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

@Sharoni – hi. @Verdi - take a deep breath.
 
I appreciate this is off topic but as it has been raised I’d like to address the ‘extra cot/beds’ issue because I believe that it is important.
 
The extra cot requests were simply made in response to MarkWarner policy at the time of booking. On booking every child 2 years and up was allocated a bed by the booking system.
 
The McCanns: 2 adults + 3 children over 2 years; 2 bedroom apartment with 5 bed spaces required (by booking system)
 
The booking form automatically generated the allocation of ‘extra bed x 1’
 
The McCanns would have been automatically given an apartment with 5 bed spaces available i.e. a bed sofa in the lounge area.
 
The Paynes: 3 adults + 1 child over 2 + 1 child under 2; 2 bed apartment with 4 bed spaces required
 
The booking form automatically generated the allocation of ‘cot x 1’ for baby Scarlet (this can be found in the line at the bottom of ‘Guest List 1’)
 
The Paynes would have been automatically given an apartment with a minimum of 4 bed spaces
 
During booking, the McCanns and Paynes then request 3 extra cots for Sean, Amelie and Lily.
 
The McCann apartment should then have had 5 beds (incl. sofa bed as 1) and 2 cots, and the Paynes apartment 4 beds (may also be a sofa bed as standard) and 2 cots.
 
We know G5A had 2 twin bedrooms and 2 cots; we don’t know if there was a sofa bed.
 
We know G5H had a double and a twin bedroom and 2 cots; we know there was a sofa bed in the lounge area.
 
Why does G5H seem a sensitive topic – constantly brought up as the ‘biggest’ apartment?
 
Why does Matthew Oldfield’s description of G5A better fit G5H?
 
Why was there none of Madeleine’s DNA in G5A? (the dogs were not looking for this when they searched)
 
Why would a grandmother (Dianne) sleep on a sofa bed in a communal area (with the need to make the bed up every night and pack away every morning) when according to the family there were 2 spare single beds in Lily’s room? If she had slept in with Lily, as expected by MarkWarner, there would have been no need for a sofa bed. Was this ‘extra’ bed sensitive to the group?
 
Sofa beds were not required by either the Mcs or the Paynes, as the twins were using cots. Was Dianne said to be sleeping on the sofa bed in G5H to justify the Paynes being in that apartment and the Mcs in G5A? Did something happen to Madeleine in G5H and the ‘crime scene (whatever the crime)’ was moved?

Verdi wrote:So much of this illusion is about timing,  not the Team McCann fictive timelines but real time as in the aftermath and the long term strategy - the wider agenda.

1.  Pamela Fenn's witness statement - 22nd August 2007

2.  Martin Smith's alert - 20th September 2007.   Not 9th September when he claims to have watched the television footage of the Mcanns return to the UK but 11 days later.

Following the disturbing visit and forensic inspection by the magnificent duo, Eddie and Keela on  6th/7th August 2007, things started to look very awkward for Messrs McCann.  By their own admission they began plans for a return to England despite previously saying they would never leave without their daughter Madeleine.  Within the same period, the government Media Monitoring Unit director Clarence Mitchell,  resigned his position to take up permanent employment representing the McCanns full-time. 

It is not known exactly when Brian Kennedy, the double glazing magnate, was engaged as their wealthy benefactor and ring leader but it was publicly announced during the same period of time - August/September/October 2007.

Curiously, again during this same period, Pamela Fenn gave her first official witness statement and Martin Smith not only publicly refuted reports about his original witness statement taken in May 2007 (August 2007), many days after the event but also in September 2007 he resurfaces with yet another surprise claim.  Not, I hasten to add, on 9th September 2007 when he claims to have watched television footage of the McCanns hasty return the the UK but eleven days later.

August and September 2007 was a very  significant time for Team McCann .... followed closely by Dr Amaral's removal from the case at the beginning of October 2007 .... the McCanns request for re-interview of named key witnesses by rogatory (in their favour) in October 2007 .... the Rothley Court Hotel meeting in November 2007 .... a media blitz in December 2007 .... new and revamped witness sightings pioneered by Brian Kennedy and representative in January 2008 .... the rogatory interviews in April 2008.

As they say, time is of the essence.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15551-bearing-false-witness#391176

This is an interesting post, thank you @ Verdi.

I was about to note that this discussion was moving somewhat off-topic and was going to suggest that this is a good thing, as the discussion is flowing. I was going to add some comment about cots and beds as well.

In both respects @ skyrocket has anticipated me, and I agree with him that we should let the conversation move along on this thread.

I was going to suggest that there is almost enough material on the subject of 'cots and beds' for there to be a new 'cots and beds' thread set up. But no, let's keep talking here.

One point I remembered from MMRG's first '50 FACTS' leaflet was this:

-------

As regards @ skyrocket's post, I think the data about G5H and G5A are both interesting and useful, but I cannot see how we get to his deduction that Madeleine might have died in G5H. I would like to hear a more detailed explanation. One other point of note: I think Kate McCann said in evidence somewhere that the curtains and windows in the 'children's room' in G5A were 'closed all week'. That is a very odd comment anyway, but especially so as from Monday morning the weather changed from being hot and sunny (Sunday) to cooler, cloudier and windier, with occasional rain.  

Before moving on @ Verdi, one correction: Pamela Fenn's statement was not made on 22 August but on Monday 20 August: 
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAMELA_FENN.htm

I would also add that the ridiculous statements by Martin Smith (20 September) and Richard McCluskey (25 September) purporting to 'recognise' Gerry McCann from 'the way he was carrying his child' are most likely to have been made by those backing Robert Murat and opposing the McCanns.

=====

The subject of cots and beds reminded me of an incident concerning a cot related by Neil Berry. Here is part of his statement made in April 2018 (a Rogatory statement). There are a number of aspects of his statement which I find of interest.

What is the connection (if any) between Berry & Balu and the Jensen/Wiltshire sisters - who later made very questionable statements  identifying a would-be abductor? (their statements were taken by Gary Hagland, Brian Kennedy's money-laundering expert who once flew to Saturn and back with aliens).

Also, is it mere coincidence that Balu and Berry's wives had both previously worked for the same company.

Here is Berry's statement of 18 April 2008. I have highlighted some points that I think are of interest:


At about 16.00 we were at the swimming pool bar within the complex. It was at this time that we had a few drinks with Raj Balu, Jayne Jensen and Anne Wiltshire, as I testified in my statement of 8th January 2008. My family returned to the apartment at about 17.000 and the four of us remained at the pool bar. I must have stayed there for another half an hour before joining my family in the apartment. When I left Jensen and Wiltshire remained at the bar. I do not remember whether Raj left with me or whether he stayed at the bar. From there I returned to my apartment and to my family.

With regard to where I took my meals and with whom:

I do not remember what we did at lunchtime on 3rd May. I only remember about the evening. I tried to reserve a table at the Tapas Bar for that night but it was fully booked. I spoke about this with Raj Balu and we decided to order a meal from the restaurant and we dined together in our apartment, as testified in my statement of 7th May 2007.

With regard to where I was at 18.00, whom I was with and the fact that I was seen by a witness at this time next to stairs and lift of block 5 of the Ocean Club:

I am not certain where I was at 18.00. It is possible that I was already in my apartment or returning from the bar. In order to arrive at my apartment I would walk along the side of the pool, crossing the stairs of block 4. If I were with someone, this person would be Raj, but as I have already said I do not remember whether I returned with him or before him. I do not remember having seen a lift in any of the apartment blocks. I was not in block 5, but had to pass by it in order to arrive at my apartment. It is possible that I was on the other side of the street opposite block five.

