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

[Benice]

Can we get back to the nitty gritty  here - as this could go round and round forever.

The fact is that the sceptics hold up the telephone record showing the first call was made at 10.41pm  because they want to say 'the McCanns didn't even bother to ring the police untiil that time'   Those that don't agree then produce evidence from the witness files to show that was not the case.

The truth of the matter IMO is that  the McCAnns never rang the police at all, because

(a) they didn't know the number

and

(b) even if they had known the number they could not speak Portuguese.

But, I do believe that Matt did go to reception early on at Gerry's request and asked the receptionist to ring the police.    I believe this because no way would Matt claim to have had  a face to face conversation with the Receptionist if it never happened - as it could be so easily disproved..

Personally I don't think that phone call was made, but Gerry BELIEVED it had been made, and so when the police did not arrive within the time he expected them too - he got Mr. Hill to make, what he thought was ANOTHER call - but which in actual fact may have been  the first call to the police at 10.41.

So yes the sceptics may be right in saying the first call was made at 10.41 but they are wrong to claim that it was because the McCanns could not be bothered to ring them until then.

This is just my opinion - no-one is obliged to agree with it.

[Mrs. B]

Very nicely put, Benice.

 

[Angelo222]

No other witness  ...  not a single one ...  claims to have made a phone call to the police that night, either by landline or mobile 

it is insupportable to insist that someone 'might'  have done so, based on no evidence whatsoever

Well I can give you one Ica.  Jeronimo asked Ricardo to telephone the police.   In fact there is no reason why someone didn't use a mobile telephone to call 112...problem is we will never know.

[Angelo222]

Can we get back to the nitty gritty  here - as this could go round and round forever.

The fact is that the sceptics hold up the telephone record showing the first call was made at 10.41pm  because they want to say 'the McCanns didn't even bother to ring the police untiil that time'   Those that don't agree then produce evidence from the witness files to show that was not the case.

The truth of the matter IMO is that  the McCAnns never rang the police at all, because

(a) they didn't know the number

and

(b) even if they had known the number they could not speak Portuguese.

But, I do believe that Matt did go to reception early on at Gerry's request and asked the receptionist to ring the police.    I believe this because no way would Matt claim to have had  a face to face conversation with the Receptionist if it never happened - as it could be so easily disproved..

Personally I don't think that phone call was made, but Gerry BELIEVED it had been made, and so when the police did not arrive within the time he expected them too - he got Mr. Hill to make, what he thought was ANOTHER call - but which in actual fact may have been  the first call to the police at 10.41.

So yes the sceptics may be right in saying the first call was made at 10.41 but they are wrong to claim that it was because the McCanns could not be bothered to ring them until then.

This is just my opinion - no-one is obliged to agree with it.

ABSOLUTELY!!!   

The receptionist didn't bother his ar.. phoning the police because he thought she would be found hiding somewhere in the grounds and that would make him look like a right tit when the GNR arrived.

If John Hill hadn't arrived on site would he have bothered at all and delayed for another half hour?

[icabodcrane]

No other witness  ...  not a single one ...  claims to have made a phone call to the police that night, either by landline or mobile 

it is insupportable to insist that someone 'might'  have done so, based on no evidence whatsoever

Well I can give you one Ica.  Jeronimo asked Ricardo to telephone the police.   In fact there is no reason why someone didn't use a mobile telephone to call 112...problem is we will never know.

It doesn't matter  if Jeronimo asked  Ricardo to telephone the police  ... what matters is  whether the phone call was actually made 

And with regard to an earlier call to the police by mobile,   what we do know is that no-one claims to have made one

This long thread has, I think, established that it is a myth that police took 50 minutes to an hour to respond to the first call

Can it be logged on the Myth forum now ?

[Mrs. B]

No other witness  ...  not a single one ...  claims to have made a phone call to the police that night, either by landline or mobile 

it is insupportable to insist that someone 'might'  have done so, based on no evidence whatsoever

Well I can give you one Ica.  Jeronimo asked Ricardo to telephone the police.   In fact there is no reason why someone didn't use a mobile telephone to call 112...problem is we will never know.

Precisely, we will never know, we can only assume.

