former head of the original Portuguese investigation, retired police officer Goncalo Amaral, for making similar claims in a book.
The fact that the appeal was not aired in Portugal is understood to have added to their frustration. Our source said: “The attitude of the Portuguese has always been that they’re not bothered.”
The Crimewatch appeal, thought to have cost around £750, 000, pulled in an average of 6.7 million viewers, the biggest in its 11-year history.
A BBC spokesman said: “Crimewatch is made for a domestic audience and we are unable to sell it abroad for legal reasons.
"We have gone to extra lengths to ensure audiences around the world can view the McCann footage by providing clips of the programme and by making the film available on the BBC Crimewatch website.
"The decision on broadcasting an appeal in Portugal is a matter for the Portuguese broadcasters, Portuguese police and The Metropolitan Police.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-crimewatch-appeal-parents-2472170
Youtube video available to anyone. . Published 14 oct 2013
https://youtu.be/OZ8jmdWlB8Y
-
"A BBC spokesman said: “Crimewatch is made for a domestic audience and we are unable to sell it abroad for legal reasons."
"Strictly Come Dancing ... the BBC show earned the corporation tens of millions of pounds in licensing fees last year as it topped the list of the most successful exports."
-
Which proves "the source" was talking out of their backside....and it was a lie that the Portuguese couldn't be bothered...it was the BBC that REFUSED...silly little "source"
AND what does THAT say about the BBC and refusal to help in a missing child case? Hmmmm???.
-
Perhaps the optimum time for a Crimewatch type programme to have been most effective in Portugal would have been when the case was live.
I don't think Mr Amaral's later 'documentary' and participation in many other opinion defining programmes went anywhere near being of benefit to Madeleine or encouraging people to keep looking out for her.
-
Which proves "the source" was talking out of their backside....and it was a lie that the Portuguese couldn't be bothered...it was the BBC that REFUSED...silly little "source"
AND what does THAT say about the BBC and refusal to help in a missing child case? Hmmmm???.
I think the quoted legal reasons were real but...
There are millions of pounds to be made by exporting an inane dancing show so obviously ways are found to make it possible, by licensing lookalike shows. Very little money would have been made by finding a way around the rules to let SIC and TVI broadcast a subtitled Crimewatch appeal.
-
I'm trying to decipher the CMTV alternative to the Crimewatch appeal. I can't catch every word, but FWIW, some notes. Perhaps a PT speaker could confirm or correct:
- Ominous music
- Large quantities of alcohol (close up of daiquiri on Paraiso drinks board)
- Heavy insinuations about DP (mystery how long he was there): Gerry said DP was in their apart from 30 mins, but Kate said 30 seconds.
- Fiona Payne guaranteed that she accompanied her husband to the apartment.and K and G were at home.
- "One thing is certain: Pamela Fenn saw DP near the apartment at around 7 pm."
- "Kate, for example, (inaudible) daquiri" (close up of one on table)
- During dinner, they drank 8 bottles of wine (4 red, 4 white).
- Hint that any checking was via front door (camera past window with shutter down towards 5A door)
- Contradictions about checking (every 30 or 15 mins)
- Russell's timeline (5.57) Jane arrow to Gerry, arrow to Russell, arrow to Kate
- At 21:00, Gerry and Russell left the table.
- Gerry bumped into Jez (a BBC producer)
- Jane Turner goes to find her husband, says she saw man carrying child on his shoulder, think it says G & J don't see her.
- Unexplained scenes of camera going down alleyway at back of apartments.
- Gerry gets back to Tapas at 21:30.
- Russell returned around 1/2 hour after Gerry.
- Kate goes to check and screams "They've taken her".
- Camera simulates running around to the front with shutter still down.
- Bed with covers pulled up (no CC or blanket).
(up to 8.45)
Then interview with GA & Moita Flores...
-
I'm trying to decipher the CMTV alternative to the Crimewatch appeal. I can't catch every word, but FWIW, some notes. Perhaps a PT speaker could confirm or correct:
- Ominous music
- Large quantities of alcohol (close up of daiquiri on Paraiso drinks board)
- Heavy insinuations about DP (mystery how long he was there): Gerry said DP was in their apart from 30 mins, but Kate said 30 seconds.
- Fiona Payne guaranteed that she accompanied her husband to the apartment.and K and G were at home.
- "One thing is certain: Pamela Fenn saw DP near the apartment at around 7 pm."
- "Kate, for example, (inaudible) daquiri" (close up of one on table)
- During dinner, they drank 8 bottles of wine (4 red, 4 white).
- Hint that any checking was via front door (camera past window with shutter down towards 5A door)
- Contradictions about checking (every 30 or 15 mins)
- Russell's timeline (5.57) Jane arrow to Gerry, arrow to Russell, arrow to Kate
- At 21:00, Gerry and Russell left the table.
- Gerry bumped into Jez (a BBC producer)
- Jane Turner goes to find her husband, says she saw man carrying child on his shoulder, think it says G & J don't see her.
- Unexplained scenes of camera going down alleyway at back of apartments.
- Gerry gets back to Tapas at 21:30.
- Russell returned around 1/2 hour after Gerry.
- Kate goes to check and screams "They've taken her".
- Camera simulates running around to the front with shutter still down.
- Bed with covers pulled up (no CC or blanket).
(up to 8.45)
Then interview with GA & Moita Flores...
My Portuguese stretches to "Olá" so I watched to get an impression of what was going on by judging (please do not laugh) 'body language'.
I thought it was the DP show, his name was mentioned so often. Also am I correct in hearing YM name being raised ... ? The main impression given was that a lot of alcohol featured ... even shots of the pool being artfully framed with glasses and bottles.
-
My Portuguese stretches to "Olá" so I watched to get an impression of what was going on by judging (please do not laugh) 'body language'.
I thought it was the DP show, his name was mentioned so often. Also am I correct in hearing YM name being raised ... ? The main impression given was that a lot of alcohol featured ... even shots of the pool being artfully framed with glasses and bottles.
Yet strangely enough in the CW programme it seemed as if DP had been airbrushed from history.
-
My Portuguese stretches to "Olá" so I watched to get an impression of what was going on by judging (please do not laugh) 'body language'.
I thought it was the DP show, his name was mentioned so often. Also am I correct in hearing YM name being raised ... ? The main impression given was that a lot of alcohol featured ... even shots of the pool being artfully framed with glasses and bottles.
I'll try listening to it again and will see if I can get confirmation from a PT speaker.
Has anyone come across a transcript?
On the content of the exclusive interview following the "reconstruction", I have a lot of trouble understanding GA's accent and anyone who speaks quickly.
-
Yet strangely enough in the CW programme it seemed as if DP had been airbrushed from history.
The CW programme was a general reminder of events to jog memories as an appeal for witnesses concerning details or people of interest to the investigation.
-
The CW programme was a general reminder of events to jog memories as an appeal for witnesses concerning details or people of interest to the investigation.
Yet all the other holiday friends were mentioned by name.
Odd !
-
The CW programme was a general reminder of events to jog memories as an appeal for witnesses concerning details or people of interest to the investigation.
I think at the time of making the Portuguese programme there was still an element of being mired in the past and massaging dated prejudices.
I wonder what the tenor of such a programme would be if made today now that people are more aware that the present investigators from the PJ continue working the case following their own investigation and that as far as SY are concerned persons of interest are in existence and have been interviewed.
We don't know what the PJ are doing because they do not require ILORs to do it and the 'source close to the investigation' has either retired or been transferred.
For one thing, I think there would be different interviewees.
-
I think at the time of making the Portuguese programme there was still an element of being mired in the past and massaging dated prejudices.
I wonder what the tenor of such a programme would be if made today now that people are more aware that the present investigators from the PJ continue working the case following their own investigation and that as far as SY are concerned persons of interest are in existence and have been interviewed.
We don't know what the PJ are doing because they do not require ILORs to do it and the 'source close to the investigation' has either retired or been transferred.
For one thing, I think there would be different interviewees.
It seems to be a knee-jerk reaction. When the Met was seeking to jog memories, Amaral & co then jumped in to insist (while the CW appeal was still hot news), that their interpretation - with numerous errors - was the right one.
How is that supposed to help find what happened to a missing child?
-
It seems to be a knee-jerk reaction. When the Met was seeking to jog memories, Amaral & co then jumped in to insist (while the CW appeal was still hot news), that their interpretation - with numerous errors - was the right one.
How is that supposed to help find what happened to a missing child?
I can appreciate that it would have been a difficult time for Mr Amaral.
