At what time were the police called after Madeleine's disappearance?

[John]

John,  this witness is reporting what someone else told him they had done   ...  it is hearsay, and of no evidential value

Why are you so determined to believe the police took too long to respond to the first call,  when all evidence  (  'hard' evidence )  proves they did not ?

What hard evidence are you referring to icabodcrane?

So suddenly the Accommodation Manager is an unreliable witness because you basically don't like what he has to say in his statement?

I have no doubt whatsoever that the police were telephoned shortly after the discovery that Madeleine had gone missing and most likely from a mobile telephone.  The telephone call recorded as being made from Reception at 10.41pm was much later and a follow up call as a result of Gerry and Matthew pressurising John Hill to phone the GNR again.

The report of this call was passed to the GNR patrol who were already on their way arriving some 15 minutes later so you see the call to the GNR at 10.41 was not the first call otherwise the police would not have been able to travel the distance they did in time to be at the resort by 11pm.

[icabodcrane]

John,  this witness is reporting what someone else told him they had done   ...  it is hearsay, and of no evidential value

Why are you so determined to believe the police took too long to respond to the first call,  when all evidence  (  'hard' evidence )  proves they did not ?

What hard evidence are you referring to icabodcrane?

So suddenly the Accommodation Manager is an unreliable witness because you basically don't like what he has to say in his statement?

The 'hard evidence'  is the phone record from the Ocean Club reception

Witnesses, like the accommodation manager are not  'unreliable'  ...  they are irrelevent !  in this regard, in  as much as what they have to say is  'hearsay'  (  they cannot confirm what someone else  actually did ...  only what they were  told  someone else did  )

[icabodcrane]

John,  this witness is reporting what someone else told him they had done   ...  it is hearsay, and of no evidential value

Why are you so determined to believe the police took too long to respond to the first call,  when all evidence  (  'hard' evidence )  proves they did not ?

I have no doubt whatsoever that the police were telephoned shortly after the discovery that Madeleine had gone missing and most likely from a mobile telephone.

Where is your evidence ?

How can you have 'no doubt whatsoever' when all you are presenting is a theory ...  an 'assumption' ...  that is based on nothing more than hearsay   

Actually,  the  'mobile phone'  part of your theory isn't even based on that  ... it is purely imagined on your part  ( there is not a single witness who claims to have phoned the police on a mobile, or to have seen anyone else do so )

I am baffled as to why you persist with the accusation that the police took 50 minutes to arrive after the first phone call when you have no evidence of any substance to support it   ( whilst continuing to ignore the evidence that proves the contrary )
   

[John]

What hard evidence are you referring to icabodcrane?

So suddenly the Accommodation Manager is an unreliable witness because you basically don't like what he has to say in his statement?

The 'hard evidence'  is the phone record from the Ocean Club reception

Witnesses, like the accommodation manager are not  'unreliable'  ...  they are irrelevent !  in this regard, in  as much as what they have to say is  'hearsay'  (  they cannot confirm what someone else  actually did ...  only what they were  told  someone else did  )

Sorry icabodcrane, all that means is that there was a telephone call made from the land-line to the police at 10.41pm.  It does not prove it was the first call.

A witness who was a Manager irrelevant?  Now you are just being silly.

Vitor Manuel dos Santos

With regard to the date of the disappearance on 3rd May 2007, he remembers that at 22.00/22.15 he received a phone call from the reception, from receptionist Helder, who told him that John Hill was extremely agitated as a child had disappeared and that the GNR had been contacted but had not arrived yet.

[John]

John why have you amended my times in my previous post? The post makes no sense now. If by 10-10.15 Vitor  Manuel da Santos said he was called by Helda from reception and said John Hill was getting agitated because police hadnt arrived, after been called several times, it must mean police were called at least 9.40 if  it took them 20 minutes to get there???? Or earlier if they didnt respond immediately. Which makes no sense either if the alarm was raised after 10pm
 >@@(*&)


Also I dont think it is right that anyones post should be altered, moderated yes, but not altered in meaning, at least not saying why

I will change them back as I see what you are getting at but you have effectively destroyed your own argument because John Hill would have assumed that the GNR patrol would have been around the town whereas we now know that they were 14Km away dealing with another call.  By their own account they were not in any hurry to attend the Ocean club and it was only because of the further radio call to them after 10.41pm that they got their finger out and put the foot down.  (Apologies to anyone who hasn't got English as their first language for the idioms.)

[icabodcrane]

What hard evidence are you referring to icabodcrane?

So suddenly the Accommodation Manager is an unreliable witness because you basically don't like what he has to say in his statement?

The 'hard evidence'  is the phone record from the Ocean Club reception

Witnesses, like the accommodation manager are not  'unreliable'  ...  they are irrelevent !  in this regard, in  as much as what they have to say is  'hearsay'  (  they cannot confirm what someone else  actually did ...  only what they were  told  someone else did  )

Sorry icabodcrane, all that means is that there was a telephone call made from the land-line to the police at 10.41pm.  It does not prove it was the first call.

A witness who was a Manager irrelevant?  Now you are just being silly.

Vitor Manuel dos Santos

With regard to the date of the disappearance on 3rd May 2007, he remembers that at 22.00/22.15 he received a phone call from the reception, from receptionist Helder, who told him that John Hill was extremely agitated as a child had disappeared and that the GNR had been contacted but had not arrived yet.

