Some random stuff on phones

For me the mobile phones and (especially) the deleted calls have always been priority potential evidence. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that I believe they are the only real hope of a breakthough in this case, unless DNA analysis is able to come up with an adanced re-evaluation.

From PJ Files: Analysis Report of First 11 Volumes
"On the annex 90, there is a detailed analysis developed based on the hypothesis that the author of the kidnapping acted with the help of another individual, and that both activated on the same minute, only on the 3rd, one of the antennas at Praia da Luz. This means, they both would activate cells in Praia da Luz simultaneously. It was taken as reference the statements of Jane Tanner and Gerald McCann and it was admitted that this contact, short, had occurred between 21:00 and 21:20h."

Trying to find the MAST DATA which PROVES this.

Even the cleaners at Scotland Yard would see the importance of this call, if it can be proved to exist.

Smokeandmirrors wrote:

Kepharel wrote:Hi Smoke,

I have read on a number of occasions about the synchronised switching off of the mobiles of GM and RM between the 2nd May and 3rd May so I must be missing something.  The table below is an extract from the mobile phone logs of these 2 individuals, as I understand it, and if that is correct there is not much synchronisation going on.  Murat has a few mobiles, and I have listed those relevant i.e. 441 and 959.
Can someone please explain this to me?
 

Date	Account	Name	Company	Caller	Called	Time	Text
2nd May	35191***441	RM	TMN	919***41	918***78	15:44:33	MTSMS
3rd May	35191***441	RM	TMN	919***41	914***57	23:39:34	SMS
2nd May	35191***959	RM	TMN	919***59	964***17	16:01:11	MTSMS
3rd May	35191***959	RM	TMN	919***59	919***75	09:19:47
2nd May	44778***188	GM	Vodafone	778***88	351***21	20:14:30	MTSMS
3rd May	44778***188	GM	Vodafone	778***88	790***97	23:14:49
3rd May	44778***188	GM	Vodafone	798***46	778***88	12:24:40

There are gaps however, about 31 hours for RM account 441, and about 17 hours for account 959. GM’s phone was live at the latest 23:14 on the 2nd, and first used at 12:25 on the third, a gap of 13 hours.  So, as you say, any large gaps can be filled in with cheapo PAYG.  Maybe the inference is that all phones were switched off, but they were nevertheless live, and GM did take a call at 12:24.

It's all algebra to me TBH, I've tried to get a handle on the phone stuff over the years but to no avail! 

I am curious that a Portugese court refused to let the PJ have the information about text message content or something like that for the Tapas crew, which is weird if there was nothing to hide, don't you think? It makes me think they had a reason to want it bad enough to court over. Is this something you've come across in your searching?

The Judge wouldn't allow a search of actual calls of the TAPAS 9 prior to 19:00hrs on 04/05/2007. Can't remember the actual wording without checking, but to paraphrase the Judge allowed checks on calls after that date /time as being after the fact.

Think it very telling that a Judge reviewed the submission and went for 19:00hrs. Why not 19:30hrs when the children were put to bed? Or 20:30 when the MCs left the apartment? Or the last alleed sihting at 21:05?

KM was alone with the children between 18:00-1900hrs, apart from DP's alleged visit - which I think DID happen because KM and children hadn't gone out for the pre-bed play as usual.
Something happened which prevented them going out.

Follow the phones... I think SY are...
Something stopped them going out.

A rather revealing article from September 2007. :


police are bugging our phone calls and emails'
By DAN NEWLING
Last updated at 12:14 20 September 2007

Kate and Gerry McCann are convinced they are being bugged by British police.

They believe their mobile phone calls and emails are being monitored by detectives collecting evidence on behalf of the Portuguese investigation.

As a result they and some of their friends and supporters go to great lengths to avoid being overheard when they are discussing sensitive issues in the case of missing Madeleine, meetforing face-to-face or talking on landlines which they believe to be harder to intercept.

Surveillance targets? Gerry and Kate McCann, pictured yesterday, are being ultra cautious about their conversations, say friends.

Their suspicions were first aroused by questions they were asked by Portuguese police which were based on information that could only have come from private conversations.

During lengthy interviews when they were first made suspects, they were asked questions which implied they had conspired during mobile phone conversations to hide who was at the dinner party - and when - on the night that Madeleine disappeared.

They are also thought to have been asked why the toddler's Cuddle Cat toy was washed twice - information that could well have come from surveillance of phone calls.

