Key Witness Statements - For Information Only

LEICESTERSHIRE CONSTABULARY Continuation WITNESS STATEMENT

INFORMATION FROM THE FAMILY

I spoke to Kate McCann on Tuesday 8th of May 07. She told me that a friend of her Aunt & Uncle from Leicester had a friend that had a strong vision that Madeleine was on a boat with a man in the Marina in Logos.
 

This person arrived in Portugal and has spoke to Kate. They have visited the Marina and identified the boat as "SHEARWATER" They saw a man on the boat. but it was not the same man that she had in her vision.
 

This is very important to Kate. I spoke to Glen Pounder if he could make some enqs with regards to the boat.

He has done this and the boat is registered to a Canadian National called Bruce Cook. Glen has told me that George Reyes at the police Stn  is now dealing with the matter with record to doing dvc checks etc.
 

I spoke to Kate today and she has given me photographs of the boat. She has also given me photographs of a man who has been on the boat. This is not the man the woman had in her vision.

This matter is very important to her and she is very pleased that we are making enq's into the matter. Once the enq's have been completed can we please let her know the results.

Thanks

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

Jose Manuel Conceicao Pacheco witness - 30th October 2007

The first time he had contact with the McCann's was on 5th May at about 19.00. This was a personal contact with them in the Ocean Club at their apartment, but not the apartment Madeleine disappeared from. They were accompanied by members of the holiday group.

This was an important meeting for the McCann's and which had not been possible to the fact that they were busy. He knows that on the fateful night the McCann's requested the presence of a priest, but he was only informed the following morning.

On the 5th, the theme they talked about was the disappearance and he gave all possible spiritual comfort and they prayed together. They also agreed that the couple would go to the church the following day to attend a mass.

He also prayed with the McCann's on the 6th and 8th May in their apartment.

He gave them the key to the church on the 7th or 8th May upon the suggestion of John Geraghty, a resident of the parish, so that they could calmly go to the church without any media pressure. Someone from the church gave the key to John Geraghty, who then passed it on to the McCann's, with Father Pacheco's permission.

He does not remember the date upon which the key was returned.

Other contact with the McCann's took place at the end of mass when he would comfort them.

He would also meet with the McCann's after they returned from their trips and remembered they were animated when they returned from Morocco as they thought they would Madeleine there. He also comforted Kate when the news of a child buried in Arau broke, as she revealed great nervousness and anxiety, thinking that the child had died.

When questioned, he said he never heard their confessions, perhaps because they only spoke English.

He never talked to them alone.

He states that they showed great suffering to the loss of their daughter.

He adds that a parish bulletin was published giving spiritual, moral and human support to the couple and to other missing children.

Kate McCann's statement - 7th September 2007

UTO FOR questioning an ARGUIDO [Defendant]
Date: 2007/09/07 Time: 11:00 AM Place: DIC PORTIMAO.
Officer performing: Paulo Ferreira, Joao Carlos and Ricardo Paiva, Inspectors.

Name: KATE MARIE HEALY

Asked if she wished to respond on the facts that are imputed, she responded:

--- That being of British nationality she does not know Portuguese, in its oral and written form, therefore an interpreter is present selected by the defendant from the list provided by the Consulate, Armanda Duarte Salbany Russell, contactable by telephone 282,48#####.

--- In this action there is also present the representative of the defendant Dr. Carlos Pinto de Abreu, the CP 9786L

--- She comes to the file now as a defendant, it being explained to her the rights and duties that assist her, along with her being subject to the TIR.

--- It is put to her the facts about her, she said she does not wish to make statements.

01--- Asked, on May 03, 2007, at 22:00, when she entered the apartment what she saw and did, where he looked, and what she touched [handled], she did not respond.


02 --- If she looked inside the cupboard of the couple's bedroom, she said No in response.

03 --- Shown two photographs of the cupboard of her bedroom, and asked for a description of the contents, she did not respond.

04 --- Asked for what reason the curtain behind the sofa in front of the side window, the photograph of which was shown to her, is moved [disordered], she did not respond. She did not respond to the question if someone [anyone] had passed [had gone; had walked] behind that sofa.
[NOTE: ?Passed? here is a physical movement, not metaphysical as in 'died']

05 --- Asked how much time it took for the search that she made in the apartment after the detection of the disappearance of her daughter MADELEINE, she did not respond.

06 --- Asked why she said from the outset that MADELEINE was kidnapped [abducted], she did not respond.