Nothing highlighted the failures of his investigation more clearly than the reopening of Madeleine McCann's case by SY compounded by the PJ reopening their own investigation.
Both relied on 'new' evidence.
Bearing in mind that there has probably never been an investigation of any kind that didn't have its flaws or where different decisions might have produced better results ... perhaps he could have approached the CW revelations in a more positive way than raking over the ashes of his tenure.
-
I can appreciate that it would have been a difficult time for Mr Amaral.
Nothing highlighted the failures of his investigation more clearly than the reopening of Madeleine McCann's case by SY compounded by the PJ reopening their own investigation.
Both relied on 'new' evidence.
Bearing in mind that there has probably never been an investigation of any kind that didn't have its flaws or where different decisions might have produced better results ... perhaps he could have approached the CW revelations in a more positive way than raking over the ashes of his tenure.
Love the way you've worded that post, Brietta ...
8((()*/
-
I can appreciate that it would have been a difficult time for Mr Amaral.
Nothing highlighted the failures of his investigation more clearly than the reopening of Madeleine McCann's case by SY compounded by the PJ reopening their own investigation.
Both relied on 'new' evidence.
Bearing in mind that there has probably never been an investigation of any kind that didn't have its flaws or where different decisions might have produced better results ... perhaps he could have approached the CW revelations in a more positive way than raking over the ashes of his tenure.
Just before 2 Oct 2007 Amaral was trying to find where man went after smith sighting.
SY in PDL were trying to find where man went after smith sighting.
-
Just before 2 Oct 2007 Amaral was trying to find where man went after smith sighting.
SY in PDL were trying to find where man went after smith sighting.
Seems their thinking re: perpetrator was very similar Pegasus.
-
Just before 2 Oct 2007 Amaral was trying to find where man went after smith sighting.
SY in PDL were trying to find where man went after smith sighting.
There is a suggestion that there are many avenues of investigation which were ignored and many investigative opportunities neglected once Mr Amaral had decided that Madeleine was dead. A thesis for which there is not a shred of evidence.
It appears that the gap between the taking of the three Smith statements and the decision to look for the man they said they had seen on the night Madeleine disappeared substantiates the inept investigation.
I can think of no other valid explanation for the failure to properly check out eye witness testimony given in May and left sitting on a shelf until October than a totally botched appraisal of the evidence.
The statements do not appear to have received the proper diligence ... it took the Rebelo investigation to check the statements on the 10th of October http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p10p3276 ... a competent investigation would have checked that out at the time and when the staff on duty might have had a better chance of recalling the large family visit.
-
Seems their thinking re: perpetrator was very similar Pegasus.
Interesting that the programme said that Mrs Fenn saw David Payne on the McCanns balcony at 7pm. That isn't in her statement in the files. The only reference to 7pm is when the 'questionnaire' is mentioned and Fiona Payne is said to have been there at 7pm. Was the questionnaire issued as a result of something said by Mrs Fenn which hasn't been released I wonder?
The programme also mentions how the Gasper statements came to the attention of the PJ. Apparently they came through with an unrelated fax from LP. That may explain how the PJ knew they existed and were able subsequently to ask for them.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/Gaspar.htm
-
There is a suggestion that there are many avenues of investigation which were ignored and many investigative opportunities neglected once Mr Amaral had decided that Madeleine was dead. A thesis for which there is not a shred of evidence.
It appears that the gap between the taking of the three Smith statements and the decision to look for the man they said they had seen on the night Madeleine disappeared substantiates the inept investigation.
I can think of no other valid explanation for the failure to properly check out eye witness testimony given in May and left sitting on a shelf until October than a totally botched appraisal of the evidence.
The statements do not appear to have received the proper diligence ... it took the Rebelo investigation to check the statements on the 10th of October http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p10p3276 ... a competent investigation would have checked that out at the time and when the staff on duty might have had a better chance of recalling the large family visit.
The Smith family were brought back to PDL by Amaral in May and a reconstruction conducted so your claim that the witness testimony was left 'sitting on a shelf ' is diengenious to say the least. Once Martin Smith had claimed in September that he was 80% sure the man he saw on the 3rd of May was Gerry McCann Amaral started to arrange for him to be brought back to Portugal. Unfortunately, as we now know, he was taken off the case before he succeeded.
-
Interesting that the programme said that Mrs Fenn saw David Payne on the McCanns balcony at 7pm. That isn't in her statement in the files. The only reference to 7pm is when the 'questionnaire' is mentioned and Fiona Payne is said to have been there at 7pm. Was the questionnaire issued as a result of something said by Mrs Fenn which hasn't been released I wonder?
The programme also mentions how the Gasper statements came to the attention of the PJ. Apparently they came through with an unrelated fax from LP. That may explain how the PJ knew they existed and were able subsequently to ask for them.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/Gaspar.htm
G-Unit are you talking about the CW programme because I don't remember any mention of Mrs Fenn ?
-
The Smith family were brought back to PDL by Amaral in May and a reconstruction conducted so your claim that the witness testimony was left 'sitting on a shelf ' is diengenious to say the least. Once Martin Smith had claimed in September that he was 80% sure the man he saw on the 3rd of May was Gerry McCann Amaral started to arrange for him to be brought back to Portugal. Unfortunately, as we now know, he was taken off the case before he succeeded.
Did Smith say he was 80% sure that the man he saw was Gerry McCann? Or are you being slightly disingenuous yourself?
-
G-Unit are you talking about the CW programme because I don't remember any mention of Mrs Fenn ?
Sorry, no, the Portuguese one.
-
Did Smith say he was 80% sure that the man he saw was Gerry McCann? Or are you being slightly disingenuous yourself?
He said 60-80% which, I'm sure you'll agree, amounts to the same thing.
-
Sorry, no, the Portuguese one.
I see. Thanks G.
-
Did Smith say he was 80% sure that the man he saw was Gerry McCann? Or are you being slightly disingenuous yourself?
I've noticed you always ask questions instead of adding facts to the debate. Never mind, I'll do it for you. The answer is that Smith did say 80% as well as 60%;
I would be 60-80% sure that it was Gerard McCann that I met that night carrying a child.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
-
Did Smith say he was 80% sure that the man he saw was Gerry McCann? Or are you being slightly disingenuous yourself?
Three people amended their original statements to the police.
- Mr McCluskey
- Mrs McCluskey
- Mr Smith
What difference is there between the amended statement made by Mr McCluskey and that made by Mr Smith?
- Both watched the same news broadcasts
- Both 'recognised' an individual
- Both used almost identical phraseology in description
- Both agonised before contacting the police
Both amended statements should logically carry the same weight as they are in essence identical. So ... wherein lies the difference?
Apart from the obvious.
Mr McCluskey saw what he said he saw we know this because his original witness statement was checked out and explained.
It seems no-one bothered to think about taking steps to check out Mr Smith's original witness statement until October.
-
There is a suggestion that there are many avenues of investigation which were ignored and many investigative opportunities neglected once Mr Amaral had decided that Madeleine was dead. A thesis for which there is not a shred of evidence.
It appears that the gap between the taking of the three Smith statements and the decision to look for the man they said they had seen on the night Madeleine disappeared substantiates the inept investigation.
I can think of no other valid explanation for the failure to properly check out eye witness testimony given in May and left sitting on a shelf until October than a totally botched appraisal of the evidence.
The statements do not appear to have received the proper diligence ... it took the Rebelo investigation to check the statements on the 10th of October http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p10p3276 ... a competent investigation would have checked that out at the time and when the staff on duty might have had a better chance of recalling the large family visit.
I believe this actually falls into the unturned stones category - unturned by Amaral. unturned by Rebelo and unturned by SY, as none of these knows how Kelly's works, why Kelly's was quiet that night, or why the Smiths should go to Kelly's from the Dolphin.
-
I can appreciate that it would have been a difficult time for Mr Amaral.
Nothing highlighted the failures of his investigation more clearly than the reopening of Madeleine McCann's case by SY compounded by the PJ reopening their own investigation.
Both relied on 'new' evidence.
Bearing in mind that there has probably never been an investigation of any kind that didn't have its flaws or where different decisions might have produced better results ... perhaps he could have approached the CW revelations in a more positive way than raking over the ashes of his tenure.
That's my view as well.
I just feel sad that the perspective of the CMTV show (only weeks after the CW appeal) was to reinforce - yet again - the original PJ view in public opinion so many years on, with so many inaccuracies, as a knee-jerk reaction to the CW programme as opposed to setting pride aside to help find what really happened to this child.
