10 REASONS WHICH SUGGEST THAT PAMELA FENN DID NOT HEAR ANY CHILD CRYING ON TUESDAY 1 MAY 2007

10 REASONS WHICH SUGGEST THAT PAMELA FENN DID NOT HEAR ANY CHILD CRYING ON TUESDAY 1 MAY 2007

 
1. On her own admission, she did not report the crying incident to the police at the time, or later

2. She appears to have been prompted into making her statement by the McCann Team
 
[BRIEF EXPLANATION: In early August, the McCann Team were reeling from Martin Grime’s visit to Praia da Luz, and from a stream of lurid headlines about blood, a corpse, DNA etc.
Then suddenly, on Saturday 18 August 2007, a spate of stories about Madeleine appeared in the British mainstream press. These stories spoke of three events: (i) a burglary (either 1, 2, 3 or ‘several’ weeks before the week of 28 April to 5 May), (ii) a suspicious blond man allegedly seen quietly opening and closing the gate to the McCanns’ apartment garden, and (iii) Madeleine crying for 75 minutes on the night of Tuesday 1 May.
These stories show clear evidence of having been planted by the McCann Team.
These stories contained correct information about when Mrs Fenn was going to be interviewed and exactly what she was going to say – two days before she was interviewed.
This is suggestive at least of co-operation between the McCann Team and Mrs Fenn.
Her story fed the public with images of burglars and suspicious men, confirmed that Madeleine was alive on 1^st May, and corroborated the McCanns’ account of the McCanns leaving their children in the apartment for periods whilst they dined out]

3. Mrs Fenn’s account of a burglary at her home in the weeks before 28^th April is at the very least open to doubt. If she was not truthful about that, we simply cannot use her statement as evidence of anything.

4. Despite a child allegedly continually crying and sobbing for 75 minutes, with other properties all around, not one other person has ever corroborated the ‘crying incident’. No-one else heard it.

5. Mrs Fenn says that she ’phoned and spoke to a Mrs Edna Glyn ‘some time after 11.00pm’, that is, after the crying had been going on for over half-an-hour. We have never seen any corroboration of this from Mrs Glyn

6. It is claimed by Mrs Fenn that when she spoke to Mrs Glyn, she replied: ‘I am not surprised’. According to Mrs Fenn’s evidence, the child she heard crying was sobbing continually - and so must have been audible to her and Mrs Glyn as they were talking (if they were). Yet on Mrs Fenn’s evidence, neither of them bothered to lift a finger about it. They could have called the police or the Ocean Club. But they did nothing

7. In any event, Mrs Fenn’s account of contacting Mrs Glyn about the crying appears to conflict with the account of a police officer, who testified that Robert Murat had said that ‘some foreign woman’ had ’phoned him up on the night of the ‘crying incident’

8. The description Mrs Fenn gives about the age of the child that she says she heard crying is strange, clumsy and contrived. Allowing for the possibility that something may have been ‘lost in translation’, her statement says that the crying was coming from directly below her and that “the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger”. The twins were two years and two months during the holiday in Praia da Luz. Thus Pamela Fenn’s statement appears to rule them out. There is at least a suspicion therefore that her statement has been carefully crafted to suggest that it was Madeleine that was crying   

9. A news clip about Mrs Fenn appeared on SIC TV, Portugal, on 22 August two days after her statement at Portimao Police Station. In it, she denied having any information about the case:

“Mrs Pamela Fenn, the British octogenarian who lives above the apartment from where Maddie disappeared, says she has been harassed by the unwanted interest of journalist, and has denied having spoken with the police. [b>She said she didn't have any information about the case.

At the age 81, this quiet, retired British woman seems to have been seriously shaken. After an outburst by her at her hairdressers, news that she was a witness in the Madeleine McCann case quickly became known to journalists' ears…According to what she was said to have told the police, the night before Madeleine was reported missing, she heard a child crying and calling for her father for a long time.

The fact that she spends most of the day on her veranda, with a view across to the Tapas restaurant, made the police return to the Ocean Club on Monday morning. Detectives quizzed her for about four hours to see if she had seen someone from the McCann group leave the restaurant to go and check on the children. .

Angry at the journalists' questions, Mrs Fenn denied being a witness in the case and said that what the press were saying was ‘pure speculation’.
 
10. Mrs Fenn herself was interviewed for the programme and said that anything she was supposed to have said to the police was ‘rubbish’.
 
[TRANSCRIPT:  
 
“Honestly, I have... I know nothing. I have been here three months. [She means: ‘This happened three months ago’. Mrs Fenn had lived I Praia da Luz for years]  Until all this happened, I've never spoken to a journalist, they've written rubbish in the newspapers. I've never even uttered a word! I've never (sighing)... it's all rubbish! Please, please, just forget it”. ]


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

 

STATEMENT OF Mrs Pamela Fenn, 20 August 2007

 

Mrs Fenn’s statement, taken in Praia da Luz on the 20th of August 2007:

Included in the files as a witness statement.

Being of British nationality and in spite of living in Portugal, does not have knowledge of the Portuguese language in its oral and written form, therefore a police interpreter is present, UEVE VAN LOOCK. Thus, according to the facts noted in the files, she says that she has lived in the apartment since 2003, which is located on the upper floor, immediately above the room from which the child disappeared.
 