With relation to one of the Ocean Club employees having passed close by:

I do not remember having seen Ocean Club staff collecting dirty laundry at this hour.

With relation to where I was between 18.00 and 23.00:

After I returned to the apartment I was with my wife and children. The children went to bed at 19.00 and Raj arrived at our apartment with his family, carrying a cot for his son. We did not manage to set the cot up and I went to find a member of staff. I found a Mark Warner employee, whose name I cannot remember but she was the girlfriend of a maintenance employee called Rob. She accompanied us back to the apartment and managed to set up the cot. We put Raj's child to bed and sat down to relax and have a drink, once the children were asleep.

At about 20.00 Raj and I went to the Tapas restaurant to place our order and wait for our meal. I think that we had a drink while we waited. I do not remember exactly what we ordered but I think it included red cabbage. When we left with the meal we took the same walk back, along the pool, crossing the road back to the apartment. I think that our apartment was 4G.

I remember that at dinner that the McCanns were not at the restaurant at the time that we left and we did not see them while Raj and I were there.

Once back at the apartment we had dinner and remained there.

From 22.00 onwards all the events that took place were already described in my previous statement of 7th May 2007 and i cannot add any further information, other than that which was already added.

With regard to Rajinder Balu:

I met Raj at the welcome ceremony when we arrived at the resort on 28th April 2007. I did not travel with him and we had not met before. I got on well with him and later on we discovered that our wives had both worked for the same company. We did not normally spend the days together, but we would meet up on some evenings to dine and drink. Raj and I spent two evenings watching football matches in a local bar. I do not remember any other information or explanations that are relevant or which could in any way help this inquiry.
        
  


 


22

There is good reason for keeping threads on topic, a little digression here and there is acceptable (heaven knows I do it myself) - I'd go so far as to say unavoidable, so there lies the reasoning for getting back on track before the topic turns into the proverbial shaggy dog story.

There are a number of search facilities on CMoMM for the benefit of readers to locate topics of interest to them.  If searching for a specific subject, say the last photograph for example,  I personally find it infuriating to land on page after page pondering the length of Aunt Gert's knicker elastic or what happened to Uncle Dave's false teeth after he put them out on the kitchen windowsill for a laugh.

The forum is packed with valuable information relative to the case of missing Madeleine McCann, navigating the forum is an adventure, a voyage of discovery, especially to new members and readers who are unfamiliar with the case detail.  It's important and good for the reader to delve into the wealth of information contained within the forum - it should be encouraged not halted by one particular thread that is allowed to flow from one subject to another. 

All members are asked to stay on topic and only stray within the bounds of what is considered reasonable.  You are asked to respect the few forum rules in place, they are there to maintain the integrity of the forum.  If, as in this case, the subject of beds and cots is of interest then please feel free to start a new topic.

Thank you for understanding.

If Mrs Fenn was working on behalf of the McCanns then they had three and a half months from May 4th until August 20th (when she gave her official statement) to get her to say what they wanted.
 Seventeen days after Mrs Fenn made her statement (claiming to have heard crying for 75 mins on the Tuesday night) Kate McCann (Sept 6th) categorically stated that what Mrs. Fenn had claimed about the crying was untrue.  She claims instead that on the night in question (Tue) Amelie was crying after midnight and that, as a result, Madeleine came and slept in their room for the remainder of the night.
Why would the McCanns put Mrs. Fenn up to telling a story about crying with which they would, just over two weeks later, rubbish. It makes no sense! If the McCanns wanted Mrs. Fenn to lie for them they had ample time to communicate what they wanted her to say. IMO all the indications are that Mrs. Fenn was not acting on behalf of the McCanns. This is why Kate tries to depict her as a snobbish, unfeeling old woman in her book.

edited to add 
 This statement of Kate's is one of the most revealing. She states clearly that the cots in the apartment were placed in situ ie. - in the children's room, on Sat April 28th, and remained there constantly during the week. Therefore, if the cleaner says that she saw, while carrying out her duties, a cot in the parent's room (which Kate categorically denies) this can only have happened on the Monday or Wednesday morning of that week as these were the cleaning days. There is no reason for the cleaner to lie about this detail.

You really do miss the point Phoebe.

aquila wrote:You really do miss the point Phoebe.

Perhaps you could enlighten me Aquila - why would the McCanns get Mrs Fenn to make a bogus statement on August 20th saying she heard crying from the apartment for an hour and fifteen minutes on Tuesday night and then, just over two weeks later, claim that was Mrs. Fenn stated was totally untrue.

I believe Mrs Fenn told the  truth. I think it alerts us to the fact that the Mccanns were, at least on one occasion, in the habit of leaving their children unattended for longer periods than 30mins.   This then brings into question the time line presented for the night of the 3rd May. Were the checks done at least every 30mins.  On the initial post, the question is posed that if Mrs Fenn did hear a child cry for 75mins why did she do.nothing. I believe that this is not unusual. There have been numerous cases of slterriblw crimes being committed whilst been witnessed (or heard) by bystanders. In such cases there is a diffusion or responsibility that occurs. People won't take responsibility because they believe it is not their responsibility to intervene or call the relevant authorities. I had a reminder of this today when I assisted a child who had got separated from his parents. I witnessed at least 10 people pass him before I could get to him to help. The child was crying out for his mummy so it was obvious he needed help. When people can directly witness such things and do nothing it is not surprising that one lady does not intervene when she hears a child crying in the apartment below hers.

Phoebe wrote:

aquila wrote:You really do miss the point Phoebe.

Perhaps you could enlighten me Aquila - why would the McCanns get Mrs Fenn to make a bogus statement on August 20th saying she heard crying from the apartment for an hour and fifteen minutes on Tuesday night and then, just over two weeks later, claim that was Mrs. Fenn stated was totally untrue.

This is a case in a million. It is NOT an 'Occam's Razor' case.

Therefore we must consider all sorts of scenarios in order to arrive at an understanding of the truth.

Moreover, Praia da Luz seems to have had some weird characters. Sir Clement Freud. The Murat family. The Eveleighs and their 'adult' holidays. Sergey Malinka. The 'ShiningInLuz' character who does the 'McCann mystery' tours. Father Haynes Hubbard and his wife Susan, who jetted in to Praia da Luz three days after Madeleine was reported missing. Father Jose Pacheco. Edward Smethurst, the McCanns' 'co-ordinating solicitor', has holidayed there every summer for 19 years. Jon Corner used to go there often. Martin Smith and his family have an apartment there. And so on.  

Consider the claim that David Payne visited the McCanns' apartment at around 6.30pm on Thursday 3 May. We found out later, by analysing the statements, that there were at least 20 (TWENTY) flat contradictions between their two accounts, which amounts to virtual proof that both fabricated their statements. So how did this happen?

Here is a suggestion. Suppose, after Sunday, there was a 'master planner' directing how the hoax would be carried out. He would have delegated Jane Tanner to fabricate an abductor. He would have appointed Nuno Lourenco to take a photo of Wojchiech Krokowski's car and then report an alleged attempted abduction on the morning of Saturday 5 May to try and divert Goncalo Amaral's team.

