As a matter of interest, do you believe this witness?
The document is in Spanish, dated to 1 Nov 2007. She didn't bother telling the Portuguese police. She didn't bother telling the Leicestershire police, but she felt the need to pass this info to the Spanish 7 months after Madeleine disappeared.
The document seems a bit muddled on dates. The only way I can make sense of an Aug/Sep 2006 date is by changing it so that she was working for 6 months up to Oct 2006, not from Oct 2006.
She now remembers an event that took place in 5A on a Thursday night but can't remember if it was in August or September.
The parents were out at the tennis night. It was 00:30, and they were not back.
Worried about rats, Margaret popped her head out the main entrance. (Why? Were the rats around there so noisy one could hear them, or did Margaret randomly check for rats?)
By the movement sensitive lights she saw a brown object move. (Neither Margaret nor the 'rat' had moved enough to switch on the light.)
When she looked closer she saw the rat was a man, who then moved (again) this time setting on the movement sensitive lights.
Then from the words "No, no" she could deduce that he was Portuguese.
She told her supervisor, who passed it on to John Hall. The supervisor is not named. However, Margaret is privy to the information that both were worried about rats. Why were they worried about rats, given that Margaret had not seen a rat?
John Hill makes no mention of this lurking man in his statement. Who knows, perhaps SY got him back in to ask him about it (oh and the entire set of lost keys he never mentioned). Perhaps Margaret's supervisor was Donna Hill, and SY hauled her in for the same reason.
No one in the T9 mentions a movement sensitive light, though if one had been disabled, they might well not have noticed it.
No one who was interviewed on the basis that they had previously occupied 5A mentions such a light. Again, if it was disabled, perhaps they did not notice it.
Why, if there was a motion sensitive light near 5A, did they not repair it, as opposed to tacking a floodlight on block 5 months or years later?
Margaret's tale is in my red herrings folder.
I find Margaret Hall's statement no more credible or incredible than anything else which is in the public domain.
According to Margaret Hall she spoke to Metodo3 who contacted the PJ because she had heard nothing from her local police to whom she had reported the incident.
I presume she spoke to them in English and they transcribed her information into Spanish (if there is no translation into Portuguese it rather suggests that no-one from the investigation bothered to read it).
If Margaret Hall had not been employed in the capacity she stated … why has no -one come forward to share that information with us?
The fact that John Hill failed to mention rats is not in the least surprising ~ he didn't mention the very recent burglaries in the block either.
In the tabloid article to which Margaret hall contributed, she stated that she was on her way home, was so unnerved by the encounter that she ran back to the apartment and had to be escorted home.
All easily verifiable … and would have been worth the police checking it out, I think, particularly as she says she had a clear view of his face.
**snip
Margaret yesterday told the Mirror she saw the prowler hiding in the dark as she left through the back entrance after baby-sitting at apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, the year before Maddy was taken from the apartment.
She screamed in terror as the unshaven figure stepped out.
His movement set off a security light and the nanny clearly saw his face. "He came towards me saying 'no, no'. I just turned round and ran back to the apartment," she said.
Shaking with fear, she was later led back to her own flat.
**snip
She was back in the UK when she heard of Maddy's disappearance in May last year - and a chill ran down her spine when she realised the little girl had been taken from the apartment where she had worked.
Her mind immediately pictured the scruffy, long-haired stranger.
She told police in her home town of Bolton and was interviewed but no photofit was ever issued.
**snip
After hearing nothing from the police in the UK, she went straight to Metodo 3, the private investigators working for Kate and Gerry.
They passed her information to Portuguese police, who dismissed it as being "out-dated".
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-nannys-new-sketch-329189Margaret Hall did not make claims on his nationality from “No! No!” in the same Mirror article she says,
"He had said 'no' in English but he was not English because of his skin colouring. He looked more Portuguese than anything."
As I said no more and no less credible than any other statement given in good faith ... but with at least two opportunities for confirmation ...
(a) a check with the people she was babysitting for if she had returned, and whoever escorted her home
(b) did her bosses remember the rat incident
I seem to remember also that a previous occupant of 5A had complained about an outside light not working or being broken ... I cannot find a cite for it, maybe someone can help? ... the motion sensitive light mentioned by Margaret hall was my interest in this ... wonder if this was the broken light I remember being mentioned?
No it wasn't ... the light I read about was the one at the front door ... that would be another point for verification of Margaret Hall's statement ... was there a motion sensitive light in the back area of the apartment?
**snip
We would always enter and leave the apartment through the main door with gave way to the parking area and the street. We did not use the pool-side doors as it was not possible to close them from the outside. It was get very dark outside our door and that left us a bit scared. The darkness was due to a faulty/wasted bulb. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLO-D_AMBROSIO.htm
