27 Jul 2009

Letter to the Attorney General regarding investigation details GERRY FOR CHANCELLOR!!

Found this on 3As and rolling on the floor laughing the proverbial off! Love the paypal button it could be a new way of paying our taxes to Saint Gerry and how he looks so erm, short arsed. I mean he may even go Tory, given they are likely to get in and he was so keen on the rather repulsive and now disgraced MuckMillan Scott.AND MORE SERIOUSLY Letter to the Attorney General regarding investigation translated from PJ file by BY ALBYM/PAMALAM (there is a bit more not reproduced here on Pamalam's page. )


This is damning against Kate and Gerry in failing to adequately protect their children and effectively blames the T7 for failing to allow the McCanns to clear themselves of any possible involvement by failing to attend the reconstruction. One can hazard a guess why the McCanns did not want them to do that!

It confirms there was overall a lack of evidence as to precisely what crime had been committed from a selection of possibilities to enable any accusations to be made against them, but concludes it is more likely Madeleine died. xx

I am sure that as educated and sensible people, the McCanns are simply heartbroken that they allowed themselves and numerous others to completely compromise, well I mean utterly trash, the crime scene preventing any forensic traces of Madeleine's, ahem, abduction being recovered from the scene. What a terrible thing to have to live with eh? And then they went and signed Madeleine's death warrant by advertising her eye defect against police advice. As Gerry said, it was a very good marketing ploy. I suppose one has to get one's priorities in order. Perfectly understandable behaviour.

I was watching an American crime programme earlier. Guilty parents apparently hold hands all the time to protect each other. Innocent parents who lost their child find the grief of that drives them apart. So it was good to see Kate still hanging on tightly to Gerry recently on Oprah. I am sure she must have caused Oprah to shed real tears at her obvious distress. Maybe Oprah will dip into her reported billions and top the Fund up for them? What do you think the chances are of that? Well Kate and Gerry will be rushing to tell us all about it, won't they?


From the items that comprise the case file this first conclusion stands out:When the GNR officers arrived at the place several people had already touched the window and entered the bedroom of Madeleine and her siblings and, later, when the PJ arrived at the apartment to recover trace evidence, the place was already laid open to the public and contaminated by the entrance of all those people and by the fact of all [everything] having been touched, consequently rendering impractical, due to this, the collection of items important to the investigation.

In the drama of the moment, no-one – parents, friends, management and staff of the resort – had the coldness [objectivity] and the lucidity [clear-mindedness] to preserve the crime scene, impeding through that laying open to the public and contamination of the trace evidence that was there, when it is common knowledge that any person should preserve the scenes of a crime – not least in terms of the law Article 171(2) of the CPP – thereby avoiding erasure or alteration of trace evidence, by which action [the impeding] the collected evidence would have already lost much of its evidential value. Given the scarcity of probative items recovered in that first phase, such as the unique fingerprints recovered with the necessary number of points to make a positive identification, which were found to be of the mother and a GNR officer (pages 885 and 1520), it was shown to have been impractical, due to that [failure to preserve], to recover items important to the investigation.

Only with the arrival of the PJ, about 00h10, in response to a request for them, did conditions suitable for the collection of trace evidence and preservation of the location commence.Resulta também dos autos que, não obstante o Infantário do Empreendimento "Ocean Club"

It follows also from the papers, notwithstanding the complementary “dining out service” provided by the Ocean Club nursery staff from 19h30 to 23h30 and, for additional cost, the babysitting service for a defined time[22], the group of friends with children, while dining, opted to check their own children by themselves; initially each couple alternated among themselves to check their own children and after some days they were asking one of the persons who stood up to listen for any noise at their apartment, as referred to by JT in her statement of 10-5-2007[23], with the exception of DP and FP who possessed a communications system to monitor their children LP and SP.[22] Inquiry paper pages 221 and 226[23] Inquiry paper pages 922/923

It is extracted [comes forth] from the papers that the McCanns and their friends made visits to see that all was well with their children, as occurred according to what was declared by the members of this group and derived also from the deposition of JTRS, a Tapas waiter[24], who stated “I understood, because it was clear, that some of the group members went regularly to the outside of the restaurant to do something, which little by little it became my understanding that it was <> the children. Nevertheless, I was always convinced that those children were in a space [room] owned by the Luz Ocean Club ...”[24] Inquiry papers page 236

Moreover, it also flowed [came] from the papers that this periodic vigilance, referred to above, not [??] in the papers, which leave [fail] to explain why, on that night the procedures had been altered in the sense that the times of the visits were shorter.

In effect, this group of friends enjoyed a short holiday, totally relaxed and, while dining and having live entertainment[25], there were, during that dinner period, few concerns about anything that could happen to their children.That such was so, it is Kate who says that in the morning of Thursday, 3 May, Madeleine questioned her about the reason she [Kate] had not gone to her [Madeleine's] bedroom when the twins had cried [26], the same [story] also being told by Gerald.[25] The witness NAJOUA CHEKAYA (page 798) refers that she was asked by the OC to host a quiz game twice a week (Tuesday and Sunday) at the Tapas restaurant.[26] Inquiry papers page 59

.Also Pamela Fenn, who lives on the 1st floor of the residential block, above the apartment that was occupied by the McCann family, clarified that on 1 May 2007, two days before the disappearance, about 22h30, heard a child crying, that by the sound could have been Madeleine and that the crying went on for an hour and fifteen minutes, until the parents arrived, about 23h45.

It is noted that the parents were not persistently worried about the children in that they did not make their check as they later declared, before they neglected, although not reckless[ly] nor grossly, the duty to protect those same children.

If such duty to protect had been observed, in the hypothesis of it having been an abduction, as insistently referred to and continues to be referred to and it is possible that it had happened, its occurrence could have been possibly impracticable [infeasible].

It adds further that, when Kate, after having found that the window and the external blinds were open and Madeleine had disappeared, made her way to the Tapas restaurant to ask for help, giving to understand that it had been an abduction, it is incomprehensible or only comprehensible due to a state of panic, that she had newly abandoned, this time only the twins, whilst the Tapas was sufficiently close [for her] to scream for help – MO places weight on it being so when referring [27] that from the restaurant table there was enough visibility, though tenuous considering the distance to the apartments and that the vision was prejudiced by a transparent tarpaulin that covered the area in which the table was located.[27] Inquiry papers page 914

Finally, without plausible explanation there remains the fact that, notwithstanding all the confusion and all the noise, the twins had continued to sleep, as referred to by the GNR officer, JMBR, member of the patrol that first arrived at the apartment “the children never woke up, lying on their stomachs, not having moved during the search and after it”[28]. However, a team from the LPC, on 4-5-2007, failed to trace the existence of any substance that could have been administered to the disappeared [child] to put her into a state of unconsciousness and [or] the presence of traces of blood.[28] Inquiry papers page

It follows also, conversely, that none of the parents were in the apartment when Madeleine disappeared and that their behaviour up to the moment of the disappearance was perfectly normal, not having manifested [displayed] any type of concern or other similar sentiment, contrary to what happened after that moment in that it [their behaviour] was well known to have turned into panic.