Did he also say to David Payne and Kate McCann: "Look, David, tell the police you visited Kate at about 6.30pm for some reason or another. That'll help prove Madeleine was alive then".  Suppose the two told the police that.

Then come their problems. To test their stories, the police ask a few key questions, like: Did you enter the apartment? How long were you there? What were the children doing? What were they wearing? Did you sit down? What was Kate doing?  Why did you go there anyway? What did you talk about?

And then, of course, their fabricated story completely breaks down as each desperately invents what is supposed to have happened!

And doubtless that is why Goncalo Amaral did not accept their fabricated accounts as evidence.

What about Mrs Fenn? We know little about her, her history, her connections, etc. Her niece Carole Tranmer's statement lacked credibility, just like Mrs Fenn's. She (CT) also seemed to have a connection with the army training college at Sandhurst.  

What if Mrs Fenn was given an outline statement, and then fluffed her lines when it came to the details? Could she have been told to tell police that she heard "a child of more than two years old crying" on the Tuesday night and that she had suffered a burglary (when in fact neither was true)?      

Mrs Fenn said that her reported evidence was "all rubbish - ignore it". Is the simplest explanation here that indeed the whole of her statement was concocted rubbish from start to finish?


.

Tony Bennett wrote:What about Mrs Fenn? We know little about her, her history, her connections, etc. Her niece Carole Tranmer's statement lacked credibility, just like Mrs Fenn's. She (CT) also seemed to have a connection with the army training college at Sandhurst. 

Carole Tranmer is indeed an enigma. 

When fiercely defending Pamela Fenn, people conveniently forget to take into consideration her niece's seemingly unnecessary lengthy testimony taken by Leicestershire Constabulary in April 2008.  Pamela Fenn's testimony cannot be successfully debated without factoring in that of Carole Tranmer, her niece. 

In reality Carole Tranmer's only input was the tale of a lurking stranger she saw at the foot of the stone steps that led to the veranda of apartment 5a.  Just how many more tales of lurking men are required to convince people that it's all contrived to reinforce the abduction claim - all fabrication.

Question remains unanswered - who prompted her to come forward with tales of her visit to Luz and the lurking stranger and why?

Strangers appearing on a nearby balcony leaving a pile of cigarette ends;  a lurking man at the foot of apartment 5a block stairwell;  the stranger at the foot of apartment 5a veranda steps;  the suspicious man lurking in the vicinity of apartment 5a block.  Then later along comes a series of sightings old and new to spice-up the mix.

A crying child;  an attempted burglary (no confirmation of a police report);  a lurking stranger.  Pamela Fenn was a resident - a local, for sure she would be acquainted with other residents, particularly of British origin.  I should be very surprised if she wasn't acquainted with Jenny Murat, Robert Murat's mother, being from a similar generation.

So what exactly did Pamela Fenn and her niece Carole Tranmer have to offer?  Nothing as far as I can see - yet still they are a focal point of the global deception.

Makes you think doesn't it?

I know I posted this a while back but wondered if it was possible that the Baby Monitor could have been used to project the crying heard by Mrs Fenn. In other words, the child heard crying may not have been in the apartment at all but elsewhere and the monitor was used to project the crying ? It may be the monitor could not be used in that way. I don't know. Just a thought

Pamela Fenn was apparently in her apartment when the alarm was raised.

Beyond a shadow of doubt, she would have been questioned during the PJ's routine house to house calls.

During this routine process, if Pamela Fenn gave any information or had any information to assist the investigation she would have been called upon to give a formal statement.

This didn't happen immediately following Madeleine's alleged disappearance.

Pamela Fenn gave a formal statement to the PJ over three months later, in August 2007.

No more need be said.

In her interview with Mrs. Fenn she clearly states that "I have been here for three months and in all this time I've never spoken to a journalist. They've written rubbish in the newspapers. I've never even uttered  word. I've never - it's all rubbish. Please, please , its a joke forget it"

Given what she says and her obvious annoyance about being hassled by a film crew it is clear IMO that she is refuting NOT HER SWORN EVIDENCE TO THE POLICE" but the speculative nonsense written about her in the tabloid rags.

I consider it beyond credulity that Team McCann approached Mrs. Fenn and asked her to say that she heard a child crying, with mounting distress, for an hour and a quarter on Tuesday or indeed any other night.
What possible purpose could such a fabrication serve - to prove Madeleine was still alive on Tuesday. There was no need - the police already believed she had been alive and well two days later. Was it to  prove that the children were left in the apartments during dinner. Again, no need to prove this - the police already accepted this. The main effect of Mrs. Fenn's statement was to make people doubt A) that they checked on the children as regularly as they claimed and B) to belie their claim that their children were always safely asleep during their absence while they wined and dined.

Dear Phoebe, I still think you are missing the point and I am not being mean to you.

Suspend common goodness and common sense for a moment and take a look at the manifestation of a dirty campaign.

aquila. X

  Pamela Fenn had hearing so good that she could not only tell us that she heard a child crying, she could also specify the age of the child, not a baby of two or under but an older child, and where the noise was coming from.  She could also tell us what time someone entered the apartment because she heard the door open.  

So what did Mrs Fenn have to say about the events of May 3rd?  Dud she not here the abductor entering the apartment, the noisy shutters being jemmied open, and the abductor leaving again?

sharonl wrote:  Pamela Fenn had hearing so good that she could not only tell us that she heard a child crying, she could also specify the age of the child, not a baby of two or under but an older child, and where the noise was coming from.  She could also tell us what time someone entered the apartment because she heard the door open.  

So what did Mrs Fenn have to say about the events of May 3rd?  Dud she not here the abductor entering the apartment, the noisy shutters being jemmied open, and the abductor leaving again?