She also refers to the day of the 1st May 2007, when she was at home alone, at approximately 22.30 she heard a child cry, and that due the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger. Apart from the crying that continued for approximately one hour and fifteen minutes, and which got louder and more expressive, the child shouted ‘Daddy, Daddy’. The witness had no doubt that the noise came from the floor below. At about 23.45, an hour and fifteen minutes after the crying began, she heard the parents arrive, she did not see them, but she heard the patio doors open, she was quite worried as the crying had gone on for more than an hour and had gradually got worse.
 
When questioned, she said that she did not know the cause of the crying, perhaps a nightmare or another destabilising factor. As soon as the parents entered the child stopped crying.


That night she contacted a friend called EDNA GLYN, who also lives in Praia da Luz, after 23.00, telling her about the situation, who was not surprised at the child’s crying.

She did not have anything to report for the 2nd May, because she was only home at night.

On the 3rd May she received a visit from her niece Carole during the morning, who said that when she was on her terrace she saw a male individual looking into the McCanns apartment, situation which has been told to the police, her family member even made a ‘photo fit’.

During the day nothing unusual happened, until almost 22.30 when, being alone again, she heard the hysterical shouts from a female person, calling out ‘We have let her down’, which she repeated several times, quite upset. Mrs Fenn then saw that it was the mother of little Madeleine who was shouting furiously. Upon leaning over the terrace, after having seen the mother, Mrs Fenn asked the father, Gerry, what was happening to which he replied that a small girl had been abducted. When asked, she replied that she did not leave her apartment, just spoke to Gerry from her balcony, which had a view over the terrace of the floor below. She found it strange that Gerry when said that a girl had been abducted, he did not mention that it was his daughter and that he did not mention any other scenarios. At that moment she offered Gerry help, saying that he could use her phone to contact the authorities, to which he replied that this had already been done. It was just after 22.30.

She said that after the mother’s shouts, she had seen many people in the streets looking for the girl. She also refers to an episode when Gerry was speaking to a policeman and he refused to recognise the police force, saying that more agents of authority were needed to carry out the search.

When asked, she replied that on 3rd May she did not hear any noise from the McCann apartment, not even the opening of doors. She also said that before hearing the shouts she was watching television, as she often stays up late. 

When questioned, she said that she never heard any arguments between the couple or with their children. She said that the family would spend much time outside of the apartment and therefore she did not notice their presence. 

She said that until that night she had never spoken to the McCanns, because up until the 3rd May, she only sometimes saw them walking in the street.

She never saw them with any vehicle. 

She also said that she never told the McCanns that she had heard their daughter crying previously on 1st May because she thought it would just increase their suffering. 

When questioned she said that she never saw any strange person or action before or after the event. She claims however, that a week previously she was the victim of an attempted robbery, which was not successful and neither was anything taken, thinking that the crying of the child could be linked to another attempted robbery in the residence.

Having read and approved the statement, she signs, together with the interpreter.

 

               

When you analyze Pamela Fenn's statement and associated media reports it really does raise an eyebrow or two.  I find it very hard to believe that someone, more so perhaps a woman, would ignore a child crying hysterically for that length of time without trying to do something about it.  She says she heard the parents return to the apartment but as she didn't actually see anyone how can she say that it was the parents or one of the parents or a burglar or an abductor or anyone else for that matter - yet still she did nothing?

Going on to the night of 3rd May, she heard the chaos below after Kate McCann raised the alarm but she didn't say anything about the crying incident because she didn't want to add to the parents distress?  What could be a vital piece of evidence yet she doesn't say anything because she doesn't want to distress the parents?  I think it more likely the parents would be more than grateful for any information that might help locate their missing child but no,  Pamela Fenn took it upon herself to keep quiet.  I seem to recollect Jane Tanner say much the same thing about the stranger she claims to have seen walking the streets with a prostrate child - she didn't immediately say anything because she didn't want to add to the distress.  I'll gloss over the fact that her sighting formed part of the time-line written on the cover of Madeleine's sticker book - but that's another issue.

So, Pamela Fenn heard a child crying ceaselessly a couple of nights before the 3rd, a child is missing, the complex is in chaos - what did she then do?  Go back to the television or retire for the night?  I cannot believe for one second that the GNR or PJ didn't call at her apartment to ask questions, her abode is in a prime location, who knows what she may have seen that might assist with the investigation.  Did she disappear temporarily or, when questioned, did she just decline to speak about the crying incident?  Even if the police didn't knock at her door, why didn't she call the police and report the crying episode or ask someone who speaks Portuguese to call on her behalf.  IF the crying incident is genuine, I don't think it's not the sort of information that can be ignored, nor can I see any reason why anyone would take it upon themselves so to do.

Verdi wrote:When you analyze Pamela Fenn's statement and associated media reports it really does raise an eyebrow or two. 

I think the crucial aspect of all this is how the McCann Team got all those media reports into the British press on Saturday 18 August, in which they:

* correctly predicted exactly when Mrs Fenn was going to be interviewed, AND

* correctly predicted EXACTLY what she was going to say.

Now, who knew about her forthcoming interview, knew what she was going to say, and had the capability of getting all the British media to run their story?