. If is an incontrovertible fact that Madeleine disappeared from apartment 5A of the Ocean Club, it is not the same with [the same cannot be said for] the manner or the circumstances in which it occurred – notwithstanding the large volume of work done to that purpose – the fan [spread/array] of crimes indicated and referred to throughout the Inquiry keeping themselves [remaining] untouchable.

It appears evident to us and because the official papers have sufficient items for such, from this fan the crime of exposure and abandonment, as per Article 138 of the Penal Code, can be eliminated.

This legal type of crime only occurs when filled with intent, it having to include the creation of danger to the life of the victim, as well as the absence of capacity to defend oneself on the part of the victim. Now, in the case of the [these] papers and in the face of the items recovered it is manifest [clear] that neither of the arguidos GM or KH acted with [such] intent. The parents could not foresee that in the village [resort] in which they had chosen to spend their holidays they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was such [foresight] expected of them: it [the holiday] was in a peaceful place, where the majority of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality [as the parents] and without any known history of criminality of this kind.

The parents did not come [close] even to describe [show] the realisation of the fact [how it was done], they confirmed that everything had gone well, as had already happened on previous nights, not setting out, nor was this expected of them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children in bed in their respective apartments.

To reinforce what was said it is still the fact of [that] although they left the girl alone with her siblings in the apartment for more or less dilated [extended] periods, it is certain that in every case they [the various parents] checked them [their children]. Without any pretension or compensatory effect [counterbalance/extenuation], we should also recognise that the parents are already paying a heavy penalty – the disappearance of Madeleine – due to the carelessness [negligence] in the vigilance and protection of the children.

The above paragraph does not make complete sense to me, so – until a Portuguese speaker can translate it correctly - I will give an interpretation of what I think it is saying, i.e. that the other identified crimes cannot apply or carry legal weight and, while there is a high probability of there having been a homicide that charge cannot be supported by the sparse evidence contained in the case file.

The non-involvement of the arguido parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant activity appears to result from the objective circumstances of them not having been in the apartment at the time of her disappearance, their behaviour having been normal [both] before this disappearance and afterwards, as amply shown in the witness statements, phone communication analyses and also the work of the experts, principally from the FSS and INML reports.

To this is added that, in reality, none of the indications used to make them arguidos were later strengthened or confirmed. But, we see: the information in the early press alert, in disregard of the police, was not proven, the laboratory ratification of the traces indicated by the dogs was not confirmed and the initial indications of the above [FSS] e-mail, better clarified afterwards, came to reveal themselves as [proved] innocuous.

Although, by hypothesis, it is admitted that GM and KH could have been responsible for the death of the child, it always remains to be explained how, where, when, by what means, with whose help and where did they liberate [get rid of] the body in the short space of time they had at their disposal. It adds that their daily routine up to 3 May confined itself to the strict limits of the Ocean Club resort and to the beach adjacent to it, not knowing the surrounding area and, outside of the English friends with whom they 'summered' [spent the summer with] there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal

17 Jul 2009


Is that a rhetorical question?I have just read in the DVD file the police did not just find stains on the walls and floor but also on the back of the sofa. If it is any consolation to you that makes me feel it much more likely that Maddie did die there, where both the dogs marked, but I have tried to explain there is still not enough evidence to charge them. That does not mean we should let them off the hook. But I think it does mean it will be much more difficult for the police to obtain any better evidence and so in that respect, it is a disappointment to me!There was a post on here a few days back that I think provided the best explanation so far. Basically as the waiters were saying they were looking for Madeleine earlier in the evening, Carpenter heard someone calling Madeleine, that would have been Kate doing a check perhaps around 9.30 ish A little later perhaps when Kate let out that blood curdling scream she just found Maddie behind the sofa. In that case it would seem perhaps Gerry grabbed her, hence the bruising to try and calm her down, saying we have to get rid of the body. I would say he flung it, weighted into the sea. It also means Goncalo is completely correct and has nothing to fear I do not believe in the McCanns suing him because I think he can clearly explain to the civil burden of proof why he is convinced that is what happened.

I am getting fed up and despondent about this case, that is probably what happened and I do not see how the police can prove it.

