Pamela Fenn

[ferryman]

Tacked on right at the end of Mrs Fenn's interview (incidentally conducted on 20 August, nearly 4 months after Madeleine's abduction) is a little-quoted part, about the entirely separate crime of which Mrs Fenn was, herself, a victim:

When questioned she [Mrs Fenn] said that she never saw any strange person or action before or after the event. She claims however, that a week previously she was the victim of an attempted robbery, which was not successful and neither was anything taken, thinking that the crying of the child could be linked to another attempted robbery in the residence.

Is it standard police practice to roll separate and unrelated incidents into a single interview?

[Carana]

Tacked on right at the end of Mrs Fenn's interview (incidentally conducted on 20 August, nearly 4 months after Madeleine's abduction) is a little-quoted part, about the entirely separate crime of which Mrs Fenn was, herself, a victim:

When questioned she [Mrs Fenn] said that she never saw any strange person or action before or after the event. She claims however, that a week previously she was the victim of an attempted robbery, which was not successful and neither was anything taken, thinking that the crying of the child could be linked to another attempted robbery in the residence.

Is it standard police practice to roll separate and unrelated incidents into a single interview?

No idea. Did she report it? If so, who would she have reported it to? The GNR? If so, were any kind of forensic tests taken? If so, did this feed into the PJ analysis? If so, what were the results?

Ditto for the other reported burglaries in the vicinity.

[faithlilly]

Hmmm. My understanding coincides with Martha's on this one (I think).


She'd heard a child crying from the floor below, who was not an infant in her opinion, but had never stated that it was Madeleine.

Was the press allegation that she'd stated that it was Madeleine what she was unhappy with?

What Mrs Fenn said is that she hadn't talked to the press and as the case was under judicial secrecy at the time it was indeed wise for her to state this publically.

[ferryman]

Tacked on right at the end of Mrs Fenn's interview (incidentally conducted on 20 August, nearly 4 months after Madeleine's abduction) is a little-quoted part, about the entirely separate crime of which Mrs Fenn was, herself, a victim:

When questioned she [Mrs Fenn] said that she never saw any strange person or action before or after the event. She claims however, that a week previously she was the victim of an attempted robbery, which was not successful and neither was anything taken, thinking that the crying of the child could be linked to another attempted robbery in the residence.

Is it standard police practice to roll separate and unrelated incidents into a single interview?

No idea. Did she report it? If so, who would she have reported it to? The GNR? If so, were any kind of forensic tests taken? If so, did this feed into the PJ analysis? If so, what were the results?

Ditto for the other reported burglaries in the vicinity.

Yes, she reported it.  This was reported on 18 August:

In a new development, a British expat has come forward with dramatic new evidence.

Pamela Fenn said a man broke into her flat above the McCanns' holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, on the Algarve, just weeks before Madeleine disappeared.

There was no sign of a break-in and it is thought the intruder may have had a key.

Mrs Fenn, who is in her 70s, found the man scrambling out of the window and tried to grab his ankle. But he escaped.

She reported the incident to Portuguese police but they did not question her again.

The information only resurfaced after British police reviewed the case two weeks ago. Mrs Fenn will now be formally interviewed for the first time on Monday.

[ferryman]

Hmmm. My understanding coincides with Martha's on this one (I think).


She'd heard a child crying from the floor below, who was not an infant in her opinion, but had never stated that it was Madeleine.

Was the press allegation that she'd stated that it was Madeleine what she was unhappy with?

What Mrs Fenn said is that she hadn't talked to the press and as the case was under judicial secrecy at the time it was indeed wise for her to state this publically.

Mrs Fenn said she had no clue a family had moved in to the holiday apartment.

And she spoke to the press to say it.

That's why they reported what she said ...

[Carana]

Hmmm. My understanding coincides with Martha's on this one (I think).


She'd heard a child crying from the floor below, who was not an infant in her opinion, but had never stated that it was Madeleine.

Was the press allegation that she'd stated that it was Madeleine what she was unhappy with?

What Mrs Fenn said is that she hadn't talked to the press and as the case was under judicial secrecy at the time it was indeed wise for her to state this publically.