-
I believe this actually falls into the unturned stones category - unturned by Amaral. unturned by Rebelo and unturned by SY, as none of these knows how Kelly's works, why Kelly's was quiet that night, or why the Smiths should go to Kelly's from the Dolphin.
They'd gone to eat out (on the last night for some of the family), and decided to stop off somewhere else on the way home.
I don't see anything odd about that at all.
-
I've noticed you always ask questions instead of adding facts to the debate. Never mind, I'll do it for you. The answer is that Smith did say 80% as well as 60%;
I would be 60-80% sure that it was Gerard McCann that I met that night carrying a child.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
What is wrong with "only asking questions"? 60% is 20% less than 80% and 60% sure is even less sure than 80% sure, don't you agree?
-
Three people amended their original statements to the police.
- Mr McCluskey
- Mrs McCluskey
- Mr Smith
What difference is there between the amended statement made by Mr McCluskey and that made by Mr Smith?
- Both watched the same news broadcasts
- Both 'recognised' an individual
- Both used almost identical phraseology in description
- Both agonised before contacting the police
Both amended statements should logically carry the same weight as they are in essence identical. So ... wherein lies the difference?
Apart from the obvious.
Mr McCluskey saw what he said he saw we know this because his original witness statement was checked out and explained.
It seems no-one bothered to think about taking steps to check out Mr Smith's original witness statement until October.
There are differences. Mr McCluskey contacted the police again because he recognised Kate McCann as the woman he saw that night.
In my original statement I described a distressed female who ran down a road towards a white van I had described.
Having viewed recent news footage of Mrs McCann I am now almost certain that she is the female I described as being in a distressed state. I say this because of her slight build, high cheekbones and her eyes and hairstyle.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RI_Mc.htm
-
They'd gone to eat out (on the last night for some of the family), and decided to stop off somewhere else on the way home.
I don't see anything odd about that at all.
I see it as very interesting indeed.
Pregnant wife, feeling unwell. Peter says early flight, Aoife says early flight, Martin (IIRC) says very early flight and he was driving.
Alcohol in the Dolphin if they wanted another round, but they chose to go to a bar. It's not on the way home, though it's not far off the route.
Aoiffe says 30 mins in Kelly's, the men say 40+ mins, yet the trio broadly agrees when they left Kelly's.
Given the importance of the timing of the Smithman encounter, if I was in OG I would want to nail this one down. Of course, it could be that OG already has.
-
I see it as very interesting indeed.
Pregnant wife, feeling unwell. Peter says early flight, Aoife says early flight, Martin (IIRC) says very early flight and he was driving.
Alcohol in the Dolphin if they wanted another round, but they chose to go to a bar. It's not on the way home, though it's not far off the route.
Aoiffe says 30 mins in Kelly's, the men say 40+ mins, yet the trio broadly agrees when they left Kelly's.
Given the importance of the timing of the Smithman encounter, if I was in OG I would want to nail this one down. Of course, it could be that OG already has.
I had until quite recently assumed that both sightings of a child carrier were reported to the authorities contemporaneously and found it puzzling that the Smith sighting was not reported until a fortnight after the event.
Given the saturation news coverage of Madeleine McCann's disappearance I am puzzled why memories had to be jogged to recall the sighting.
Was the memory in reference to the night of May third ... or might it have been on another occasion that the family passed a man carrying a child on their way home?
A prompt and public request might have nailed that one with others coming forward to say they had seen the Smiths ~ they had seen the man in the area ~ or that they had seen both Smiths and man.
I do not think a heavily pregnant woman who felt unwell would welcome going from one hostelry to another ... unless it was for the express purpose of the need to visit the toilet ... and I think a caring family would be anxious to get her, and the younger children , home to bed.
-
@Shining. In Kellys or similar is it pay for drinks when you get them or tab and pay when you leave?
-
I'm trying to decipher the CMTV alternative to the Crimewatch appeal. I can't catch every word, but FWIW, some notes. Perhaps a PT speaker could confirm or correct:
...
Then interview with GA & Moita Flores...
The envelope shaped button on the bottom of the YouTube video says it is subtitles/CC. I have only checked a very small amount at the beginning of the intro, but it appears to be a 100% match for the Portuguese spoken (in Portuguese, of course).
ETA. Nope, it seems to be some automatic guessing software that corpses on Gerry and Kate.
-
Kelly’s 282 788 631
Rua da Calheta, 4
English bar with selection of draught beers & cider showing live sports on large TVs, sun terrace and ‘Fred’s Fun Quiz’ every Monday and Friday at 21.00. Free Wi-Fi
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/12003990_10205968465784593_7822994995100094106_n.jpg?oh=6dbb4895d429c1b6f48c912cc4715b49&oe=56708DF3&__gda__=1449798028_cd570bde34d9a4f655d993ee3cc0577e)
Watching the game ... In an Irish pub
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Kellys-Bar-Praia-Da-Luz/437469679616723
You normally pay when you order your round of drinks in English/Irish pubs.
9.39 13.75 euros
-
@Shining. In Kellys or similar is it pay for drinks when you get them or tab and pay when you leave?
Regulars normally run tabs, at least in most of the bars.
If the bar staff were not familiar with the customer, it would be usual to request the money when the drinks are served.
Martin Smith might have been in Kelly's often enough to merit a tab, but then the staff would probably have remembered him. It was Peter's first visit, so I doubt if he would have been able to run a tab.
-
If they pay for drinks when they order them, then the 9:39pm transaction is theirs.
9.27pm pay bill at Dolphin.
9.39pm arrive Kellys and pay for drinks, then sit down and drink them.
But if they pay for drinks on tab when they leave Kellys, then the 9.39pm transaction is IMO too early to be them.
-
The envelope shaped button on the bottom of the YouTube video says it is subtitles/CC. I have only checked a very small amount at the beginning of the intro, but it appears to be a 100% match for the Portuguese spoken (in Portuguese, of course).
ETA. Nope, it seems to be some automatic guessing software that copses on Gerry and Kate.
Thanks, I hadn't thought of that... but it's automatic gibberish, as you say.
-
If they pay for drinks when they order them, then the 9:39pm transaction is theirs.
9.27pm pay bill at Dolphin.
9.39pm arrive Kellys and pay for drinks, then sit down and drink them.
But if they pay for drinks on tab when they leave Kellys, then the 9.39pm transaction is IMO too early to be them.
The evidence suggests 9:39 for a group of 9 (5 kids) so they paid when they bought their drinks. They only had one and leave around 20 minutes later at 10pm.
-
Why didn't the PJ, at any stage, put out an appeal for people who were in the vicinity of Kelly's Bar/LuzDoc that night between 9.30 & 10.30 to come forward?
-
Why didn't the PJ, at any stage, put out an appeal for people who were in the vicinity of Kelly's Bar/LuzDoc that night between 9.30 & 10.30 to come forward?
Was it usual for the PJ to put out appeals?
-
Why didn't the PJ, at any stage, put out an appeal for people who were in the vicinity of Kelly's Bar/LuzDoc that night between 9.30 & 10.30 to come forward?
Good point, Misty. The GNR did go around asking if anyone had seen anything suspicious, and some house searches for the "missing minor", but it seems to have ended there.
-
Was it usual for the PJ to put out appeals?
No. The GNR/PSP do not make public appeals & the PJ only make appeals for "wanted" criminals on their website.
However, the PJ did/do not seem adverse to using the media to publicly present allegations and "evidence " against known suspects in a case.
This case was huge for the PJ. They needed all the help they could get. They had information about a 2nd man seen with a child in the right location at the right time. Surely it was in everyone's interests to find this man & rule him in or out of proceedings asap. Instead - zilch. It's almost as though someone didn't want to solve the case.......
-
No. The GNR/PSP do not make public appeals & the PJ only make appeals for "wanted" criminals on their website.
However, the PJ did/do not seem adverse to using the media to publicly present allegations and "evidence " against known suspects in a case.
This case was huge for the PJ. They needed all the help they could get. They had information about a 2nd man seen with a child in the right location at the right time. Surely it was in everyone's interests to find this man & rule him in or out of proceedings asap. Instead - zilch. It's almost as though someone didn't want to solve the case.......
It is obvious that Mr Amaral did, and still does, very much want to solve the case.
Why on earth would he not want to solve it?
A very active investigation of the Smith sighting (including property searches just south of the sighting, and plans to fly witnesses to Portugal again) was abruptly halted by whoever engineered Mr Amaral's removal on the morning of October 2nd 2007.
MFLNSUL for many years since the case was shelved had the opportunity to publish a portuguese language appeal about smithman - but can anyone post a link to it?