Although the couple have been back home in Rothley, Leicestershire, for 12 days, they fear the practice is continuing. A source close to the family said:

"The assumption is that it is taking place. Everyone involved is very careful, particularly with their mobile phone calls and what they say.

"There was an assumption from the early days that their mobile communications were unsafe and could be listened to.

"They believed it in Portugal and they believe that is still happening now that they are back home.
"Gerry will often refuse to talk on a mobile phone - he prefers to use landlines as he considers that they are safer. They feel they are being watched at all times."

The source added: "It would be entirely wrong to say that their phone conversations are in any way furtive as a result of this.

"They are entirely innocent and have nothing whatsoever to hide - but they are being understandably cautious about what they say on the phone and in emails.

"They would obviously not want to disclose the way in which they plan to conduct their defence."

Leicestershire police yesterday refused to comment on the allegation.

But a senior police source said: "It is highly likely to be happening. There would need to be high-level meetings before anything like this could be done.

"But if I were someone in Government I would have got it done anyway to make sure that we knew as much as possible, given that the case involves UK citizens."

Dr Russell O'Brien and Jane Tanner, who were both on holiday with the McCanns, have spoken to friends of their belief that their phones were tapped in Portugal.

Portuguese detectives have reportedly admitted monitoring the emails of Robert Murat, the British expat in Praia da Luz who became the first suspect in the case.

However, this is the first time that anyone involved in the case has claimed the practice is taking place in Britain. A spokesman for the McCanns refused to comment.

? Police fitted a tracking device to the McCanns' hire car, it was claimed last night, to monitor their precise movements in the days after they came under suspicion.

A gadget the size of a wallet is capable of transmitting a signal to satellites - like a Sat Nav system in reverse - enabling police to watch where the couple go.

It is claimed the device was installed in the Renault Scenic during the 48 hours the police had the car in early August to gather forensic samples. It could have been placed in the boot or attached using a magnet under the bonnet.

It explains why detectives returned the hire car to the McCanns after their tests rather than impounding it.

"The police are not fools - they did not give the car back without reason," said a Portuguese source with knowledge of the investigation.

"They wanted to see where it would go and would have used a tracking device."

? Portuguese detectives have taken a step closer to being able to search the McCann family home.

Policia Judiciaria detectives believe something inside the Leicestershire house could yield a vital clue and have sought approval from the judge in the case to ask British officers to carry out the raid.

Yesterday Judge Pedro Miguel dos Anjos Frias agreed to the request.

• Portuguese police would have needed to apply directly to the Home Office for permission to bug a UK citizen's telephone or emails.

They would have filed a Mutual Legal Assistance request, which is the only formal way for a foreign police force to obtain evidence from another country.

Providing that the request is legal under UK law - the relevant law in this case would have been the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act - the request would then be passed to the Home Secretary for final approval.

British police would also need Home Office permission to carry out telephone and computer taps.

Between January 2005 and March last year, the Home Office approved 440,000 requests for permission to intercept personal communications.

Most of these would be seeking telephone numbers one particular phone has called. Only a very small proportion would have been for permission to listen in on a call or read an email.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482815/Madeleines-parents-British-police-bugging-phone-calls-emails.html#ixzz2KdCnTXSy

tigger wrote:A rather revealing article from September 2007. :


police are bugging our phone calls and emails'
By DAN NEWLING
Last updated at 12:14 20 September 2007

Kate and Gerry McCann are convinced they are being bugged by British police.

They believe their mobile phone calls and emails are being monitored by detectives collecting evidence on behalf of the Portuguese investigation.

As a result they and some of their friends and supporters go to great lengths to avoid being overheard when they are discussing sensitive issues in the case of missing Madeleine, meetforing face-to-face or talking on landlines which they believe to be harder to intercept.

Surveillance targets? Gerry and Kate McCann, pictured yesterday, are being ultra cautious about their conversations, say friends.

Their suspicions were first aroused by questions they were asked by Portuguese police which were based on information that could only have come from private conversations.

During lengthy interviews when they were first made suspects, they were asked questions which implied they had conspired during mobile phone conversations to hide who was at the dinner party - and when - on the night that Madeleine disappeared.

They are also thought to have been asked why the toddler's Cuddle Cat toy was washed twice - information that could well have come from surveillance of phone calls.