Three choices, I think:

A. The PJ ?

B. Mrs Fenn or her relatives/friends/contacts ? or 

C. Clarence Mitchell ?        


I think the answer's pretty clear

What a disgusting bunch of people Fenn  Murrat the McCann's and the rest of them all concealing the truth and for what to save the themselves and perhaps others from persecution

It is INCONCEIVABLE that the PJ would not have visited Mrs Fenn on 4/5/7, and very probably taken a statement from her.
All House to house visits are meticulously logged, every person is TIE (Traced, interviewed and eliminated) and for the ones in the close vicinity full and detailed statements would have been taken
Therefore we may begin tentatively to deduce
The original statement says
Saw nothing, heard nothing, can offer no further information ...

Which makes the second statement, under the conditions noted above, almost certainly - probably - a rehearsed script.

Tony Bennett wrote:

Verdi wrote:When you analyze Pamela Fenn's statement and associated media reports it really does raise an eyebrow or two. 

I think the crucial aspect of all this is how the McCann Team got all those media reports into the British press on Saturday 18 August, in which they:

* correctly predicted exactly when Mrs Fenn was going to be interviewed, AND

* correctly predicted EXACTLY what she was going to say.

Now, who knew about her forthcoming interview, knew what she was going to say, and had the capability of getting all the British media to run their story?

Three choices, I think:

A. The PJ ?

B. Mrs Fenn or her relatives/friends/contacts ? or 

C. Clarence Mitchell ?        


I think the answer's pretty clear

Lest they forget..

The Sun - 18th August 2007

Meanwhile Portuguese cops were again under fire. The woman living in the apartment above the McCanns claimed she had not been spoken to by police until the British team arrived two weeks ago.

A friend said: "She was surprised that neither the police nor the McCanns had approached her before."

Pamela also said her niece, who stayed with her the week Maddie disappeared, spotted somebody fitting the description of a man seen carrying a child away under a blanket. The pal added: "He was acting suspiciously."

Daily Mirror - 18th August 2007

In a new development, a British expat has come forward with dramatic new evidence.

There was no sign of a break-in and it is thought the intruder may have had a key.

Mrs Fenn, who is in her 70s, found the man scrambling out of the window and tried to grab his ankle. But he escaped.

She reported the incident to Portuguese police but they did not question her again.

The information only resurfaced after British police reviewed the case two weeks ago. Mrs Fenn will now be formally interviewed for the first time on Monday.

Mrs Fenn's niece has said she spotted a suspicious man near the McCanns' apartment around the time Madeleine disappeared.

Daily Express - 18th August 2007

A British widow has come forward with new information which could help Portuguese detectives solve the mystery of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance, the Daily Express can reveal.

Ex-pat Pamela Fenn, who is in her 70’s, has told police she has three "bombshell" clues she believes could be vital to the inquiry.

In the weeks before Madeleine disappeared Mrs Fenn scared off an intruder who had apparently let himself into her apartment with a key.

And she revealed vital details of the movements of Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry, and their holiday friends in the run up to the night of May 3 - when Madeleine vanished.

Even though she lives in the apartment directly upstairs the police had never tried to get in touch with her.

Incredibly Mrs Fenn, who lives in the apartment directly above the flat the McCanns were staying in, was never interviewed by Portuguese police, it was claimed yesterday.

It was only when a team of British officers were called in to help carry out a major review of the case that the information was acted on.

Now Mrs Fenn will be formally interviewed for the first time by Portuguese detectives at police headquarters in Portimao on Monday morning.

Me says:  and this is the real bombshell...


Daily Mail - 19th August 2007

Detectives are understood to be waiting for the results of DNA tests on blood samples before re-interviewing Kate and Gerry McCann and their party of friends.

PeterMac wrote:It is INCONCEIVABLE that the PJ would not have visited Mrs Fenn on 4/5/7, and very probably taken a statement from her.
All House to house visits are meticulously logged, every person is TIE (Traced, interviewed and eliminated) and for the ones in the close vicinity full and detailed statements would have been taken
Therefore we may begin tentatively to deduce
The original statement says
Saw nothing, heard nothing, can offer no further information ...

Which makes the second statement, under the conditions noted above, almost certainly - probably - a rehearsed script.

Exactly.  She is obviously the very first person a detective team would have visited, so why isn`t this particular statement in the revealed files?

Verdi wrote:When you analyze Pamela Fenn's statement and associated media reports it really does raise an eyebrow or two.  I find it very hard to believe that someone, more so perhaps a woman, would ignore a child crying hysterically for that length of time without trying to do something about it.  She says she heard the parents return to the apartment but as she didn't actually see anyone how can she say that it was the parents or one of the parents or a burglar or an abductor or anyone else for that matter - yet still she did nothing?

Or even that someone entered through the patio doors. They could just have easily have exited. All she supposedly heard were the patio doors sliding open.

kaz wrote:

Verdi wrote:When you analyze Pamela Fenn's statement and associated media reports it really does raise an eyebrow or two.  I find it very hard to believe that someone, more so perhaps a woman, would ignore a child crying hysterically for that length of time without trying to do something about it.  She says she heard the parents return to the apartment but as she didn't actually see anyone how can she say that it was the parents or one of the parents or a burglar or an abductor or anyone else for that matter - yet still she did nothing?

Or even that someone entered through the patio doors. They could just have easily have exited. All she supposedly heard were the patio doors sliding open.

Very good point !

Having said that - was the patio door left unlocked every evening?  The joint garbled T9 statements can't be used as an accurate guide as they don't seem to be aware of each others movements or who checked who and when who checked who.  Keeping it simple - A seasoned professional police officer talks of the importance of witness statements..