This was posted on FB by 
Michelle Wootton-Rowley
 quite an interesting read -


Yesterday at 7:58 PM
More on the deleted call records – Where Was Kate McCann?
By Paulo Reis and associates (*)
The CD issued by Ministerio Publico de Portimao in July 2008, contains a great deal of information on the mobile calls made and received by the “Tapas 9” but it is dispersed, difficult to retrieve and with important pages and charts missing. The main documents of interest from the CD are:
A 3 page report by the Policia Judiaria (undated, but probably 4th May 2007) listing call records retrieved from the handsets of Mr and Mrs McCann
A detailed (and excellent report) by Inspector Paulo Dias, Inspector of UNI-Sector de Análise, Lisbon, dated 9th November 2007
Schedules provided by Vodafone on 14th December 2007 covering a period from 29th April 2007 for Gerald McCann, David Payne, Rachael Mampilly, broken into four separate sections for incoming and outgoing telephone calls, incoming and outgoing SMS traffic
A second report by Inspector Dias dated 5th February 2008, containing time bars, link charts and maps pinpointing where the “Tapas 9’s” sets were when they activated antennae
A third report by Inspector Dias dated 2nd June 2008 which includes details of activations of the Luz and other mobile antenna from 28th April 2007 to September 2007
The Rogatory Letter requests and correspondence dated from 5th December 2007 to May 2007 and responses from the Home Office in April and May 2008
The PJ used a program, called the “Analyst’s Notebook” as well as “Excel” to handle what were very large datasets. Inspector Dias pointed out that “Excel” was far from ideal, because of its limited capacity and it seems that much of the data provided was paper based and had to be rekeyed. Also the main focus of the research was limited to the evening of Thursday 3rd May 2007. But, despite the problems, the PJ’s work is impressive, innovative and very detailed. For example, there is a brilliant analysis (which unfortunately led nowhere) based on the hypothesis of two abductors each working with mobiles in the Ocean Club area immediately before Madeleine was reported missing. There is another excellent piece of work which tracks down a misrouted call, from Swansea, to Kate McCann at 11.21 on Wednesday 2nd May 2007.
However, there are potentially serious omissions:
The most important records were not available when Mr and Mrs McCann attended their “Arguido interviews” on 6th and 7th September 2007 and it is doubtful that they were ever reviewed by the very experienced analysts from the Leicestershire Police, whose team left the Algarve soon after the McCann’s return to the UK in September 2007
There are no detailed call records from the mobile operators for Kate McCann, Russell O’Brien, Matthew Oldfield and Jane Tanner
When the PJ obtained the McCann’s mobiles they do not appear to have retrieved deleted data or to extract their contact lists
None of the telecom records show triangulation co-ordinates but are limited to identifying the single primary antenna on which calls were registered
The details of over 50 UK subscribers contacted by the Tapas 9 in the critical period, as well as their onward local and international call records, was included in the Rogatory Letter request in December 2007. If this information was provided, it is not in the CD
A critical link chart (Anexo 37) for Tuesday 1st May 2007 is missing from Inspector Dias’s report
These omissions make interpretation of the data difficult but what is available provides an interesting picture. First, it is obvious that the memories in the McCann’s mobiles were incomplete and, in Kate McCann’s case, selectively deleted.
Her mobile memory held details of 39 calls from 18.28 on Wednesday 25th April to 16.35 on 27th April 2007. After her arrival in Portugal on 28th April 2007, with the exception of one incoming call on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 at 11.21 (which, very interestingly, was the Swansea “wrong number”), and one call from her husband at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007, everything else has been “whoosh-clunked” from memory. These deletions could have been accidental, but a high degree of cunning could be implied. Why would she selectively delete everything up to Thursday 3rd May 2007 with the exception of one wrong number and what was her reason for deleting three of the four calls, between 23.14 and 23.17, from her husband on that critical night?. A possible answer is that she wished to avoid alerting the PJ to evidence that details of around 40 calls had been erased and she felt happier leaving something uncontroversial (or misleading) in memory for them to find. Another answer is that, unsurprisingly, she was under the most extreme stress imaginable following the disappearance of her daughter: but why, in that case, give priority to deleting anything. It is the last thing most parents would think about in the circumstances.
The first call found in Gerald’s mobile memory was timed at 00.30 on Friday 4th May 2007. Again matching antenna records to memory suggests that by the time he gave the handset to the PJ the records of 24 calls or SMSs had been erased, including the one from him found on his wife’s handset and timed at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007. It appears that he had deleted details of the four calls he made to her that night and she deleted just three. It was this simple discrepancy that first led the PJ to suspect interference with the handsets.
If the deletions were deliberate (and it is an “if”) it implies the McCann’s were both “forensically aware” and crafty and wanted to hide something from the PJ. For this reason, it is important to explore the call record data and to match it against other evidence.
On Saturday 28th April 2007, after their arrival in Luz, Kate McCann’s mobile triggered the antenna 9 times. It is not possible to say, from the available records, whether these were incoming or outgoing calls or SMSs or for how long they lasted. The last activations were at 20.55 and 20.59 when (based on their statements) the Tapas 9 returned for an early night after eating at the Millennium Restaurant with their children. All of these records were erased from the memory of Kate McCann’s mobile. Gerald McCann’s mobile did not activate any of the Luz antennae that day.
On Sunday 29th April 2007, the first activation of Kate McCann’s mobile was at 9.23, but again there are no Vodafone logs or time bars to provide further detail. However, by internally matching the antenna records it appears that she called her husband at 12.26 and 17.02.
The crèche records indicate that he collected Madeleine at 12.15. He also picked up the twins around 17.00 but mistakenly recorded the time as “12.30”. Chances are that the calls from Kate McCann were to check that he had picked up the kids. At 10.13 Gerald McCann received a call from a UK mobile xxxxx3899. The last activation by Kate McCann’s mobile was at 19.30 and Gerald’s at 17.02.
A pattern on this sheet (and it applies to all of the Tapas 9) is that no activations took place at any time during the week while they were at dinner. So maybe Clarence Mitchell was right, after all, and that they were so “into each other” that they didn’t want to be disturbed while sardine munching and left their mobiles in their rooms. They were never specifically asked this question, but it is very important and the point will be addressed later.
On Monday 30th April 2007, neither of the McCann’s telephones activated the Luz transmitters. This looks very odd, especially as they were around the Ocean Club to shuffle the kids to and from the crèches. On this afternoon, Madeleine remained in the crèche for only 15 minutes and was picked up by her mother at 15.30. We do not know what Madeleine did for the rest of the day, but it is possible she was being fractious. Interestingly, a friend of Mrs and Mr McCann supposedly told the “Dispatches” team that made a TV program on the tragedy, that “Madeleine was a screamer”. This could be interpreted in one of two ways, but any use of the past tense in referring to Madeleine would be very significant. It was such a past tense referral, to her supposedly living children, that alerted the FBI to their murder by Susan Smith, their mother.
On Tuesday 1st May 2007, Gerald McCann’s handset was silent all day. Kate McCann’s mobile first activated the Luz antenna at 10.16, but all details of the day’s calls have been deleted from the handset and there is no nothing in the CD from her mobile provider. Another activation took place at 12.17. The crèche records show that Gerald McCann picked up Madeleine at 12.20 (a bit earlier than usual) but Kate McCann’s call at 12.17 does not appear to have been to him, (because his mobile was not activated at all that day). Kate McCann dealt with her last call before leaving for the Tapas Bar at 20.35.
At around 8.45pm on Tuesday 1st May 2007, Miss Nejoua Chekeya, the Ocean Club’s busty Aerobics Instructor, held a “Quiz Night” and was later invited, allegedly by Gerald McCann, to join his table which she did sometime between 9.30pm and 9.50pm. She did not say how long she had remained with them, but she is not the sort of woman men would wish see to leave too quickly. Miss Chekeya stated that one dinner setting was unused and that she could not remember seeing Kate McCann.
