The PJ's 57-page 'Final Report' summary & the Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch
PJ Final Report - The full investigation on the McCanns
Thanks to 'astro', 'debk' and 'JM' for translation
pages 1 and 2
Ministry Of Justice
Judiciary Police
Investigative Criminal Department of Portimão
NUIPC-201/07.0 GALGS
4th Brigade
Inspector João Carlos
Denouncer/Offended – Judiciary Police
Denunciated/Arguidos - Robert James Queriol Evelegh Murat, identified and questioned at fls. 1170, 1947 and 1959.
*Gerald Patrick McCann, identified and questioned at fls. 2569.
*Kate Marie Healy, identified and questioned at fls. 2557.
Witnesses/Persons inquired – see Index
Type of Crime – Unknown
Time and Place – Between 21H05 and 22H00 of the day 3 May of 2007, at the G5A apartment, located at the touristic resort ‘Ocean Club’, Vila da Luz, Lagos.
Apprehended Objects – see Index (all the apprehended objects were given back to the owners by means of term)
Examinations done – see Index
>>>
Final Report
Introduction
These documents relate to an occurrence which describes the disappearance of a minor of British nationality, MADELEINE BETH MCCANN daughter of GERALD PATRICK MCCANN and KATE MARIE HEALY, on the date with three (almost four) years old.
According to the Time and Place, the facts occurred on the day 3 of May of 2007, in a temporal hiatus, understood to be between 21H05 and 22H00 (being certain that after 17H30, only GERALD and KATE had contact with MADELEINE) at the resort named 'Ocean Club', located in Vila da Luz, Lagos, place, where the minor’s family, along with seven other persons, with whom they had a friendship relationship, where enjoying some holidays, with the duration of one week.
The arrival of the group from England, at national territory, via Faro's airport, took place on the 28 of April 2007.
They travelled in two separate groups, since they live in different locations. The trip from the airport to the place of Luz was done in a mini bus, provided by the resort management company 'Mark Warner'.
pages 3 and 4
Upon check-in, they were placed into several apartments, all located in block G5, next to each other, which was an imposition, or at least a suggestion, made by the entire group.
They were all lodged in the ground floor, except the PAYNE family (David, Fiona and Diane Webster), which was lodged in the first floor.
The MCCANN family was given apartment G5A, which is located on the left end of the residential block (seen from the front) and therefore, it can be said, the most accessible one and with facilitated visibility from the outside.
This is a group where seven of the elements are medics, from various specialties, which adds to the fact that all of them have under-age children, which accompanied them. The MCCANN family was composed of the parents, as well as MADELEINE and the twins SEAN and AMELIE, these being two years old, at the date of the facts.
This trip was organized by the PAYNE family, namely by the male element of the couple, DAVID ANTHONY PAYNE, who had knowledge, as a user, of the tourist resorts that belong to the "Mark Warner" company.
The group shared among themselves a friendship that existed before this trip, based on professional relationships and other holiday trips.
It is pointed out that this was the first time that the elements of the group were on holidays at this resort on national territory for the first time, and that the group's will to carry out the trip was planned approximately one month before it took place.
On the other hand, nothing indicates that any of the participants had any previous connection to Vila da Luz or that there resided or stayed any person related to them.
The group's daily routine implied their movement, for dinner, to the Tapas Restaurant, which is located at the resort (although outside of the specific area of the apartments and without permitting a complete visual control of the latter), while their underage children remained alone – supposedly asleep – in their apartments while the dinner was under way.
According to the group's common version, the checking of the children was done through regular visits by the adults to the apartments, with an – approximate – spacing of half an hour, with the exception of the children of the PAYNE couple, that possessed a technological system of self control, via intercommunication ("baby listening").
Constitution of the group:
DAVID ANTHONY PAYNE – apartment 5H (first floor)
FIONA ELAINE PAYNE
DIANNE WEBSTER
RUSSEL JAMES O’BRIEN – apartment 5D
JANE MICHELLE TANNER
pages 5 and 6
MATTHEW DAVID OLDFIELD – apartment 5B
RACHAEL MARIAMMA (sic) JEAN MANPILLY
GERALD PATRICK McCANN – apartment 5A
KATE MARIE HEALY
The aforementioned persons were interviewed carefully and in great detail, on various occasions (see index), with the intention to collect all the relevant elements that could help the investigation to uncover the truth regarding the facts.
The analysis of the grouping of these inquiries emphasized the existence of important details which were not entirely understood and integrated, which needed to be, from our viewpoint, tested and compared together [concatenated] in the actual location.
As such, a concrete understanding of the lack of synergy of some aspects of elevated relevance should be attempted through a processed diligence via the reconstitution of the facts, which, due to a lack of collaboration of several relevant witnesses, was not able to be accomplished, in spite of all the force brought by the authorities.
Further ahead, in this report, the necessity of this diligence will be better analysed.
The investigation, during more than 13 months, followed all the credible indices related to different hypotheses and, in an impartial manner, continued to analyse, correlate and synthesize them, looking for an explanation for the happenings of the night of 3 May 2007.
Assuming that the minor's disappearance was due to the acts of third parties, the PJ explored various lines of investigation, not excluding any hypothesis considered plausible or hypothetically acceptable.
From the documentation, you will observe that during the investigation various possibilities were contemplated.
As such, consider:
1. abduction, for sexual exploration or other (e.g, later adoption, child trafficking, organ trafficking), without homicide;
2. abduction, followed by homicide with (or without) hiding of the corpse;
3. accidental death, with later hiding of the corpse;
pages 7 and 8
The Hypothesis 1 and 2 were considered in the double notion of the illicit of abduction (if that happened) that could have had occurred due to feelings of revenge by the
Kidnapper(s) towards the parents (intended abduction) or by taking merely the opportunity of the child being at a vulnerable situation (opportunity abduction).
As a remote hypothesis, the possibility of the minor leaving the apartment by her own means was explored – that would be highly unlikely physically – and after, because of an accident or by a third person intervention, she would have disappeared.
>>>
As to the present report, and for a better understanding, it will be divided in to 5 major areas, to know:
- Generic diligences for the localization of the minor, entwined in the main body of the Inquest, done by the Judiciary Police, the Maritime Police and the G.N.R.;
- Thematic Appendixes, in a total of nine (sub-divided into 55 volumes) referred to the fls. 3528-a, whose creation allows to complement the main body of the processes and to follow up all the information received and treated;
- The suspicions about ROBERT MURAT, and his status of arguido;
- The Cadaver Dogs Units searches and the subsequent establishment of the parents of the British minor, GERALD MCCANN and KATE HEALY as arguidos;
- The forensic and laboratorial exams, done at the Forensic Science Service and at the National Institute of Forensic Medicine, from now on designated as the FSS and INML, correspondingly;
Even though there is this division in to sub groups, the present report will be done by order of occurrence or information, without the obstacle of joining by themes, when the chronological order it is not sufficient.
>>>
As stated before, it was done a presentation of the intervenients in the process and a brief introduction of the facts. Following, we will do a more detailed explanation, where, likewise, the various intervenients will match and the actions done by them will take on a procedural relevance.
>>>
Relative to the appendixes, in a total of nine, where divided thematically as stated:
Appendix I – Forensic Exams – where all the exams and forensics that were carried out by scientific and technical entities, specifically those who are destined to the detection, collection and traces analyses that could lead to the understanding of what happened and to the discovery of the culprits in the disappearance of the minor.
pages 9 and 10
Appendix II – Analysis of communications – where all the inventory, analysis and pertinent correlations, which were possible and eventually relevant about the communications and movements that were made before, during and after the facts, were made;
Appendix III – Inspections, canine, maritime and air searches – where the specific diligences that were carried out in an attempt to physically locate the minor, especially in the surrounding areas, are described;
Appendix IV – Searches/apprehensions, direct exams, delivery/deposit of goods – where the set of diligences that were directed on goods or items that could eventually be connected to the disappearance are listed;
Appendix V – Supposed sightings and localizations – where the news that had some credibility and signalled the alleged presence of the child in various locations worldwide, as well as the hundreds of diligences that were carried out to confirm or dismiss them, are listed.
As it is known, the disappearance of the British minor, under the circumstances that were described, implied the action of diverse entities, with special relevance for the intervention of the Polícia Judiciária, which was joined by other forces of criminal police. In parallel, this disappearance concentrated an unmatched dynamics from the media, both national and foreign, namely and with more emphasis in the United Kingdom, which filled, for days in a row, their news at prime time with live transmissions from Praia da Luz, and special programmes that were dedicated to the issue.
pages 11 and 12
Some of the information did not merit, due to the circumstances surrounding it, the least credibility, leaving those, at the other extreme, which required a more solid and effective systemization and treatment. Those which, by their geography and time-space relevance, seemed credible were thoroughly explored and included in the documentation and this appendix.
There remains a large, diffuse stain of supposed sightings and localizations – some receiving notable emphasis, such as those in Belgium and Morocco – which had few, vague, discordant, incompatible or incongruent elements, which deserved a treatment with a view towards their infirmação or set aside for the future, should solid elements arise, which all are herein included;
Appendix VI 1 – Information/Lists of Suspects of Sexual Crimes – where you will find a detailed reviews, from the perspective of the possibility of encountering correlations with suspects with sexual motives;
Appendix VI 2 – Diligences and Exploration of Information related to the aforementioned – in which, in conformity with that already expressed and in order to provide a better consultation, were gathered the information collected about residents in the surrounding areas – temporary and permanent – as well as a listing of local crime (break-ins and others) and crimes of a sexual nature. The information provided came to this Police by individual knowledge, through British authorities or by other sources;
Appendix VII - Letters Rogatory – outlining the diligences performed, at the request of the Portuguese judiciary, in foreign countries;
Appendix VIII – Transportation, Movement and Location of Sightings – in this appendix are collected and analyzed the information related to possible means of transportation/flight, by land means (road—trains), sea and air. Also explored were information related to the delivery of photographs from individuals in the area for holidays and obtained by the Police, along with various hotel chains, whose examinations yielded nothing useful;
Appendix IX – Juridic Actions
In addition, and in spite of its irrelevance, there were meanwhile added 22 "dossiers" with notifications of a speculative or clearly incredible nature, such as psychic visions or divinations, which will not be included with the documentation, but which you will find carefully organized, in the eventuality that they may need to be consulted in the future.
>>>
DEVELOPMENT
The present documentation originated from a process elaborated by this Police, having received notice of the disappearance of a minor of British nationality of three years of age. The occurrence was communicated by the GNR at 00h10 on 4 May 2007.
pages 13 and 14
According to that police force, the disappearance would have occurred at 22H40 (later on it was verified that the detection and the subsequent alarm of the same, in reality happened, between 22H00 and 22H10 of the day 3 of May of 2007, in one of the apartments of the tourist resort 'Ocean Club', located at Vila da Luz, Lagos, where a family composed by a couple and 3 children under aged were staying.
Topologically, the apartment is composed by two bedrooms, a kitchen, a living room and a bathroom, with easy access to the street, from the both the front and the back, where there is a small balcony and a sliding door.
At the time of the disappearance, the children were alone in the apartment. However the couple, during dinner, went two times to the same, one of those times being the one where the mother (KATE) noticed that her oldest daughter was no longer there alerting all for that fact.
Aware of this fact, the police squad went to the place, to initiate the relevant investigative steps, at that moment.
Immediately they proceeded with the identifications of the progenitors, GERALD MCCANN and KATE HEALY, as well as of the disappeared minor, MADELEINE BETH MCCANN, born on the 12 of May of 2003, in the United Kingdom. Besides MADELEINE the couple has two more children, twins, with two years old, at the time of the facts, who were also staying in the same bedroom from where the child disappeared.