07 --- On the assumption that Madeleine had been kidnapped [abducted], why she left the twins alone at home to go to the Tapas to give [raise] the alarm, yet [while] the supposed kidnapper [abductor] could still be in the apartment, she did not respond.

08 ---Why she had not asked the twins at that time what had happened to their sister, or why she had not asked them later, she did not respond.

09 --- Questioned when she gave the alarm in the Tapas what she said specifically, what words she used, she did not respond.

10 --- Asked about what happened after giving the alarm at Tapas, she did not respond. Asked [word missing; presumed to be ?se?] if she had any mobile phone, with her at that moment, she did not respond.

11 --- Asked why she went to warn [inform] her friends instead of shouting from the balcony, she did not respond.

12 --- Asked who contacted the authorities, she did not respond.

13 --- Asked who participated in the [words missing; presumed to be ?buscas. NAo?] searches, she did not respond.


14 --- Asked if anyone outside the group knew, in the following moments [at the time], of the disappearance of MADELEINE, she did not respond.

15 --- Asked if any female neighbour offered her assistance after the alarm of the disappearance, she did not respond.

16 --- Asked what the expression "we let her down" means, she did not respond.

17 --- Asked if JANE told her about having seen a man with a child, on that night, she did not respond.

18 --- Asked how the authorities were contacted and that police force was alerted, she did not respond.

19 --- Asked, during the searches already with the police presence [after the police arrived], in what places she went [and] looked for MADELEINE, how and in what way [manner], she did not respond.

20 --- Asked why the twins did not [word missing; presumed to be ?acordavam?] wake up during this search, or when they went to the floor above, she did not respond.

21 --- Asked whom she telephoned after the facts [events], she did not respond.


22 ---Asked if she called "Sky News" she did not respond.


23 --- Asked about the danger of calling the news media alerting them of the abduction, because it could influence the kidnapper [abductor], she did not respond.


24 --- Asked if they requested the presence of a priest, she did not respond.

25 --- Asked what was the manner of divulging the face of MADELEINE, if photographs or other, she did not respond.

26 --- Asked if it is true that during the search she sat on her bed in her bedroom without moving, she did not respond.

27 --- Asked what was her behaviour during that night, she did not respond.


28 --- And asked if she had managed [been able to] to sleep, she did not respond.

29 --- Asked if before the trip to Portugal she made a comment of [about] a bad feeling [presentiment] or bad omens, she did not respond.

30 --- Asked about the behaviour of MADELEINE she did not respond.


31 --- Asked if she suffered from any infirmity [illness] or took medication, she did not respond.

32 --- Asked what was MADELEINE's relationship with the siblings.

33 --- Asked what was MADELEINE's relationship with the siblings, friends and school colleagues, she did not respond.

34 ---- Asked about her professional life, and in how many hospitals and in which she had worked, she did not respond.


35 --- Being a doctor, and asked about her speciality, she did not respond.


36 --- Asked about if she worked in shifts, in emergencies [the emergency section of a hospital] or other services she did not respond.


37 --- If she worked every day, she did not respond.

38 --- Asked if at a particular time she stopped working and why, she did not respond.

39 --- Asked whether or not it is true that the twins have difficulty sleeping, that they are restless and that that causes her uneasiness, she did not respond.

40 --- Asked whether or not it is true that at certain times she felt desperate [driven to despair; angered; exasperated] by the attitude of the children and that that left her much disquiet [unease], she did not respond.

41 --- Asked whether or not it is true that in England she was thinking to deliver MADELEINE into the custody [guardianship] of a family member, she did not respond.

42 --- Asked if at home (England) she gave medication to the children and what kind of medication, she did not respond.

43 --- In this 'auto' [official document recording an official action] there were shown several films of canine inspections, forensic in character, where can be seen the marking by them of indications of human cadaver smell and blood traces also human, and solely human, as well as the comments of the expert responsible for that inspection activity.

--- The viewing ended and after signs of cadaver odour in her bedroom next to the cupboard and behind the sofa against the window of the living room, she said that she can not explain anything more than that already mentioned.

44 --- Also signalled, now by the dog of the detection of human blood behind the sofa mentioned above, she said that she can not explain anything more than that already mentioned.

45 --- Signalled the cadaver odour in the car that they rented about one month after the disappearance, registration 59-DA-27, she said that she can not explain anything more than that already mentioned.

46 --- Signalled the presence of human blood in the trunk of the same vehicle, she said that she can not explain anything more than that already mentioned.