However, both Jane Tanner and Russell O’Brien have stated that he did not go to the Tapas Bar on the “Quiz Night” (ie Tuesday 1st May 2007), but had stayed in their room looking after his sick daughter. Jane Tanner took his dinner to the room; thus explaining the unused plate setting. Russell O’Brien was not asked by either the Policia Judiciaria or Leicestershire Police whether he had heard Madeleine crying!
Kate McCann’s mobile was next activated six times, in rapid fire, between 22.16 and 22.27, after she had returned to Apartment 5A after dinner. The antenna traffic proves that these calls were not made to any of the “Tapas 9”.
The evidence from the call logs gives the strongest clue that the “Tapas 9” left their telephones in their rooms when they went to dinner. Clarence Mitchell, the McCann’s spokesperson, confirmed this. In an interview, reported on 6th April 2008 by Ned Temko of “The Guardian”, Mr Mitchell said: “You had nine people in a bar without watches on, without mobile phones and absolute panic set in when they realised what had happened…. We would say that, if the police had a perfect time line across nine people, that would be a damn sight more suspicious than the fractured, illogical, composite statements they might have got”
Mrs Fenn, the McCann’s neighbour, reported that Madeleine had cried for her father between 22.30 and 23.45. The evidence shows that Kate McCann was in Apartment 5A 14 minutes before Madeleine started crying. Tuesday 1st May 2007 is the only night (except, of course, for Thursday 3rd May 2007) that either of the McCanns or any of their friends made calls after dinner.
Mrs McCann volunteered to the PJ that on the night of Wednesday 2nd May 2007, she had slept in the spare bed in her children’s room because her husband had not paid her enough attention over dinner. Or put another way, does she mean the amorous Scot was paying someone else (like Miss Chekeya) too much attention, causing her to stomp out of the Tapas Bar before him: ultimately leading to the spare bed in a strop? Gerald McCann said he thought the reason his wife had slept in the children’s bedroom was because of his snoring and that he did not even bother asking her the following morning what the problem was.
Could it be that their timings are wrong by 24 hours and that Kate McCann’s nocturnal shenanigans took place on the night of Tuesday 1st May 2007? It would fit, but why be untruthful about it? A possible reason is that they wanted to conceal both Kate McCann’s state of mind and the fact that she had returned to Apartment 5A, just before Madeleine’s cried for help.
On Wednesday 2nd May 2007, Kate McCann called her friend “Amanda” at 7.36.41 and again at 7.36.45. This was around two hours earlier than any of mobile activations on any other morning: so Kate McCann was “up with the larks”. Amanda returned the calls at 7.50. There is no record of how long any of these calls lasted or whether they were SMSs. They were all deleted from memory.
At 8.07 Gerald McCann received a call from the SMS message centre (447818520047), but does not appear to have responded. At 8.50 Kate McCann received a call from a UK mobile xxxxx27010 and returned it at 8.53, before going to play tennis. Gerald McCann received a series of calls from his SMS message centre between 9.10 and 10.47, again without response.
At 11.21 Kate received a call from what appears to be a landline in Swansea ( xxxxx0023). The report by Inspector Dias researched this call in detail (Page 21 in his report of 9th November 2007) and discovered that it had not activated any of the Luz antennae. But digging deeper, he found that another UK mobile (xxxxx 1583) had triggered the Luz antenna when connecting to the same Swansea number at 14.01. He dug even deeper, tracked all of the calls made from Luz by xxxx1583 and established it had no connection whatsoever with any of the “Tapas 9”. The Swansea call to Kate McCann was simply a “wrong number”, misrouted and thus not logged by the Luz antennae.
What Inspector Dias did not realise was that the Swansea call had become so special to Kate McCann that, when deleting all of the other Portuguese call records from memory, she decided to leave this one intact.
Gerald received five further calls from the SMS message centre and at 15.50 called 91121, probably to collect his messages. He received further calls from the centre at 17.49 and 19.49. The records provided by Vodafone show these calls but that they originate from a different mobile number (0xxxx014310)
At 20.08 Kate McCann received two calls from a UK mobile xxxx7624 and six minutes late Gerald McCann called 91121: again to collect messages before he left for the Tapas Bar. This was the last activation of the day by either of the McCanns; probably confirming that their mobiles remained in Apartment 5A when they went to dinner.
On Thursday 3rd May 2007 (the critical day) at 8.23 and 8.24 Kate McCann’s mobile activated the antenna to call xxxx7624. There is nothing in file to indicate the owner of this mobile but it does not appear to be any of the McCann family or friends.
At 12.24 Gerald McCann received a call from a UK Mobile xxxx1746. Again there is no clue in the file to the subscriber’s name. At 12.31 Kate McCann received a call (or SMS) from her mother’s mobile and responded an hour later.
Neither of the McCanns appears to have had any further activity on their telephones until after Madeleine was reported missing when Gerald McCann called his wife four times between 23.14 and 23.52. At 23.40 he called his sister – Trish Cameron and at 23.52 -Janet Kennedy.
The batch of SMS messages received by Gerald McCann on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 seems to have caused him some anxiety. Although the number “07818520047” is in a block allocated to Vodafone, the company has no record of the subscriber’s name. When the number is dialed, connection is made to a recorded message which explains that changes have been made to the way customers can access their mailboxes and that they can now dial “121” from their handset or “07836121121” from any other telephone.
Thus the number appears to be a message box for Gerald McCann that sends him an SMS when his mobile is unable to accept a call (because it is out of range or turned off). However, when he was asked by “Expresso TV” on 6th September 2008 about the “sixteen SMS messages” received, he flustered:
“No one has ever asked to see any of my text messages. There is no way that there 16 messages on that day or even the day after, you know. You know, the day after, you know that we got…” Kate McCann came to his rescue and interrupted; “Gerry hardly ever sends text messages until the day after, the day after Madeleine was taken”. Gerald McCann continued: “so you know that it is actually rubbish”
Their McCann’s denials were, of course, technically true although perhaps disingenuous – because there were only 14 messages received on the day before they reported Madeleine missing and two on the day after.
There were 16 SMS messages, in total, so why prevaricate and deny an allegation that was never made. The question was about received messages, not those sent, and on the day before not on 3rd May 2007 or the day after! In the field of forensic linguistics you must always concentrate on the precise wording of denials and especially on those of allegations not made. The denials made by the McCanns are suspicious. However, Mrs McCann’s statement about her husband not sending SMS messages, until after Madeleine’s disappearance, is confirmed by Vodafone’s records.
Mr and Mrs McCann were never closely questioned by the PJ about the detail of their calls, but Gerald McCann excused the deletions by saying that his telephone’s memory only retained details of the last ten calls made. This obvious inaccuracy (It already had retained details of 17 calls) does not appear to have been challenged by the PJ and it does not in anyway explain the selective deletions from his wife’s handset.
So the bottom line is that Kate McCann was in Apartment 5A when Madeleine cried for her father between 22.30 and 23.45 on Tuesday 1st May 2007, leading to a unique flurry of late night calls and to unique calls very early the following morning. A forensic examination of the records of Madeleine’s attendance at the “Lobsters” crèche on Wednesday 2nd and Thursday 3rd May 2007 is critically important because if they have been falsified, to establish she was there when she was not, this case takes on an entirely new dimension and sets different search parameters.
Secondly, if the memories of the mobile telephones were deleted in way suspected, a level of cunning is implied that would be capable of conceiving plan to deliberately delay reporting Madeleine’s “disappearance”; if for no other reason than to disassociate it from the crying incident on Tuesday 1st May 2007.
Of course, this is speculation and it is entirely possible that further investigation and the much awaited transparency by Mr and Mrs McCann will totally exonerate them. But why don’t they simply produce the SMS messages and explain why call details were deleted?
(*) This report is a result of cooperation with a leading international investigative firm that is in the closing stages of an 18 month intensive investigation that is expected to reopen the case in Portugal and to start new proceedings in the UK.
141 Responses to “More on the deleted