Although the couple have been back home in Rothley, Leicestershire, for 12 days, they fear the practice is continuing. A source close to the family said:

"The assumption is that it is taking place. Everyone involved is very careful, particularly with their mobile phone calls and what they say.

"There was an assumption from the early days that their mobile communications were unsafe and could be listened to.

"They believed it in Portugal and they believe that is still happening now that they are back home.
"Gerry will often refuse to talk on a mobile phone - he prefers to use landlines as he considers that they are safer. They feel they are being watched at all times."

The source added: "It would be entirely wrong to say that their phone conversations are in any way furtive as a result of this.

"They are entirely innocent and have nothing whatsoever to hide - but they are being understandably cautious about what they say on the phone and in emails.

"They would obviously not want to disclose the way in which they plan to conduct their defence."

Leicestershire police yesterday refused to comment on the allegation.

But a senior police source said: "It is highly likely to be happening. There would need to be high-level meetings before anything like this could be done.

"But if I were someone in Government I would have got it done anyway to make sure that we knew as much as possible, given that the case involves UK citizens."

Dr Russell O'Brien and Jane Tanner, who were both on holiday with the McCanns, have spoken to friends of their belief that their phones were tapped in Portugal.

Portuguese detectives have reportedly admitted monitoring the emails of Robert Murat, the British expat in Praia da Luz who became the first suspect in the case.

However, this is the first time that anyone involved in the case has claimed the practice is taking place in Britain. A spokesman for the McCanns refused to comment.

? Police fitted a tracking device to the McCanns' hire car, it was claimed last night, to monitor their precise movements in the days after they came under suspicion.

A gadget the size of a wallet is capable of transmitting a signal to satellites - like a Sat Nav system in reverse - enabling police to watch where the couple go.

It is claimed the device was installed in the Renault Scenic during the 48 hours the police had the car in early August to gather forensic samples. It could have been placed in the boot or attached using a magnet under the bonnet.

It explains why detectives returned the hire car to the McCanns after their tests rather than impounding it.

"The police are not fools - they did not give the car back without reason," said a Portuguese source with knowledge of the investigation.

"They wanted to see where it would go and would have used a tracking device."

? Portuguese detectives have taken a step closer to being able to search the McCann family home.

Policia Judiciaria detectives believe something inside the Leicestershire house could yield a vital clue and have sought approval from the judge in the case to ask British officers to carry out the raid.

Yesterday Judge Pedro Miguel dos Anjos Frias agreed to the request.

• Portuguese police would have needed to apply directly to the Home Office for permission to bug a UK citizen's telephone or emails.

They would have filed a Mutual Legal Assistance request, which is the only formal way for a foreign police force to obtain evidence from another country.

Providing that the request is legal under UK law - the relevant law in this case would have been the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act - the request would then be passed to the Home Secretary for final approval.

British police would also need Home Office permission to carry out telephone and computer taps.

Between January 2005 and March last year, the Home Office approved 440,000 requests for permission to intercept personal communications.

Most of these would be seeking telephone numbers one particular phone has called. Only a very small proportion would have been for permission to listen in on a call or read an email.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482815/Madeleines-parents-British-police-bugging-phone-calls-emails.html#ixzz2KdCnTXSy

I wonder if they are still tapping the McCanns phones now.

Good question Estelle.

If they are and have been all this time I can't understand how they have not been pulled in for questioning, you know, to help the police with their inquiries. 

I find it unbelievable that nothing of interest will have come out of their conversations  in all these years, but then I suppose it can't have done as they are still free...

There have been so many opportunities to arrest the McCanns and find out more about them including their surveillance using their phones and so on that I am feeling so frustrated this last week with all these stupid news stories coming out. 

I just want them charged with something.

What struck me in the DM is Kate complaining that she was asked why Cuddlecat was washed twice. 

Now why I would ask, is that due to a tapped conversation. How did that go then? 

X: if they're going to use dogs again, you better give it another wash Kate. 

K: Gonna have to take the rosary and the good quality wristband off?

X: that scent tends to stick you know. 

K:  what if it doesn't  come off? 

X:  I'll say there is a perfectly innocent explanation for anything they may or may not find...

If innocent can't see why phone tapping would even bother the mccs

notlongnow wrote:If innocent can't see why phone tapping would even bother the mccs

That is obviously correct and makes them look even more guilty.

Who?What?Where? wrote:Thank's for the info Kepharel.

So many coincidence's.