What the Accomodation manager has to say about contacting the police is  'irrelevent'  ...  heH  did not contact the police ...  and when he relates that someone else told him they  had done so,  it is mere hearsay  (  and of no evidential value )

I can provide not just evidence,  but documented  'proof'  that the first phone call to the police from the Ocean Club reception that night was at 22.41pm

What evidence, or proof,  can you provide to support your claim that an earlier call was made on a mobile phone  ?

[John]

I can provide not just evidence,  but documented  'proof'  that the first phone call to the police from the Ocean Club reception that night was at 22.41pm

How are you going to do that?   

If the journey to Praia da Luz took 20 mins and they were already in the middle of dealing with another call they would not have been able to get to Ocean Club by 11pm had they only found out about the call at about 10.45pm.

Work it out for yourself for heavens sake.

[Matthew Wyse]

I can provide not just evidence,  but documented  'proof'  that the first phone call to the police from the Ocean Club reception that night was at 22.41pm

How are you going to do that?   

If the journey to Praia da Luz took 20 mins and they were already in the middle of dealing with another call they would not have been able to get to Ocean Club by 11pm had they only found out about the call at about 10.45pm.

Work it out for yourself for heavens sake.

All sounds very logical to me mate.   There were many mobile telephones mentioned in the police files but they had no reason to provide itemised lists for staff members. 

[Redblossom]

Well John, you have got me confused, but anyway,  if it is not proved that the Pj were called at 10 pm-10.15 pm or earlier as some of those statements suggest, which is a bit ridiculous that they could have been, if Gerry Mccann says Kate didnt come to the tapas bar until 10.13,  it cant be taken as true

Whats with all the minutes of the hour being recorded anyway? Gerry checked at 9.04, Kate at 10.03... Did he have a speaking clock in his head?

[John]

All this evidence that the police were contacted well before 10.41pm is well and truly mounting up from several sources.  The tapas waiter, Ricardo Oliveira, who served the group on the fateful night also remembers Kate's scream from the balcony just minutes after 10pm.

After a few moments, around 5 or 10 minutes, he heard screaming from the apartment zone and saw a woman on the balcony of 5 A. He did not understand what she was saying. As it was night, and given the distance from the Tapas bar to the apartment, he was not able to determine if there was someone else next to the woman on the balcony. At that moment his colleague, Joe, met up with him and asked the witness to call the police, and that a child has gone missing and could not be found. Immediately afterwards, Joe left toward the street. He does not know who gave this information to Joe but the witness (or his colleague who believes the witness did so) called the reception asking them to inform the police.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICARDO-A-D-L-OLIVEIRA.htm

[icabodcrane]

All this evidence that the police were contacted well before 10.41pm is well and truly mounting up from several sources.  The tapas waiter, Ricardo Oliveira, who served the group on the fateful night also remembers Kate's scream from the balcony just minutes after 10pm.

After a few moments, around 5 or 10 minutes, he heard screaming from the apartment zone and saw a woman on the balcony of 5 A. He did not understand what she was saying. As it was night, and given the distance from the Tapas bar to the apartment, he was not able to determine if there was someone else next to the woman on the balcony. At that moment his colleague, Joe, met up with him and asked the witness to call the police, and that a child has gone missing and could not be found. Immediately afterwards, Joe left toward the street. He does not know who gave this information to Joe but the witness (or his colleague who believes the witness did so) called the reception asking them to inform the police.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICARDO-A-D-L-OLIVEIRA.htm

There is not a single witness who claims to have phoned the police on their mobile that night

Why do you insist that one of them must  have ?

You  are making an unsubstanciated  'guess'  ...  nothing more

[Redblossom]

It is a bit of a dogs dinner isnt it

[registrar]

It is a bit of a dogs dinner isnt it

coconut ice cream perchance?

[icabodcrane]

It is a bit of a dogs dinner isnt it

The only  'evidence'  to support the claim that the police were contacted  before the first call was logged at 22'41pm,  is that people were running around  assuming  that they had been called  ...  but none of them having done so themselves

[John]

It is a bit of a dogs dinner isnt it

The only  'evidence'  to support the claim that the police were contacted  before the first call was logged at 22'41pm,  is that people were running around  assuming  that they had been called  ...  but none of them having done so themselves

That is not true icabodcrane so please stop creating myths.  I have already pointed out to you that the police had to have been contacted well before 10.40pm in order to have arrived by 11pm.  This in itself is evidence and evidence by the Portuguese police so please stop posting that there is no evidence of an earlier call.

Evidence comes from many sources both direct and indirect, it is the job of an investigator to interpolate that evidence and fit it together to create a full picture.  Harping on about a telephone call at 11.41pm is only evidence of a telephone call.  It is not evidence of it being the first, the last, the 5th, 6th, or 7th that was made to police that night.

To be absolutely honest, it is bloody stupid to suggest that it took 40 minutes for anyone to call the police when a child had disappeared in such circumstances.  If it had been my child I would have telephoned them within 10 to 15 minutes of the discovery having made a cursory search of the immediate area.

I will also add that it is very clear that the telephone records of who telephoned who that night are far from complete.