"The parents and their friends will be heard quickly. The first statements are of prime importance: memories are still vivid and crucial details could thus be obtained, which would risk being lost later."

[The Truth of the Lie - Goncalo Amaral.  Chapter 3]

Gerry McCann's witness statement taken on 4th May 2007, within hours of his daughters disappearance..

[Thursday 3rd May]  As usual, every half hour and considering that the restaurant was close to the apartment, the deponent or his wife went to check if the children were ok. Thus, at 9.05 pm, the deponent entered the club [apartment], using his key, the door being locked...

Gerry McCann's witness statement taken on 10th May 2007.

[Thursday 3rd May]  Despite what he said in his previous statements, he states now and with certainty, that he left with KATE through the back door which he consequently closed but did not lock, given that that is only possible from the inside. Concerning the front door, although he is certain that it was closed, it is unlikely that it was locked, because they left through the back door.

Begs the question, did Pamela Fenn hear ANYONE entering OR leaving through the patio door? 

I've never believed they left that patio door unlocked - unless it was for a reason other than their alleged checking system.  Be honest, who in their right mind would leave three very young vulnerable children alone in a unlocked, in the dark, in a strange place, only a few yards from a concrete staircase and a public thoroughfare?  I've known some pretty rubbish selfish parents but I've never encountered one who admits to leaving their child/ren alone in holiday accommodation whilst they are off on the hit and miss!

As an aside, I don't recall if Pamela Fenns presence on the night of 3rd May was mentioned by anyone other than the McCanns and their mates?  Given the apparent absence of any witness statement prior to August 2007, I'm wondering if she was around on that night.  She's not mentioned by Dr Amaral (Truth of the Lie), despite the potential importance of what she may have seen and/or heard.

Verdi wrote:

I've never believed they left that patio door unlocked - unless it was for a reason other than their alleged checking system.  Be honest, who in their right mind would leave three very young vulnerable children alone in a unlocked, in the dark, in a strange place, only a few yards from a concrete staircase and a public thoroughfare?  I've known some pretty rubbish selfish parents but I've never encountered one who admits to leaving their child/ren alone in holiday accommodation whilst they are off on the hit and miss!

Have got to agree with you there. As a mother of three who have now 'grown and flown' I feel qualified to say that  there's just no way you would leave the patio doors open. I don't know about those particular doors but the sort of patio doors I've encountered abroad are the sort that if you want to leave open you have to leave a gap  If you pull them too far they 'click' and lock. Sometimes these doors have a lever on the inside but again very easily inadvertently locked by a child playing with it inside. Just too dangerous. What is it about these doors that are so integral to their version of events that it has to be invented? The 'abductor' entered by the  window with the jemmied window didn't he/she? And there of course is the answer to their dilemma . As the skittles get knocked down they have to put new ones up to stay in the game. Round and round we go........................ but all roads lead to Rome don't they........................eventually ?

I dont understand. Wouldn't it make the MCanns look very bad if they let one of their children cry alone for over an hour..?
Why would the want to invent this?

I can absolutely believe they never checked their children at all, and left them crying.

Versailles wrote:I dont understand. Wouldn't it make the MCanns look very bad if they let one of their children cry alone for over an hour..?
Why would the want to invent this?

I can absolutely believe they never checked their children at all, and left them crying.

It seems to me that they were prepared to live with the 'negligent' accusation as long as it served a purpose. In this case the purpose would be confirmation of Madeleine being alive on the Tuesday evening. The fact that Mrs Fenn emphasised that the age of the crying child was more likely to be  Madeleine's  than the twins'  is highly suspicious. Why the need to elaborate? Do 2 and 4 year olds really have AGE distinctive cries? The worrying aspect of  all this is,  what was SO  bad that they were prepared to be accused of negligence and see it as the lesser of two evils ?

Mrs Fenn was an elderly lady who lived on her own. She had likely brought her own children up in a completely different era and has seen the different parenting styles that seem acceptable now but wouldn't have to someone of her generation.
So she may not have wanted to interfere, may not have wanted someone maybe drunk and agressive telling her to mind her own bloody business. Maybe she thought by reporting it to the Ocean Club she would have been in trouble with the parents, who knows?
So she didn't get involved apart from telephoning her friend and offering help to Gerry McCann - help that was sneered at by Kate McCann don't forget.

Casey5 wrote:Mrs Fenn was an elderly lady who lived on her own. She had likely brought her own children up in a completely different era and has seen the different parenting styles that seem acceptable now but wouldn't have to someone of her generation.
So she may not have wanted to interfere, may not have wanted someone maybe drunk and agressive telling her to mind her own bloody business. Maybe she thought by reporting it to the Ocean Club she would have been in trouble with the parents, who knows?
So she didn't get involved apart from telephoning her friend and offering help to Gerry McCann - help that was sneered at by Kate McCann don't forget.

I totally agree Casey!!

Also Mrs Fenn was seriously ill and died not long afterwards.  I see no reason whatsoever to disbelieve her and have voted accordingly.

Two other threads discussing Tuesday, 1st May which I think are worth re-reading:

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10219-tuesday

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3861p20-tuesday-may-1st-day-3

If Mrs Fenn DIDN'T hear a child crying then why would she make this up? What is her motive? 

It does not paint the McCanns in a good light as it suggests that the times between checks were much longer than half an hour - or at least on that one occasion. Which makes them look even more negligent.