-
Imagine if a portuguese child disappeared in the UK.
And there was a big need to identify a person in a sighting.
And the appeal was broadcast in Portuguese language only and in Portugal only.
It would be ridiculous.
-
It is obvious that Mr Amaral did, and still does, very much want to solve the case.
Why on earth would he not want to solve it?
A very active investigation of the Smith sighting (including property searches just south of the sighting, and plans to fly witnesses to Portugal again) was abruptly halted by whoever engineered Mr Amaral's removal on the morning of October 2nd 2007.
MFLNSUL for many years since the case was shelved had the opportunity to publish a portuguese language appeal about smithman - but can anyone post a link to it?
If Amaral & Co really wanted to solve the case, why were they more interested in discussing the theory that Madeleine was dead & where she could be buried rather than thoroughly investigating the very important sighting of this 2nd man seen carrying a young girl in the vicinity on the night in question?
There are NO additional statements in the files between May & October when GA was removed of any police asking the bar owners etc in the immediate vicinity of Smithman sighting if they remember who was in their premises that night. The emphasis was always on what happened after Madeleine went missing, not what was happening before.
-
If Amaral & Co really wanted to solve the case, why were they more interested in discussing the theory that Madeleine was dead & where she could be buried rather than thoroughly investigating the very important sighting of this 2nd man seen carrying a young girl in the vicinity on the night in question?
There are NO additional statements in the files between May & October when GA was removed of any police asking the bar owners etc in the immediate vicinity of Smithman sighting if they remember who was in their premises that night. The emphasis was always on what happened after Madeleine went missing, not what was happening before.
Amaral IMO believed the time of the sighting stated by the 3 Irish witnesses on 26 May IMO. Later Rebelo double-checked the time by asking at Dolphin and Kellys for till and payment receipts.
Just before 2nd Oct Amaral was investigating this sighting in a hypothetical non-abduction scenario, and so did years later (partly at least) SY.
-
Amaral IMO believed the time of the sighting stated by the 3 Irish witnesses on 26 May IMO. Later Rebelo double-checked the time by asking at Dolphin and Kellys for till and payment receipts.
Just before 2nd Oct Amaral was investigating this sighting in a hypothetical non-abduction scenario, and so did years later (partly at least) SY.
Was Amaral working on the 9.30 or 10pm time provided by the 3 members of the Smith family prior to him being removed?
-
Was Amaral working on the 9.30 or 10pm time provided by the 3 members of the Smith family prior to him being removed?
IMO, the sighting time as stated in the three 26 May statements, 9.50pm to 10pm if I remember
-
IMO, the sighting time as stated in the three 26 May statements, 9.50pm to 10pm if I remember
I think I have dementia. Time to stop tonight!
-
I think I have dementia. Time to stop tonight!
BTW the smith sighting is irrelevant IMO.
The importance of a portuguese appeal would be only to rule him out IMO.
But would a second 'revelation' do any good? Investigators reportedly seem addicted to consider only this ridiculous transport method - they would probably just hunt for a third uncovered carrying sighting and base everything on that?
-
It was without doubt very noticeable that Portugal refused to broadcast the BBC Crimewatch programme discounting Tannerman in favour of Smithman, any thoughts on this?
-
It was without doubt very noticeable that Portugal refused to broadcast the BBC Crimewatch programme discounting Tannerman in favour of Smithman, any thoughts on this?
Good question particularly as we know a) the "sceptics" believe this was a police ploy to spook Gerry and b) we know about the PT'smedia McCanntipathy. You'd think they'd have jumped at the chance, adding their own interpretation of the e-fits, wouldn't you?
-
It was without doubt very noticeable that Portugal refused to broadcast the BBC Crimewatch programme discounting Tannerman in favour of Smithman, any thoughts on this?
Portuguese TV stations were refused the CW programme by the BBC due to 'licencing issues', I thought?
-
Even if it had been aired, it wouldn't have stopped a TV chat show following it to rubbish it, with burbles about DP, Martin Smith, fridges, dogs, tennis bag, FSS contamination, satellites, various prime ministers and MI5.
-
Even if it had been aired, it wouldn't have stopped a TV chat show following it to rubbish it, with burbles about DP, Martin Smith, fridges, dogs, tennis bag, FSS contamination, satellites, various prime ministers and MI5.
Is only one version of events allowed then? There were factual discrepancies in the CW programme. Moving the timeline to allow an abduction after 9.30pm was fine, but Jane and Russell's movements between 9.30 and 10pm were ignored.
-
Even if it had been aired, it wouldn't have stopped a TV chat show following it to rubbish it, with burbles about DP, Martin Smith, fridges, dogs, tennis bag, FSS contamination, satellites, various prime ministers and MI5.
Exactly. I think the Portuguese media missed a trick there, either that or they have come to their senses.
-
Exactly. I think the Portuguese media missed a trick there, either that or they have come to their senses.
Is what the Portuguese media broadcast really that important ? Surely what the PJ are uncovering in their investigation is ? Unless it is being insinuated that they are one and the same thing ?
-
Is what the Portuguese media broadcast really that important ? Surely what the PJ are uncovering in their investigation is ? Unless it is being insinuated that they are one and the same thing ?
No I wasn't insinuating that at all, simply commenting on Admin's earlier post about the PT media. Do you have a problem with me doing so?
-
Publicity appears to be considered essential when a child disappears.
So much of the publicity concerning Madeleine's disappearance was of an almost uniquely pejorative nature that it could only have been of little assistance in her recovery.
Good to see Facebook being used positively.
CHILD RESCUE ALERT
Latest News
16/09/2015:
We are delighted to announce today the new partnership between Child Rescue Alert and Facebook. This huge step forward for the Child Rescue Alert system will harness the power of the social media giant’s community when a child’s life is believed to be at immediate risk. With over half of the UK population registered to Facebook, today’s announcement means that Child Rescue Alerts will have the potential to reach a far greater audience than ever before.
A staggering 140,000 children go missing each year in the UK. Recent research has shown a 13% increase in child abductions in the past year, when nearly 900 child abductions and child kidnappings were reported in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The six hours following a child’s disappearance – often referred to as the ‘golden hours’ – are critical to the investigation. The sooner the public is alerted to a disappearance, the greater the chance of the child’s safe return.
This innovative partnership will see Facebook utilise its latest technology to target alerts to specific geographical areas. Like the established email and SMS format of Child Rescue Alert, the Facebook format will feature a photo of the missing child along with a description, location of the abduction and any other available information that can be provided to the public to aid in the search. Once issued, the alert will instantly appear on the Facebook newsfeed, with the alert’s reach increased by ‘shares’ from Facebook users.
Jo Youle, Chief Executive of the charity Missing People which manages the Child Rescue Alert system in partnership with the CEOP Command of the National Crime Agency and Groupcall said “Every minute after a child’s disappearance is crucial to bringing them home safely. This fantastic new partnership with Facebook will mean even more members of the public can help safeguard children in the most extreme danger - and hopefully save a child’s life”.
A spokesperson for National Crime Agency said “The speed at which a large number of people can be reached and the opportunities for targeting the search area through Facebook will be valuable tools for police forces in the event of issuing a CRA.” A spokesperson for Groupcall says “Groupcall are delighted that Facebook are now supporting Child Rescue Alert having provided the technology behind the system”.
19/08/2015:
When a child goes missing and their life is believed to be at risk, it’s important that there are as many eyes and ears to the ground as possible to increase the chances of the child returning safe and well. That’s why Missing People holds regular Child Rescue Alert sign-up days across the UK.
Child Rescue Alert sign-up days can be held almost anywhere and commonly take place in busy town centres, at sporting events or fêtes. Equally, they can be held in the workplace or at local community centres. At these events, representatives of Missing People speak to members of the public about Child Rescue Alert and why it’s useful, encouraging people to sign up. There is also the option sign up to receive future news about Missing People and some of their ongoing and future appeals.
At one recent sign-up event in Cowley, Oxford, a sign-up event was combined with a bake sale for members of the public. On that day alone, Missing People spoke to many about the importance Child Rescue Alert and signed up over 100 people to the system. To date, Missing People has organised 19 Child Rescue Alert sign-up events, which has contributed to the current number of sign-ups, which stands at 309,000, and helped raise awareness of the system. The charity has recently been lucky enough to partner with Barclays branches in the South East and London, sending volunteers across the area to join Barclays staff in their branches to raise awareness about Child Rescue Alert.