That work ^^^ is courtesy of Paulo Reis https://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/2008/12/more-on-deleted-call-records.html

Jill Havern wrote:That work ^^^ is courtesy of Paulo Reis https://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/2008/12/more-on-deleted-call-records.html

Yes I noticed after I posted.

ferrotty wrote:

sharonl wrote:  Pamela Fenn had hearing so good that she could not only tell us that she heard a child crying, she could also specify the age of the child, not a baby of two or under but an older child, and where the noise was coming from.  She could also tell us what time someone entered the apartment because she heard the door open.  

So what did Mrs Fenn have to say about the events of May 3rd?  Dud she not here the abductor entering the apartment, the noisy shutters being jemmied open, and the abductor leaving again?

This was posted on FB by 
Michelle Wootton-Rowley
 quite an interesting read -


Yesterday at 7:58 PM
More on the deleted call records – Where Was Kate McCann?
By Paulo Reis and associates (*)
The CD issued by Ministerio Publico de Portimao in July 2008, contains a great deal of information on the mobile calls made and received by the “Tapas 9” but it is dispersed, difficult to retrieve and with important pages and charts missing. The main documents of interest from the CD are:
A 3 page report by the Policia Judiaria (undated, but probably 4th May 2007) listing call records retrieved from the handsets of Mr and Mrs McCann
A detailed (and excellent report) by Inspector Paulo Dias, Inspector of UNI-Sector de Análise, Lisbon, dated 9th November 2007
Schedules provided by Vodafone on 14th December 2007 covering a period from 29th April 2007 for Gerald McCann, David Payne, Rachael Mampilly, broken into four separate sections for incoming and outgoing telephone calls, incoming and outgoing SMS traffic
A second report by Inspector Dias dated 5th February 2008, containing time bars, link charts and maps pinpointing where the “Tapas 9’s” sets were when they activated antennae
A third report by Inspector Dias dated 2nd June 2008 which includes details of activations of the Luz and other mobile antenna from 28th April 2007 to September 2007
The Rogatory Letter requests and correspondence dated from 5th December 2007 to May 2007 and responses from the Home Office in April and May 2008
The PJ used a program, called the “Analyst’s Notebook” as well as “Excel” to handle what were very large datasets. Inspector Dias pointed out that “Excel” was far from ideal, because of its limited capacity and it seems that much of the data provided was paper based and had to be rekeyed. Also the main focus of the research was limited to the evening of Thursday 3rd May 2007. But, despite the problems, the PJ’s work is impressive, innovative and very detailed. For example, there is a brilliant analysis (which unfortunately led nowhere) based on the hypothesis of two abductors each working with mobiles in the Ocean Club area immediately before Madeleine was reported missing. There is another excellent piece of work which tracks down a misrouted call, from Swansea, to Kate McCann at 11.21 on Wednesday 2nd May 2007.
However, there are potentially serious omissions:
The most important records were not available when Mr and Mrs McCann attended their “Arguido interviews” on 6th and 7th September 2007 and it is doubtful that they were ever reviewed by the very experienced analysts from the Leicestershire Police, whose team left the Algarve soon after the McCann’s return to the UK in September 2007
There are no detailed call records from the mobile operators for Kate McCann, Russell O’Brien, Matthew Oldfield and Jane Tanner
When the PJ obtained the McCann’s mobiles they do not appear to have retrieved deleted data or to extract their contact lists
None of the telecom records show triangulation co-ordinates but are limited to identifying the single primary antenna on which calls were registered
The details of over 50 UK subscribers contacted by the Tapas 9 in the critical period, as well as their onward local and international call records, was included in the Rogatory Letter request in December 2007. If this information was provided, it is not in the CD
A critical link chart (Anexo 37) for Tuesday 1st May 2007 is missing from Inspector Dias’s report
These omissions make interpretation of the data difficult but what is available provides an interesting picture. First, it is obvious that the memories in the McCann’s mobiles were incomplete and, in Kate McCann’s case, selectively deleted.
Her mobile memory held details of 39 calls from 18.28 on Wednesday 25th April to 16.35 on 27th April 2007. After her arrival in Portugal on 28th April 2007, with the exception of one incoming call on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 at 11.21 (which, very interestingly, was the Swansea “wrong number”), and one call from her husband at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007, everything else has been “whoosh-clunked” from memory. These deletions could have been accidental, but a high degree of cunning could be implied. Why would she selectively delete everything up to Thursday 3rd May 2007 with the exception of one wrong number and what was her reason for deleting three of the four calls, between 23.14 and 23.17, from her husband on that critical night?. A possible answer is that she wished to avoid alerting the PJ to evidence that details of around 40 calls had been erased and she felt happier leaving something uncontroversial (or misleading) in memory for them to find. Another answer is that, unsurprisingly, she was under the most extreme stress imaginable following the disappearance of her daughter: but why, in that case, give priority to deleting anything. It is the last thing most parents would think about in the circumstances.
The first call found in Gerald’s mobile memory was timed at 00.30 on Friday 4th May 2007. Again matching antenna records to memory suggests that by the time he gave the handset to the PJ the records of 24 calls or SMSs had been erased, including the one from him found on his wife’s handset and timed at 23.17 on Thursday 3rd May 2007. It appears that he had deleted details of the four calls he made to her that night and she deleted just three. It was this simple discrepancy that first led the PJ to suspect interference with the handsets.
If the deletions were deliberate (and it is an “if”) it implies the McCann’s were both “forensically aware” and crafty and wanted to hide something from the PJ. For this reason, it is important to explore the call record data and to match it against other evidence.
On Saturday 28th April 2007, after their arrival in Luz, Kate McCann’s mobile triggered the antenna 9 times. It is not possible to say, from the available records, whether these were incoming or outgoing calls or SMSs or for how long they lasted. The last activations were at 20.55 and 20.59 when (based on their statements) the Tapas 9 returned for an early night after eating at the Millennium Restaurant with their children. All of these records were erased from the memory of Kate McCann’s mobile. Gerald McCann’s mobile did not activate any of the Luz antennae that day.
On Sunday 29th April 2007, the first activation of Kate McCann’s mobile was at 9.23, but again there are no Vodafone logs or time bars to provide further detail. However, by internally matching the antenna records it appears that she called her husband at 12.26 and 17.02.
The crèche records indicate that he collected Madeleine at 12.15. He also picked up the twins around 17.00 but mistakenly recorded the time as “12.30”. Chances are that the calls from Kate McCann were to check that he had picked up the kids. At 10.13 Gerald McCann received a call from a UK mobile xxxxx3899. The last activation by Kate McCann’s mobile was at 19.30 and Gerald’s at 17.02.
A pattern on this sheet (and it applies to all of the Tapas 9) is that no activations took place at any time during the week while they were at dinner. So maybe Clarence Mitchell was right, after all, and that they were so “into each other” that they didn’t want to be disturbed while sardine munching and left their mobiles in their rooms. They were never specifically asked this question, but it is very important and the point will be addressed later.
On Monday 30th April 2007, neither of the McCann’s telephones activated the Luz transmitters. This looks very odd, especially as they were around the Ocean Club to shuffle the kids to and from the crèches. On this afternoon, Madeleine remained in the crèche for only 15 minutes and was picked up by her mother at 15.30. We do not know what Madeleine did for the rest of the day, but it is possible she was being fractious. Interestingly, a friend of Mrs and Mr McCann supposedly told the “Dispatches” team that made a TV program on the tragedy, that “Madeleine was a screamer”. This could be interpreted in one of two ways, but any use of the past tense in referring to Madeleine would be very significant. It was such a past tense referral, to her supposedly living children, that alerted the FBI to their murder by Susan Smith, their mother.
On Tuesday 1st May 2007, Gerald McCann’s handset was silent all day. Kate McCann’s mobile first activated the Luz antenna at 10.16, but all details of the day’s calls have been deleted from the handset and there is no nothing in the CD from her mobile provider. Another activation took place at 12.17. The crèche records show that Gerald McCann picked up Madeleine at 12.20 (a bit earlier than usual) but Kate McCann’s call at 12.17 does not appear to have been to him, (because his mobile was not activated at all that day). Kate McCann dealt with her last call before leaving for the Tapas Bar at 20.35.