Informally, GERALD MCCANN said that he was on the resort since the 28 of April 2007, on vacation, for a period of time corresponding to a week. The day after their arrival, 29/05/07, they started doing their meals at the 'Ocean Club' restaurant, which is distanced a few meters away from the apartment, with the company of three other couples, who had also travelled with them.
Specifically to what is relative to the day 3, he alleged that:
- they woke up around 07H30, had breakfast in the apartment, going out at around 09H00;
- soon after, they left their children at the nursery, until 12H30;
- around 14H30, after lunch, they put their children back at the nursery, this time until 17H00;
- at 17H30 they did the children's hygiene, and settle them in their respective beds by 19H30, all in the same bedroom;
- at 20H30, the couple went out to the restaurant;
- at 21H05/21H15 the father went to check the children, noticing that all was normal, the window and the blinds were closed, however the door to the room seemed more opened than when he had left;
pages 15 and 16
- at around 9.20 p.m., a friend from the group, JANE TANNER, when heading for her apartment, noticed an individual who carried a child in his arms, walking down the road. She described him as aged 30 to 40, with dark hair and wearing light coloured trousers;
- at 9.30 p.m., it was the time for another friend, MATTHEW OLDFIELD, to go to the MCCANNS' apartment to check on the children, but he only saw the twins, given the fact that he did not enter the room. In order to see MADELEINE'S bed, he would have to go inside. He detected nothing out of the ordinary;
- at around 10 p.m., when KATE went to the apartment she verified that MADELEINE had disappeared, and that the window and shutters of the bedroom were open.
Apart from that, and according to what was established within the investigation in the meantime, the witness MATTHEW OLDFIELD assumes that, at around 8.55 p.m., he went near the outside of the window of the bedroom where MADELEINE was sleeping – a window that was closed – in order to verify if there was any noise in the inside that might indicate that the child was not asleep. He heard nothing, therefore concluding that everything was well.
Due to its relevance, on that very night the Maintenance Director, SILVIA BAPTISTA, was asked for a list of the resort's guests and the check outs on the 3rd, as well as the identification of the crèche workers, where the children stayed during the day.
It should be emphasized that the entire apartment had been searched and rummaged by an undetermined number of people, with the contamination that it brings and the difficulty that it raises for the collection of residues.
On that very night, the surroundings of the apartment, and Vila da Luz itself, were intensely searched through, both by the GNR members and by members of the public.
Concerning that and other searches on subsequent days, the proof is given by the report that was written by the GNR from pages 3491-a to 3525-a, with the latter being a cartographic remission. The same procedure was made by the Maritime Police, according to the report from pages 3867 until 3885.
On page 06 the air registration of the luggage pertaining to the MCCANN family was appended, as well as the passport that belongs to the missing minor.
From pages 12 to 23, we can observe the photographic coverage of the location of the facts, which were collected on that night, as well as a layout of the apartment.
On page 26 the report that was written by the GNR can be found, on page 30 the photograph of the minor that was given by the parents, taken from a memory card and revealed on a printer that belongs to one of the nannies, as will be seen further on, and the press communication, on pages 33-B.
It should be pointed out, in terms of the media knowledge and divulgation, that witness RACHEL MAMPILLY, at around 2 a.m. on the morning of the 4th, assumes to have contacted the official British television BBC, through someone that she knew, reporting the disappearance and asking for it to be broadcast.
pages 17 and 18
First thing in the morning on 4 May, and already within the framework of heavy media coverage, an interview of the entire group took place, pages 34-83, interrogations which were repeated later.
From pages 86 to 118, there are included details relative to the identity of the nannies (CATRIONA BAKER and STACEY PORTZ) and all the officials of the establishment, with the two that dealt with the MCCANN children being heard informally; nothing unusual having been reported by them, they were formally interviewed again later.
In subsequent days, with the participation of over a hundred researchers from the PJ, the enormous collection of diverse notifications about the disappearance was reviewed, having been already completed innumerable contacts resulting from the ongoing processing of information.
The collection of notifications was transmitted by a wide variety of sources, coming to the PJ by various means, requiring the installation of a permanent police post within the Luz village.
The result of such efforts is found in the documentation and the various appendices, having been spent thousands of hours of work in its completion.
It should be noted, also, the receipt of an enormous quantity of fantastical notifications, devoid of any credibility, which forced the research into constant and considerable clarification efforts, all the more important as it was known that time was of the utmost importance in the fundamental goal of finding the missing girl.
>>>
Resuming the factual description, it is noteworthy that from pages 119 and forward, the witness JEREMY WILKINS, affirmed that he saw an individual with a strange appearance and behaviour. This was eventually confirmed to be a guest, who participated in the searches, page 124.
From pages 127 and following, relates the the sighting of a child, with a face similar to MADELEINE's, in a gas station. When the images from the gas station were shown to the parents, they peremptorily affirmed that they did not represent their daughter.
On page 134, is reported a situation, once again resulting from physical similarities with MADELEINE, later verified as not being the child. In addition, an attempt was made to locate an individual referred for sexual abuse of minors, later coming to verify that at the relevant time period, he was no longer in Portugal.
pages 19 and 20
There was a inquest to DENISE BERYL ASHTON, fls. 136, which reported the presence of two individuals, who she could not identify or recognize, which, alleged that they were conducting a petitioning in behalf of a children's institution, which would be fraudulent. Despite that this situation took place on the day 03 May, we could not relate it with the disappearance of the British minor, nor the description corresponds to the sketch widespread in the media by the press officer of the MCCANN couple, issue that will be addressed next .
From the Fls. 140 to 144, it was reported an alleged sighting of the minor, which, after several diligences, was proved, again, to be another child.
A witness, DEREK FLACK, heard at page 200, reported the presence of a suspect, who was allegedly looking at the target apartment, near a white truck, pages 145 and following pages. It was not possible to identify this person, despite having been made a portrait-robot, page 205. However, we believe there are very strong possibilities of being construction workers – who were there making small works - a gardener (fls. 973), or BARRINGTON NORTON (fls 833), inquired at page 704. The latter is a regular of Praia da Luz, engaged in the activity of musician on the streets of the town. Nothing was found relevant to the investigation.
From the page 161 to 197, NUNO JESUS, reported a situation connected with his daughter, with clear similarities with Madeleine, which was the victim of an alleged attempt to kidnap (qualified by himself) by a Polish couple, whose registration of the hire car and used in national territory, he provided to the police. They were approached when going back to their native country, nothing was detected that could incriminate them, pages 214 to 216. The car and the place where they had enjoyed their holidays was analysed in a laboratory, but once again without incriminating results
It was near the report at page 148, where it's described the approach door-to door taken in 443 houses, all of them in Praia da Luz, which is demonstrative of the gigantic work that would be carried out. Such approach included the physical entrance, with the agreement of the inhabitants, in many just to verify completely the eventual presence of traces of the minor disappeared.
LANCE PURSE, inquired at page 208, did equally a sketch of an individual, page 210, which possessed similar characteristics similar to the one related by another witness, who also didn't identify himself.
At pages 211 and 212, it is reported another occurrence relative to an individual referenced for sexual abuse of minors, who, after the approach of the same, nothing of relevance was brought to the present investigation.
"Mutatis mutandis", [literally "changes changed", from Latin, in this instance someone who changes constantly of mood], relative to a guest from the female gender, who revealed a odd behaviour, but with no vector of correlation to the disappearance of MADELEINE MCCANN.
At page 220 the hearings of the resort employees started, from there nothing resulted as being relevant or useful for the investigation at course. From the hearings there were no elements collected which allowed to follow any line of investigation.
pages 21 to 26
Inquired employees: -----
A huge list of names which I will not write here for the right to privacy of these people.
The baby sitters that talked to the media in previous interviews are on the list.
CATRIONA T. S. BAKER
STACEY PORTZ
CHARLOTTE E. A. PENNINGTON
Also several G.N.R. Military, belonging to various areas, patrols and binomials (sic) were heard in declarations - list of names
>>>
end of page 26 : In the path of the diligences of localization, it was requested the entry registrar of the Marina de Lagos, place who does not have a system to collect images, usually called by CCTV, page 290.
pages 27 and 28
Information was also collected that the road known as A22, usually known as “Via Infante de Sagres”, does not have images available either, to match the period of time that would be of interest.
Diligences were carried out to try to locate and discover the routines of individuals that are related to criminal practices of a sexual nature, pages 293 to 300, 448 to 451, 452 and 453; nothing was discovered that could be characterized as relevant.
From pages 309 to 311, and because it could be important, we mentioned the only register of a repair that was carried out in the apartment that was used by the MCCANN family, without major relevance.
>>>
The situation concerning the first suspect, ROBERT MURAT, will now be approached, thus following a line of the succession of the facts, without prejudice of returning to the description of occurrences further ahead.
A few days after the facts took place, suspicions were raised concerning an individual that resides approximately 100/150 metres away from apartment 5A, identified as ROBERT JAMES QUERIOL EVELEIGH MURAT.
These suspicions arose initially due to the formulation by a British journalist, who found the special commitment and curiosity of MURAT in this case to be strange, which had reminded her of another [case] that had taken place in the United Kingdom with similar outlines and where the guilty persons had actively participated in searches.
The reasons for said suspicion are duly listed within the information that is contained in the process, on pages 308, 328, 442, 461, 957, 960, 961 and 986 to 1000, being certain that they ended up being reinforced, some time later, by elements of the holiday group that asserted, contrary to what MURAT said, that he had participated in the searches on the evening of the disappearance.
In an initial phase, before the investigation was deepened, this individual gathered the conditions to be pointed out as a suspect. The conditions that are intrinsical to his suspect status, can be analysed, as stated before, on the routine reports that were mentioned above.
In order to confirm or dismiss the suspicions about ROBERT MURAT, searches and telephone surveillance were requested, pages 995 to 1013, both on the suspect and on the individuals with whom he directly or indirectly interacted, namely with who he met almost daily and maintained telephone contacts.
Despite the exhaustive and methodical investigation into MURAT and the persons close to him, no elements whatsoever were collected to relate him to the crime that was under investigation, and it should be noted that contrary to what witnesses within the group stated concerning his hypothetical participation in the searches on the night of the disappearance, other witnesses (like SILVIA BAPTISTA and elements of the GNR) asserted that they had not seen him during those diligences.
pages 29 and 30
Beyond the communication interceptions and forensic exams of the computers belonging to them, which pointed to nothing useful, several searches were also performed in the suspect’s home, as mentioned earlier, with cino-technical assistance and exploration of the subsoil, both physically and by technological detection means, which also did not allow for the collection of exact evidence.
Be aware that, in relation to the utilization of very advanced technological means, in the area of the detection of strange bodies in the subsoil or enclosed [walled in], these were performed specifically by technicians from Aveiro University, using equipment that allowed a detailed search of the area.
This [research] continued in the same way in relationship to all the vehicles of the group, with no results.
The homes and vehicles were examined in great detail by the Scientific Police Laboratory, without finding any relevant vestiges.
The analyses of the telephone and electronic communications (reports in appendix II) and the resultant correlation, had the same results.
In the interrogation headquarters, the suspect denied any involvement with the process. The interviews with all the elements, with personal and professional relationships with ROBERT MURAT, also did not deliver anything of value as evidence.
In truth, in the unfolding of the searches, several objects were apprehended, for later analysis, without having obtained any incriminating evidence, which you can better observe in Volume V of the documentation, where the processual pieces related to the searches are found.