If you would like to find out more about how to organise a Child Rescue Alert sign-up day in your community, contact regional@missingpeople.org.uk
25/05/2015:
Today, International Missing Children’s Day, marks the first anniversary of the launch of the enhanced Child Rescue Alert. The system is managed in partnership between Missing People, CEOP, a command of the National Crime Agency, and GroupCall. It has been made possible thanks to players of People’s Postcode Lottery Dream Fund.
Over the past year, the Child Rescue Alert partners have worked hard to raise awareness of the system by consistently building its reach through major new partnerships and by encouraging members of the public to sign up at over 65 sign up events and through high profile national media coverage. There are now 287,000 people signed up to receive the alerts.
Further highlights over the past year have included:
- A fundraising dinner at London’s Mondrian Hotel, in October
- A feature on Good Morning Britain in November highlighting the system, which lead to a further 70,000 sign-ups. Following the feature, the Child Rescue Alert app was in the top 100 most popular apps on app store Google Play.
- December saw the beginning of a partnership with Royal Mail Group. With 124,000 Royal Mail staff receiving alerts on their PDA and more eyes and ears than ever before to the ground when a high-risk child goes missing. The partnership between the charity Missing People and Royal Mail, which includes Child Rescue Alert, has recently been recognised with a Business Charity Award.
- The first enhanced Child Rescue Alert was launched in March, with the subject on the alert, a 14 year old girl from Nottingham, being found safe and well within 24 hours of the alert being issued.
We would like to take this opportunity to thank all of the Child Rescue Alert partners who have joined up to receive the alerts this year and recognise the enormous value in this ground-breaking national system. Over the coming year we will look forward to further building the network of partners and members of the public who sign up to receive the alert seeing this project go from strength to strength.
11/03/2015:
On 10 March 2015 the first, national Child Rescue Alert in the UK, was issued using the new system. A 14 year old girl went missing from her home in Nottinghamshire. The Police ordered an alert be issued and the system went into action. Groupcall’s dedicated software ensured that every subscriber to Child Rescue Alert received the alert. The alert appeared on Facebook pages and Twitter feeds and on the hand held devices of 124,000 Royal Mail postal workers.
Thankfully the child was found safe and well less than 24 hours later. Jo Youle Missing People Chief Executive said : “The Child Rescue Alert process went seamlessly and it's great that the child was found. Child Rescue Alert would not be possible without the National Crime Agency, Groupcall players of People’s Postcode Lottery, Royal Mail, LexisNexis, BHS, Press Association and Child Rescue Alert Patrons.”
18/11/2014: 124,000 postmen and women across the country will be assisting Child Rescue Alert to locate vulnerable missing children, significantly increasing the number of people committed to helping to find them. Click here to find out more.
13/11/2014: Royal Mail have announced that they will be supporting Child Rescue Alert by sending alerts to postal workers via their handheld PDA devices. Click here for more.
12/11/2014: Following ITV1 Good Morning Britain's recent campaign to raise awareness of Child Rescue Alert, almost 70,000 people downloaded the Child Rescue Alert app or registered to receive alerts. Click here to see why.
http://childrescuealert.org.uk/
-
Ahh. Here we go. A translated transcription of CMTV's "reconstruction".
Part 1
https://zizipresscuts.wordpress.com/page/6/
Part 2
https://zizipresscuts.wordpress.com/page/5/
-
Sooo. Crimewatch makes an appeal for witnesses and just a couple of weeks later CMTV does its own exclusive with parentsandfriendswhatdunnit and an expert panel of Amaral, Sargento and Moita Flores.
How exactly is that supposed to advance the search?
-
Ahh. Here we go. A translated transcription of CMTV's "reconstruction".
Part 1
https://zizipresscuts.wordpress.com/page/6/
Part 2
https://zizipresscuts.wordpress.com/page/5/
Good find Carana.
-
It was without doubt very noticeable that Portugal refused to broadcast the BBC Crimewatch programme discounting Tannerman in favour of Smithman, any thoughts on this?
It didn't take them long to do their own version of the reconstruction as was kindly posted by Carana above.
Crimewatch was barely watched by ex-pats in PDL with satellite TV . If they weren’t interested, is it likely the portuguese would be?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Madeleine McCann Crimewatch appeal 'barely watched' in Portuguese village of Praia de Luz
22:00, 14 October 2013
Updated 09:05, 15 October 2013
By Andy Lines
In the village where Maddie disappeared, there was anger over the new influx of media and a desire to "move on" from the events of 2007
PA Apartments at the Ocean Club in Luz in the Algarve, Portugal
There was widespread apathy in Portugal last night as police tried to get Madeleine McCann case back in the spotlight again.
The special BBC Crimewatch programme was not even shown on Portuguese TV.
Only ex-pats with satellite TV or the bars in the quiet village of Praia da Luz had the option of showing the programme.
Most of them didn’t.
Some preferred to show the Northern Ireland Danske Bank football league clash between Portadown and Glenavon.
Others chose to concentrate on their weekly quiz.
The new e-fits were nowhere to be seen.
Ex-pat Paul Patterson said: “It’s not that people don’t want Maddie found - it’s just that it was six years ago and everything has moved on.
“We just want to be left alone - when will it all end?
“I’d be surprised if you found anyone here in Praia da Luz who watched the programme.”
There was growing anger in the town over the influx of media into the town again.
TV crews setting up in the small car park near apartment 5a were asked by one resident ; “why are you dragging all this up again?”
Business here has suffered badly and no-one wants to return to the days following 2007.
Sitting outside The Bull pub across the road from the church where Maddie’s parents Gerry and Kate sought solace one group of expats made it clear it was “enough”.
“We just dont want you here any more,” said Rod Turner.
“Enough is enough - we all have to move on. This TV programme has just made people remember what part Praia da Luz played in the tragedy and we are only recovering slowly even now.
“We are now a place with connotations like Soham Hungerford and Dunblane.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-crimewatch-appeal-barely-2371909
-
Erm... Has anyone found a trace of this in the files?
(GA): I ask my self what is going on in here. I find it all rather enigmatic, particularly since those people (Drs. Katherina and Arul Gaspar) were not interviewed despite being listed in the “rogatory letter”.
Translators’ note: “rogatory letter”: a request by the Portuguese Justice Minister to the British Home Secretary for the Police to interview certain witnesses. The Portuguese authorities submitted their names (Gaspars) and tried to have them re-interviewed in England…
But that person (Dr. Katherina Gaspar) was not questioned because she was not present at the police headquarters when the questioning took place. Rather conveniently, she only arrived (or was made to arrive) after the Portuguese police had already left the premises (…)
-
Erm... Has anyone found a trace of this in the files?
(GA): I ask my self what is going on in here. I find it all rather enigmatic, particularly since those people (Drs. Katherina and Arul Gaspar) were not interviewed despite being listed in the “rogatory letter”.
Translators’ note: “rogatory letter”: a request by the Portuguese Justice Minister to the British Home Secretary for the Police to interview certain witnesses. The Portuguese authorities submitted their names (Gaspars) and tried to have them re-interviewed in England…
But that person (Dr. Katherina Gaspar) was not questioned because she was not present at the police headquarters when the questioning took place. Rather conveniently, she only arrived (or was made to arrive) after the Portuguese police had already left the premises (…)
The statements were sent 24th October 2007.
ETA
Statements dated 16th may 2007.
-
The statements were sent 24th October 2007.
ETA
Statements dated 16th may 2007.
Thanks, but this bit, Anna:
But that person (Dr. Katherina Gaspar) was not questioned because she was not present at the police headquarters when the questioning took place. Rather conveniently, she only arrived (or was made to arrive) after the Portuguese police had already left the premises (…)
I can't find either of them listed in the PT rogatory requests, let alone interviewed in response (April / May 2008).
-
(GA) Yes, where they found the cadaver odour. These are hairs without roots, which the British laboratory (the defunct FSS) said – by analysing its colour – belonged to Madeleine McCann.
Most importantly, they pointed out that nothing – short of being accidentally transported there – would justify their presence in the luggage compartment of the car where the dog detected cadaver odour.
Therefore, I suggest the Policia Judiciária who, as far as I know, still has those hairs; send them to a laboratory competent enough to determine its DNA profile without the need for the hair roots.
At least he's changed his mind... he'd said in other interviews that the FSS had destroyed all the hairs. I've no idea how he had come to that conclusion as there is a receipt slip signed by a PJ officer.
-
GA:
By the way, just before the rounding up of the programme, if I may. I must alert you to a situation that is critically important. The English are particularly fond of the scientific side of an investigation. For them it is not just the indicia, the circumstantial evidence, the incongruences but – the scientific bits (…)
Fascinating stuff. Many thanks to Zizi for the translation.