15 Jul 2009


Table of Contents : Processo Vol 9...Pages 2224-2234— "Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document (in English) by Mark Harrison 2007.07.23" (For transference to relevant Thread within the Table of Contents Thread)Processo Volume 9...Pages 2224-2234Page 2224 :National Policing Improvement AgencyWyboston Lakes, Great North Road,Wybmion, Bedfordshire,MK44 3BY,United Kingdom.Tel: +44 (0)87XX XXXXXXWeb: http://www.npia.police.ukMark Harrison MBENational Search AdviserHomicide, Missing Persons, Mass Fatality DisastersEmail: markha&n@npia.pnn.police.ukDlrect dlal: +44797XXXXXXX23/07/2007Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support DocumentThe reconnaissance undertaken and this report has been completed at the direct request and benefit of Guillhemino Encamacao the Algarve Regional Director of the Portuguese Judicial PolicePersonal ProfileI am the National Adviser in relation to Search for all Police agencies within the United Kingdom for Missing persons, Abduction and Homicide. My role involves advising on searching for persons that are missing, abducted or murdered, using enhanced search techniques and technologies. I attend and review cases providing advice and support on search plans, strategies and resources. I have extensive national and international experience in such casework. I am a visiting Professor of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the University of Southampton.In compiling this report I have driven and walked around the relevant areas of Praia Da Luz during the hours of darkness and then during daylight hours. I have conducted reconnaissance flights using the Civil defence helicopter. Consultation has been made with various colleagues and subject matter experts in the development of this report.This report considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz. Other scenarios or possibilities may on request be considered and be subject of a further report. I also make comment on the recent claims made by a Mr Krugel as to the whereabouts of the missing child.Page 2225 :Initial ActionOn Friday 20.07.2007 a request was made by the Portuguese Judicial Police to the NPIA for search advisory assistance. As a result of this the following terms of reference were produced.Terms of reference to provide assistance to the Portuguese Judicial Police.1. Assist the Judicial Police and GNR in assessing new or previous areas searched and give opinion on the best methods and assets to provide assurance as to the absence or presence of M McCann's concealed remains.2. Act as a "critical friend" to the officer in charge of search planning and management and offer immediate and enduring peer review until case resolution or search suspension.3. Assist in the development of framework models such as scenario based searching to aid homicide disposal searching.4. Consider further opportunities or areas for search in order to locate M McCann as applicable to the latest intelligence and inform tion provided.5. Where appropriate, provide independent and impartial advice on the enabling and disabling factors of specialist resources available either within Portugal or elsewhere in body detection.6. To assist in decision support where requested by testing and challenging claims made by persons offering unorthodox search methods or devices to aid locating M McCann.7. Where appropriate and requested, assist in advising on procedures to procure any non Portuguese specialist assets that are deemed to be relevant and useful.Mr Krugel's Claims Regardlng the Location of Madeleine McCannA Mr Krugel, at the McCann's request, attended Praia Da Luz last week from South Africa alleging he could assist in locating Madeleine McCann. I have spoken with the Police officers that accompanied him and viewed the documentation Krugel has supplied to the PJ.The limiting factor in coming to a view is that Krugel did not allow anyone to view the handheld device he had with him or observe him using it. He was unable to provide any validating scientific data or documents to support the claims he made or the device he alleged to have with him.In short he would appear to claim he has uniquely developed a handheld device that can find a missing person alive or dead in any given terrain over any elapsed time period.In debriefing the officers who accompanied Krugel it is possible to hypothesise what he may have been doing and using.In consultation with a colleague Dr Wolfram Meier-Augenstein we feel he may have been attempting to give the impression he had developed and was using Page 2226 :a "Remote Laser based gas sensing device". However his claims regarding the distance of detection, up to 20km and the use of a hair sample are highly unlikely and would be a great innovation in the scientific world. Further provenance of this technique could be sought from Prof. Miles Padgett who is a Professor of optics in physics at the University of Glasgow (m. padgett@phvsics.nla.ac.uk tel +44 141 XXXXXXX)One obvious challenge to the claims of the device capability is that if Krugel claims that by taking 3 separate location readings he is able to triangulate to an area then one would assume that as an area was identified further reading and triangulation inside that area could be conducted repeatedly until an "X marked the spot”.Of most concern is the poor quality of his report which merely shows a google earth image of an area to the east of Praia Da Luz and includes open scrub land, beach and sea. As Krugel was not prepared to allow the device to be viewed or provide any specification data of readings or equipment and the fact that no known device currently exists commercially or academically then I can only conclude that the information he has provided is likely to be of low value.GNR Searches Conducted wlthln 7 days of Madeleine McCann's Disappearance.On Saturday 21.07.2007 I met with Major Luis Seqeuira, GNR Portimao who was the search coordinator for all search activity that was under taken in the physical search for Madeleine McCann.Major Seqeuira has not benefited from any formal training or accreditation in the management of searching for missing persons. The search officers with the exception of the search and rescue team dispatched from Lisbon had not benefited from any formal training in search procedures. The teams available and deployed by Major Seqeuira were drawn from unit of the GNR, Civil Protection, Fire Brigade, Red Cross and Urban Police. Each team numberedaround 10 and between 80 to 100 personnel were involved in search activity.The searches were based on a strategy of searching in "rescue and recovery mode” to locate the missing girl alive or if dead, not as a victim of crime. This search phase lasted for 7 days from the date M McCann went missing.The search was split into 3 zones radiating out from Praia Da Luz in a northward direction. The first zone extended 3km to the EN125 road at Espiche. Wíthin this zone, sectors were drawn using the natural boundaries that exist and included the entire village. Officers were briefed and debriefed before and after deployments and records of activity collected. Each sector was repeatedly searched on 3 separate occasions over the 7 days using ofíicers conducting line searches and supported by air scenting dogs.The next Zone 2 was extended out to a radius of 7km to the boundary of the N120 road at Bensafrim. As the sectors were larger and in order to support the line searches 2 GNR officers on motorcycles and 6 GNR officers on horsePage 2227 :-back were deployed. These sectors were all searched on 2 separate occasions over the 7 day period.The outer zone 3 was extended to 15km at Barragem de Odiaxere a dammed lake. This zone is in a mountainous region subject to flash forest fires.Therefore Fire officers who routinely patrol and have local knowledge of the area were tasked to drive the tracks, visit empty properties to look for the missing girl. Additionally the fire brigade used a boat to visually inspect the suríace water of the lake.Re Visiting Previousiy Searched Areas.In considering the two scenarios that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body disposed of by a person on foot or in a vehicle, I have reflected on the areas within zone 1 that have been previously searched or subject to forensic examination.Mark Warner Creche at Praia Da Luz.This is the location of the last confirmed sighting by a person independent of family members of Madeleine McCann. Although this location was within the original search area it may well benefit from a further search using enhanced detecting methods for human remains. This will depend on the size of any outside grounds and concealed areas inside the building.McCann's Apartment.The apartment in which the McCann's had stayed may present furtheropportunities to search. The use of a specialist EVRD (Enhanced VictimRecovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) could potentially indicate on whether Madeline's blood is in the property or the scent of a dead body is present. In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed. This search process could be repeated in all the apartments that were occupied by the friends holidaying with the McCann's.Murat's House and Garden.The property has been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however the house and gardens may benefit from a fully invasive specialist search to preclude the presence of Madeleine McCann.A method previously employed on similar cases has been to use the below assets.Deploy the EVRD to search the house and garden to ensure Madeleine McCann's remains are not present. The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.Deploy the CSI dog to search the house to locate any human blood.This will act in support of the forensic examination already completed.An inhibiting factor will be on areas where Luminol has been used.Page 2228 :Deploy geophysical instruments in the house and garden to detect any burial of a body or concealment in voids.These specialists should be supported by physical search teams exploring and accessing all areas where concealment of a child's body could be made typically 0.5m.Murat's Vehicles.All vehicles Murat has had access to have been forensically examined to recover any surface trace evidence however they may all benefit from a full search by the EVRD and CSI dogs. They may be able to detect whether a dead body has been transported in one of the vehicles for intelligence purposes or detect human blood deposits that can be recovered andexamined in a laboratory for Madeleine McCann's blood.Open Area to East of Praia Da Luz.This open area between the village urban limits and the Boavista golf club to the east and includes a plateau on which sits a trig point and mobile phone mast.This area has been previously searched by officers and dogs walking through the area to check for Madeleine McCann's visible remains. However considering the new scenario of Homicide and concealed deposition this area affords many opportunities to dispose of a body. Within this area there are old empty properties, wells, thick vegetation, pockets of soft sand and natural fissures in the cliffs. Whilst there is no intelligence she is buried or concealed in this land it would be a natural place an offender may choose dose to the Village using the least effort principle. A proportionate response may therefore be considered to conduct a search of this area using a team of Victim Recovery Dogs (VRD) that are specifically trained to located concealed human remains.Prior to undertaking this task it would be beneficial to consult with a Forensic Anthropologist with knowledge of this region of Portugal to give opinion as to the likely state of any remains to be found. Further research could also be conducted with regards to the natural scavenging predators in the area.An inhibiting factor is that since the disappearance of the child an old empty house adjacent to the Trig Point on the Rocha Negra has been demolished and all rubble removed, If she was concealed within this property the search would be unlikely to detect her now.Praia Da Luz Beach and Shoreline.The beach and shoreline are bounded by high cliffs and shallow waters. The beach has fine granular sand and provides easy digging. However the beach is extensively used by tourists and locals and afíords minimal areas of cover from view for concealment. It may be considered appropriate to use the VRD dog team supported by geophysical GPR to sweep the beach. This would be Page 2229 :a considerable time and cost undertaking and should be weighed in the absence of specific intelligence.Search Duration.If all the described assets were deployed it would be likely all assets would complete their searches within one week.Costs.Currently only costs for the EVRD and CSI are available.The daily rate for this dog team is 1000 Euros. Flight travel costs for handler and dogs could be 2750 Euros. Veterinary costs: U.K. and Portugal to comply with Pet Passports scheme 450 Euros. Accommodation, subsistence and vehicle transportation would incur extra charge.Costs for a VRD dog team to conduct the open area search are not available at the time of writing. Such a team could be sourced from several countries within Europe or USA that have this capability including the UK. However the UK is limited to those teams whose dogs have "pet passports" due to UK quarantine restrictions.Costs for a geophysical search team to conduct the search of Murat's house and garden are not available at the time of writing. These could be sourced from a commercial surveying company, a university or military within Portugal. Alternatively enquires could be made within the UK.Ofíshore.The sea in general circumstances would be immediately attractive to an offender as an easy way of body disposal and so must be considered.The searches of the coastline was conducted by the Maritime Police and Coastguard. They searched the sea for any body buoyant on the surface and checked the coves and caves.It could be considered appropriate to conduct research into the tidal flows and movement of the sea in this region and hypothesise where a body may travel if entered at certain points. It has been observed the depth of the sea appears shallow at the relevant area of coastline and this may become an inhibiting factor for any offender wishing to dispose of a body in it.Overall Summary.This report has highlighted the extensive and professional efforts made by the Portuguese authorities regarding the search to locate Madeleine McCann alive. It has now begun to consider further opportunities to re search locations in order to address the possibility that she has been murdered and concealed nearby. This would be a proportionate and appropriate response given the elapsed time since her disappearance and previous experience in such similar cases. Should the investigators wish to discuss and develop the issues raised Page 2230 :in this initial assessment I would be happy to do so. Should further advisory “in country” support be required of the National Search Advisor following this initial assessment phase formal approval must be sought from the NPIA.Page 2231 :APPENDIX VICTIM RECOVERY DOGS & GPRThis section describes the training and abilities of victim recovery dogs (VRD), the enhanced victim recovery dog (EVRD) and Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR).VICTIM RECOVERY DOGSSearch Asset ProfileVictim recovery dogs (VRDs) are also known as body or cadaver dogs. They are used in many countries to assist the police in locating concealed human remains. In the UK, police dogs are used that are trained and licensed to a national standard.Pig carcasses are used to train the dogs in the UK as it is not legal to use human cadavers. This is an established training method and enables the dogs to successfully detect human remains in operational case work.Enhanced tralning to produce a EVRD.The training of a VRD provides an alert response using Ivan Pavlov's theory of producing a conditioned reflex, in this case barking, to the presence of detected decomposing human/pig flesh, bone, body fluid and blood. The dog will bark, whether or not it is able to get to the source of the scent. The benefit of this reflex is that the dog will respond whenever the target scent is present.This enables the dog to be used in an investigative role, assisting experts in other fields, such as, geophysics.An EVRD dog received additional training on human cadavers which were buried on land and submerged underwater. This took place in America and facilitated by the FBI at the University of Tennessee.The scent detection threshold of the dog is greatly enhanced. In operational deployment and in training, the dog is successful in detecting human remains, body fluids and blood, to cellular levels that can be recovered by low copyanalysis at forensic laboratories.The proven capability of the EVRD is to :Search to locate very small samples of human remains, body fluids and blood in any environment or terrain.Identify sub-surface depositions to a depth of approximately one metre below the surface of the ground, depending on the scent permeability of the ground.This depth is increased substantially when the ground is 'vented' prior to deployment.Page 2232 Locate and give an alert to cross contamination by a cadaver. This is particularly valuable when the dog is used to assist in searches where the discovery of a body has prompted the investigation. The dog may locate secondary deposition sites and any areas of contamination, e.g., items of vehicles used to transport the body.The generation, storage and migration of natural gases and body scent. Gases from decomposing human remains may be dissolved in groundwater depending on the pressure, temperature or concentration of other gases or minerals in water. Dissolved gases may be advected by groundwater, and only when the pressure is reduced and the solubility limit of the gas in groundwater exceeded, do they come out of solution and form a separate gaseous phase.'Scent', (cocktail mixtures of gases), from organic decaying remains can move through bedrock by diffusion, which is relatively slow, but if the bedrock is fractured, (eg, by bedding planes, joints and faults), the difíusion rate is increased. Gas and scent from organic decaying remains also migrate through rocks via intergranular permeability or, more particularly, along discontinuities. The hydrostatic head imposed by groundwater flows may also influence gas/organic scent emissions.Determination of the migration pathway of gas/body scent depends on the geological, geomorphological and hydrogeological conditions and an understanding of the victim deposition site. Factors such as the suríace andgroundwater flow paths, drainage, topography, runoff, precipitation rates, permeability of the soil and bedrock and hydrogeological domains, location of seeps and springs need to be determined if gases/human remains migrationpathways are to be determined.The age of the source does not affect the process of scent movement but it will effect the concentration, as will the rate of decomposition. Body scent may be transported by 'leachate plumes' to emerge at the ground surface.Page 2233 Figure 61 : Schematic illustration to show the influence of groundwater flows and the migration of body scent, which may be carried away from the grave site, as a lecahate plume, to emerge on the flanks.(Note (by me) : Diagram and explanatory indicators shown here but I cannot capture it as a screenshot)Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)This consists of a radar antenna transmitting electromagnetic energy in pulse form at frequencies between 25 MHz and 1 GHz. The pulses are partially reflected by the sub-surface geological structures, picked up by a receiving antenna and plotted as a continuous two-way travel time record, which is displayed as a pseudo-geological record section. The vertical depth scale of this section can be calibrated from the measured two-way travel times of the reflected events either by the use of the appropriate velocity values of electromagnetic pulse through the ground.The depth of penetration achieved by the radar pulse is a function of both it's frequency and the conductivity of the ground.Page 2234The equipment benefits in use by detecting anomalies in the ground and is particularly effective through sand and concrete. However it is limited in undulating terrain or areas where it is an anomaly rich environment such as awooded area.This equipment whilst readily available in the Commercial Surveying Industry and University Geophysics Departments requires expert interpretation of the imagery for grave detection._________________======================================="We