>>>
Returning to the sequence of information which has some relevance related to finding the minor, there came forth information about the presence of a sack [bag] near a cliff in Ponta da Piedade, Lagos, pages 316 to 327, whose contents revealed nothing of importance.
Page 463, reveals information related to an individual who spoke in Castellean, whose involvement was not able to be discovered.
Pages 524 to 531, 740 to 749, provide information about supposed sightings of the minor, all of them disparate amongst themselves.
On page 800, the interview with TASMIN MILBURN SILENCE is presented, who saw on two occasions and on several other days, an individual observing the apartment from which MADELEINE disappeared. A photo-fit was created based on the witness' indications . . . diligences were performed which led to the identification of MICHAEL ANTHONY GREEN, who was the target of diverse diligences without incriminatory results, pages 632 to 726 of Volume III, Appendix VI. Beyond this individual, there were other diligences performed at this level, also without useful results for the investigation, as is explained throughout Appendix VI.
pages 31 and 32
Still on Appendix VI, pages 504 and in the following, it was investigated a situation relative to two individuals, NEIL BERRY and RAJINDER BALU (complementary inquests requested in the letter rogatory), specifically relative with the first one, whose information was crossed with the above aforementioned witness, TASMIN SILENCE, namely to what concerns the photo-fit, having this one made clear that it was not that same individual.
This occurrence was targeted due to an information given by an employee of the resort, pages 504 and 505 of the Appendix VI, where a somewhat peculiar situation was reported, supposedly to do with NEIL BERRY. However, in spite of the diligences done, inclusive in the letter rogatory, nothing was established that connected him to the disappearance of the British child.
At the pages 801 and the following, an information was worked relative to a sighting done by a professional taxi driver.
Also relative to the individuals who do this type of professional work and who have their headquarters in Praia da Luz, page 818, we talked with them but nothing of relevant for the process was determined.
At the pages 820 to 822, an information from the maritime police was added, creating several diligences, however had no results.
From the page 825 to 830, we added a report of the G.N.R. police action. Nothing of pertinent value was deducted.
For the analyses and dismissal of eventual relevant situations, traffic reports were requested in the places considered of higher interest, page 823, relatively to the days 2, 3 and 4th of May of 2007, and that was object of a highly detailed analytical report (see Appendix II), though without criminal conclusions.
At page 835, a report of a diligence done in a gipsy camp was done, nothing useful was gathered.
At page 848 and following and from pages 856 to 857 a synopsis of the interrogations done to the resort employees was made.
At page 859, it’s related a situation eventually suspicious which leads to nothing of interest for the process.
At page 868, an occurrence is reported (about a couple who had an argument, where is mentioned the disappearance of a child), after investigation this did not lead to relevant elements.
From page 870 to 883, it was done the reconstitution of the places outside the nursery, where the British child and her nanny went.
At page 884 and the following, it was added the lophoscopy [study of fingerprints] report where only finger traces of KATE HEALY were found, namely on the window’s frame who would have been opened at the time of the disappearance, and at page 967, another report describing the same type of exam, this time without any match, though the diffusion done at an International and national level, page 1470. Later on we verified that that trace wasn’t of author (sic), page 1480.
Page 33 and 34
On pages 886 and following, a typed report can be observed, which was elaborated by the holidaying group after a detailed joint meeting, that recalls that steps that were made on that evening, describing the facts both in time and space.
On page 993, there is a report listing the apartments that were subject to searches, with special attention on blocks 4 and 5.
On pages 983 and 984, the preservation, for visualization purposes, of images from several petrol stations was requested, but nothing out of the ordinary was observed, page 3191.
On pages 1101 and following, several pieces of information from Interpol are listed, alerting towards supposed sightings of the minor, in several European countries, but absolutely nothing was found.
Diverse information concerning other suspects of crimes of sexual abuse of minors and paedophilia, page 1246 and following, which, after due analysis, did not contribute with anything of interest for the investigation.
On page 1398 there is an answer to the question from page 1400, informing that there are no other images from the GALP station, apart from those that were already delivered.
On page 1592, a divulgation, appealing to the person who on the 3rd of May 2007, at around 9.30 p.m., in Praia da Luz, transported a child in his arms, to identify himself, in order to dismiss the situation that was narrated by witness JANE TANNER.
Further on this issue, the testimony of MARTIN SMITH was considered, pages 1606 and following, reporting the sighting of an individual carrying a child, in one of the streets that lead to the beach. It was said that the child could be MADELEINE McCANN, although it was never peremptorily stated. Some time later, the witness alleged that, by its stance, the individual who carried the child could be GERALD McCANN, which was concluded when he saw him descending the stairs from an airplane, pages 2871, 3991 and following and 4135 and following. It was established that at the time that was being mentioned, GERALD McCANN was sitting at the table, in the Tapas Restaurant.
The workers that carried out construction works in Vila da Luz were heard, pages 1650 and 1651, who did not detect anything strange, during their works of excavation and placement of plumbing (also see pages 3983 to 3987), although they carefully verified, on the day that followed the disappearance and before they started the works, if there was a body hidden next to said works.
From pages 1811 to 1827 we appended two lab tests and the corresponding reports, which turned out to have no evidential interest for the process.
On pages 1846 and following, a situation of fraud was reported, concerning misleading and fraudulent information relating to the whereabouts of MADELEINE McCANN. This individual, who was the author of the fraud, was detained, and confessed to know nothing about the facts, after detailed and pertinent diligences were carried out by the authorities of the Netherlands, within the frame of a Rogatory Letter. The main report, which comprises the diligences that were requested and carried out by the Dutch Police can be found in the corresponding appendix.
pages 35 and 36
On page 1897, a Spanish journalist was heard, who was to have information about the alleged abductor. Once again, nothing was supplied that allowed for the substantiation of such suspicions.
An attempt was made to obtain identification elements from users of computer equipment in two establishments in Luz, which was not possible, as explained on page 1900.
On page 2006 and forward, is found the report of an identical occurance to one that had happened in Holland, coming to be found to pertain to, once again, untrue information about the child. With the prestigious collaboration of the Spanish authorities, Grupo de Sequestros de Madrid, it was possible to identify the couple responsible for the false information, with only the male being detained under the auspices of an outstanding detention mandate.
>>>
Now the question related to the performance of the British dogs will be covered, along with the consequent quality assumed by the parents of MADELEINE, once again with the ability to revisit the description later in the report.
In this way, from pages 1989 and following, one can read the full report by MARK HARRISON, whose specialty is the search for missing people or homicide victims, including catastrophe scenarios. He provided the use of canines, specialized in the detection of vestiges of human blood and human cadaver odor.
This is an inspection technique commonly used in the United Kingdom, frequently with positive results, consisting of the utilization of two especially trained dogs.
One of the dogs is trained to detect cadaver odor and the other to detect vestiges of human blood, with existing knowledge that their prior usage had resulted in significant results, principally in the detection of vestiges, which had then been, later, confirmed in the laboratory.
After a positive joint meeting with the British police, it was decided to use this capability and a large number of objects and locations were examined, with these diligences being recorded in films which are included in the documentation (appendix III).
In some of these locations and objects, the animals exhibited the behaviour of identification and "signaling", including:
pages 37 and 38
1 - Apartment 5A, of the resort 'Ocean Club', place from where the child disappeared.
- cadaver odour dog:
*in the couple’s bedroom, in a corner, close to the wardrobe;
*in the living room, behind the sofa, close to the lateral window of the apartment;
- blood dog:
* in the living room, behind the sofa, close to the lateral window of the apartment (exactly as it was signalled by the cadaver odour dog);
2 – Area of the backyard, close to the apartment 5A:
- cadaver odour dog:
* in a flowerbed, commented by the dog handler the lightness of the scent detected;
3 – Apartments where the rest of the elements of the group stayed
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;
4 – House of the MCCANNs at the date of the inspection
* NOTHING at the house, was detected by any of the dogs;
5 - In the area of Vila da Luz
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;
6 – In the clothes and belongings of the Family MCCANN
- cadaver odour dog:
* in two pieces of clothing belonging to KATE HEALY
* in a piece of clothing of the minor MADELEINE
* in the plush toy, possibly belonging to MADELEINE (it was detected cadaver odour, when the plush was inside the residence – at the date occupied by the family)
7 – In the vehicle used by the MCCANN family
- cadaver odour dog:
* signalled the key of the vehicle;
- blood dog:
* signalled the key of the vehicle;
* signalled the interior of the vehicle’s boot;
8 – In the vehicle used by a friend of the family, who stayed in the same resort, matching some of the holiday days.
pages 39 and 40
* NOTHING was detected by either dog;
9. In all the vehicles that were used by arguido ROBERT MURAT and persons that are close to him;
* NOTHING was detected by either dog.
(in a total of ten vehicles, the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour dog only signaled the vehicle that belonged to the MCCANN family, which was rented on the 27th of May)
On the locations and the pieces that were marked and signaled by the blood dog, forensics tests were performed, especially at a reputed British laboratory (Forensic Science Service – check Appendixes I and VII – FSS Final Report) but also, some of them at the reputed National Institute of Forensics Medicine (check Appendix I), whose final results did not corroborate the canine markings, which is to say, cellular material was collected that was not identified as pertaining to anyone specific, and it was not even possible to determine the quality of that material (v.g. whether it could be blood or another type of bodily fluid).
But during a first scientific approach (pages 2617 and following), the possibility of a match between the DNA profile of MADELEINE and some of the collected residues (among which those that existed in the Renault Scenic that had been rented by the McCANN couple were abundant) was raised; a match which, as can be verified in the aforementioned final report from the FSS, failed to be verified, after the execution of long and complex testing.
On pages 2461 and following, the translation of the comments that were made by the dog handler, during the inspection actions, was appended.
Based on the action of the canine team and the aforementioned initial scientific approach, which revealed the possibility of the existence of a cadaver inside the apartment and in the vehicle that was used by the MCCANN family, and in order to allow for GERALD McCANN and KATE HEALY to see their position within the process safeguarded, they were made arguidos, in face of the mere possibility of their involvement with the possible cadaver. During the questioning as arguidos, they denied any responsibility in the disappearance of their daughter.
It may be questioned that KATE HEALY was not immediately made an arguida, but rather inquired, as a witness, and only afterwards, following said inquirition, did she assume that quality.
Therefore, the constitution of KATE HEALY as an arguida was made when she was confronted with concrete elements that might lead to her incrimination, a fact that, within the terms of the penal process law, would officiously force that constitution.
Returning to the description of the pieces of the process, on page 2294, there is a note of the delivery of four (04) photographs, which were printed by an employee of the resort, AMY TIERNEY.
pages 41 and 42
Page 4193, she clarified that the photographs were made on her own printer, which allowed her to use photographic paper and cut to size (10x15), which in this way, reduced any suspicion related to her possession, on the part of the parents.
Nonetheless, before her interview, the photographs were examined, as related on pages 4155 and following, and pages 4197, in which it is alleged to not be possible to determine with complete confidence if the printer is compatible with the photographs, but it seems to us, by the laboratory results (merely indicative) that these photographs were printed there.
On pages 2305, 3195 and 3212 is the detailed report, relative to the laboratory exams done on the apartment from where the disappearance occurred, which took place on 4 May 2007.
On page 2327, is the report of the exams of the home and some of the vehicles of ROBERT MURAT and, on page 2348, the report of the exam of the car belonging to SERGEY MALINKA, an individual of interest given his relationship with ROBERT MURAT, not having been uncovered, however, anything of a criminal nature.
On pages 2360 to 2371, is the report of the vehicles belonging to LUÌS ANTÒNIO, with whom, also, ROBERT MURAT had an acquaintance. Nothing suspicious was found.