As it happens, quite a few PT prison inmates would quite like more of the "scientific bits" as well....
A considerable number of inmates claimed that additional
intensive and extensive uses of forensic DNA databases were desirable because
more “scientific tools” might be more protective of their own individual rights,
possibly increasing potential for exoneration or at least protecting them from
illegal and incriminatory police actions such as planting biological evidence in
crime scenes, forcing confessions or using snitches (Machado
et al.
2011,
Machado and Prainsack 2012).
https://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/bitstream/1822/23610/4/Prisoners'%20views%20of%20CSI's%20portrayal%20of%20forensic%20identification%20technologies%20A%20grounded%20assessment.pdf
-
Thanks, but this bit, Anna:
But that person (Dr. Katherina Gaspar) was not questioned because she was not present at the police headquarters when the questioning took place. Rather conveniently, she only arrived (or was made to arrive) after the Portuguese police had already left the premises (…)
I can't find either of them listed in the PT rogatory requests, let alone interviewed in response (April / May 2008).
No request found ...unless I am looking in the wrong place
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RESPONSE-ROGATORY.htm
The statement sent in oct 2007
To: Ricard Paiva
From: DC 1756 Mike MARSHALL
Ref: David Payne
Date: October 24, 2007
Leicester Police Constabulary
Ricardo,
As requested, appended are the statements of Arul and Katherina Gaspar.
"I read carefully the written document/questionnaire provided by David Payne."
but was not able to extricate any other information besides what is already known. He declares that he saw Madeleine, for the last time, at 17H00 on 3/5/07 in the McCann apartment. Also present there were Kate and Gerry. He did not indicate the motive for being there or what he was doing. He also cannot indicate how long he stayed.
When asked with whom he was on the afternoon of May 3rd, he declares that this information was already offered to the police and cannot remember if anyone else was there.
He does not remember what he was wearing that afternoon.
He took part in the searches, having carried out most of them alone. He was at times accompanied by Matthew Oldfield.
He did not partake in the searches realized on the 4th of May, because, on this day, he spent to majority of time in the police headquarters.
For many questions, he does not give a complete response, affirming simply that he has already given this information to the Portuguese police in his declarations.
I examined once again the declarations of Fiona Payne. In her depositions, she states that she went to the McCann apartment, around 19H00, on the 3rd of May, together with Kate. She states afterwards that, 10 minutes later, the husband arrived; it is not clear which husband she refers to.
Her responses to the questions are vague. She continued to respond to questions with "they conform with my earlier deposition" or some similar statement.
3911 to 3915 Witness statement of Katherina Zacharias Gaspar 2007.05.16
TRANSLATIONS BY INES
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/Gaspar.htm
-
I haven't found anything either, Anna.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RESPONSE-ROGATORY.htm
-
(GA) Yes, where they found the cadaver odour. These are hairs without roots, which the British laboratory (the defunct FSS) said – by analysing its colour – belonged to Madeleine McCann.
Most importantly, they pointed out that nothing – short of being accidentally transported there – would justify their presence in the luggage compartment of the car where the dog detected cadaver odour.
Therefore, I suggest the Policia Judiciária who, as far as I know, still has those hairs; send them to a laboratory competent enough to determine its DNA profile without the need for the hair roots.
At least he's changed his mind... he'd said in other interviews that the FSS had destroyed all the hairs. I've no idea how he had come to that conclusion as there is a receipt slip signed by a PJ officer.
I'm reading through the translations in the links you provided just on the first page, Carana, well done for finding them. How could the Portuguese public opinion have been anything other than it was when they have been subject to such unchallenged prejudicial statements from 'experts' such as these?
At the time of broadcast I think it possible that a Portuguese version of the Crimewatch programme would simply have been ignored as the attitudes of the Portuguese 'experts' seemed to prevail.
The resistance apparent at the time of the sad graffiti scrawls when SY started digging suggest they still had a certain validity.
Since then a Portuguese court has ruled in favour of the McCanns and the PJ and SY are demonstrably rubbing along quite well with the investigation.
One wonders if the SY dig were to be repeated if it would meet with the same resistance the last one did?
Back to the transcripts for now.
-
Even many of the moderate sceptics on here might well accept - at least privately - that many of the details simply don't correspond to the files or else don't make much sense.
-
Not a very popular thread...
-
Not a very popular thread...
I wonder why not...? &%+((£
-
Even many of the moderate sceptics on here might well accept - at least privately - that many of the details simply don't correspond to the files or else don't make much sense.
I guess they prefer to do their accepting privately Carana.
-
Not a very popular thread...
Hardly surprising Carana as it gone so off topic that it bears no relation to the question posed in the OP.
-
Hardly surprising Carana as it gone so off topic that it bears no relation to the question posed in the OP.
@)(++(* Carana, perhaps if you started a new thread you'd get a better response - lol.
-
@)(++(* Carana, perhaps if you started a new thread you'd get a better response - lol.
I doubt it, but I was going off the thread title, whoever chose it: Would a Portuguese Crimewatch have helped find Madeleine McCann?
The OP was from Shining, but it may have been a new thread started by Admin.
Would a Portuguese Crimewatch have helped find Madeleine McCann?
« on: September 09, 2015, 08:43:58 AM »
Quote
Does anyone have a view on HOW SY/OG/DCI Nicola Wall should go about getting some sort of equivalent of Crimewatch out in Portugal?
I have been pondering this point for a while, as it seems one way of potentially making major progress in the case.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2015, 02:49:29 AM by Admin »
I don't see what's off topic in discussing the CMTV show that appeared in lieu of the Crimewatch appeal.
-
@)(++(* Carana, perhaps if you started a new thread you'd get a better response - lol.
Any suggestion as to a better title for a new thread?
Maybe "dogs" could be worked into it somehow... &%+((£
-
I doubt it, but I was going off the thread title, whoever chose it: Would a Portuguese Crimewatch have helped find Madeleine McCann?
The OP was from Shining, but it may have been a new thread started by Admin.
Would a Portuguese Crimewatch have helped find Madeleine McCann?
« on: September 09, 2015, 08:43:58 AM »
Quote
Does anyone have a view on HOW SY/OG/DCI Nicola Wall should go about getting some sort of equivalent of Crimewatch out in Portugal?
I have been pondering this point for a while, as it seems one way of potentially making major progress in the case.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2015, 02:49:29 AM by Admin »
I don't see what's off topic in discussing the CMTV show that appeared in lieu of the Crimewatch appeal.
The thread was pruned from somewhere else by Admin. I was probably off-topic at that time.
The lack of a Portuguese Crimewatch equivalent allied to the CMTV reconstruction in 2013 is motivating me to start broadcasting a small sub-set of topics in Portuguese on my blog.
Therefore, thanks for digging up the CMTV prog and the transcripts in English. It may well move the case forward, which I believe all of us would appreciate.
-
Any suggestion as to a better title for a new thread?
Maybe "dogs" could be worked into it somehow... &%+((£
Maybe a thread to discuss Portuguese media propaganda about the case?
-
The BBC / (SY potentially culpable too) are the ones at fault here, for making no leeway vis a vis their "rules" ...not as if the PT stations asked for a licence to broadcast Eastenders or Coronation Street!!. I wonder why the Mccanns haven't sued them for hampering the search!! Idiots.
-
What would the legal position of the Smith family have been in Portugal had the Crimewatch programme been shown there containing the efits they apparently produced for Oakley Int.? They had made statements as witnesses to the PJ confirming that they were unable to produce efits in May 2007.
-
What would the legal position of the Smith family have been in Portugal had the Crimewatch programme been shown there containing the efits they apparently produced for Oakley Int.? They had made statements as witnesses to the PJ confirming that they were unable to produce efits in May 2007.
Nothing they might lose sleep over I'm sure
-
Nothing they might lose sleep over I'm sure
They didn't lie, then?
-
They didn't lie, then?
I don't know and neither do you, they most probably didn't , why the hell would they? Where do you they LIED?? I think you would have to be insane to come forward with info and then LIE in a huge case like this
-
I don't know and neither do you, they most probably didn't , why the hell would they? Where do you they LIED?? I think you would have to be insane to come forward with info and then LIE in a huge case like this
Is it not inconsistent (and the non-believers do so love their inconsistencies) for 3 people to say they didn't see Smithman's face clearly enough to recall enough detail to produce an efit 3 weeks after the event but to then be able to produce a detailed efit 8 months down the line for a non-police source associated with the McCanns?
How do you think that would have been received by the Portuguese public?