Outros Apensos Vol IXPages 39 – 40Letter from Pinto de AbreuDate 25th September 2007Gerald McCann and Kate Healy, identified in the case number above, having been notified as to whether they are interested in being constituted “assistentes” in the process, both come to reply that they have every interest in being constituted “assistentes”.The constituted assistente in his/her position as collaborator of the Public Ministry is always subordinate to the PM, having the powers conferred upon him/her by article 69, nº 3 of the CPP, that is to say, all the rights of intervening in the process, offering proof and requiring the diligences they deem to be necessary, deducing independent charges and intervening in the decisions that affect them.In this way, the status of assistente is not incompatible with the status of arguido, because it cannot be confirmed – with any degree of probability or even less of certainty - that the persons in question committed any crime or that either of them would have “co-participated in the crime”.The status of assistente, as well as that of arguido confers the rights of participation and intervention in the process (many of these even coincide), but even in this exercise, they never conflict because they are always subject to the application, pondering and decisions of the judge.To this effect and according to article 68 .1 of the CPP “assistentes in the penal process can be constituted as well as the persons and entities who confer them this right, in the case of the offended party being aged under 16, or due to any incapacity, the legal representative or the persons previously indicated, unless one of them has participated in the crime”.There is no norm that prevents the constitution as assistentes of those requesting this status or that impedes them from exercising their rights as parents in representing the interests of their daughter Madeleine.I would finally add that those making the requests, although arguidos, are innocent or at least presumed innocent, they are and do not cease to be the legal representatives of the girl Madeleine, they have a lawyer, they have paid their legal costs and in this sense, all things considered, having fulfilled all the requirements for the request, are also “the owners of the interests that the law particularly wishes to protect”.Last but not least, in the latest communication from the prosecutor, annexed to this note, the Public Ministry understands that “no line or inquiry should be disregarded” which is why “inquiries will continue under the functional direction of the Public Ministry, under the responsibility of the PJ”, inquiries that cannot be prejudiced by those making the request, independently of the status conferred or imposed upon them.We request that they should be admitted to the status of assistentes.LawyerCarlos Pinto de Abreu_________________ines753@etb.net.co