On page 2383, is the report of the exam done in the apartment retained by the Polish couple and, on page 3230, the detailed report of the exams done on the vehicle rented by the McCANN couple.
All of these exams, for now, allowed nothing to be inferred relative to the exact understanding of the facts.
On page 2396, is a file, which was attributed an inquiry number, which alludes to a supposed sighting. This occurrence was duly discarded, after several diligences, outlined from pages 2739 to 2762.
On page 2412, is the interview with PAMELA FENN, who relates several details, of which, though not clarifying the facts, are elucidating. PAMELA FENN lives on the first floor of the residential block, above the apartment occupied by the McCANN family. She related that, on 1 May 2007, two days before the disappearance, at about 22h30, she heard a child crying, which by the sound was MADELEINE. The child continued weeping for one hour and 15 minutes, until the parent’s arrival (she heard the door sounds), at about 23h45. This witness places in cause the allegation (by the parents) of the daily routine of visits every 30 minutes to check the children who had been left on their own.
She also added to the files, that her niece, CAROLE, on the morning of 3 May 2007, had seen an individual observing the child’s apartment. This individual was not identified, but could have been a gardener. An interview with CAROLE was requested in the Letter Rogatory submitted to the UK authorities, with nothing relevant having been discovered.
pages 43 and 44
On pages 2426 and following, the forensics report was attached, concerning the residues that were collected on several locations, with results that did not attain the desired purpose, which was to establish elements that conducted to the author or authors of the facts.
From pages 2771 to 2869, the final report was added, concerning the action of the canines and the searches, carried out by the British experts.
A new occurrence was explored on pages 2876 and following, concerning a crematorium, where according to the press, the cadaver of the British minor could have been placed. The crematorium was closed and sealed, according to what is explained in the aforementioned report.
On page 2897, the copies of the contract for the vehicle that was rented by the McCANN family were requested, and added from pages 2900 to 2937, as well as the registers from anterior rentals, including the last user, who was heard on page 2997.
On page 2945 and following, some situations concerning movements by the McCANN couple and episodes involving the press and private detectives are reported.
On page 2962, the holiday group’s flight data is added, in its entirety.
On pages 3148 and following, the sighting of an individual with a strange behaviour, though not substantially founded, who sometimes was motionless and other times spoke on the phone from a cabin, is mentioned. That individual, according to witness statements from pages 3150 to 3156, had some similarities with the figure that was described by JANE TANNER, page 3157. Nothing was established that could relate him to the facts.
All the garbage bins that exist in the Vila da Luz and surroundings, in a total number of 188 (one hundred and eighty eight), were searched and inspected, yet nothing relevant was found, page 3183.
According to what is documented in the process, on the afternoon of the 3rd of May, the group, with the exception of the McCANN family, were in a bar next to the beach, named "Paraíso", and the images from the video surveillance system were appended, pages 3266 to 3273, which did not supply any further clarifying elements.
On pages 3893 and following, several inquiritions that came from the British Authorities, and the corresponding translations, were added, with an informative character.
On pages 3922 and 3923, a summary of the financial situation of the group, constituted by nine persons, can be found.
On page 3924, due to the tight connection with the McCANN couple, the priest who practises in Praia da Luz, Father JOSÉ PACHECO, was questioned, but did not add anything relevant for the investigation to the process.
On pages 3928 and following, another summary of the sequence of events, executed by the holiday group, was added.
pages 45 and 46
The report on page 3998 and the inquirition on page 3459-a refers to two telephone communications that were received on the night of the facts by KATE HEALY, from a bar that is located in Vilamoura. It was possible to verify that it was a common friend/client between both.
In the same perspective that motivated the appending of the registries of users of the vehicle that was rented by the couple, the appending of the register of occupants of apartment G5A was carried out, page 3417-a.
The wife of the Anglican Priest, SUSAN HUBARD, was questioned, as she had a relationship of some proximity to the McCANN couple, during their stay in Portugal. Once again, nothing that can be reputed as important was collected.
On page 3418-a YVONE MARTIN was questioned, who offered some information, which, despite its pertinence, did not show any relevance, pages 3421-a and following.
Information was collected from a Spanish detective agency, named "Método 3", which was hired by a British citizen, to benefit the McCANN couple. This contact was solicitated by this agency, and the information that was given was subject to analysis and dismissal by this Police, pages 3434-a and following. It revealed itself, all of it, as speculative and without fundament, focusing particular attention on ROBERT MURAT.
From the tests and inspections that were carried out, a biological residue was collected which supposedly carried identificative value. Faced with this, the same residue was sent to Interpol, in order to be compared with the compatible databases, page 3467-a.
Following the aforementioned canine action, after the constitution and the questioning under arguido status of GERALD McCANN and KATE HEALY, these would end up abandoning the national territory, returning to the United Kingdom, where the remaining elements of the group already were.
From this moment on, it became necessary to request from the British authorities the performance of a set of diligences, that had the purpose of helping to clarify the facts and to establish what type of crime had been committed, as well as the responsibility of the corresponding authorship, pages 3528-a and following.
Therefore, from page 3705-a to page 3792-a the Rogatory Letter is appended, that was elaborated by the Public Ministry, based on what had been reported by the Polícia Judiciária, and from page 3795-a to page 3822-a, a second rogatory letter, this time elaborated the solicitation of arguidos GERALD McCANN and KATE HEALY.
From pages 3928 until 3931 the statements from a witness, who helped during the searches for the child and who decided to give a voluntary statement, were appended. It did not point out anything of substantial relevance.
From pages 3932 to 3937, another witness alleged that she had seen GERALD McCANN, in Avenida Descobrimentos, in Lagos, near an ATM terminal, at around 2.26 p.m. on the 7th of May 2007. According to the witness, the father of the minor was talking on the phone, saying "don’t hurt Madeleine, please". She was not peremptory in affirming that it was GERALD McCANN. It seems unlikely to us that it was GERALD, given the fact that on that day, he only activated antennas in Praia da Luz, adding to the fact that, at around 2.16 p.m., he activated an antenna in the centre of Praia da Luz, which we consider to make it impossible that he was present in Lagos ten minutes later.
pages 47 and 48
On pages 3943 and forward, is the request for a comparison of the DNA for MADELEINE McCANN, with the genetic profile of a child's cadaver found on the coast of the USA, victim of a homicide. It was verified that they were incompatible.
From page 3948 to 3964 an intercalar report was elaborated, giving an account of the diligences meanwhile performed and the results obtained, as well as explanations of the same.
>>>
Now in an advanced phase of the investigation, pages 3965 to 4113, there arises, related to the private investigation developed by the McCann couple, and publicly announced by their spokesman, CLARENCE MITCHELL, the alleged existence of a suspect, which, supposedly, was undertaking a collection in Praia da Luz, at the time of the disappearance. A fotofit was created of this individual by a witness – GAIL COOPER – who saw him, page 3979.
From the beginning and immediately, this was compared with the photo-fit from JANE TANNER, and despite hers not having a face, page 3977, she alleged they were the same person, with an approximately 80% certainty.
In order to assess the credibility of the description and of the drawing, it is important to highlight that the witness GAIL COOPER, was heard for the first time and in a very detailed fashion [emphasis in the report], by the British authorities (see page 3982), then affirming that she saw this person only one time [emphasis in the report], in a collection done at the door of the residence she was occupying during her holidays.
However, a few months later, in a new deposition, the same witness affirms that she saw this individual three times [emphasis in the report] (one of which he was watching, in a strange way, the children at the Paraíso Restaurant), during her stay in Luz, information which she did not supply at the time of her first deposition to the police in the UK.
With the publication of this portrait, a myriad notices about sightings of this individual arose, most from the UK, but also from Portugal (see pages 4130).
All of this information received due treatment and evaluation in regards to credibility, of which nothing has come until now, in spite of innumerable persons approached, supposedly of similar appearance with the "suspect".
pages 49 and 50
Apart from other investigative actions, said persons were photographed and their mobile phones crossed with the antennas that were activated in Vila da Luz, during the period that is comprehended between the 2nd and the 4th of May 2007, without any connection resulting from it.
On page 4116, a situation that was related to an individual who had been referenced for sexual abuse of minors was explored, whose inquiry was under process in this Department. There was no information whatsoever concerning his involvement in the present investigation, yet, as it referred to a sexual crime against minors, several diligences were carried out, whose result, for this case, was fruitless.
On pages 4147 and following, an information was received, and duly taken care of, concerning a new supposed sighting of MADELEINE McCANN. It was once again verified that it was a child that resembled her.
On pages 4163 to 4165, the situation that involved the abduction and murder of a minor of gipsy ethnicity, in the city of Huelva, Spain, was considered and duly correlated with the disappearance of MADELEINE McCANN. After several contacts were established with the investigation that was ongoing in the neighbouring country, it was concluded that the occurrences are disparate among themselves.
From pages 4167 to 4182, the forensics report from the National Institute for Forensic Medicine was appended, whose conclusions do not allow for significant advances in the investigation, but which identify several different haplotypes, some of which match intervenients in the process and others without any identificative value.
Immediately, the question concerning the differentiating value of some haplotypes [haplotype (Greek haploos = single) is a combination of alleles at multiple loci that are transmitted together on the same chromosome] was raised, namely concerning JANE TANNER, page 4175, which was located in a residence in Burgau, which, in our understanding, would not be viable and logical, or to say the least, would be very strange. Therefore, in order to clarify this situation, a clarification was requested from that Institute, pages 4320 and following, which, in its reply, is peremptory in stating that there are haplotypes that are identical among each other, in a percentage that is still significant, pages 4325 to 4328. This means that the hair that was found inside that residence, while possessing the same haplotype as JANE TANNER, belongs to someone else.
Still within the area of collection, treatment and analysis of residues, the identification of a stain on the cover of one of the beds in MADELEINE’s bedroom (not the one she slept in), which raised some suspicions, should be pointed out.
Duly analysed, the stain configured a biological residue (saliva) that belonged to a child – CHARLIE GORDON – that had been on holidays, earlier and with his parents, in the same apartment.
On pages 4200 and following and pages 4204 to 4212, two events were reported, which once again, were subject to treatment, and their importance to the ongoing investigation was immediately dismissed.
>>>
pages 51 and 52
Summarising the diligences that are reported in the process and that were carried out or coordinated by the PJ, the following should be mentioned:
- de factum preservation of the location (despite the fact that it had already been rummaged by countless persons), several collections and exams on the existence of possible residues, as well as a circumstantiated photographic report;
- installation, within the first 24 hours, of an extensive operational scheme, including the participation of several police forces and civil protection services, in a total of over 130 elements;
- reinforcement, within the next 24 hours, of said operational scheme, with the mobilization of over 300 elements from police forces and public entities;
- the operational mechanism that was implemented on the terrain included, among others, and as soon as possible, the installation of posts to control the roads and the southern terrestrial frontier with Spain, the usage of canine detection teams, the usage of exceptional search and rescue means – aerial, terrestrial and maritime -, alerts and broadcasts all over the country and abroad. Just as an example, it is mentioned that during the following weeks and in permanence, two helicopters, four ships and several off-road vehicles were used, apart from airplanes and private ships;
- in the same manner, the investigative operations were coordinated with the specific search operations, and hundreds of diligences were carried out, like the identification and hearing – both formally and informally – of citizens, the execution of door-to-door searches in the residences and tourist resorts of Vila da Luz and surrounding areas, the identification and search of vehicles, and searches on the terrain, in an area that was initially of 15 square kilometers, and then was progressively enlarged until 30 square kilometers (where special attention was given to locations like wells, passages, tunnels, dams and lakes);
The magnitude of this operation exceeded, right from the first moment, the dimension that is commonly used in similar cases, a fact that was made public, having been notoriously and widely publicized by the media.