Mrs Fenn said she had no clue a family had moved in to the holiday apartment.

And she spoke to the press to say it.

That's why they reported what she said ...

As I pointed out earlier, what she actually said to the paper was that she had no idea that THAT family had moved into the apartment below her, meaning the McCanns.  She must've realised there was someone staying there because it is from there that she claimed she heard the child crying.

That's how I understood it as well, Martha. In the context.

[ferryman]

It is semantic sophistry to suggest Mrs Fenn might have meant a family had moved in, but not that family ...

[Carana]

It is semantic sophistry to suggest Mrs Fenn might have meant a family had moved in, but not that family ...

Not necessarily.

What was the press saying at the time?


What was she objecting to?

[Carana]

I happen to agree with Martha on this point.

[AnneGuedes]

Hmmm. My understanding coincides with Martha's on this one (I think).


She'd heard a child crying from the floor below, who was not an infant in her opinion, but had never stated that it was Madeleine.

Was the press allegation that she'd stated that it was Madeleine what she was unhappy with?

That's how I understand it. Remember on some documentary how abruptly she shuts her door to some journalist. Mrs Fenn was a discreet and fair person, she hated gossip and this is why I wish I hadn't read Kate McCann's unpleasant comment in "Madeleine".
Now I'm really amazed somebody gives credit to a tabloid ! Sometimes right, sometimes wrong, how will you know without losing time ?

[faithlilly]

Hmmm. My understanding coincides with Martha's on this one (I think).


She'd heard a child crying from the floor below, who was not an infant in her opinion, but had never stated that it was Madeleine.

Was the press allegation that she'd stated that it was Madeleine what she was unhappy with?

That's how I understand it. Remember on some documentary how abruptly she shuts her door to some journalist. Mrs Fenn was a discreet and fair person, she hated gossip and this is why I wish I hadn't read Kate McCann's unpleasant
comment in "Madeleine".
Now I'm really amazed somebody gives credit to a tabloid ! Sometimes right, sometimes wrong, how will you know without losing time ?

Mrs Fenn's denial is on camera so there really should be no question regarding what she said.

[Carana]

Hmmm. My understanding coincides with Martha's on this one (I think).


She'd heard a child crying from the floor below, who was not an infant in her opinion, but had never stated that it was Madeleine.

Was the press allegation that she'd stated that it was Madeleine what she was unhappy with?

That's how I understand it. Remember on some documentary how abruptly she shuts her door to some journalist. Mrs Fenn was a discreet and fair person, she hated gossip and this is why I wish I hadn't read Kate McCann's unpleasant comment in "Madeleine".
Now I'm really amazed somebody gives credit to a tabloid ! Sometimes right, sometimes wrong, how will you know without losing time ?

Aside from that, what do you think about the idea that she could have been re-interviewed to clear up some details?

I find some loose ends.

[ferryman]

Ferryman, surely you can see the difference in meaning between these two sentences?

"I didn't even know that family was in there."

"I didn't even know a family was in there".

Mrs Fenn said the former statement according to the Mail, but you have attributed the latter statement to her.

If she knew a family was in there, it would defy logic or common sense for her to issue a denial about knowing the exact identity of the family she knew was in there.

She was (expecting to be) interviewed about the crime of which she was victim and which she reported.

In the rendering we read on line, that crime gets a mention (just) right at the end of an interview that purports to be about Madeleine ...

[Carana]

Ferryman, surely you can see the difference in meaning between these two sentences?

"I didn't even know that family was in there."

"I didn't even know a family was in there".

Mrs Fenn said the former statement according to the Mail, but you have attributed the latter statement to her.

If she knew a family was in there, it would defy logic or common sense for her to issue a denial about knowing the exact identity of the family she knew was in there.

She was (expecting to be) interviewed about the crime of which she was victim and which she reported.

In the rendering we read on line, that crime gets a mention (just) right at the end of an interview that purports to be about Madeleine ...

I'm not sure I'm following.

I'd agree that she was not happy about being a subject of media interest.


Hardly surprising as she lived just above.

On a more mundane issue, why was she not interviewed until 20 August?

[ferryman]

I'm not sure I'm following.

Follow what?