Processos Vol VPages 1292 – 1297Witness StatementRachel MampillyDate: 2007-05-15She confirms the integrity of her previous statements.When asked, she said this was the first time she had been in Portugal. She travelled with her husband Matthew, her daughter G***e, aged 19 months. In addition to these, the group was made up of the McCann family (with three children the eldest being Madeleine) the Payne family (two children), Dianne Webster, Fiona Payne’s mother and O’Brien and his partner Jane Tanner, who also have two children.The group was composed of nine adults and eight children.They arrived in Portugal on Saturday 28th April, arriving at the OC in the middle of the afternoon. They flew from Gatwick to Faro. The Payne, McCann families and Diane Webster arrived an hour later by a separate flight (East Midlands – Faro).On that evening they all went for dinner at the Millenium restaurant.On the morning of the 29th, Sunday, they all went to play tennis except for Matthew because he was ill (vomiting and diarrhoea) and ROB. The children went to the Club. They all lunched in David and Fiona’s apartment. The McCanns lunched in their apartment and then went to meet the others. In the afternoon the children slept (except the McCann children) and afterwards they went to the recreation area. At 17.00 the children went for dinner. Immediately afterwards, the witness, her husband and daughter went to walk on the beach. She thinks that the McCanns remained at the recreation area near to the pool and tennis courts, as did the others. At about 20.30 when the children has been bathed and were asleep, they all went for dinner at the Tapas Restaurant, near to the pool.The only beach they members of the group went to was the beach in P da L.On the 29th, 30th, April, 1st, 2nd and 3rd May they always dined at the Tapas restaurant.On Monday they were told that there was no room for all of them in the restaurant, but they obtained a special favour from a waiter and all dined together. In order to obtain this favour they said that the children were asleep and that they could not move anywhere else. For this reason, from this day onwards they would reserve a space in the restaurant (for the adults) for the following day.That on the five consecutive nights they dines at the Tapas restaurant they always followed the same ritual.They would always begin dinner at 8.30, after the children were asleep. If one of them hadn’t fallen asleep, one member of the couple would stay until the child had fallen asleep and as soon as that happened, would go and join the others.This happened to ROB on Tuesday evening and he did not manage to have dinner, his partner Jane Tanner brought him his dinner in his room.On Wednesday evening the witness did not go for dinner because she was feeling ill and spent the day in the apartment. On Thursday evening, for the same reason, ROB went to dinner ten minutes late.The ritual during dinner was always the same. The Payne family used a walkie talkie to check whether their children woke up. For this reason they never left the table and were calm. This couple when they left, would always lock the windows and doors, in spite of their apartment being on the first floor.The witness and her husband who were staying on the ground floor (5B) in a space of 20 - 30 minutes would leave the restaurant and go to the apartment, entering by the front door and checking on G***e. They always locked the door and closed the windows.The ROB and JT couple did exactly the same as the witness. They locked the door and closed the windows.The McCanns who were staying in 5ª on the ground floor left the patio doors closed but not locked so that every 30 minutes during dinner, one of them would check to see how the children were.Each couple checked on their own children.She never noticed anything strange during dinner or when checking on the children.On 3rd May, the day of Madeleine’s disappearance they all (except for the McCanns who stayed in their apartment) has breakfast at the Millenium at 08.00.Afterwards the witness took G***e to the Club. Madeleine and the twins also went to the Club that morning, as well as the other children in the group.Matthew and ROB went to the beach. The Payne couple were also at the beach. The witness, after leaving G***e at the club went to the apartment to get ready for tennis. Also present at the tennis courts between 9.10 and 10.10 were Kate McCann, Dianne Webster and Jane Tanner. The witness’s tennis session was at 11 with Matthew after he returned from the beach. Gerry’s tennis session was at 10.00.After tennis, as usual they went to pick up the children and all had lunch in David and Fiona’s apartment apart from the McCann family.After lunch the children went to sleep. She was not with the McCanns that afternoon until dinner time. She does not know what they did or where they were during that time.They spent most of the time on the beach that afternoon. They saw Kate running on the beach but she did not stop and they did not speak.All the children, except the McCann children dined at a beach restaurant at 17.30. After the children’s dinner, the men went to play tennis and the women and children watched, once again except for the McCann family (Gerry was playing tennis but she did not see Kate or the children).Afterwards they went to bathe the children and put them to bed.When they arrived at the restaurant at 20.45 the McCann couple was already there.They were talking to a couple they knew from tennis, whose name she cannot remember. Jane was also there but she was not talking to them. The Payne family and Dianne arrived just after 21.00. Matthew bumped into them as he had gone to the apartment, but he did not enter, he just listened outside to see if there was any noise. He did the same at the Tanner and McCann apartments.The window shutters of the McCann’s apartments were closed. The patio door that they used to enter the apartment also had its shutter closed. In order to enter they had to raise the shutter.At about 21.00 they were all seated at the restaurant. At 21.05 Gerry went to check on his children and returned minutes later. Jane also went to heck on her children before returning.Gerry said that he was chatting to a tennis friend called Jez about the tennis tournament that would take place the following day.When Jane returned they began to eat dinner.At about 21.30 Matthew and Russell went to check on their children at the same time. They offered to check on the McCann children. After checking his children Matthew went to see the McCann children. In order to do so he entered via the patio doors. According to what her husband told her the bedroom door was ajar. He did not enter the room and therefore cannot say whether Madeleine was in the room or not. All he could confirm was that nobody was crying and the twins were there. Russell was not with him as he had stayed in his apartment because one of his children was crying.Matthew returned to the table and said that all was calm, except for Russell’s daughter, which is why ROB stayed with her.In the meantime they began dinner (at that time they would be eating their starters) and after eating Jane went to Russell to see if he wanted to have dinner. It was about 21.45.While Russell was having dinner, Kate went to see the children. Minutes later at about 22.00 she returned to the restaurant in complete panic, saying that Madeleine had disappeared.During that day and evening the witness had not seen anything strange.She just says that at about 21.15 when Gerry was talking to Jez, Jane saw a man carrying a child in pyjamas, bare foot crossing road between blocks 5 and 6.According to Jane she did not see the face of the man carrying the child.She could only tell what she saw.When asked what the relation between the group was she says that all the men and Fiona are doctors and a friendship had built up between them because at one stage or another, they had worked together. In spite of not living in the same town they would meet up.Fiona and David Payne are the closest to the McCann family.It is the second time that they have been on holiday with these friends. In September 2006, they went for a week to the island of Zakynthos in Greece. However, neither the McCann family nor Diane Webster went.When asked she says that all the couples have been together for various years (between 8 and 12 years). They all have stable relationships. She does not know whether any female or male members of the group have had any other relationships between them, other than the current.She does not have any knowledge of whether any members has a parallel relationship with any other members of the group.When asked, she says that there is no friction or conflict between those that make up the group as they are in total harmony as regards the kind of holidays they take, they all have good jobs and identical levels of living as well as having the children in common, whom they all have to look after and they try as hard as possible to do everything together.She says that in terms of harmony and friendship the group is very close.When asked about the characteristics of the other couples, she says that they are all persons of normal considered behaviour, and has nothing to point out.She says that the first time she saw the suspect Robert Murat was on the night of 3rd May shortly after they had discovered Madeleine was missing. She saw him for the first time at about 23.30 in the covered area between apartments 5B and D. She thought it very strange as he seemed to be there watching, trying to be the next person to talk to the couples from the group.That immediately, when the police arrived, he introduced himself to elements of the group, namely Russell, accompanied by the GNR, translating all the initial contacts between the group and the police.When asked, she says that she does not know whether he entered the McCanns apartment with the police.As regards the other people searching for the girl outside the apartment he tried to contact them directly, saying that he had a daughter of the same age as Madeleine, offering to translate whatever was necessary.She thought this individual’s behaviour was very strange, given the intensity of his presence. In addition, all the people they contacted that night belonged to the MW resort and he stayed there, in the middle of them, without anyone knowing where he had come from. Because of her profession (personnel recruitment, interviews) she thinks she knows a bit about human behaviour, thinking it rather strange that he introduced himself in such an insistent manner.She saw that this individual was with the police in the area for some minutes before she lost sight of him. She does not know whether he managed to enter the McCann’s apartment.She thinks that after this night she only saw him again on Sunday, 6th May in the morning, in the P da L church during mass.She saw him again on 11th May when he was translating some statements at the PJ in Portimao. She thinks he spoke again and wanted to draw close to her companions with great intensity, wanting to talk about his life, saying that he was carrying out work in a house in the UK, that he had a daughter of the same age as Madeleine, that she was phoning him a lot to ask how he was (which she though strange given the girl’s young age), always showing a familiarity that was out of the ordinary.She always had the impression that this individual had strange behaviour and that he wanted to impose his presence, trying to take part in everything that was related to Madeleine’s disappearance.She did not see him again, except for yesterday, when he was shown on various television channels as a suspect in the abduction of Madeleine. She then felt her suspicions about this individual would be confirmed, feeling bad for not having expressed them earlier to others and to the police.Reads, ratifies, signs