On the following days, over 700 persons that might possess any relevant information about the disappearance were formally and informally questioned, the PJ having used, for that task, over 100 employees from several departments in Portimão, Faro and Lisbon, which worked on a consecutive basis of 24 hours per day.
Equally, all the locations where images that could be related to the case might exist, were consulted (like, for example, restaurants and petrol stations) and telephone lines from the permanent services of the departments in Faro and Portimão were made available, and a mobile police post was installed in Vila da Luz for the collection of information.
Beyond the already mentioned identifications and domiciliary door-to-door searches, the identification, contact and interview with known suspects in the area that had previously been connected to sexual criminality over minors was carried out.
pages 53 and 54
Also, regarding the missing child's parents, the PJ was careful to schedule periodic meetings with them and to designate an Official Liaison to the family as support for a permanent relationship, with the accompaniment and active collaboration of the Royal British Consulate in Portimão.
Shortly after the beginning of the investigation, continuous relationships were created with the Leicestershire Constabulary which sent, in support, various of their members to Portugal, having, equally, the PJ sending employees to the UK.
It is emphasized, specifically, that the level of cooperation and of understanding between the PJ and the Leicestershire Constabulary achieved, always, very high levels, united in the common pursuit of the missing child and the truth.
As such, the Portuguese authorities engaged an enormous and expensive panoply of technical and human resources, in the attempt to discover the missing child and the understanding of the explanation of the disappearance.
The PJ never disregarded any information or credible elements – as will be seen in this criminal process – that could have led to the realization of the disappearance, and there have been completed, during these months, more than 2000 diligences, formal and informal, in this regard.
As an example, we refer to the international cooperation, especially with Spain, the Netherlands and the UK which led to the detention and identification of individuals who tried to introduce deceptive information about the hypothetical destination or location of the child.
All of the information with any major or minor level of credibility was explored, nationally and internationally, by the PJ, with special relevance given to dozens of supposed sightings or localizations of the child, most of which, in fact, were widely publicized in the press.
The PJ, as in probably no other investigation in Portugal, withheld no effort, in the sense of providing exceptional technical means, manpower and financing towards the discovery of the child and the determination of the truth of the facts, having been completely accompanied in this effort by the Leicestershire Constabulary, the police department headquartered in the city of Leicestershire, from where most of the elements of the holiday group are from.
As another example, just the scientific exams alone cost many tens of thousands of euros.
Addressing now, and specifically, the question relative to the diligence known as the "reconstitution of the facts" (Article 150º of the Penal Process Code), which was not performed due to the refusal of some of the integral members of the holiday group to return to our country (as documented in the Inquiry), the same would have clarified, duly and in the location of the disappearance, the following extremely important details, amongst others:
pages 55 and 56
. The physical, real and effective, proximity between JANE TANNER, GERALD McCANN and JEREMY WILKINS, at the moment when the former passed them, and which coincided with the sighting of the supposed suspect, carrying a child. It results, from our understanding, as unusual that neither GERALD McCANN nor JEREMY WILKINS did not see her, nor the alleged abductor, despite the small dimensions of the space;
. The situation that concerns the window of the bedroom where MADELEINE slept, together with the twins, which was open, according to KATE. It would be necessary to clarify whether there was a draft, due to the fact that movement of the curtains and pressure under the bedroom door are mentioned, which would eventually be clarified through the reconstitution.
. The establishing of a timeline and of the effective checking of the minors that were left alone inside the apartments, given the fact that, believing that said checking was as tight as the witnesses and the arguidos describe it, it would be, to say the least, very difficult that the conditions were reunited for the introduction of an abductor in the residence and the posterior exit of said individual, with the child, namely through a window with little space. It is added that the supposed abductor could only pass that window holding the minor in a different position (vertical) from the one that was visualized by witness JANE TANNER (horizontal).
. What happened during the time lapse between 5.30 p.m. (the time at which MADELEINE was seen for the last time by a person that differs from her parents or siblings) and the time at which the disappearance is reported by KATE HEALY (at around 10 p.m.).
Concerning the result of the diligences that were requested from the British authorities, as earlier mentioned, despite the fact that they were almost completely carried out, nothing new was added to the process and, consequentially, to the investigation.
The questioning of the holiday group merely corroborated what had already been established during the investigation, without any detail that could have been reputed as especially relevant being brought forward.
In conclusion, it results from everything that has been done, despite the efforts that were made and all investigation lines being explored, that it is not possible to obtain a solid and objective conclusion about what really happened that night, and about the present location of the missing minor.
On the other hand, it should be referred that this investigation moved itself under conditions of exceptional media exposure, with the publication of many "news" of imprecise, inexact or even false contents, which did not help, in the least, the discovery of the truth and created, many times, a climate of unusual commotion and of lack of serenity.
Therefore, as we do not envision, at the present moment, the execution of any other diligence within the process that might produce any useful result for the process, I submit it to your consideration, for you to determine whatever you may see as convenient.
page 57
* * C O N C L U S I O N * *
Portimão, 20th of June 2008
The Inspector
57 Pages - all pages were translated in pairs hence the number above each part of the article
Note: fls. is the shorten way to write folhas in Portuguese - pages, sometimes it will be translated as pages other times we left it as in the original. Where possible an explanation of terms is given between square brackets.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Archiving of the Madeleine Process: Comment Joana Morais blogspot
By Astro
21 July 2009
One year ago today, the Madeleine McCann case investigation was archived, pending 'better' evidence. The three arguidos in the process, Robert Murat, Kate Healy and Gerald McCann, were relieved of their arguido status.
The archiving dispatch, authored by public prosecutor José de Magalhães e Menezes, and joint prosecutor João Melchior Gomes, is the document that analyses the case investigation and justifies the decision to archive the process.
I personally respect, but disagree with the decision that was made on the case one year ago. The archiving dispatch itself is riddled with contradiction and recognises the very significant amount of facts about this case that remain unclear. How any case can be archived, sustained on a 57-page document that lists nothing but doubts, can only be justified by the need to comply with the new Penal Process Code, which was enforced on the 15th of September 2007. Under the new code, any judicial process starts a countdown on the day that the first arguido is made: after 8 months, with two possible extensions of 3 months each, there has to be a decision to either accuse, or archive the case.
Robert Murat was made an arguido on the 14th of May 2007 - 4 months before the new Penal Process Code was enforced -, and 14 months later, the case was archived, caught in time between two different legal frames.
Nobody wants to believe that Justice could be anything but blind. Personally, I don't want to believe that this case was archived due to a technicality, at a time when there were still diligences to be made, leads to be followed, important details to be clarified.
But that is precisely what the archiving dispatch tells us.
>>>
The Archiving of the Madeleine Process: Part 1 Joana Morais blogspot
By Astro
12 August 2009
1- Introduction
Before actually entering the appreciation of the present inquiry, it is useful to take a summarised look at the enormous dimension of the inquiry which is constituted of 17 Volumes, with a global processing of approximately 4500 leafs, 9 appendixes that are integrated by 55 Volumes, in which 12000 leafs and other relevant pieces were gathered, analysed and treated; further 22 dossiers were constituted, with more than 5000 leafs, concerning fanciful or senseless news, yet organised out of mere caution.
Therefore, this inquiry, which demonstrates the pertinent commitment of the Polícia Judiciária (PJ) in the resolution of the disappearance of minor Madeleine McCann, demanded from it the performance or coordination of several diligences as described in the various files, namely: the preservation of the location of the fact (although it had already been rummaged by numerous people as we will discuss ahead); several collections and examinations on the existence of eventual traces; a circumstantiated photographic report; the installation, in the first 24 hours, of an extensive operational scheme, including the participation of several police and civil protection forces, in a total of over 130 elements; the reinforcement, in the next 24 hours, of said operational scheme, with the mobilisation of over 300 members of police forces and public entities; the installation of control posts on roads and on the Southern terrestrial border with Spain; the use of sniffer dog teams; the use of exceptional search and rescue teams (aerial, terrestrial and maritime), alerts and diffusion all over the country and abroad. As a mere example, during the following weeks and on a permanent basis, two helicopters, four vessels and several all-road vehicles, apart from private airplanes and boats, were employed; in the same manner, the investigation operations were coordinated with the specific search operations, with hundreds of diligences performed, like the identification and the formal and informal hearing of citizens, door-to-door searches, in the impressive number of 443, at the residences and tourist resorts of Vila da Luz and its surroundings, the identification and search of vehicles, and searches on the terrain, in an area that started out covering 15 Km2, and progressively grew to 30Km2 (where special attention was paid to locations like wells, passages, tunnels, reservoirs and lakes).
During the following days, more than 700 persons who might possess some relevant information about the disappearance were formally and informally questioned, with the PJ using more than 100 officers from several departments of Portimão, Faro and Lisbon, who worked on a consecutive base of 24 hours per day to accomplish the task.
All the locations where there could be images that might be related to the case (like, for example, restaurants and petrol stations) were equally consulted, and the telephone lines of the permanent services of the Portimão and Faro departments were made available. A mobile police post was installed in Vila da Luz to collect information.
Apart from the already mentioned identifications and door-to-door house searches, the listing, contact and interview with known local suspects with previous connections to sexual criminality against minors, was performed.
The PJ was especially careful to promote regular meetings with the missing child's parents and also designated a Liaison Officer for the family, for permanent support and relationship, with the active following and cooperation of the Royal British Consulate in Portimão.
Shortly after the beginning of the investigation, continuous relationships with the Leicestershire Constabulary, which, for the effect, sent several of its officers to Portugal, with the PJ equally sending officers to the United Kingdom, were established, and intense cooperation and understanding was registered between these entities, which were united in the common purpose of searching for the missing child, and for the truth.
In the inquiry, it is clear that the PJ never dismissed any information or credible elements that might lead to the revelation of facts, with over 2000 formal and informal diligences carried out over the months, and the PJ having explored, nationally and internationally, all of the information with a higher or lower degree of credibility, with special relevance for tens of supposed sightings or trackings of the child, most of which were widely reported by the press.
>>>
By Astro
12 August 2009
2 – The Inquiry
A - General analysis
In the present process, the disappearance of the child of British nationality, Madeleine Beth McCann, daughter of Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, aged three on the date (about to become four, as she was born on the 12th of May 2003), was investigated.
Concerning the time and the place, the facts have taken place on the 3rd of May of 1007, within the time span, according to testimonies, between 9.05 p.m. and 10 p.m., at the resort called "Ocean Club", located in Vila da Luz – Lagos, where the child's family, together with a group of seven persons, - with whom they kept a friendship that had started before this trip and which was based on professional relations and on other leisure trips -, were enjoying a holiday period, with the duration of one week, having arrived in Portugal on the 28th of April 2007, more precisely at the Airport of Faro, coming from the United Kingdom.
At check-in, they were placed in several apartments, all of them in block G5, next to each other, which was a demand, or, at least, a suggestion of the entire group, which was composed of the couple Gerald McCann, Kate Marie Healy and their children Sean, Amelie and Madeleine, (apartment 5A), David Anthony Payne, Fiona Elaine Payne, their children Lilly Payne and Scarlett Payne and mother-in-law Dianne Webster (apartment 5H – first floor), Russell James O’Brien, Jane Michelle Tanner and their children Ella O’Brien and Evie O’Brien (apartment 5D) and Matthew Oldfield, Rachael Mariamma Jean Mampilly and their daughter Grace Oldfield (apartment 5B), with the apartment that was occupied by the McCann family being the one that was most accessible and had the easiest visibility from the outside.