[Benice]

No other witness  ...  not a single one ...  claims to have made a phone call to the police that night, either by landline or mobile 

it is insupportable to insist that someone 'might'  have done so, based on no evidence whatsoever

Well I can give you one Ica.  Jeronimo asked Ricardo to telephone the police.   In fact there is no reason why someone didn't use a mobile telephone to call 112...problem is we will never know.

It doesn't matter  if Jeronimo asked  Ricardo to telephone the police  ... what matters is  whether the phone call was actually made 

And with regard to an earlier call to the police by mobile,   what we do know is that no-one claims to have made one

This long thread has, I think, established that it is a myth that police took 50 minutes to an hour to respond to the first call

Can it be logged on the Myth forum now ?

Can it also be logged that the claim that the McCanns could not be bothered to ring the police until 10.40 is also a myth?

[Admin]

First off, the police have admitted that they did not treat the call as an emergency in the first instance and it was only following the receipt of the second call that they sped to the scene.

In the absence of any mobile telephone records it is not possible to determine when the first call was made to the police or by whom.

If anyone was responsible for a delay it was the receptionist.

[AnneGuedes]

First off, the police have admitted that they did not treat the call as an emergency in the first instance and it was only following the receipt of the second call that they sped to the scene.

In the absence of any mobile telephone records it is not possible to determine when the first call was made to the police or by whom.

If anyone was responsible for a delay it was the receptionist.

Please, where has the police admitted that they didn't treat the call as an emergency ?
Nelson Filipe Pacheco da Costa
02-Processos  Volume II Pages 417-419
Date/Time: 2007/05/07 18H45
G.N.R. Military Personnel
Concerning the issue of the process said;
. In the sequence of facts, he was with the patrol of the GNR that went to the Ocean Club Gardens establishment (situated in Para da Luz) on night of May 03, 2007, with the goal of investigating the circumstances that surrounded the disappearance of a minor, of British nationality, that was installed there temporarily, together with the rest of her more direct family ' knowing these to be, the respective parents, and two siblings, twins, minors, whose name do not need to be clarified;
. Clarifies that the occurrence in question was transmitted to the above referenced patrol via radio, at time when they were located in Odiaxere;
. The patrol of which he took part, and now as a witness, went immediately to the principal reception of the aforementioned establishment, where there was encountered the father of the missing child;

[icabodcrane]

First off, the police have admitted that they did not treat the call as an emergency in the first instance and it was only following the receipt of the second call that they sped to the scene.

In the absence of any mobile telephone records it is not possible to determine when the first call was made to the police or by whom.

If anyone was responsible for a delay it was the receptionist.

The police arrived within 20 minutes of the first call  ( at 22.41pm )  ...  when the second call  was made at 22.52pm they werev already on their way, and arrived less than 10 minutes later

Whether or not someone  'might' have called the police on a mobile phone sometime earlier is entirely speculatory, as there is no evidence whatsover to support that  suggestion

It  is a 'myth'  that the police took 50 minutes or more to respond to the first call,  and it is disappointing that the forum will not acknowlege that

We have a 'Myths'  section,  and this one should certainly be there

[Benice]

First off, the police have admitted that they did not treat the call as an emergency in the first instance and it was only following the receipt of the second call that they sped to the scene.

In the absence of any mobile telephone records it is not possible to determine when the first call was made to the police or by whom.

If anyone was responsible for a delay it was the receptionist.

The police arrived within 20 minutes of the first call  ( at 22.41pm )  ...  when the second call  was made at 22.52pm they werev already on their way, and arrived less than 10 minutes later

Whether or not someone  'might' have called the police on a mobile phone sometime earlier is entirely speculatory, as there is no evidence whatsover to support that  suggestion

It  is a 'myth'  that the police took 50 minutes or more to respond to the first call,  and it is disappointing that the forum will not acknowlege that

We have a 'Myths'  section,  and this one should certainly be there

I wouldn't disagree with that - as long as you will agree that the sceptics' claim that the reason why the first call was not made until 10.40 was because the McCanns could not be bothered to call the police until then is also a myth.  Can we agree on that?

[AnneGuedes]

In the absence of any mobile telephone records it is not possible to determine when the first call was made to the police or by whom.