-
Is it not inconsistent (and the non-believers do so love their inconsistencies) for 3 people to say they didn't see Smithman's face clearly enough to recall enough detail to produce an efit 3 weeks after the event but to then be able to produce a detailed efit 8 months down the line for a non-police source associated with the McCanns?
How do you think that would have been received by the Portuguese public?
I have no idea, but we are continuously lectured here about memory and its shifting sands......
what's your theory then?
aNd YES, SOME inconsistencies are ridiculous, others can be explained and I make no apology for noticing either
-
I have no idea, but we are continuously lectured here about memory and its shifting sands......
what's your theory then?
aNd YES, SOME inconsistencies are ridiculous, others can be explained and I make no apology for noticing either
which category do the Smiths inconsistencies fall into?
-
Is it not inconsistent (and the non-believers do so love their inconsistencies) for 3 people to say they didn't see Smithman's face clearly enough to recall enough detail to produce an efit 3 weeks after the event but to then be able to produce a detailed efit 8 months down the line for a non-police source associated with the McCanns?
How do you think that would have been received by the Portuguese public?
Two members of an Irish family made the e-fits according to the Met. They never said this family were named Smith.
What makes you think the Portuguese public care about this case?
-
Two members of an Irish family made the e-fits according to the Met. They never said this family were named Smith.
What makes you think the Portuguese public care about this case?
Are you now suggesting that the 2 efits shown on Crimewatch were not, in fact, the same 2 efits the McCanns had been accused of withholding from the public all those years?
Was there another Irish family, whose details aren't in the files, which reported a sighting the Portuguese investigation didn't follow up?
-
Are you now suggesting that the 2 efits shown on Crimewatch were not, in fact, the same 2 efits the McCanns had been accused of withholding from the public all those years?
Was there another Irish family, whose details aren't in the files, which reported a sighting the Portuguese investigation didn't follow up?
I'm not suggesting anything. The Met said there was a sighting by an Irish family and two members of that family created two e-fits of the same man. They never gave the name of the family. They never said when the e-fits were made. It's highly likely that their name was Smith, but that hasn't been said either by Crimewatch or by the Met.
-
I'm not suggesting anything. The Met said there was a sighting by an Irish family and two members of that family created two e-fits of the same man. They never gave the name of the family. They never said when the e-fits were made. It's highly likely that their name was Smith, but that hasn't been said either by Crimewatch or by the Met.
Indeed, it could have been possible G. However they were recognised by the McCann PIs who produced them
...............................
In 2008, the McCanns used money from their charity fund to hire investigators from a firm called Oakley International, led by former MI5 surveillance officer Henri Exton, to look into the mystery – and they focused on the Smith sighting.
“I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478087/Why-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-E-fits-kept-secret-5-years.html
-
I'm not suggesting anything. The Met said there was a sighting by an Irish family and two members of that family created two e-fits of the same man. They never gave the name of the family. They never said when the e-fits were made. It's highly likely that their name was Smith, but that hasn't been said either by Crimewatch or by the Met.
IMO the Smiths have played a blinder.
They couldn't produce efits to go with their original statements to the PJ.
They could produce efits for a firm of private investigators, which would be inadmissible as evidence under Portuguese law.
They efit they produced was for PI's who have no legal jurisdiction in the UK therefore the Smiths have committed no criminal offence.
One of the efits produced looked like it had walked off the page of GM's passport, so that wasn't the outcome both the PI's & McCanns were anticipating.
If SY finally took the decision to release those efits to the public, safe in the knowledge that GM was not Smithman, they were not compromising the Smiths' legal position in any way.
If the Portuguese media took the decision to release those efits in their country, they would be proving the Smiths to be unreliable & untruthful witnesses, thus undermining their own police force's investigation.
Does that make sense?
-
IMO the Smiths have played a blinder.
They couldn't produce efits to go with their original statements to the PJ.
They could produce efits for a firm of private investigators, which would be inadmissible as evidence under Portuguese law.
They efit they produced was for PI's who have no legal jurisdiction in the UK therefore the Smiths have committed no criminal offence.
One of the efits produced looked like it had walked off the page of GM's passport, so that wasn't the outcome both the PI's & McCanns were anticipating.
If SY finally took the decision to release those efits to the public, safe in the knowledge that GM was not Smithman, they were not compromising the Smiths' legal position in any way.
If the Portuguese media took the decision to release those efits in their country, they would be proving the Smiths to be unreliable & untruthful witnesses, thus undermining their own police force's investigation.
Does that make sense?
This was a group of nine - 5 kids. The Smiths are telling the truth and Aoife saw his face. Seeing that person again could bring it back. Did SY say on CW it was not who Martin Smith said it was in 2007. No way but knowing who he is doesn't solve a case.
-
IMO the Smiths have played a blinder.
They couldn't produce efits to go with their original statements to the PJ.
They could produce efits for a firm of private investigators, which would be inadmissible as evidence under Portuguese law.
They efit they produced was for PI's who have no legal jurisdiction in the UK therefore the Smiths have committed no criminal offence.
One of the efits produced looked like it had walked off the page of GM's passport, so that wasn't the outcome both the PI's & McCanns were anticipating.
If SY finally took the decision to release those efits to the public, safe in the knowledge that GM was not Smithman, they were not compromising the Smiths' legal position in any way.
If the Portuguese media took the decision to release those efits in their country, they would be proving the Smiths to be unreliable & untruthful witnesses, thus undermining their own police force's investigation.
Does that make sense?
They weren't asked to produce e-fits by the PJ because they said they wouldn't recognise the man again.
Jane Tanner's e-fit was publicised by the PJ who didn't produce it. Why would other e-fits be inadmissable?
It is rumoured they produced e-fits for PI's. We don't know if that's true.
The e-fits are said to be of the same man.
How do you know SY were safe in the knowledge the e-fits weren't of GM?
The Potuguese media could easily show the e-fits as 'released by Operation Grange, who say they were produced by two members of an Irish family'. How does that undermine the PJ investigation? One of the e-fits looks like GM as you say. One of the Smiths was 60-80% sure the man he saw was GM, but he didn't base it on his recognition of GM's facial features. That's the real problem with the e-fits. If the Smiths did them, where in the world did they get those features from? Memory or an assumpton of who they saw?
-
They weren't asked to produce e-fits by the PJ because they said they wouldn't recognise the man again.
Jane Tanner's e-fit was publicised by the PJ who didn't produce it. Why would other e-fits be inadmissable?
It is rumoured they produced e-fits for PI's. We don't know if that's true.
The e-fits are said to be of the same man.
How do you know SY were safe in the knowledge the e-fits weren't of GM?
The Potuguese media could easily show the e-fits as 'released by Operation Grange, who say they were produced by two members of an Irish family'. How does that undermine the PJ investigation? One of the e-fits looks like GM as you say. One of the Smiths was 60-80% sure the man he saw was GM, but he didn't base it on his recognition of GM's facial features. That's the real problem with the e-fits. If the Smiths did them, where in the world did they get those features from? Memory or an assumpton of who they saw?
JTs efit did not include facial features. It was an artist's impression of what she saw sideways on from a distance, which amounted to little more than clothing description, height, build & hair colour. This was consistent with the information she supplied in her statement to the PJ and they had done their own artist's impression (which must have been as much use to their investigation as a toddler's drawing).
We know that SY cannot place GM at the Smithman sighting location at the time the Smiths reported in their statements. Even GA conceded that, and attempted to alter the time to as much as 25 minutes later.
The original Portuguese investigation would be undermined because the Smiths did return to Portugal & do a reconstruction of their sighting yet nothing was followed up. A demonstration of why a reconstruction by the Tapas 9, so important to the PJ, would have been pointless.
-
IMO the Smiths have played a blinder.
They couldn't produce efits to go with their original statements to the PJ.
They could produce efits for a firm of private investigators, which would be inadmissible as evidence under Portuguese law.
They efit they produced was for PI's who have no legal jurisdiction in the UK therefore the Smiths have committed no criminal offence.
One of the efits produced looked like it had walked off the page of GM's passport, so that wasn't the outcome both the PI's & McCanns were anticipating.
If SY finally took the decision to release those efits to the public, safe in the knowledge that GM was not Smithman, they were not compromising the Smiths' legal position in any way.
If the Portuguese media took the decision to release those efits in their country, they would be proving the Smiths to be unreliable & untruthful witnesses, thus undermining their own police force's investigation.
Does that make sense?
**Snip
In the United Kingdom, just 10% of composite faces are released to the media.