At around 8.45pm on Tuesday 1st May 2007, Miss Nejoua Chekeya, the Ocean Club’s busty Aerobics Instructor, held a “Quiz Night” and was later invited, allegedly by Gerald McCann, to join his table which she did sometime between 9.30pm and 9.50pm. She did not say how long she had remained with them, but she is not the sort of woman men would wish see to leave too quickly. Miss Chekeya stated that one dinner setting was unused and that she could not remember seeing Kate McCann.
However, both Jane Tanner and Russell O’Brien have stated that he did not go to the Tapas Bar on the “Quiz Night” (ie Tuesday 1st May 2007), but had stayed in their room looking after his sick daughter. Jane Tanner took his dinner to the room; thus explaining the unused plate setting. Russell O’Brien was not asked by either the Policia Judiciaria or Leicestershire Police whether he had heard Madeleine crying!
Kate McCann’s mobile was next activated six times, in rapid fire, between 22.16 and 22.27, after she had returned to Apartment 5A after dinner. The antenna traffic proves that these calls were not made to any of the “Tapas 9”.
The evidence from the call logs gives the strongest clue that the “Tapas 9” left their telephones in their rooms when they went to dinner. Clarence Mitchell, the McCann’s spokesperson, confirmed this. In an interview, reported on 6th April 2008 by Ned Temko of “The Guardian”, Mr Mitchell said: “You had nine people in a bar without watches on, without mobile phones and absolute panic set in when they realised what had happened…. We would say that, if the police had a perfect time line across nine people, that would be a damn sight more suspicious than the fractured, illogical, composite statements they might have got”
Mrs Fenn, the McCann’s neighbour, reported that Madeleine had cried for her father between 22.30 and 23.45. The evidence shows that Kate McCann was in Apartment 5A 14 minutes before Madeleine started crying. Tuesday 1st May 2007 is the only night (except, of course, for Thursday 3rd May 2007) that either of the McCanns or any of their friends made calls after dinner.
Mrs McCann volunteered to the PJ that on the night of Wednesday 2nd May 2007, she had slept in the spare bed in her children’s room because her husband had not paid her enough attention over dinner. Or put another way, does she mean the amorous Scot was paying someone else (like Miss Chekeya) too much attention, causing her to stomp out of the Tapas Bar before him: ultimately leading to the spare bed in a strop? Gerald McCann said he thought the reason his wife had slept in the children’s bedroom was because of his snoring and that he did not even bother asking her the following morning what the problem was.
Could it be that their timings are wrong by 24 hours and that Kate McCann’s nocturnal shenanigans took place on the night of Tuesday 1st May 2007? It would fit, but why be untruthful about it? A possible reason is that they wanted to conceal both Kate McCann’s state of mind and the fact that she had returned to Apartment 5A, just before Madeleine’s cried for help.
On Wednesday 2nd May 2007, Kate McCann called her friend “Amanda” at 7.36.41 and again at 7.36.45. This was around two hours earlier than any of mobile activations on any other morning: so Kate McCann was “up with the larks”. Amanda returned the calls at 7.50. There is no record of how long any of these calls lasted or whether they were SMSs. They were all deleted from memory.
At 8.07 Gerald McCann received a call from the SMS message centre (447818520047), but does not appear to have responded. At 8.50 Kate McCann received a call from a UK mobile xxxxx27010 and returned it at 8.53, before going to play tennis. Gerald McCann received a series of calls from his SMS message centre between 9.10 and 10.47, again without response.
At 11.21 Kate received a call from what appears to be a landline in Swansea ( xxxxx0023). The report by Inspector Dias researched this call in detail (Page 21 in his report of 9th November 2007) and discovered that it had not activated any of the Luz antennae. But digging deeper, he found that another UK mobile (xxxxx 1583) had triggered the Luz antenna when connecting to the same Swansea number at 14.01. He dug even deeper, tracked all of the calls made from Luz by xxxx1583 and established it had no connection whatsoever with any of the “Tapas 9”. The Swansea call to Kate McCann was simply a “wrong number”, misrouted and thus not logged by the Luz antennae.
What Inspector Dias did not realise was that the Swansea call had become so special to Kate McCann that, when deleting all of the other Portuguese call records from memory, she decided to leave this one intact.
Gerald received five further calls from the SMS message centre and at 15.50 called 91121, probably to collect his messages. He received further calls from the centre at 17.49 and 19.49. The records provided by Vodafone show these calls but that they originate from a different mobile number (0xxxx014310)
At 20.08 Kate McCann received two calls from a UK mobile xxxx7624 and six minutes late Gerald McCann called 91121: again to collect messages before he left for the Tapas Bar. This was the last activation of the day by either of the McCanns; probably confirming that their mobiles remained in Apartment 5A when they went to dinner.
On Thursday 3rd May 2007 (the critical day) at 8.23 and 8.24 Kate McCann’s mobile activated the antenna to call xxxx7624. There is nothing in file to indicate the owner of this mobile but it does not appear to be any of the McCann family or friends.
At 12.24 Gerald McCann received a call from a UK Mobile xxxx1746. Again there is no clue in the file to the subscriber’s name. At 12.31 Kate McCann received a call (or SMS) from her mother’s mobile and responded an hour later.
Neither of the McCanns appears to have had any further activity on their telephones until after Madeleine was reported missing when Gerald McCann called his wife four times between 23.14 and 23.52. At 23.40 he called his sister – Trish Cameron and at 23.52 -Janet Kennedy.
The batch of SMS messages received by Gerald McCann on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 seems to have caused him some anxiety. Although the number “07818520047” is in a block allocated to Vodafone, the company has no record of the subscriber’s name. When the number is dialed, connection is made to a recorded message which explains that changes have been made to the way customers can access their mailboxes and that they can now dial “121” from their handset or “07836121121” from any other telephone.
Thus the number appears to be a message box for Gerald McCann that sends him an SMS when his mobile is unable to accept a call (because it is out of range or turned off). However, when he was asked by “Expresso TV” on 6th September 2008 about the “sixteen SMS messages” received, he flustered:
“No one has ever asked to see any of my text messages. There is no way that there 16 messages on that day or even the day after, you know. You know, the day after, you know that we got…” Kate McCann came to his rescue and interrupted; “Gerry hardly ever sends text messages until the day after, the day after Madeleine was taken”. Gerald McCann continued: “so you know that it is actually rubbish”
Their McCann’s denials were, of course, technically true although perhaps disingenuous – because there were only 14 messages received on the day before they reported Madeleine missing and two on the day after.
There were 16 SMS messages, in total, so why prevaricate and deny an allegation that was never made. The question was about received messages, not those sent, and on the day before not on 3rd May 2007 or the day after! In the field of forensic linguistics you must always concentrate on the precise wording of denials and especially on those of allegations not made. The denials made by the McCanns are suspicious. However, Mrs McCann’s statement about her husband not sending SMS messages, until after Madeleine’s disappearance, is confirmed by Vodafone’s records.
Mr and Mrs McCann were never closely questioned by the PJ about the detail of their calls, but Gerald McCann excused the deletions by saying that his telephone’s memory only retained details of the last ten calls made. This obvious inaccuracy (It already had retained details of 17 calls) does not appear to have been challenged by the PJ and it does not in anyway explain the selective deletions from his wife’s handset.
So the bottom line is that Kate McCann was in Apartment 5A when Madeleine cried for her father between 22.30 and 23.45 on Tuesday 1st May 2007, leading to a unique flurry of late night calls and to unique calls very early the following morning. A forensic examination of the records of Madeleine’s attendance at the “Lobsters” crèche on Wednesday 2nd and Thursday 3rd May 2007 is critically important because if they have been falsified, to establish she was there when she was not, this case takes on an entirely new dimension and sets different search parameters.
Secondly, if the memories of the mobile telephones were deleted in way suspected, a level of cunning is implied that would be capable of conceiving plan to deliberately delay reporting Madeleine’s “disappearance”; if for no other reason than to disassociate it from the crying incident on Tuesday 1st May 2007.
Of course, this is speculation and it is entirely possible that further investigation and the much awaited transparency by Mr and Mrs McCann will totally exonerate them. But why don’t they simply produce the SMS messages and explain why call details were deleted?
(*) This report is a result of cooperation with a leading international investigative firm that is in the closing stages of an 18 month intensive investigation that is expected to reopen the case in Portugal and to start new proceedings in the UK.
141 Responses to “More on the deleted