From what I have read in the press, Murat and some of the Tapas9 have recieved substantial payment's, through the libel system in the UK. Could this be the real reason that some journalist's were suspicious about how excited Murat seemed to be, about this case?

Was Murat excited about the case itself, or the incredible amount of media involvement?

I've always thought Murat might have had some part in this, especially with his Exeter connections like the Tapas have Exeter connections.

It has been my thinking for a while that Murat was called a suspect deliberately to not only divert attention away from the real suspects, but they would also know that the paper's would run with the story, libel him, then be cleared as a suspect, and then collect libel cash...

All this would indicate some level of premeditation. Just a few thoughts...

Yours have been my thoughts too, Sonic.

Estelle wrote:Yours have been my thoughts too, Sonic.

Hi Estelle!

I'm glad someone else agrees with me on that, just an idea, and I think some of my ideas might be too crazy sometimes, but it's reassuring to know other people have thought about the same thing!

sonic72 wrote:

Who?What?Where? wrote:Thank's for the info Kepharel.

So many coincidence's.

From what I have read in the press, Murat and some of the Tapas9 have recieved substantial payment's, through the libel system in the UK. Could this be the real reason that some journalist's were suspicious about how excited Murat seemed to be, about this case?

Was Murat excited about the case itself, or the incredible amount of media involvement?

I've always thought Murat might have had some part in this, especially with his Exeter connections like the Tapas have Exeter connections.

It has been my thinking for a while that Murat was called a suspect deliberately to not only divert attention away from the real suspects, but they would also know that the paper's would run with the story, libel him, then be cleared as a suspect, and then collect libel cash...

All this would indicate some level of premeditation. Just a few thoughts...

Jane Tanner stated (witness statement) that while in Portugal she met a couple and their two kids - she knew them from back home in Exeter!

More random stuff on phones.

Odd the group maintained they didn't have mobile phones on 3rd while out dining.

Mr & Mrs seem to have carried theirs around with them during the day so that they could be contacted (see creche record below).  Would they leave them lying around in apartment at night?

Mr said that he collected Madeleine at the creche lunchtime Thursday - According to sign out signature Mrs did!

 
29^th April 2007
Sunday
Madeleine
 

Session	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	Kate's mobile phone number	09:45	Kate McCann	12:15	Gerry McCann
PM	Gerry's mobile phone number	14:45	Gerry McCann	17:30	Kate McCann

 
 
29^th April 2007
Sunday
Sean and Amelie
 
ime out
S

Session	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
PM	Kate's mobile phone number	14:35	Kate McCann	17:30	Gerry McCann

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
30^th April 2007
Monday
Madeleine
 in
Signature
 
 

	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	TENNIS Gerry's mobile phone number	09:30	Gerry McCann	12:10	Gerry McCann
PM	Kate's mobile phone number	15:15	Kate McCann	15:30	Kate McCann

 
 
30^th April 2007
Monday
Sean and Amelie
 
Time in
S

Session	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	TENNIS Gerry's mobile phone number	09:20	Gerry McCann	12:20	Kate McCann
PM	Kate and Gerry's mobile phone numbers	15:25	Kate McCann	17:20	Kate McCann

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1^st May 2007
Tuesday
Madeleine
 
TSignature

Session	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	TENNIS	09:30	Gerry McCann	12:20	Gerry McCann
PM	TENNIS/POOL Kate's mobile phone number	14:30	Gerry McCann	[No entry]

 
1^st May 2007
Tuesday
Sean and Amelie

Session	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	TENNIS Kate's mobile phone number	09:20	Gerry McCann	12:20	Kate McCann
PM	Kate's mobile phone number	14:30	Kate McCann	17:20	Kate McCann

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2^nd May 2007
Wednesday
Madeleine

	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	ROOM* Kate and Gerry's mobile phone numbers	09:20	Gerry McCann	12:30	Cat Nanny [Catriona Baker]
PM	Kate's mobile phone number	14:45	Kate McCann	17:30	Kate McCann [signed as 'Kate Healy']

 
 
 
2^nd May 2007
Wednesday
Sean and Amelie

Session	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	Kate and Gerry's mobile phone number	09:10	Gerry McCann	12:25	Kate McCann
PM	TENNIS Kate's mobile phone number	14:40	Kate McCann	17:20	Gerry McCann

 
 
 
 
 
 