One thing we DO know is that Kate writes disparagingly about her in her book. She records that Mrs Fenn lent over her balcony on that fateful evening and asked what was going on. Her response when told by Kate and Jane that a child had been abducted was, apparently, woefully inadequate and Kate and Jane sent her off with a flea in her ear. 

This, of course, is more evidence, if you need it, that Madeleine had not been abducted from her bed by a stranger that night. As clearly Mrs Fenn would have been a vitally important eye-witness and could have seen or heard something. 

But the FACT that Kate writes disparagingly about Mrs Fenn and they do not ask her if she saw or heard anything and also refuse her offer of lending them her phone I do believe to call the police suggests to me that she was a thorn in their side.

j.rob wrote:If Mrs Fenn DIDN'T hear a child crying then why would she make this up? What is her motive? 

For a moment, let's just move away from Mrs Fenn (a long-time acquaintance/friend of Jenny Murat, Robert Murat's mother), and look at the big picture, and ask ourselves a few more 'why would' questions:

why would David Payne and Kate McCann give wholly contradictory stories about an alleged visit by Payne to G5A at 6.30pm on 3 May?

why would Murat tell the PJ 17 lies about his movements between 1 and 4 May?

why would Nuno Lourenco invent an alleged kidnapping by Wojcek Krokowski?

why would Gerry McCann not say whether he knew Murat or not?

why would Jane Tanner say she saw Robert Murat, then help Melissa Little draew up a sketch of someone who looked quite different?

why would Martin Smith wait until the day after Murat was arrested to report his claimed 'sighting', then 4 months later say he thinks it was Gerry McCann that he saw, and then spend the next 7 years fully co-operating fully with the McCann Team?

why would government media spokesmen, the British security services, Control Risks Group, CEOP, the top brass of Bell Pottinger, ambassadors, British police officers and consuls and lawyers all descend like a hundred tons of bricks on Praia da Luz in the first 3 days?

and then

why would Mrs Fenn make up a wholly improbable story about an alleged burglary (which she says might have happened one, no, two, no, three, no, 'several' weeks before 3 May) in which, allegedly, she 'tried to grab' the feet of a burglar who was just about to leap out of a window onto a concrete surface 12 or more feet below?

If @ j.rob you ponder these questions carefully, I think you might get your answer

@TB - when you started this thread I was strongly in favour of Mrs Fenn being a genuine witness and the crying incident being real. Nice old, middle class Mrs Fenn surely wouldn't lie on oath would she? But I have to confess I am almost swayed by your argument.

One thing I don't agree on is the fact that Carol Tranmer's stranger, who she supposedly spotted creeping quietly down the Mcs outside steps and gate on the 3 May, was a creation in August 2007 to combat bad press. We are told that CT had given her initial statement about her sighting to the police on the 8 May, after returning to the UK. The blond-haired stranger may be real or not, but he was certainly in the mix early on. The leak of the alleged sighting to the press of course could have been tactical. 

Something else which seems to support the theory of Mrs Fenn as a plant is the last part of Carole Tranmer's rogatory in which she states:

CT'Not really, there is only the issue of what I have spoken about and which had to do with the apartment. I did not know that it was the apartment below ours and, humm'I did not know that they were staying in that apartment; I was focused on the gate. I had no idea.

DC1485'Yes.

CT'Except in the Sunday papers, as we have seen.

DC1485' Had you seen anyone prior, anyone at all, leaving by that gate before'

CT'Hummm... no, not while we were visiting, no.

DC1485'And do you remember if it was occupied at that time'

CT'I cannot be sure, I do not know if anyone was there because it was very early in the season, and there were some guests staying in apartments above the ground floor.

DC1485'Yes.

DC1485'Was there anyone there, who perhaps put out clothing'

CT'Yes.

CT'There were some, but that small gate...it also gives access to the apartments above.

DC1485'Yes.

CT'For this reason, I do not know...

DC1485'Okay.

CT'As you know, I did not see anyone leave or enter.

DC1485'Do you know if your aunt knew of anyone staying as a guest, or mentioned that someone was staying there'

CT'She probably knew, but she does not talk much about this.

DC1485'Yes.

CT'So this'humm.

DC1485'Yes.

CT'She knows some people from the Resident's Association but I cannot guarantee that she knew who was staying there. She is pretty reserved or at least tries to be, but she does know the majority of the members of the Resident's Association and when there is a meeting'for this reason perhaps she knew that an apartment would be occupied. Remembering this after so much time has passed'

DC1485'Yes.

CT'She is very astute, you know.

DC1485'Very good. Is there anything else you would like to add'

CT'No.

DC1485'She was given the opportunity to clarify. Right, it is 11h10. This interview has ended/

So in April 2008, CT is saying that she does not know for certain whether her aunt, Mrs Fenn, was aware that anyone was staying in 5A let alone the Mc's. And yet, from Mrs Fenn's statement of 20 August 2007 to the PJ, it is clear that she knew that the Mcs were staying in 5A; that they were a family with young children; that she could recognise both KM and GM by sight; that they didn't argue during the week; that they were out of the apartment a lot.

So are we to assume that Pamela Fenn did not discuss anything with her niece? And what about when Mrs Fenn's story about the crying incident was released to the press (before the 20 August statement was made, according to @TB's research) - did her niece not read that? How could CT not be aware of the fact that her aunt knew the Mcs were in 5A? Carole Tranmer's comments in the above part statement regarding this point sound extremely evasive - why? Very odd. And, what does the last line by DC1485 'She was given the opportunity to clarify' refer to?