The remainder are used for internal police enquiries: around half are shown to informants familiar with the appearance of local criminals and another third used for house-to-house enquiries in the hope that it will cue a tentative identification (Kitson, Darnbrough & Shields, 1978).
Inevitably many composites end up neglected in police files or thumb tacked to bulletin boards.
http://www.valentinemoore.co.uk/trv/DVfacialcomposite.pdf
Which seems to suggest another reason why the efits were not released until it suited SY decided they wanted them released to the public domain.
It is apparently procedure to use efits in different ways and sometimes not to release them at all.
There is no set formula or preferred system for getting the information required to construct an image; but I think it would probably be true to say that a prerequisite is that immediately after seeing a person the witness should be capable of recalling features to enable a reconstruction.
The three members of the Smith family whose statements we have seen are on record as stating they were unable to do that.
The descriptions came from somewhere: I for one would be interested in the methodology used to generate memories which could not be recalled in 2007, in the weeks after the event.
-
**Snip
In the United Kingdom, just 10% of composite faces are released to the media.
The remainder are used for internal police enquiries: around half are shown to informants familiar with the appearance of local criminals and another third used for house-to-house enquiries in the hope that it will cue a tentative identification (Kitson, Darnbrough & Shields, 1978).
Inevitably many composites end up neglected in police files or thumb tacked to bulletin boards.
http://www.valentinemoore.co.uk/trv/DVfacialcomposite.pdf
Which seems to suggest another reason why the efits were not released until it suited SY decided they wanted them released to the public domain.
It is apparently procedure to use efits in different ways and sometimes not to release them at all.
There is no set formula or preferred system for getting the information required to construct an image; but I think it would probably be true to say that a prerequisite is that immediately after seeing a person the witness should be capable of recalling features to enable a reconstruction.
The three members of the Smith family whose statements we have seen are on record as stating they were unable to do that.
The descriptions came from somewhere: I for one would be interested in the methodology used to generate memories which could not be recalled in 2007, in the weeks after the event.
That's an interesting piece of information, Brietta.
From that, I would assume that perhaps SY detectives had shown those efits to everyone they interviewed who was in PdL that week and may have been able to identify the person. The negative response necessitated public release.
-
...
If the Portuguese media took the decision to release those efits in their country, they would be proving the Smiths to be unreliable & untruthful witnesses, thus undermining their own police force's investigation.
...
The e-fits were reported and shown in Portuguese media around the time of the Crimewatch prog.
What I can't see is anything significant in Portuguese media linking the e-fits to a phone number to call, or other contact method, in those reports. Or that Smithman is merely someone whom OG would like to eliminate from their enquiries.
-
JTs efit did not include facial features. It was an artist's impression of what she saw sideways on from a distance, which amounted to little more than clothing description, height, build & hair colour. This was consistent with the information she supplied in her statement to the PJ and they had done their own artist's impression (which must have been as much use to their investigation as a toddler's drawing).
We know that SY cannot place GM at the Smithman sighting location at the time the Smiths reported in their statements. Even GA conceded that, and attempted to alter the time to as much as 25 minutes later.
The original Portuguese investigation would be undermined because the Smiths did return to Portugal & do a reconstruction of their sighting yet nothing was followed up. A demonstration of why a reconstruction by the Tapas 9, so important to the PJ, would have been pointless.
No JT couldn't see a face and he morphed into George Harrison. The Smiths passed close not like Tanner. Aoife said they left at 10 so that connects to 10:02/3 sighting time.
-
That's an interesting piece of information, Brietta.
From that, I would assume that perhaps SY detectives had shown those efits to everyone they interviewed who was in PdL that week and may have been able to identify the person. The negative response necessitated public release.
There is so much that we don't know about police procedures and operational matters, Misty, and it allows assumptions to be made.
I had no idea at all that usable efits would be withheld ... and that the percentage not publicised was as high as the research suggests.
I think your suggestion that all avenues had already been pursued is a sound one.
-
JTs efit did not include facial features. It was an artist's impression of what she saw sideways on from a distance, which amounted to little more than clothing description, height, build & hair colour. This was consistent with the information she supplied in her statement to the PJ and they had done their own artist's impression (which must have been as much use to their investigation as a toddler's drawing).
We know that SY cannot place GM at the Smithman sighting location at the time the Smiths reported in their statements. Even GA conceded that, and attempted to alter the time to as much as 25 minutes later.
The original Portuguese investigation would be undermined because the Smiths did return to Portugal & do a reconstruction of their sighting yet nothing was followed up. A demonstration of why a reconstruction by the Tapas 9, so important to the PJ, would have been pointless.
The PJ decided that GM was at the Tapas restaurant at the time of the Smith sighting. If all the statements are read it's clear that the times reported that evening varied widely. We don't know why the PJ reached the conclusion they did.
How should the PJ have followed up the Smith sighting in your opinion, and why does that make a reconstruction pointless?
-
The PJ decided that GM was at the Tapas restaurant at the time of the Smith sighting. If all the statements are read it's clear that the times reported that evening varied widely. We don't know why the PJ reached the conclusion they did.
How should the PJ have followed up the Smith sighting in your opinion, and why does that make a reconstruction pointless?
It would have been useful for the PJ to take the 3 Smith family members to the Dolphin restaurant & Kellys Bar when they were there at the end of May. Staff memories would have been fresher, audit rolls could have produced precise timings for purchases instead of that information not being obtained until the October. If it was important enough to fly the Smiths back to Portugal to assure the PJ it was definitely not RM they saw that night, surely it was equally important to investigate the sighting as fully as possible.
A reconstruction in the case of the Tapas 9 would only have been useful if it could have produced a definitive timeline AND been the focus of jogging local memories to obtain information which had not previously forthcoming. How long did it take for Jenny M to come forward with information about the woman in the purple top acting suspiciously outside block 5 between 8 & 8.30? Would that suspicious woman have featured in the PJ reconstitution?
-
It would have been useful for the PJ to take the 3 Smith family members to the Dolphin restaurant & Kellys Bar when they were there at the end of May. Staff memories would have been fresher, audit rolls could have produced precise timings for purchases instead of that information not being obtained until the October. If it was important enough to fly the Smiths back to Portugal to assure the PJ it was definitely not RM they saw that night, surely it was equally important to investigate the sighting as fully as possible.
A reconstruction in the case of the Tapas 9 would only have been useful if it could have produced a definitive timeline AND been the focus of jogging local memories to obtain information which had not previously forthcoming. How long did it take for Jenny M to come forward with information about the woman in the purple top acting suspiciously outside block 5 between 8 & 8.30? Would that suspicious woman have featured in the PJ reconstitution?
The focus of the inquiry seemed to revolve less around solving what had actually happened to Madeleine McCann or whether she was to be found alive or dead but all about locating and prosecuting a likely suspect.
Once the Smith family failed to identify Robert Murat it seems interest was totally lost in what other evidence might have been found from closer study of their version of events ... the least of which might have been as you suggest, retracing their footsteps of May 3rd.
-
The focus of the inquiry seemed to revolve less around solving what had actually happened to Madeleine McCann or whether she was to be found alive or dead but all about locating and prosecuting a likely suspect.
Once the Smith family failed to identify Robert Murat it seems interest was totally lost in what other evidence might have been found from closer study of their version of events ... the least of which might have been as you suggest, retracing their footsteps of May 3rd.
tHere was no focus, the original inquiry was far ranging up to a pong months later, and it's extremely disingenuous if you to suggest otherwise
-
tHere was no focus, the original inquiry was far ranging up to a pong months later, and it's extremely disingenuous if you to suggest otherwise
Is your predictive text acting up? ... I cannot make sense of what you are saying.
-
Is your predictive text acting up? ... I cannot make sense of what you are saying.
Yes, so sorry, must change my settings, post remains in totality apart from the pong which should have read point! Well spotted
There is no way yu can say the PT police did NOT look for Madeleine, did NOT conduct other massive operations and did not follow up sightings..at least up until they became a little ludicrous lets say
It becomes a little boring and nauseating to read posts that read like Kate and Gerry McCann and co's comments IE the police did nothng and do nothing whilst in their other breath sayng they're very pleased with what police have done and are doing, it's a bit of a joke at best...bit rich too when they left their kids on their own and didn't notice one was abducted for a good while after then go to complain it's someone's else's fault she's not found??? let alone Kate McCann mak veiled accusations to so many in her book! Talk about farming out the guilt to innocents...quite despicable behaviour all in all...NEXT TIME don't leave your BABIES on their OWN out of sight and sound when you go OUT...really is NOT hard to understand...is it?