3^rd May 2007
Thursday
Madeleine

Session	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	TENNIS/ROOM* Gerry's mobile phone number	09:10	Gerry McCann	12:25	Kate McCann
PM	Kate's mobile phone number	14:50	Kate McCann	17:30	Kate McCann

 
 
3^rd May 2007
Thursday
Sean and Amelie

Session	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	[No morning attendance sheet in the files]
PM	Kate and Gerry's mobile phone number	14:45	Kate McCann	17:25	Kate McCann

Note where Mr & Mrs can be located on Wednesday morning 2nd May 2007 not at tennis, or jogging, or swimming, but in the  *Room*

'Mr' the proud daddy dropped Madeleine off.   Cat signed her out!


[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


2^nd May 2007
Wednesday
Madeleine

	Parent's location	Time in	Signature	Time out	Signature
AM	ROOM* Kate and Gerry's mobile phone numbers	09:20	Gerry McCann	12:30	Cat Nanny [Catriona Baker]
PM	Kate's mobile phone number	14:45	Kate McCann	17:30	Kate McCann [signed as 'Kate Healy']

And who is Lily?  Her name appears on creche records with Sean & Amelie's but doesn't look as though she attended often, no signatures in or out most days for this child.  Yet on 4th May (after Madeleine vanished) Dianne Webster signed, both in and out of the creche, Lilly, Sean and Amelie, under apartment 5H?

She's the Paynes' daughter, Dianne Webster's grand-daughter.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:She's the Paynes' daughter, Dianne Webster's grand-daughter.

Thank you.    So three little lambs to the slaughter - potentially!   In the wake of Madeleine supposedly having been abducted by a stranger/s from paedophile ring, in their wisdom, the parents sent the remaining kids to spend the day with the nasty Ocean Club employees, who may just have been the perpetrators, the same workers Mr & Mrs, said, being strangers to their children would not be suitable to look after them on the night of 3rd May 2007. Such concern for the safety of Sean & Amelie!   Payne's couldn't have been too concerned either about their daughter coming to harm, as they got granny Webster to throw Lily to the lions too - one for the pot!

How many other families with young children, having heard a child was abducted from an apartment at the Ocean Club, would let their children out of their sight during that holiday, and in particular on the morning after?

Watching wrote:

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:She's the Paynes' daughter, Dianne Webster's grand-daughter.

Thank you.    So three little lambs to the slaughter - potentially!   In the wake of Madeleine supposedly having been abducted by a stranger/s from paedophile ring, in their wisdom, the parents sent the remaining kids to spend the day with the nasty Ocean Club employees, who may just have been the perpetrators, the same workers Mr & Mrs, said, being strangers to their children would not be suitable to look after them on the night of 3rd May 2007. Such concern for the safety of Sean & Amelie!   Payne's couldn't have been too concerned either about their daughter coming to harm, as they got granny Webster to throw Lily to the lions too - one for the pot!

How many other families with young children, having heard a child was abducted from an apartment at the Ocean Club, would let their children out of their sight during that holiday, and in particular on the morning after?

And that is surely proof, if any more were needed, that none of the group feared an abductor.
One who now knew their evening routine and could have dropped round the following evening to hoover up the rest of them

Watching wrote:

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:She's the Paynes' daughter, Dianne Webster's grand-daughter.

Thank you.    So three little lambs to the slaughter - potentially!   In the wake of Madeleine supposedly having been abducted by a stranger/s from paedophile ring, in their wisdom, the parents sent the remaining kids to spend the day with the nasty Ocean Club employees, who may just have been the perpetrators, the same workers Mr & Mrs, said, being strangers to their children would not be suitable to look after them on the night of 3rd May 2007. Such concern for the safety of Sean & Amelie!   Payne's couldn't have been too concerned either about their daughter coming to harm, as they got granny Webster to throw Lily to the lions too - one for the pot!

How many other families with young children, having heard a child was abducted from an apartment at the Ocean Club, would let their children out of their sight during that holiday, and in particular on the morning after?

Read Rachel's statement when she speaks of her baby who was ill with a vomiting bug, and yes, that one was a baby not a toddler.  It will give you some insight into how their minds worked as parents.

To me it's highly significant that not one of the other three couples has to my knowledge ever made a public statement about how horrified they were by what happened, while being eternally thankful that it wasn't one of their daughters who was taken. After all, they all claim to have left their babies unattended so it could have been any one of them, couldn't it?