I have been trying to imagine what would possess a woman like Mrs Pamela Fenn, at her stage in life, to give false information in a statement. It is a strong accusation to make of anyone and I feel uncomfortable swaying in that direction, particularly as she is no longer around to defend herself. She came across in the media as strong and level headed. Her niece describes her as astute. Money wouldn't do it; the only 2 suggestions I have are national security or threats directed at family members.

Verdi wrote:

j.rob wrote:If Mrs Fenn DIDN'T hear a child crying then why would she make this up? What is her motive?

IF Mrs Fenn did hear a child crying, why didn't she do something positive about it at the time, why didn't she tell the McCanns or one of their friends that she heard a child crying, more pertinent still - why didn't she tell the police at that time that she heard a child crying? What was her true motive for not doing so?

It does not paint the McCanns in a good light as it suggests that the times between checks were much longer than half an hour - or at least on that one occasion. Which makes them look even more negligent.


The McCanns and indeed their group of friends, have purposely encouraged the world to think they were neglectful - above all else.  That is the one thing they have never attempted to conceal.  Clouded by false claims of half hourly checks, crying, washing out pyjama stain - all red alerts to imply neglect.  Now, why would that be - because they are guilty of neglect or because they want you to concentrate on the neglect issue?  I believe they knew they would never be prosecuted for neglect as any one with half an ounce of savvy would likewise know, yet still they pushed the neglect issue.

One thing we DO know is that Kate writes disparagingly about her in her book. She records that Mrs Fenn lent over her balcony on that fateful evening and asked what was going on. Her response when told by Kate and Jane that a child had been abducted was, apparently, woefully inadequate and Kate and Jane sent her off with a flea in her ear.

There is no evidence that I can recall to confirm the alleged incident between P Fenn on her terrace and Kate McCann below. 

This, of course, is more evidence, if you need it, that Madeleine had not been abducted from her bed by a stranger that night. As clearly Mrs Fenn would have been a vitally important eye-witness and could have seen or heard something.

Living above apartment 5a she certainly would be a key witness but there is no evidence to suggest she was interviewed by the PJ prior to August 2007 - this suggests to me that she was not in her apartment on the night of 3rd May 2007 or she is playing the proverbial three wise monkeys.  Either way it doesn't look good. 


But the FACT that Kate writes disparagingly about Mrs Fenn and they do not ask her if she saw or heard anything and also refuse her offer of lending them her phone I do believe to call the police suggests to me that she was a thorn in their side.

See above.

I really don't know whether Mrs Fenn hear a child crying or not that night! I am simply interested in her motive if she made this up. I agree it is odd that she didn't contact OC reception, say. Or even go down and knock on the apartment door. Instead of which she claims she phoned a friend. Which may or may not be true but in any event does nothing to help the crying child.  Many people however are very reluctant to get involved in situations like this. They don't want to be confronted by an angry parent telling them to mind their own business, for instance.

I agree that TM don't seem that bothered by the neglect issue but Kate in her book writes that the longest time they left the children unchecked was one night when they had a drink at the bar after the Tapas meal so it was about 45 minutes between checks rather than half an hour. So this does suggest that she was slightly sensitive to criticism on this matter. 

Nevertheless, an hour and a quarter of anguished crying is one hell of a long time so I cannot imagine that the McCanns particularly welcomed Mrs Fenns testimony, whether true or not.

There is no evidence that I can recall to confirm the alleged incident between P Fenn on her terrace and Kate McCann below.  


I didn't say there was. I said there was evidence from Kate's book that Kate writes disparagingly about Mrs Fenn who - according to Kate in her book - puts her head over the balcony at around 10.30pm that fateful Thursday evening and asks what is going on. Kate McCann writes in her book that Mrs Fenn's response, when told a child had been abducted, was woefully inadequate to the extent that Kate and Jane give her a pithy retort.

Mrs Fenn in her testimony claims that she heard Kate crying out: "We have let you down" several times. When she looks over the balcony Gerry McCann tells her a girl has been abducted. Mrs Fenn says that she offered to help by saying they could use her phone to call police but Gerry said police had already been called.

Now, it is perfectly possibly that ALL of these accounts are not the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I would believe Mrs Fenn over the Mcs, though. 

However there is EVIDENCE from what Kate writes in her book that both Kate and Jane Tanner want to send the 'plummy' Mrs Fenn off with a flea in her ear. And, despite the fact TM claim there was an abduction, extraordinarily none of them want to find out whether this very near neighbour - a key eye-witness  - saw or heard anything.

This suggests to me that TM are nervous that Mrs Fenn may well have seen or heard something incriminating and want to get rid of her. 

In any event, it would not be at all unlikely if one of the McCann children had woken up and cried - especially given that they were allegedly left alone.  Many of the apartments near Mrs Fenn's were unoccupied so there were not that many people to overhear a child crying. 

(Social worker Yvette Martin gets a similarly brusque reception from Kate and David Payne intervenes and ushers Kate away. )

I think that is EVIDENCE that Mrs Fenn is a thorn in their side.

And the FACT that Kate and Gerry flag up a crying incident from Madeleine suggests to me that Madeleine - or one of the twins - may indeed have been crying and the incident was significant but they wish to sanitize it. 

there is no evidence to suggest she was interviewed by the PJ prior to August 2007 -


Really? The police gained entry to nearby apartment within days and particularly those that were occupied.