Processos Vol VPages 1320 to 1322Witness statement Russell James O’Brien Date: 2007.05.16He comes to the process as a witness and of his own free will to make this statement.When asked he says that he does not speak Portuguese and is assisted by the interpreter Alice Avakoff.When asked whether he is capable of recognising without any doubt the suspect Robert Murat, the witness replies yes.When questioned he says that the first time he saw Robert Murat was on the night of the events currently under investigation, in other words, the night upon which Madeleine disappeared, at about 01.00 in the early morning of 4th May.That he saw Murat for the first time at this moment in the Rua Silva in front of the apartment where the events occurred, near to the parking area.When asked whether Murat arrived before or after the police, the witness says that he does not know, given that at the time the police arrived he was not present as he was searching for Madeleine.When he saw him for the first time the police were on the scene.Robert Murat appeared in the middle of different people (friends from the group, people from the resort, tourists and locals) who were searching for Madeleine. he adds that he does not know at what time Murat appeared on the scene, nor whether he arrive alone or accompanied, in the sense that when the witness arrived at the scene, Murat was already there.When asked, he says that as far as he can remember, Robert was translating conversations between two officers and various people who were searching for Madeleine. As far as he could make out at that time, it seemed that Robert was trying to help, in the sense that these people were exasperated with some of the officers. He remembers that all the people were quite upset, whilst Robert was very calm. That morning was the first time the witness spoke to Murat, not remembering whether he had approached Murat or whether Robert had addressed him. They had various discussions including the fact that Robert was fluent in Portuguese as he had lived in the country for many years.He adds that Robert told him he had a daughter of Madeleine’s age in the UK and that Madeleine’s disappearance was a terrible thing.When asked what Murat was wearing that night, the witness says he is not certain but thinks he was wearing dark coloured trousers, he can’t remember the colour, and a T-shirt, perhaps dark grey in colour and perhaps a jacket, the characteristics of which he cannot describe. He clearly remembers that Robert wore glasses.When asked he says he does not know how Robert found out about Madeleine’s disappearance nor how he arrived at the scene.When asked, he says that he had never seen Robert before.After this morning the witness saw Murat 3 more times, once on the morning of 4th May in the same street, rua Silva at about 12.00 in the company of police officers. About two days later he saw Murat at the OC reception at about 12.00/14.00. Robert was alone and walking towards the previously mentioned road. The witness says that he (ROB) was accompanied by Rachel. The last time he saw Robert was last Sunday, near to his house at about 20.30. At that moment the witness was with Jane.He never noticed anything suspicious about Murat except for the last time he saw him when Robert was being transported in a vehicle, a green van with four windows, he does not remember the make, model or number plate and that he stopped, got out of the van, opened the back and showed photos of Madeleine and that he showed himself to be a very important person in the investigation, saying that he was providing immense help to the police in discovering the truth.When asked, he says that according to his wife Jane, she did not see Murat on the night of the events as she had spent most of the time looking after her children.No more is said. Reads, ratifies, signs.