The behaviour of the group's members until the day of the event was shaped by the normality of a daily routine, which, as far as the McCann couple is concerned, consisted of getting up at around 7.30 a.m. and having breakfast in the apartment; at around 9/9.30 a.m. they left the apartment and left their children at the crèche where they remained until around 12.30 a.m. After lunch, at around 1.30 p.m., the children went to play by the pool and around 2.30 p.m. they left them at the crèche again, where they stayed until around 5 p.m., the time at which the children went for high tea at the bar, which was done in a group, independently of age, in a recreational area next to the "Tapas" restaurant; between 5 and 5.30 p.m., they returned to the apartment, where around 5.30 p.m. they bathed the children, that went to bed at 7.30 p.m.
From the 2nd day of their stay onwards, the couple had dinner at the "Tapas" Restaurant, with the rest of the group, while all of the children stayed asleep alone in their apartments, with the surveillance initially being made by each couple, whose members took turns in checking the children, and as the days went by, each member who went to check his children would take the chance and check on the rest of the children, with the exception of the Payne couple, that possessed their own technological control system, through baby listening monitors, an issue that we will discuss in more detail further ahead.
All of the group's members including the McCann couple were questioned several times, at length and in detail, in order to collect the greatest possible number of relevant details that could assist the investigation in discovering the truth of the facts.
From the analysis of the total of depositions that were made, the existence of important details that were not fully understood and integrated became evident; details that would need to be tested and tried on location, in order to establish the apparent failures to meet and lacks of synchrony, even divergences, in a suitable diligence, which was not possible to perform despite the commitment that was displayed by the Public Ministry and by the PJ to fulfil that purpose, as we will see in closer detail, further ahead.
Considering the participated facts, conjugated with the information that was offered. namely by the witnesses, and with the information that was made available through the development of the inquiry, the investigation equated the verification of several hypotheses: abduction, for the purpose of sexual exploration or others (i.e. posterior adoption, child traffic, organ traffic), without homicide; abduction, followed by homicide with (or without) concealment of a cadaver, hypotheses that were considered under the double sides of the abduction (if it existed) having occurred due to feelings of vengeance of the abductor(s) towards the parents (directed abduction) or simply taking advantage of the circumstance that the child was in a situation of actual vulnerability (opportunity abduction), accidental death, with posterior concealment of the cadaver and, underlying all of these possibilities, abandonment, substantiated as a crime under article 138 of the Penal Code. The possibility of theft, whose author would have been disturbed by the child Madeleine and who, in order to prevent her from disturbing him, neutralised her in a violent manner, and, afterwards, took her with him, dead or alive, in order to leave no trace that could eventually lead to his identification.
The systematisation and order that were given to the Inquiry should further be stressed, as it facilitates an easy approach in its consultation, despite its volume and the complexity of some of the issues; with attention to the synthesis that was made and that is visible namely in the index and in the listing of the persons that intervened in the process.
Therefore, we will follow, despite some isolated diversions, the division that was observed in the Final Report that was made by the Polícia Judiciária:
1 – General diligences to locate the child, performed by the Polícia Judiciária, the Polícia Marítima [Maritime Police] and the G. N. R., and added to the inquiry's main body;
2 – The suspicions about Robert Murat and his arguido status;
3 – Sniffer dog searches and the consequent constitution as arguidos of the British child's parents, Gerald McCann and Kate Healy.
Concerning the appendixes and their contents, they will be analysed within the 3 main issues into which the investigation has been divided.
in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4595-4598 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)
>>>
By Astro
25 July 2009
C - The suspicions about Robert Murat and his constitution as an arguido
Apart from the suspect being seen on the location of the occurrence and speaking about the event with the persons that were around there, namely journalists, his name was on the list of interpreters, and he made a commitment as such (Commitment Act on page 1577).
On the 6th of May 2007 the PJ received a fax from the Leicestershire Constabulary (page 307) in which this police transmits that a reporter from the Sunday Mirror, Lori Campbell, had communicated that certain behaviours of the suspect compromised him, namely by giving his name without any information about himself, by having conflicting relationships with several people and being worried when a photograph of him was taken for that newspaper, which led the English Police to request that he was relieved of interpreter duties.
The files further contain:
- On page 328 a report of an external diligence tells that, on the 4th of May 2007, the suspect offered his assistance to the GNR to help with anything that was needed, namely as an interpreter;
- That on the 6th of May 2007 the signatory of said report was approached by several journalists indicating the arguido with suspicious behaviours, in the sense of what was already explained concerning the fax;
- On page 461 anonymous information, where a telephone call from a woman who tries to incriminate the suspect is reported, although no facts were presented;
- On page 957 there is a report about an external diligence that resulted from a trip to the location where, according to witness Jane Tanner, she saw, a short time before she knew that Madeleine had disappeared, a man carrying a child walking into the direction of the suspect's house, Casa Liliana;
- On page 960 the service information according to which the curiosity that the arguido showed in the investigation was found strange.
In order to be able to be heard about the suspicions that befell him, Robert Murat was made an arguido on the 14th of May 2007 [9], having declared that he has already served as an interpreter during process actions, that he has a daughter that was born in 2002 and lives in England where he visits her several times, having returned to Portugal on the 1st of May 2007 and that he rented a vehicle because his mother uses the VW at the stand that was put up in Luz to support Madeleine's family.
That on the 3rd of May 2007 he didn't leave home in the evening, having heard a siren at around 10.30 p.m. or shortly afterwards, a fact that he commented with his mother, but didn't come outside to investigate.
On Friday the 4th of May 2007 he was alerted by his mother to the disappearance of a child in Praia da Luz, according to news on "Sky News", having then walked to the location of the disappearance, where he was introduced to the child's parents, offering his assistance.
That afterwards, with a GNR officer and a member of the resort staff, they entered several apartments, with the purpose of locating the child. That before this occasion, he didn't know the inside of the "Ocean Club".
He further clarified, because he was asked, that he was the main suspect among the journalists, therefore from that moment onwards he refused speaking to them, including in that refusal the mention of his full name, or allowing to be photographed.
He further clarified that he has nothing to do with the child's disappearance, and knows nothing about this case, explaining that he asked an English policeman about the manner in which the British police was able to trace a person in a given location and at a given time and if the police could trace him at home through his mobile phone, but he did this to prove his innocence.
On the other hand, rather unpleasant references were made to his personality, as was the case of a witness that has known him for many years [10].
It should be further referred that witnesses Rachel Mampilly, Russell James O'Brien and Fiona Elaine Payne mentioned that they saw arguido Robert Murat at the "Ocean Club" resort on the night that Madeleine disappeared.
During the confrontation that took place on the 11th of July 2007 [11], these witnesses, just like the arguido, maintained their previous positions.
Nevertheless, the positions are different regarding the witnesses that were heard, because while Sílvia Baptista [12] admits it is very possible that a person with the arguido's characteristics was helping to search for Madeleine on the night of the disappearance, other witnesses, Paul Wright, June Wright, Barend Weijdon and GNR officer José Baptista Roque [13], among other officers, mentioned that they didn't see the arguido on location that night.
Facing the suspicions that befell the arguido, considering what he seemed to transmit and the type of occurrence that was under investigation, whose real scope was not, like now, delimitated, and in order to confirm them or to set them aside, taking into account that they were indispensable for the continuation of the investigation, searches were made at the arguido's house as well as at his mother's and telephone interceptions were carried out, both on the arguido and on those with whom he directly or indirectly interacted, namely with whom he met on an almost daily basis and with whom he kept telephone contact.
Searches were also performed at the location where he started to spend the night at, the Quinta Salsalito, which is a vast place of difficult control, therefore the search on this location might permit the collection of elements that are reputed to be of high interest for the investigation, but those searches had no effect whatsoever.
During the searches at Casa Liliana, two rain water cisterns near the pool were checked, the missing minor's trail was searched by the GNR's sniffer dog team, both inside and outside the residence, searches were equally performed inside three vehicles that were parked there, and the matching photographic report was carried out by members of the CSS (Crime Scene Sector), experts from the Criminal Police Lab, but nothing positive was attained.
From the forensics exams to Sergei Malinka's, Robert Murat's and Jenny Murat's computers [14], it could be concluded that the contents of the examined drives produced nothing that could compromise them as participants in any illicit activity, namely the one that was being investigated in the process.
From the interception of communications, the telephone contact record of arguido Robert Murat, his mother Jennifer Murat, witnesses Michaela Walazuch, Luís António and Sergei Malinka; records and maps of the telephone calls that were made from public telephone booths in Praia da Luz nothing flows that could have any indicative use.
From the analysis that was performed on every contact, from the 1st of November 2006 until the 19th of July 2007, by Robert, Michaela, Sergey, Jennifer and Luís António, results that Robert and Malinka, only contacted each other eight times [15], that there were no relations between Sergei and Luís António, nor between him and Robert, nor between either of them and the Murat residence, between the 30th of April and the 4th of May 2007 [16].
Searches were performed at the residence, and the subsoil was explored with a Geo-radar (GPR), - which consists of a radar antenna that transmits electromagnetic energy in the shape of an impulse within frequencies between 25 MHz and 1 GHz. Those impulses are partially reflected through sub-superficial geological structures, captured with a receiving antenna and marked as a time record of continuous bi-directional path which is presented as a pseudo-geological record section – e these technical searches neither found nor marked anything of interest to the files [17].
Searches were equally performed with the use of sniffer dog support, with the dog Eddie that detects cadaver odour, and it was verified that the dog signalled nothing [18]. The examination of the targets' vehicles (arguido and people who interacted with him), nothing was found.
Therefore, despite the suspicions that befell the arguido, - partly because they were induced, albeit involuntarily, by himself, namely the protagonism that he assumed both with the group of friends, which the McCann couple was part of, and with the journalists, showing his great curiosity in finding out what diligences had been performed and which were to be performed, and by objective elements and the fact that his residence is located in the direction which, according to Jane, was taken by the stranger who carried the child in his arms – and which therefore demanded his constitution as an arguido. It is nevertheless certain that through the collected evidence, said suspicions gradually emptied themselves, until the point where any connection of the arguido to the child's disappearance was set aside, which is why, at the end, the archiving of the process will be determined.
[9] Notice on page 1169
[10] Questioning report on page 1288
[11] Confrontation report on pages 1957/1958
[12] Questioning report on page 1290
[13] Questioning report on pages 1338, 1328, 1330 and 1349
[14] Forensics – Appendix-1, Vol. IV, V and VI
[15] Analyses report, annex 87
[16] Analyses report, annexes 82 to 86
[17] Search and Apprehension report on page 2130-v
[18] Dog Inspection report, page 2131
in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4639-4645 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)
>>>
The Archiving of the Madeleine Process: Section D Joana Morais blogspot
By Astro
31 July 2009
D – Dog searches and constitution of Gerald McCann and Kate Healy as arguidos
In an attempt to advance towards the discovery of Madeleine's whereabouts, a Report was written by Mark Harrison, National Counsellor for searches at the level of all police agencies in the United Kingdom, concerning Missing Persons, Abduction and Homicides, with his role comprising the counselling in relation to those people.
Thus a request for help in counselling at the level of searches was made, with part of that help being made through the action of dogs that are trained to detect mortal victims (VRD), and dogs with advanced training in tracing very small samples of human remains, bodily fluids and blood, in any environment or terrain (EVRD).