Given that Leics police interview Mrs Fenn's niece on 8th May 2007 - and she was only visiting rather than staying there I do believe - I cannot believe that they did not interview Mrs Fenn - the only permanent resident in this block apparently - in the very early days.

j.rob wrote:Given that Leics police interview Mrs Fenn's niece on 8th May 2007 - and she was only visiting rather than staying there I do believe - I cannot believe that they did not interview Mrs Fenn - the only permanent resident in this block apparently - in the very early days.

Firstly, there is some ambiguity as regards the whereabouts of the witness statement allegedly volunteered by Carole Tranmer in the UK, early May 2007.

I agree Pamela Fenn would most definitely be an important witness and thus would have been interviewed by the PJ on 3rd/4th May 2007.  The 3rd IMO if the exchange between her from her terrace and Kate Mccann stationed below be true - hence my previous comment that Fenn was either not in her apartment on that day/night or she declined to comment.

I believe the subject was touched on here..

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t4236p110-carole-tranmer?highlight=pamela+fenn

Someone with their finger on the pulse can no doubt post-up another link/s that might be more informative.

I find the timings of Mrs Fenn's alleged overhearing of the crying and the timing of Robert Murat's last minute flight out to Luz interesting.

Mrs Fenn says in her police statement that she heard an hour and a quarter of crying coming from apartment 5a from 10.30pm until 11.45pm on Tuesday evening on the 1st May 2007. Which is, of course, two nights before Madeleine's alleged abduction. 

If you run with a theory that something happened to Madeleine by Monday 30th April -  hence Robert Murat's hurried arrival in Luz on Tuesday 1st May, then the Mrs Fenn crying incident just happens to have occurred on the very same day that Murat arrives in Luz. 

Just a co-incidence maybe? Or maybe not? 

Several distinct hypotheses then emerge, imo, depending on whether Mrs Fenn is entirely unbiased or not.

IF Mrs Fenn is an entirely unbiased eye-witness (ahem, do they exist in this strange case?) then she may well have overheard a distraught Madeleine crying out after something bad had happened earlier - either on Sunday and certainly by Monday. Something that necessitated Robert Murat being drafted in at the last minute on Tuesday morning.

By Tuesday evening - despite Murat's arrival - things are still in disarray. Madeleine is deeply distressed and inconsolable. Chaos has ensued and Mrs Fenn overhears Madeleine crying out in distress from apartment 5a for an hour and a quarter as she is inconsolable.The crying stops abruptly when patio doors are opened. Assuming this account is truthful, then the crying stopping suddenly is suspicious as it would take some time to calm  down a very distressed child. The sobs would become less loud over a period of time, not stop abruptly. It could suggest that an adult (a parent?) came into the room and silenced the inconsolably sobbing child.

Whether or not Mrs Fenn is unbiased I  happen to believe that there was a crying incident that week involving Madeleine which is highly sensitive because the McCanns' themselves flag it up. And Kate becomes highly distressed in an earlier media interview when talking about it. The McCanns change the date and timing of the incident, imo, to make it appear that Madeleine was alive, well and full of beans on Thursday morning. When she probably wasn't by then. And they also sanitize the incident by claiming Madeleine was quite unfazed by what woke her up and made her cry. Which is not believable as a child of nearly four would not react in this manner. It is simply not credible. If, as the McCanns' state, both Madeleine and Sean woke up and cried and found their parents not there and the parents didn't come back either until the crying had eventually stopped, there is no way that Madeleine would be completely unfazed about it the next day. Children of this age when they wake up at night expect and have a right to have a responsible and known adult there to check they are okay and to settle them down again. It would have been scary for Madeleine to find out there was no babysitter, no one looking after her and her siblings. She would be far too young to settle Sean down and both children would have been distressed to find they were alone with no babysitter. Even if both her and Sean did eventually settle themselves again, either one or both of them might be unsettled the next day. Fearful and unsettled particularly when it came to night time and they would be worried that they would be left alone again - particularly Madeleine aged nearly four. Children of nearly four would be highly sensitive to a situation where their parents woefully neglected to ensure their safety and left them exposed and vulnerable at night. 

So I find the McCanns' account of the crying incident hugely deceptive, totally unbelievable and -if true - it suggests huge negligence. I presume the only way they can justify leaving the children unattended again the following night is by pretending that neither Madeleine nor Sean were bothered by waking at night and finding themselves without any adult supervision. To the extent that it was absolutely fine to do exactly the same the following evening. 

But of course this version of events allows windows of opportunity for 'the abductor' to - allegedly as insinuated by Kate in her book - do a dummy run on Wednesday night. Try to drug Madeleine (the stain on the pyjama top) but flee empty-handed as he disturbs the children and they wake up crying. So unperturbed are Madeleine and Sean by this incident - despite having been woken and possibly drugged by a paedophile abductor and despite finding themselves quite alone in the apartment with a probable paedophile abductor at large - that the McCanns do exactly the same thing the following night. Which of course allows the paedophile abductor to do a return visit and this time be successful as he has by now refined his strategy. Successfully drugs all three children and escapes into the night with a sedated Madeleine in his arms.

The mind boggles as to how the McCanns could have answered Madeleine's question about where they were when she and Sean woke up on Wednesday night.