Processos Vol IPages 35 – 39Witness StatementGerald Patrick McCannDate: 2007/05/04Time 11.15He comes to the process as a participant and offended party, as the girl’s father. Being of British nationality he does not speak Portuguese and is assisted by the interpreter Natália de Almeida.When asked he says that he had been in Portugal previously in 1994, staying in an apartment near to Albufeira. This is the first time he has returned to Portugal.His desire to know Portugal in 1994 was due to the fact of playing golf, as our country is known for the excellent conditions for practising this sport. On this occasion, the trip was proposed by one of his friends who accompanied him, David Payne, who upon searching in Internet, made a reservation at the OC, P da L, Lagos, for the witness, his wife and the rest of the group, a total of nine adults and 8 children, including his daughter Madeleine, this group consists of people he has known for 5 or 6 years.In this way they travelled in two separate groups, one of the groups being the witness, his wife Kate and three children and other group consisting of David with his wife, mother in law and two children. The witness left from the local airport (Leicestershire) and the other group left from London and consisted of four adults and three children.The meeting point was in Portugal, at the OC, where his group arrived at about 14.30 on 28th April 2007, arriving from Faro airport in a small minibus provided by the airport services. The other group also arrived on the same day at about 13.00, also by means of a minibus.After checking in, the witness and his family were accommodated in apartment G5 A, the family nucleus consisting of the witness, his wife Kate, his daughter Madeleine and a couple of twins aged two, Sean and Amelie. The apartment consisted of two beds in one bedroom, another two beds in another bedroom and two cots provided by the resort, as well as a WC and kitchen.The witness and his wife slept in one of the bedrooms and the three children in the other, the twins in the cots and Madeleine in a bed, leaving the remaining bed empty.Between the 28th April, the day they arrived and the time the disappearance was discovered, he says that nothing unusual happened, only referring to an episode on the morning of the 3rd May, when Madeleine asked the witness the reason why they had not gone to her room when the twins were crying. As he did not hear anything, the witness did not go to the bedroom, however he finds his daughter’s comment to be strange, maybe because it was the first time that she had made it.As regards routines, he says that on Sunday they had breakfast between 07.30 and 08.30 at the OC Bar at a few metres distance from the apartment. During the following days, because of the fact that the bar was quite far away, they began to buy food at a supermarket situated in the same street as the apartment, he cannot remember the name of the supermarket and they would have breakfast in the apartment. After breakfast the children would stay in the resort crèche, called the Kid Club, doing various activities such as painting and collage, etc, until about 12.30, they were always supervised by various members of staff, in a ratio of one member of staff to every three children. At this time – 12.30 – the parents would collect the children and have lunch in the apartment, which had a kitchen. When lunch was finished, at about 13.30, the children would stay at the Club pool, supervised by the parents, for about 45 minutes, where they would relax and put on sun screen, etc. Afterwards, they would take the children back to the Kid Club until about 17.00, when the children would have dinner at the bar, under the attentive eye of their parents. After dinner at 17.00, they would bath the children and get them ready for the night and play with them for a few moments in the recreation area near the tennis courts, always supervised by the parents. At about 19.30 – 20.00 the children were put to bed until the following morning when the routine described would begin.Whilst the children were at the Kids Club, the witness would play tennis with his wife, go for walks, read and go jogging.Yesterday, after their daily routine, Madeleine and the twins went to their bedroom and were placed in their respective beds and their blankets were placed, at about 19.30. The witness and his wife, between this time and 20.30 stayed in the apartment relaxing and drinking a glass of wine. After 20.30, the witness and his wife, after looking at the children, went to the Tapas Bar, about 50 metres away, where they had dinner. As usual, every half hour and as the restaurant was near, the witness or his wife, would check whether the children were all right. In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked, went to his children’s bedroom and checked that the twins were fine, as was Madeleine. He them went to the WC where he remained for a few moments, left, and bumped into a person he had played tennis with and who had a child’s push chair, he was also British, he had a short conversation with him, before immediately returning to the restaurant. At about 21.30 his friend Matt (member of the group) went to the apartment, where his children were and on his way went to the witness’s apartment, entering by means of a glass sliding door that was always unlocked and was located laterally to the building. He entered the bedroom, he observed the twins and he does not remember whether Madeleine was there as everything was calm, the shutters were closed and the door to the bedroom was ajar as usual. Matt immediately returned to the restaurant.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 and saw immediately that the door to the children’s bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the blinds were raised and the curtains were drawn open.The side door leading to the living room was closed, which as previously stated, was never left locked. Faced with this troubling situation, Kate checked that the twins were in their beds, unlike Madeleine, who had disappeared. After checking the apartment thoroughly, his wife, quite shocked and upset, went to the restaurant, alerting the witness and the others about the disappearance. Immediately the group rapidly went to the club, searched all the installations, swimming pool, tennis courts, etc. and the apartment, with the help of staff at the same time as contacting the authorities who would arrive later.It is emphasised that one of the members of the group, Jane, at about 21.10 – 21.15 when she was going to her apartment to check on her children, when looking behind, at a distance of about 50 metres, on the road leading to the club, she saw an individual carrying a child, wearing pyjamas, Jane will be able to clarify this situation.With regard to Madeleine, he describes her as being of Caucasian race, with quite white skin, four years old (12-05-2003), almost 90 cm in height. She has a slim face, dark blond hair which is straight and shoulder length. Her left eye is blue and green and her right eye is green with a brown mark in the pupil. She has a small brown birthmark on the knee of her right leg, he does not remember any others. She did not have any scars. At the time of her disappearance she was wearing pyjamas, the trousers were white with a floral pattern, and the short-sleeved top was predominantly pink and there was a blue and white figure on the front, with the inscription “Eeyore”.As regards personality, the child was extrovert, very active, talkative, alert with an easy relationship with other children. He also says that she would never go with a stranger.He has no suspects to point out, he cannot find any motive for such an act, as neither he nor his wife has any enemies. He adds that his daughter is not suffering from any illness or take any medication.When asked, he says that he authorises a reading of the constant data of his mobile phone nº 00447786986188.Apart from the Kid Club and the apartment they only went to the beach with Madeleine and the other children once and for a short time as the weather conditions were unstable. At the beach they just ate an ice cream and then returned to the apartment. In addition to what he has described, on the Wednesday or Thursday, Madeleine and the other children went sailing along the beach, five minutes away from the Club, for an hour, organised by the resort, an activity that has an available chart. The supervision and organisation of this activity is the responsibility of the Club, which is why neither the witness nor his wife were present.He never saw any strange behaviour during these days not anything to be suspicious of.When he was shown a list of the Club’s guests he says he only recognises the names of the members of the group.He never detected that any object had disappeared.He has no other elements to bring to the process, desiring the appropriate criminal procedure and (the person) caught for the act he was a victim of.No more is said. Reads, ratifies, signs.(Note: several mentions are made to “club” in the text, in some cases I understand them to mean “apartment” but have left them as described in PT text)._________________ines753@etb.net.co