From the searches with the dogs [19], whose video recordings are appended to the files, the following resulted:
1 – The tracking dog named "Eddie" (dog that signals cadaver odour) "marked" (signalled) inside the couple's bedroom, in apartment 5A, in an area next to the wardrobe (cf. page 2054 and/or annex 88);
2 – That same dog "marked", in the same apartment, an area near the living room window, which has direct access to the street, behind the sofa (cf. page 2054 and/or annex 88);
3 – Still inside the apartment, the dog "marked" a garden area, in a square corner, vertically to the balcony (cf. page 2054 and/or annex 88);
4 – In the "Vista do Mar" villa, the house that was rented by the McCanns after leaving the Ocean's Club, the dog "marked" the area of a wardrobe that contained inside the soft toy that belonged to Madeleine McCann (cf. page 2099 and/or annex 88);
5 – In the examination of the clothes, which was carried out in a pavilion in Lagos, this dog signalled/"marked" pieces of clothing that belong to Kate Healy (cf. page 2101 and/or annex 88);
6 – This dog signalled the lower outside area next to the driver's door of the Renault – 59-DA-27 – that was rented by the McCanns (cf. page 2187 and/or annex 88);
7 – Finally it "marked" the key/card of that vehicle when it was hidden under a fire prevention sand box (cf. page 2187 and/or annex 88);
8 – The tracking dog named "Keela" (dog that detects the presence of human blood), "marked" an area in the living room, in apartment 5A, which had already been "marked" by "Eddie" (cf. page 2054 and/or annex 88);
9 – After the tiles which this dog had signalled during a first inspection, and which are mentioned under the previous item, were removed, the dog signalled the same area again (cf. page 2190 and/or annex 88);
10 – It made another "marking" on the lower part of the left hand side curtain of the window that we have been referring to (cf. page 2190 and/or annex 88);
11 – It "marked" the right lower lateral part of the inside of the boot of vehicle 59-DA-27 (cf. page 2187 and/or annex 88);
12 – Further concerning the vehicle, "Keela" "marked" the storage compartment, on the driver's door, which held the vehicle's key/card (cf. page 2187 and/or annex 88);
13 – This dog also marked the key/card when the same was hidden under the fire service sand box, inside the parking lot.
The viewing of these videos, whose contents is very impressive, becomes essential to understand the dogs' action and signalling, more than by any words.
These dogs, which had already been used on multiple occasions by the Scotland Yard and by the FBI with positive results, are evidence collection means and do not serve as evidence; any residue, even if invisible to the naked eye, which is collected using this type of dogs, has to be subject to forensics testing in a credentialed laboratory.
Martin Grime, the dogs' instructor himself [20], mentions in his report: "Whereas there may be no retrievable evidence for court purposes this may well assist intelligence gathering in Major Crime investigations"; or scientist Dr John Lowe [21] who refers that the FSS has no scientific support about the use of the dogs as a fundament for the collection of biological residues and that normally take the handler's word for certification, that asserts that the dogs are more sensitive than any chemical technique or other techniques that are normally used by crime scene sector experts.
In that sense, forensic examinations were performed in the areas and on the objects that were marked and signalled by the blood dog, especially in a credentialed British lab (Forensic Science Service - cf. Appendixes I and VII – FSS Final Report), and also, some of them, at the National Institute for Legal Medicine (cf. Appendix I), whose final results failed to corroborate the canine markings, that is to say that cellular material was collected, which was nevertheless not identified as belonging to a specific person, and it was not even possible to establish said material's quality (namely if it could be blood or another type of bodily fluid).
It should be stressed that the option towards that Laboratory was and remains obvious taking its prestige, its independence and its scientific reputation into account, although on an initial approach there seemed to be the possibility of compatibility between Madeleine's DNA profile and some of the collected residues (of which those that existed in the Renault Scenic vehicle that was rented by the McCann couple were in great quantity), taking the contents of the fax that is reproduced below exactly as it appears in the files, into account (pages 2620 and following)
____________________
From: "Prior Stuart"
To: "Task Portugal"
Sent: 04 September 2007 10:14
Subject: FW: Op Task - in Confidence
_________
From: Lowe, Mr J R
Sent: 03 September 2007 15:01
To: stuart prior
Subject: Op Task - in Confidence
Stuart,
Firstly, here are the last three results you are expecting
An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab 3a. The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive, it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.
There is no evidence to support the view that Madeline McCann contributed DNA to the swab 3B
A complex LCN DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the luggage compartment section 286C 2007 CRL10 (2) area 2. Within the DNA profile of Madeline McCann there are 20 DNA components represented by 19 peaks on a chart. At one of the areas of DNA we routinely examine Madeline has inherited the same DNA component from both parents; this appears therefore as 1 peak rather than 2, hence 19 rather than 20. Of these 19 components 15 are present within the result from this item; there are 37 components in total. There are 37 components because there are at least 3 contributors; but there could be up to five contnbutors. In my opinion therefore this result is too complex for meaningful interpretation/conclusion.
Why?...
Well, lets look at the question that is being asked
"Is there DNA from Madeline on the swab?"
It would be very simple to say "yes" simply because of the number of components within the result that are also in her reference sample.
What we need to consider, as scientists, is whether the match is genuine and legitimate; because Madeline has deposited DNA as a result of being in the car or whether Madeline merely appears to match the result by chance. The individual components in Madeline's profile are not unique to her, it is the specific combination of 19 components that makes her profile unique above all others. Elements of Madeline's profile are also present within the the profiles of many of the scientists here in Birmingham, myself included. It's important to stress that 50% of Madeline's profile will be shared with each parent. It is not possible, in a mixture of more than two people, to determine or evaluate which specific DNA components pair with each other. Namely, we cannot separate the components out into 3 individual DNA profiles.
Therefore, we cannot answer the question: is the match genuine or is a chance match.
The same applies to any result that is quoted as being too complex for meaningful inclusion/interpretation
What questions will we never be able to answer with LCN DNA profiling?
When was the DNA deposited?
How was the DNA deposited?
What body fluid(s) does the DNA originate from?
Was a crime committed?
These, along with all other results, will be formalised in a final report
Please don't hesitate to contact me if you require any further assistance
kind regards
John
________________________
but whose compatibility, as can be concluded from the above mentioned final FSS report, was not confirmed after the performance of lengthy and complex tests.
Previously to these indications, is the circumstance that the Parents were the last known persons who had been with Madeleine, alive and traced, a circumstance that in itself made them subject to investigation.
On the other hand, there was information, which was not confirmed afterwards, that the McCanns, while focused on stating an abduction theory, had contacted the British media (Sky News), before calling the police authorities.
Confronted with these elements, namely the possibility of the existence of a cadaver in the apartment and in the vehicle that was used by the parents, founded suspicions of their involvement were raised.
As they were summoned to depose again, while there was no plausible explanation for those situations and as they were to be confronted with the dogs' findings and with the lab information, which were susceptible of rendering them responsible as authors of crimes (at least, of neglectful homicide and of concealment of a cadaver), they were, obligatorily and inexorably, made arguidos, in strict obedience to article 59 nr. 1 of the Penal Process Code; thus the disposition from nr. 4 of article 58 (presently 5) – its new redaction was not in force yet, taking into account that they were made arguidos on the 6th of September 2009 – and on the other hand they could benefit from arguido status, with all the rights and guarantees of defence that are inherent to it, despite the stigma that is associated with it, which is techno-juridically misadjusted. In effect, the constitution and questioning as arguidos, while used to confirm indications towards the committing of crimes, are also used, with equal strength and reason, to infirm indications and to eliminate suspects.
As judicially stressed in the sentence dated 06.10.1990 by the then Judge of the Police Court of Lisbon. "The authority that directs the inquiry is not free to postpone the moment when a witness passes into arguido status (…) if diligences are being performed, which are destined to prove her imputation, that affect her personally (…)"
Colectânea de Jurisprudência, 1990, vol. IV. p.323 and following.
The constitution of Gerald and Kate McCann as arguidos at that moment is nothing more that the practical fulfilment of the right to defence of those arguidos, which is to say, to ensure their concrete rights to "co-determine or conform the process' final decision. Said rights assume consistency and effectiveness, according to the new Code, right after the moment of constitution as an arguido, and therefore, still during the inquiry and the instruction." - Professor Jorge de Figueiredo Dias, "Sobre os sujeitos processuais no novo Código de Processo Penal" Jornadas de Processo Penal, CEJ, Livraria Almedina, 1988, p 28.
Therefore, under the light of interpretation of the elements that constituted the process at that date, there is no doubt whatsoever concerning the legitimacy and legality of their constitution as arguidos, as it is also certain that any investigation has its own dynamics and the continuous flow of elements into the files may alter the situation, as it has, and no judgment or presumption of guilt can be extracted from such a process act.
[19] Cf. digital drives contained in Appendix III
[20] Page 2271
[21] Questioning file on page 3899
in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4628-4636 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)
>>>
By Astro
21 July 2009
E – About the interest of the reconstruction
Taking into account that there were certain points in the arguidos' and witnesses' statements that revealed, apparently at least, contradiction or that lacked physical confirmation, it was decided to carry out the "reconstruction of the fact", a diligence that is consecrated in article 150 of the Penal Process Code in the sense of duly clarifying, on the very location of the facts, the following very important details, among others:
1 – The physical, real and effective proximity between Jane Tanner, Gerald McCann and Jeremy Wilkins, at the moment when the first person walked by them, and which coincided with the sighting of the supposed suspect, carrying a child. It results, in our perspective, strange that neither Gerald McCann nor Jeremy Wilkins saw her, or the alleged abductor, despite the exiguity of the space and the peacefulness of the area;
2 – The situation concerning the window to the bedroom where Madeleine slept, together with the twins, which was open, according to Kate. It seemed then necessary to clarify if there was a draught, since movement of the curtains and pressure under the bedroom door are mentioned, which, eventually, could be verified through the reconstitution;
3 – The establishment of a timeline and of a line of effective checking on the minors that were left alone in the apartments, given that, if it is believed that such checking was as tight as the witnesses and the arguidos describe it, it would be, at least, very difficult to reunite conditions for the introduction of an abductor in the residence and the posterior exit of said abductor, with the child, namely through a window with scarce space. It is added that the supposed abductor could only pass, through that window, holding the minor in a different position (vertical) from the one that witness JANE TANNER saw (horizontal);
4 – What happened during the time lapse between approximately 6.45/7 p.m. – the time at which MADELEINE was seen for the last time, in her apartment, by a different person (David Payne) from her parents or siblings – and the time at which the disappearance is reported by Kate Healy – at around 10 p.m.;
5 – The obvious and well-known advantages of immediate appreciation of evidence, or in other words, the fulfilment of the principle of contiguity of evidence in order to form a conviction, as firm as possible, about what was seen by Jane Tanner and the other interposers, and, eventually, to dismiss once and for all any doubts that may subsist concerning the innocence of the missing [child's] parents.
In this sense, the legal procedures were followed, according to the norms and conventions that are in force, and the appearance of the witnesses was requested, inviting them to be present inclusively appealing to solidarity with the McCann couple, as it is certain that since the beginning they adhered to that process diligence.
Nevertheless, despite national authorities assuming all measures to render their trip to Portugal viable, for unknown motives, after the many doubts that they raised about the necessity and opportunity of their trip were clarified several times, they chose not to attend, which rendered the diligence inviable.