"Well, darling, we were out on the piss and we left you alone in the apartment without a babysitter.  Even when you woke up and cried we didn't return because we didn't hear you from where we were and we couldn't see you either. Maybe a nasty abductor came in, tried to drug you  but you woke up and spoilt his plan so he fled without any of you. But don't worry, we will do exactly the same tomorrow night. Leave you alone without a babysitter so that if the nasty man wants to come back and try to drug you all and then abduct one or more of you then this time he might be successful.

Sleep tight, darlings!"

The whole thing is so preposterous I cannot believe they have got away with this NONSENSE for so long. 

So - if Mrs Fenn's account of a prolonged period of sobbing is truthful (and if she made it up she is certainly not doing the McCanns any favours) then it is highly incriminating for the McCanns. Suggesting that whoever entered the patio door quickly silenced an inconsolable child.

However, I do agree that it would be difficult to distinguish between a two year old and a nearly four year old crying. How could Mrs Fenn be so sure - assuming she did hear the crying - it was not one of the twins, say?

For instance, something terrible could have happened to Madeleine on, say, Sunday or Monday. The twins despite their parents efforts catch wind of something and one of them cries out in distress for an hour and a quarter on Tuesday night? Either crying out for Maddie or crying out for Daddy who is busy dealing with "the disaster" that has struck Madeleine.

You would expect Mrs Fenn to have introduced a level of uncertainty into her statement, such as: 'I think it sounded like a child older than two but of course I could be mistaken and it might have been one of the twins for all I know.'

If Mrs Fenn is NOT an unbiased witness and has another agenda, then what? Something relating to her knowing Robert Murat's mother Jennifer, perhaps?  Then that obviously opens up other scenarios. Especially as the crying incident just happens to be overheard the very day Robert Murat arrives in Luz. And obviously at a critical time that week, given the question marks over Madeleine's whereabouts that fateful week. 

In the event of the above, then Mrs Fenn's motives for reporting on this incident - whether genuinely overheard or whether fabricated - become more convoluted and far more complex. Especially when you consider that Jennifer Murat's son is later made arguido in the case. 

The ramifications of this are too complex and too convoluted for one post but whether or not Mrs Fenn is unbiased (I really don't know but it's a pretty damning thing to make up) I still maintain that her statement is not flattering for the McCanns and does not paint a good picture of their parenting or childcare. 

An hour and a quarter of anguished crying which escalates and stops abruptly when doors are opened, presumably when a parent or another adult enters, suggests grossly negligent childcare, imo. Not only are three children (supposedly) left unattended for a long period without adult supervision (or if there is an adult in there they are unable to console the sobbing child which also paints a terrible picture of what could have happened to make a child so inconsolable). And as I wrote up-thread a sudden cessation of crying is suspicious.

So - whether true or not - I still maintain that Mrs Fenn's statement does not paint the McCann parents in a good light at all. It raises some ugly questions about their childcare arrangements, and about what lead to one of their children becoming so distressed on what was supposed to be a lovely family holiday.

And it is on record in Kate's book that both Kate and Jane Tanner send Mrs Fenn off her balcony with a flea in her ear when she asks what is going on that fateful Thursday evening. Kate labels her 'plummy' which I presume is meant to be pejorative. Again, we only have Kate's word for this by it is clear Kate has no time for her. Mrs Fenn as far as I know says in her statement that she hears Kate crying out: "We have let her down." And she also claims that Gerry refuses her offer of help by lending him her phone to call police.

I really don't think that Mrs Fenn's statement - again whether true or not - does any favours at all for the McCanns. Quite the reverse in fact. It screams out negligent childcare and a completely inconsolable child left crying.

If this account is indeed fabricated and Mrs Fenn heard nothing at all, one has to ask WHY? In her statement she is certainly pointing quite an accusative finger at Kate and Gerry that is for sure. So unless she is malicious why is she wanting to do this? (To 'protect' her friend's son Robert Murat perhaps?)

And of course Mrs Fenn IS an important eye-witness. She is a very near neighbour. One of the only people who lived permanently in that block. Would know people locally so be privy to all sorts of rumours and gossip floating around that week and beyond. And of course it is possible that this statement is the tip of the iceberg. Mrs Fenn may have seen and heard more or may have spoken with other people at OC and locally who were also privy to information about what really happened to Madeleine that week.


http://www.mccannfiles.com/id331.html

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t727-the-mystery-of-robert-murat-17-changes-in-his-story?highlight=Robert+Murat

What human being especially an elderly woman who has had children of her own would allow a child crying and clearly very distressed to continue to do so for such a lon time without seeking assistance. None in my opinion and neither would Mrs Fenn. Therefore no crying. As to why this story has been concocted is beyond reason. Why she wasn't interviewed sooner is consistent with her not being at home.

I don't in fact believe...
The phone offer
The flea in the ear
The We let her down cry from the woman who gave birth to MM
Gerry McCann and the a girl is missing bit
The burglar
The witness statement
The why didn't you come mummy fairie tale
And I don't believe the abrupt stopping of the crying
Why?? Because it never happened!

It has all been made up. Just like so many other things in the case...
Why? Because the MCCanns and their friends are in it up to their necks! Why? Because they know a death occurred and covered it up and tried to simulate a stranger abduction. It's the oldest blag n the book. But it's not believable and that's why they will be arrested and hopefully convicted of the charges against them.