Post subject: Re: 4th May Statements translated from PT files
Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 11:30 pm
On ParoleJoined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:09 pmPosts: 1097
Processos Vol IPages 69 – 72Witness StatementFiona Elaine PayneDate: 2007.05.04Time: 19H20She comes to the process as a witness, and as part of the group that travelled to Portugal with the parents of Madeleine. She is married to David, who also travelled to Portugal.She has known the girl’s parents, Gerard (sic) and Kate, for about seven years. She got to know them through Kate when they worked together. It was also at this time that she got to know her [Kate’s] husband in social settings. She knows that the couple has three children, twins who are two years of age and Madeleine, who was almost four years old. The witness has two children, of the female sex, who are two and one years old respectively. The idea of travelling to Portugal came from her husband David who had already been to Portugal about 11 years ago, before she got to know him.She arrived in Portugal on the 28th April, at around 12H00, leaving from Leicestershire, and arriving at Faro and then on to Praia da Luz. From Faro, she arrived at the Ocean Club via mini bus taken from the airport. After check-in she was lodged in apartment G5H with her family (husband, mother and two daughters).As regards the next days, she says that in the morning, after breakfast, which the family would eat in the club bar around 08H15/08H30 they would then put their children in the club crèche, in different areas. During this time, the witness and her husband would go swimming and practice other sports on the beach, which was around 8 minutes distance on foot. Around 12H30/13H00 they would go to get the children from the crèche and would have lunch in the apartment, at times with other children. Immediately afterwards her children would take a nap, whilst the witness and her husband stayed in the apartment. Around 15H30/16H00 the children would wake up from their nap and all of them would head towards the pool zone or the tennis court where they would stay until around 18H00/19H00. They would then return to the apartment, would bathe the children, put them to sleep and would go and meet with the rest of the group, to have dinner. All the adults would meet in the Tapas restaurant located close to the club. During dinner, as they were in a possession of a “baby monitor”, they did not go to the apartment to check on their children and would only do so if they heard any strange noises or crying. On the day before yesterday, they slightly altered their routine—they went to the beach with the children and her mother Dianne. They arrived there around 15H45 and left at 18H15, and headed towards the tennis court until about 19H00. Immediately afterwards, the witness headed towards the apartment with her children, and her mother. Ten minutes later her husband David appeared. In the apartment her mother, helped by her husband David, bathed the children whilst the witness went jogging on the beach until around 20H00. Afterwards, she returned to the apartment and got ready. She left around 20H45, accompanied by David and her mother, in order to meet the rest of the group in the Tapas restaurant.During dinner, amongst other friends present was the McCann couple—Madeleine’s parents. When questioned she says that she did not go to the club, neither did her husband, to check on the children as she possessed a baby monitor, as previously mentioned. However, she states that Gerald and Kate went with regularity, as did the other couples to ensure that their children were well. On one of these occasions, upon returning, Kate, very scared and nervous, in a panic, told them in the restaurant that Madeleine had gone missing, screaming and frightened. Immediately, they organised search groups, either in the apartment thinking that she could be hidden, or outside, which resulted in nothing, even with the help of the employees.Due to Kate’s highly anxious state, she decided to stay with her, giving her all support she needed. She was never in Madeleine’s family apartment.She knew Madeleine well and describes her as very intelligent and she would not go with stranger without screaming or protesting unless she was very tired or sleeping.As regards the episode with Jane—she [Jane] only told her that she had seen an individual with a child in his arms, not knowing that it was Madeleine.During this holiday period she never noticed anything strange or relevant to the facts in question. She has no other elements to offer the investigation.No more was said.Reads, ratifies, signs.