If anyone was responsible for a delay it was the receptionist.

You believe a colleague and acquaintance's child has been abducted , the poor father sends you out of despair search help close to authorities. You only find a receptionist, but at least he's got a phone and speaks also the language of the authorities. You tell him what happened. He doesn't react. You do nothing, you don't scream, you just stare at him and wait and then finally leave hoping he will call ?
And the famous call made on a cell phone, who made it ? The receptionist ? Why didn't this phone call produce any reaction whereas the 21:41 one produced one ? The GNR thought "Oh, it will be fine" ? And considering nothing went fine, they decided to conceal they had received a first call nobody claims to be, though a register on a cell phone proves the right thing was done ?
 

[icabodcrane]

First off, the police have admitted that they did not treat the call as an emergency in the first instance and it was only following the receipt of the second call that they sped to the scene.

In the absence of any mobile telephone records it is not possible to determine when the first call was made to the police or by whom.

If anyone was responsible for a delay it was the receptionist.

The police arrived within 20 minutes of the first call  ( at 22.41pm )  ...  when the second call  was made at 22.52pm they werev already on their way, and arrived less than 10 minutes later

Whether or not someone  'might' have called the police on a mobile phone sometime earlier is entirely speculatory, as there is no evidence whatsover to support that  suggestion

It  is a 'myth'  that the police took 50 minutes or more to respond to the first call,  and it is disappointing that the forum will not acknowlege that

We have a 'Myths'  section,  and this one should certainly be there

I wouldn't disagree with that - as long as you will agree that the sceptics' claim that the reason why the first call was not made until 10.40 was because the McCanns could not be bothered to call the police until then is also a myth.  Can we agree on that?

Absolutely

There is evidence that the McCanns thought the police had been contacted about 25 minutes before they actually were

[Admin]

First off, the police have admitted that they did not treat the call as an emergency in the first instance and it was only following the receipt of the second call that they sped to the scene.

In the absence of any mobile telephone records it is not possible to determine when the first call was made to the police or by whom.

If anyone was responsible for a delay it was the receptionist.

The police arrived within 20 minutes of the first call  ( at 22.41pm )  ...  when the second call  was made at 22.52pm they werev already on their way, and arrived less than 10 minutes later

Whether or not someone  'might' have called the police on a mobile phone sometime earlier is entirely speculatory, as there is no evidence whatsover to support that  suggestion

It  is a 'myth'  that the police took 50 minutes or more to respond to the first call,  and it is disappointing that the forum will not acknowlege that

We have a 'Myths'  section,  and this one should certainly be there

Hate to point this out but we can't be sure of the time of the first call.  In addition, rightly or wrongly, it is stated that several calls were made to the police.

Can I remind you of the Accommodation managers statement...

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. He added (the receptionist) that he had phoned the GNR post several times and that he had been told that they would arrive when they could but that they were investigating a theft in Odiaxere. The receptionist asked the witness whether he should contact the PSP, to which the witness replied no as this area belongs to the GNR.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR-SANTOS.htm


As John Hill never arrived until after 10.30pm we can only assume that they were in contact by mobile telephone.

[icabodcrane]

First off, the police have admitted that they did not treat the call as an emergency in the first instance and it was only following the receipt of the second call that they sped to the scene.

In the absence of any mobile telephone records it is not possible to determine when the first call was made to the police or by whom.

If anyone was responsible for a delay it was the receptionist.

The police arrived within 20 minutes of the first call  ( at 22.41pm )  ...  when the second call  was made at 22.52pm they werev already on their way, and arrived less than 10 minutes later

Whether or not someone  'might' have called the police on a mobile phone sometime earlier is entirely speculatory, as there is no evidence whatsover to support that  suggestion

It  is a 'myth'  that the police took 50 minutes or more to respond to the first call,  and it is disappointing that the forum will not acknowlege that

We have a 'Myths'  section,  and this one should certainly be there

Hate to point this out but we can't be sure of the time of the first call.

Yes we can

It was made from the Ocean Club reception at 22.41pm

That is the first call to the police that there is any record of and evidence for

'Imagining'  that an earlier call might have been made,  is nothing more than make-believe !