Slarti's Simple Solution.

[Carana]

No confusion over which door he meant, though - the one that needed a key.

Gerry was the first witness that morning. There is no indication that the officer taking notes had a clue about the layout of the flat. There would (or should) have been some initial discussion in order to understand the situation. The person they got to interpret wouldn't have had a clue either. The interpreter and / or officer may well have scribbled notes on paper and all it takes is a mistake in confusing the front and rear entrances and hey presto you have Gerry entering via the long way around with a key.

If the officer had stopped to think about it, he could have asked why Gerry would have taken the longer route to go in, then gone out via the patio, and the matter could have been clarified straight away.

The initial statements were hardly in depth - at that stage, there was a rush to conduct as many interviews as fast as possible.

[jassi]

Gerry was the first witness that morning. There is no indication that the officer taking notes had a clue about the layout of the flat. There would (or should) have been some initial discussion in order to understand the situation. The person they got to interpret wouldn't have had a clue either. The interpreter and / or officer may well have scribbled notes on paper and all it takes is a mistake in confusing the front and rear entrances and hey presto you have Gerry entering via the long way around with a key.

If the officer had stopped to think about it, he could have asked why Gerry would have taken the longer route to go in, then gone out via the patio, and the matter could have been clarified straight away.

The initial statements were hardly in depth - at that stage, there was a rush to conduct as many interviews as fast as possible.

And equally may have made concise notes.

[Carana]

And equally may have made concise notes.

Why do you think Gerry would have lied?

[jassi]

Why do you think Gerry would have lied?

Who said he lied?  Poor man must have been confused, what with all that was going on.

[stephen25000]

Who said he lied?  Poor man must have been confused, what with all that was going on.

Very confused................... %&5%£

[Carana]

Who said he lied?  Poor man must have been confused, what with all that was going on.

It's not impossible that Gerry himself was the source of confusion, but I find that less likely than the interpreter / officer getting muddled.

Some are convinced that he lied (possibly not you).

I see no reason for him to have lied. It's not as if he was trying to make the flat sound more secure than it was when in the same statement he said that he went out via the patio door.

[Benice]

If Gerry had gone in via the front door - he would have had to explain to the PJ why on earth he would decide to walk past the patio doors only a few yards away and take the much longer way round - especially if he needed the loo,

He'd already said the patio doors were unlocked - so why would he make such a ridiculous claim - for which IMO no sensible explanation exists.     If the PJ officer interviewing him had picked up on that at the time - and asked  Gerry why he went the long way round then IMO it would all have been cleared up there and then.

The previous confusion caused by some people describing the patio doors as the 'front door' and the door overlooking the car park as the 'back door' was mentioned by the police officer interviewing JT.  Therefore it was decided to call the patio doors the 'poolside door' and the wooden door the 'roadside door' to avoid any further similar confusion.

It may be true that Gerry did say he came in by the 'front door' - but he was referring to the patio doors - but the PJ officer interviewing him didn't realise that during that first interview.  (understandable IMO)

If there was anything suspicious or unusual in the reason Gerry gave for correcting his statement - then surely that reason would have been recorded in the second statement.   

AIMO

[G-Unit]

If Gerry had gone in via the front door - he would have had to explain to the PJ why on earth he would decide to walk past the patio doors only a few yards away and take the much longer way round - especially if he needed the loo,

He'd already said the patio doors were unlocked - so why would he make such a ridiculous claim - for which IMO no sensible explanation exists.     If the PJ officer interviewing him had picked up on that at the time - and asked  Gerry why he went the long way round then IMO it would all have been cleared up there and then.

The previous confusion caused by some people describing the patio doors as the 'front door' and the door overlooking the car park as the 'back door' was mentioned by the police officer interviewing JT.  Therefore it was decided to call the patio doors the 'poolside door' and the wooden door the 'roadside door' to avoid any further similar confusion.

It may be true that Gerry did say he came in by the 'front door' - but he was referring to the patio doors - but the PJ officer interviewing him didn't realise that during that first interview.  (understandable IMO)

If there was anything suspicious or unusual in the reason Gerry gave for correcting his statement - then surely that reason would have been recorded in the second statement.   

AIMO

I think it's perfectly clear. The key was mentioned twice on 4th; there was no key for the patio doors. The PJ questioned him on 10th about changing which door he had used and he accepted that he had changed it;

In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked,

At about 22.00 it was his wife Kate who went to check on the children. She entered the apartment by the door using the key
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm


Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE by the rear door which he consequently closed but did not lock given that that is only possible from the inside. Referring to the front door, while he is certain that it was closed it is unlikely that it was locked as [because] they had left by the rear door.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

[Carana]

I think it's perfectly clear. The key was mentioned twice on 4th; there was no key for the patio doors. The PJ questioned him on 10th about changing which door he had used and he accepted that he had changed it;

In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked,

At about 22.00 it was his wife Kate who went to check on the children. She entered the apartment by the door using the key
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm


Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE by the rear door which he consequently closed but did not lock given that that is only possible from the inside. Referring to the front door, while he is certain that it was closed it is unlikely that it was locked as [because] they had left by the rear door.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

Previous statements (plural?)

There was only one prior to that.

Is a PJ officer likely to state that there had been a misunderstanding by him/her self or another colleague in the initial one?

[faithlilly]

Previous statements (plural?)

There was only one prior to that.

Is a PJ officer likely to state that there had been a misunderstanding by him/her self or another colleague in the initial one?

Is Gerry likely to sign a statement which admits it was his mistake if it wasn't ?

[G-Unit]

Previous statements (plural?)

There was only one prior to that.

Is a PJ officer likely to state that there had been a misunderstanding by him/her self or another colleague in the initial one?

Official and unofficial statements perhaps. Blame the PJ? They sure have a lot to answer for according to some.

[Carana]

Is Gerry likely to sign a statement which admits it was his mistake if it wasn't ?

Have you found anything that would indicate that the non-Portuguese readers were able to read through a written statement in their native language?

I haven't.

[jassi]

As a trained medic, Gerry doesn't seem the sort who would put his signature to something he didn't understand.

[Carana]

As a trained medic, Gerry doesn't seem the sort who would put his signature to something he didn't understand.

He and the PJ wanted to get the ball rolling to help find his missing daughter.

This isn't about signing off a written cardiovascular report by a colleague in a hospital context in a language that he was able to review.

[mercury]

Previous statements (plural?)

There was only one prior to that.

Is a PJ officer likely to state that there had been a misunderstanding by him/her self or another colleague in the initial one?

How does someone who is bilingual misunderstand opening a locked door with a key when entered via an unlocked door was supposedly said? Where did they pluck the word key from ? Aren't you in danger of blaming the police /translators for every witness statement  inconsistency? IMO there's two options...he lied or he was confused