We believe that the main damage was caused to the McCann arguidos, who lost the possibility to prove what they have protested since they were constituted arguidos: their innocence towards the fateful event; the investigation was also disturbed, because said facts remain unclarified.
in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4636-4638 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)
>>>
The Archiving of the Madeleine Process: Section F Joana Morais blogspot
By Astro
02 August 2009
F – Communications analysis
The process has been appended with the daily maps of the mobile phones' registry by registrar/owner, a map of the intervals without communications of the couple's equipment between the 4th and the 13th of May, and maps of the localities where the antennas were activated, as well as the report of the analysis of the communications that were registered by the antennas that serve Praia da Luz, of the 3 service providers, made by the 9 members if the McCann family's group, concerning the days between the 2nd and the 4th of May (calls that were operated exclusively by the fixed network are not contemplated, because as they do not use the GSM system of mobile communications, those do not activate the antennas ("B.T.S.").
During that period they maintained a communication traffic that can be accepted as normal for someone who is on holidays. Between the 4th and the 17th of May, the antennas with most traffic registered are the ones that serve the localities of Luz, Lagos, Portimão and others that are situated between Praia da Luz and Portimão; the daily activity of the mobile phones of each one of the 9 persons in the group was analysed, with every register since their arrival until their departure being treated, as well as about the time intervals when Madeleine's parents' mobile phones were without any contact between 00 hours of the 4th and 00 hours of the 14th of May.
It was important to determine if through the analysis of that data other investigation hypotheses appeared, leading to the discovery of what happened on the night of the 3rd of May, at apartment 5A, of the "Ocean's Club of Praia da Luz", but this also remained unsuccessful.
The fulfilling of the Rogatory Letters to the Justices of the United Kingdom failed to add anything relevant to what was already in the Process.
in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4638-4639 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)
>>>
The Archiving of the Madeleine Process: Section G Joana Morais blogspot
By Astro
22 July 2009
G – Appreciation and judicial frame
From the analysis of the elements that are part of the files, this first conclusion emerges immediately:
When the GNR officers arrived on location, several people had already touched the window and entered Madeleine's and her siblings' bedroom, and later on, when the PJ arrived at the apartment to collect traces, the space had already been rummaged through and contaminated due to the entrance of all of those people and to the fact that everything had been touched, thus rendering inviable, right away, the collection of important elements for the investigation.
In the drama of the moment, nobody – parents, friends of the parents, resort management and personnel – was cold and lucid enough to preserve the crime scene, preventing that rummaging and the consequent contamination of traces from happening, while it is common knowledge that it is any person's responsibility to preserve crime scenes – apart from a legal demand: article 171 number 2 of the Penal Process Code – thus avoiding that traces can be erased or altered, therefore the collectable evidence had already lost much of its indicative value. Hence the lack of evidential elements that were collected during that initial phase, so much so that the only latent fingerprints that were collected, with the number of elements that are necessary to perform a positive identification, were individualised as belonging to the missing child's mother and to a GNR officer (pages 885 and 1520), thus immediately rendering the collection of important data for the investigation inviable.
It was only when members of the Polícia Judiciária arrived, at around 0.10 a.m., following a request for their presence, that measures were taken to make the collection of residues and the preservation of the event’s location possible.
It further results from the files that, despite the fact that the 'Ocean Club' resort's crèche offers a complimentary dining out service from 7.30 until 11.30 p.m., at an additional cost, apart from another babysitting service with no defined schedule [22], the members of this group of friends with children chose to do their own checking on the children during dinner. During a first phase, each couple took turns among them to check on their own children, and as the days went by, they started to ask one of the members that got up, to listen whether there was any noise in their apartment, as Jane Tanner mentioned during questioning on the 10th of May 2007 [23], with the exception of the David and Fiona Payne couple, who possessed an intercom system to watch over their children L*** Payne and S******* Payne.
It is extracted from the files that the McCanns and their friends checked to verify if all was well with their children, as can be concluded from what the members of this group declared, and also derives from the testimony of Jerónimo Tomás Rodrigues Salceda, a waiter at the Tapas [24], who stated that he "noticed, because it was evident, that some of the group's members sometimes went outside of the restaurant to do something, which by and by he realised was to "check" on the children. Nevertheless, he was always convinced that those children were in a space that belonged to the Luz Ocean Club…"
Nevertheless, it can also be concluded from the files that this surveillance with the periodicity that was mentioned above was not the one that is alleged in the files, which leaves unexplained why, on that night, the procedures were altered in the sense of reducing the checking intervals.
In effect, this group of friends was enjoying a short holiday period, therefore perfectly relaxed and it would be normal that, having dinner, inclusively with an entertainment service available [25], they were not very concerned with anything that might happen to their children during that dinner period.
It is so much so that Kate herself mentions that on Thursday morning, the 3rd, Madeleine questioned her about the reason why they didn't come to her room, given the fact that the twins had cried [26], as was also mentioned by Gerald.
Pamela Fenn, who resides on the residential block's first floor, above the apartment that was occupied by the McCann family, clarified that on the 1st of May 2007, two days before her disappearance, at around 10.30 p.m., she heard a child crying, which from the sound would be MADELEINE and that she cried for an hour and fifteen minutes, until her parents arrived, at around 11.57 p.m.
This shows that the parents were not persistently worried about their children [and] that they didn't check on them like they afterwards declared they did, rather neglecting their duty to guard those same children, although not in a temerarious, or gross, manner.
If said guard duty had been observed, in the possibility of this being an abduction, as was insistently mentioned and continues to be mentioned and is admissible to have happened, its occurrence might eventually have been rendered inviable.
It is further added that Kate, after noticing that the bedroom's window and shutters were open and Madeleine was missing, headed for the Tapas Restaurant asking for help, suggesting that an abduction had taken place, it is incomprehensible, or only comprehensible in a state of panic, that she once again abandoned, this time only the twins, while the Tapas was close enough to shout for help, - although Matthew Oldfield refers [27] that from the restaurant table there was very tenuous visibility, taking into account the distance at which they were from the apartments, and vision being hampered by a transparent linoleum that covered the area where the tables were located.
Finally, the fact that, despite all that confusion and all that noise, the twins continued to sleep, as mentioned by GNR Officer José Maria Baptista Roque, a member of the patrol that was first to arrive at the apartment "the children never woke up, remaining in a ventral decubitus position, not moving during the search and afterwards" [28], remains unexplained. Nevertheless, a Team from the Criminal Police Lab, on the 4th of May 2007, eliminated the existence of any product that could have been ministered to the missing child, in order to maintain her in a state of unconsciousness, as well as the presence of blood traces.
On the other hand, it also results that none of the parents was inside the apartment when Madeleine disappeared and that their behaviour until the moment of the disappearance was perfectly normal, not manifesting any kind of preoccupation or any other similar feeling, contrary to what happened after that moment when the state of panic was notorious.
While it is an unavoidable fact that Madeleine disappeared from Apartment 5A of the 'Ocean Club', the manner and circumstances under which this happened are not – despite the numerous diligences made in that sense -, therefore, the range of crimes that were indicated and referred to during the inquiry remains untouched.
It seems evident to us and because the files contain enough elements for such, that the crime of exposure or abandonment according to article 138 of the Penal Code can be eliminated from that range:
"1 – Whoever places another person's life in danger,
a) By exposing her in a location where she is subject to a situation from which she, on her own, cannot defend herself against; or
b) Abandoning her without defence, whenever the agent had the duty to guard her, to watch over her or to assist her;"
This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim's life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim's behalf. In the case of the files and facing the elements that were collected it is evident that none of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.
The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty – the disappearance of Madeleine – due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.
Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.
The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media - before the police - was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.
Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child's death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the 'Ocean Club' resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal.
In a final synthesis, based on facts, it seems to us that the following can be asserted:
- On the 3rd of May 2007, at around 10 p.m., at the Ocean Club, in Praia da Luz, Kate Healy – like her, her husband Gerald and their friends, while dining at the Tapas, did with a periodicity that has not been rigorously established – headed for apartment G5A, in order to check on her three children, who had been left there, asleep;
- She'd barely entered the apartment when she noticed that her daughter Kate [sic] had disappeared, not being in her bed nor in any other location inside the residence and that the bedroom's window and shutters were open;
- Then, Kate Healy ran to the restaurant, immediately alerting Gerald McCann and the other friends;
- Following that alert, the entire apartment was searched and rummaged by an indeterminate number of people, thus resulting in the contamination of traces, with irreversible and undetermined damage in terms of the acquisition of evidence;
- Immediately, intense and extensive terrestrial, maritime and aerial searches were launched, which lasted for several days, involving hundreds of people and equipment and means, as sophisticated and advanced as presently available;
- Several hundred people were heard, formally and informally, whose hearing was anticipated as being of interest for the clarification of the matter, thousands of pieces of information and suggestions were analysed, and tens of sightings and locations that seemed plausible were checked. Telephone interceptions were performed and the traffic data from thousands of telephone conversations was analysed and crossed, and many thousands of diligences of the most diverse nature were developed;
- The obliging cooperation and commitment of Police forces from many countries, with a very special mention for the British police entities, was counted upon;
- Tests and analyses were performed in two of the most prestigious and credentialed institutions for this effect – the National Institute for Legal Medicine and the British lab Forensic Science Service -, whose final results did not positively value the collected residues, or corroborated the canine markings;
- Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively – the most dramatic – to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
But therefore we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann – apart from the supposed but dismissed crime of exposure or abandonment – or to hold anyone responsible over its authorship.
Finally, it should be underlined that this case, unfortunately, is not a police novel, an appropriate scenario for a "crime" that is tailored for the success of the investigative work of a Sherlock Holmes or a Hercule Poirot, guided by the illusion that the forces of law and justice always manage to re-establish the altered order, returning to society the peace and the tranquillity that were only accidentally disturbed.
The disappearance of Madeleine McCann is rather an implacable and intricate case of real life, which lies closer to the lucid narrative by Friedrich Duerrenmatt, - "The Pledge. Requiem for the police novel" – because reality and everyday life owe little or no obedience, most of the time, to logic.
Life's events do not conform to stereotyped novel-like schemes, it is rather the case that its outcome is often the product of chance or conditioned by accidental and unpredictable factors, and therefore, hard to envision.
The investigators are well aware of the fact that their work is not exempt of imperfection; they have worked with an enormous error margin, and what they have achieved is very little in terms of conclusive results, especially concerning the fate of the unfortunate child. Nevertheless, they always knew that action was necessary and in reality they acted intensively and with commitment, even at the risk of erring.
Nevertheless, anyone who feels unsatisfied about the epilogue of the investigations, will have the possibility to react against it, having the possibility of eventually changing that epilogue, by prompting diligences based on new evidence, as long as that person has the legitimacy to request them and the requested diligences are serious, pertinent and consequent. They may do so in three ways: by requesting the reopening of the inquiry, under article 279, number 1 of the Penal Process Code; by appealing hierarchically against this dispatch under number 2 of article 278, or in another case, under number 2 of article 279 of the Penal Process Code, or by requesting the opening of the instruction under article 287, number 1, item b, of the Penal Process Code.
Finally, it should be noted that an archiving decision may be a fair decision, although of the possible justice, and, especially, to underline heavily that the archiving of the present files does not equal a definite and irreversible closing of the process. This process, as long as the prescription deadline for the possibly committed crimes does reach its term, and if new evidence that justifies it, appears, can always be reopened, officiously or through the request of an assistant, again ordinate to a final decision of accusation or non accusation.
Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:
a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;
b) The archiving of the Process concerning arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
Article 277 number 3 of the Penal Process Code is to be fulfilled.
Under article 214 number 1 item a) of the Penal Process Code, the coercion measures that have been imposed on the arguidos are declared extinct.
Portimão, 21.07.08
The Republic's Prosecutor
(José de Magalhães e Menezes)
The Joint General Prosecutor
(João Melchior Gomes)
in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4639-4649 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)
Thanks to Nigel at mccannfiles
No comments:
Post a Comment