Very interesting summary of the phone logs,but as with this case,there are more questions than answers.

On the night of Madeleine's "abduction" the McCanns spectacularly failed to ask Mrs. Fenn (when she called down to them to ask what all the commotion was about) if she had seen or heard anything untoward. Now that is telling! In fact, they fobbed her off by saying " A small girl" had gone missing with no further elaboration. Innocent parents would have been banging on every door near their apartment to see if anyone had seen or heard anything which might help them to find their daughter!

As it turns out, Mrs. Fenn had noticed nothing unusual until around 10.30 p.m. when the commotion in the garden below disturbed her.
Kate told John Corner on camera that their nightly childcare arrangements involved them "bobbing back and forth SEVERAL TIMES AN HOUR", as is also claimed on the sticker-book timeline and in their statements.
 While Mrs Fenn could tell the P.J. investigators nothing of value about the night of May 3rd they would, having begun to disbelieve the Tapas 9 story of "checking", have found her account of the night of May 1st most interesting and valuable since it directly contradicted the "checking several times an hour" fable. Presumably it was this information which they desired to get into a formal statement. She is the SOLE witness who can contradict the  Tapas 9 claims of their child-checking routine that week.

Phoebe wrote:On the night of Madeleine's "abduction" the McCanns spectacularly failed to ask Mrs. Fenn (when she called down to them to ask what all the commotion was about) if she had seen or heard anything untoward. Now that is telling! In fact, they fobbed her off by saying " A small girl" had gone missing with no further elaboration. Innocent parents would have been banging on every door near their apartment to see if anyone had seen or heard anything which might help them to find their daughter!

As it turns out, Mrs. Fenn had noticed nothing unusual until around 10.30 p.m. when the commotion in the garden below disturbed her.
Kate told John Corner on camera that their nightly childcare arrangements involved them "bobbing back and forth SEVERAL TIMES AN HOUR", as is also claimed on the sticker-book timeline and in their statements.
 While Mrs Fenn could tell the P.J. investigators nothing of value about the night of May 3rd they would, having begun to disbelieve the Tapas 9 story of "checking", have found her account of the night of May 1st most interesting and valuable since it directly contradicted the "checking several times an hour" fable. Presumably it was this information which they desired to get into a formal statement. She is the SOLE witness who can contradict the  Tapas 9 claims of their child-checking routine that week.

That's a good point. What intrigues me the most is the fact that Mrs. Fenn said that Gerry said, "A child is missing".

Not, "My daughter is missing!"

As pointed out by poster pauloalexandre on another thread, Mrs Fenn stated that when she asked what was going on she was told "A" child had gone missing, not that it was Gerry's daughter who had vanished from the flat beneath her. She allegedly offered them her phone to telephone the police but was told there was no need as this had already been done.
It's hard not to get the impression that Mrs. Fenn was being told to keep her nose out of it - a decidedly odd position for frantic parents to adopt. Here was a potential witness who could have information about hearing or seeing an intruder and - she is ignored!
In her book Kate later tries to smear Mrs Fenn by implying that she was uninterested in this "trivial" problem, claiming that Mrs Fenn replied something like "Oh is that all" as if a tin of beans had fallen off a shelf". Yet if Mrs Fenn offered the use of her phone to contact the police it does not suggest she regarded it as a trivial matter.
Kate claimed that half an hour earlier she "Knew" her daughter had been abducted during a break-in, yet she fails to ask the lady upstairs if she had any information regarding this alleged crime which happened just beneath her.
IMO it's clear the McCanns didn't want Pamela Fenn to state that she had heard no jemmying of shutters, no patio doors opening several times during checks etc. They would also have been terrified of her suggesting the child might have awoken and wandered off given that she had been crying hysterically for an hour and a quarter two nights earlier with no one checking on her well-being during that time!

...yeah..detailed accounts of crying, yet no one hears a set of roller shutters being forced the wrong way from the outside by person unseen and unknown

Phoebe #144

Once again you use your own interpretation of what might have been, in preference to looking at face value.

How did Pamela Fenn know, in the dark, that it was Gerry McCann who spoke to her?  How were the words used, did they imply panic or confusion or impatience or anger or complaisance?

Gerry McCann or whoever down below, at the time might have said .... 'mind yer business yer nosy old trout', or .... 'no thanks, that's already been done' or .... 'do you mind, we're trying to have a private conversation down here' or .... 'make yerself useful and put the kettle on love'. 

Who knows? 

Pamela Fenn's statement was taken over three months after the event, when she provided information that could have been vital to the investigation three months prior.

The police would have spoken to her during their routine house to house calls, if she had then provided any information of value, she would have been called on to give a formal statement in the days following the event, that information, if it existed, would be recorded in the PJ files. 

This did not happen.  Instead Pamela Fenn waited for nearly two and a half months before imparting information that could be of interest to the investigation.

That is what should be questioned - when, what and why.

@ Verdi. How do you know that it was so dark Mrs Fenn could not make out the face of the man standing directly below her. The light on her balcony and the lights from the sitting room area together with any street lights would have provided ample illumination - not to mention Gerry's strong Glaswegian accent being a bit of a giveaway!!! 
You ask why Mrs Fenn was not interviewed formally for over two months. Well, she had nothing to tell the police which could shed any light on how Madeleine was "taken" that night. - she had seen and heard nothing untoward. The only thing on which she could cast light (and which formed the bulk of her statement) is the fact that, despite claims to have been checking the children "several times an hour", on Tuesday night one of them was crying and yelling for Daddy for an hour and a quarter. As I pointed out, NO other witness , save Mrs. Fenn has contradicted the McCanns' claims to have checked - several times an hour- that their children remained safely sound asleep. Dr. Amaral recounts that he and his team became sceptical about this checking claim. It makes sense that it was in pursuit of this aspect that Mrs. Fenn was heard formally after any initial informal questioning.

Something I don't understand if supposedly the children were being watched by one of the parents each night how come this child if it was Madeline was left crying for so long?