47 --- Confronted with the result of the collection of DNA from MADELEINE, which analysis was carried out by a British laboratory, from behind the sofa and trunk of the vehicle, situations previously described, she said that she can not explain anything more than that already mentioned.

48 --- Asked if she had any responsibility or involvement in the disappearance of her daughter MADELEINE, she did not respond.

------------------------------


49 --- Asked if she is aware that her failure to respond to the questions put in the cause of the investigation, which seeks to know what happened to her daughter, she replied that

yes, if the investigation so thinks.

--- Asked if she has anything to add,

she responded negatively.

--- The floor being given to the distinguished advocate, he said he had nothing to say [discuss] or to request.

--- At 14H30 this interview was ended.
And nothing more said, this document is read thought to be correct, she ratifies and is going to sign, together with the defence attorney and interpreter.

Russell James O'Brien witness statement
Date: 2007.05.16

He comes to the process as a witness and of his own free will to make this statement.

When asked he says that he does not speak Portuguese and is assisted by the interpreter Alice Avakoff.

When asked whether he is capable of recognising without any doubt the suspect Robert Murat, the witness replies yes.

When questioned he says that the first time he saw Robert Murat was on the night of the events currently under investigation, in other words, the night upon which Madeleine disappeared, at about 01.00 in the early morning of 4th May.

That he saw Murat for the first time at this moment in the Rua Silva in front of the apartment where the events occurred, near to the parking area.

When asked whether Murat arrived before or after the police, the witness says that he does not know, given that at the time the police arrived he was not present as he was searching for Madeleine.

When he saw him for the first time the police were on the scene.

Robert Murat appeared in the middle of different people (friends from the group, people from the resort, tourists and locals) who were searching for Madeleine. he adds that he does not know at what time Murat appeared on the scene, nor whether he arrive alone or accompanied, in the sense that when the witness arrived at the scene, Murat was already there.

When asked, he says that as far as he can remember, Robert was translating conversations between two officers and various people who were searching for Madeleine. As far as he could make out at that time, it seemed that Robert was trying to help, in the sense that these people were exasperated with some of the officers. He remembers that all the people were quite upset, whilst Robert was very calm. That morning was the first time the witness spoke to Murat, not remembering whether he had approached Murat or whether Robert had addressed him. They had various discussions including the fact that Robert was fluent in Portuguese as he had lived in the country for many years.

He adds that Robert told him he had a daughter of Madeleines age in the UK and that Madeleines disappearance was a terrible thing.

When asked what Murat was wearing that night, the witness says he is not certain but thinks he was wearing dark coloured trousers, he can't remember the colour, and a T-shirt, perhaps dark grey in colour and perhaps a jacket, the characteristics of which he cannot describe. He clearly remembers that Robert wore glasses.

When asked he says he does not know how Robert found out about Madeleines disappearance nor how he arrived at the scene.

When asked, he says that he had never seen Robert before.

After this morning the witness saw Murat 3 more times, once on the morning of 4th May in the same street, rua Silva at about 12.00 in the company of police officers. About two days later he saw Murat at the OC reception at about 12.00/14.00. Robert was alone and walking towards the previously mentioned road. The witness says that he (ROB) was accompanied by Rachel. The last time he saw Robert was last Sunday, near to his house at about 20.30. At that moment the witness was with Jane.

He never noticed anything suspicious about Murat except for the last time he saw him when Robert was being transported in a vehicle, a green van with four windows, he does not remember the make, model or number plate and that he stopped, got out of the van, opened the back and showed photos of Madeleine and that he showed himself to be a very important person in the investigation, saying that he was providing immense help to the police in discovering the truth.

When asked, he says that according to his wife Jane, she did not see Murat on the night of the events as she had spent most of the time looking after her children.

No more is said. Reads, ratifies, signs.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Witness statement of Russell James O'Brien 2007.07.11
Date: 11 July 2007; Time: 19h15; Place: Praia da Luz
Officer: Paulo F., Inspector
To the matter at hand he said:
--- That he confirms the completeness of his previous declarations given in the present case, giving
all of it unchanged as reproduced for this present document.
--- The deponent reaffirms that in truth he met Robert Murat on the night on which Madeleine
disappeared. He saw him for the first time about 01h00 on 4 May near to the parking area in front
of the main entrance [front door] of the apartment from which Madeleine disappeared.
--- That in the early hours of the morning of 4 May he was speaking with Robert Murat, having
spoken about the circumstances in which Madeleine could have disappeared. He saw him several
times that night given that he had stayed [remained] in the area [and] having also seen him
speaking with uniformed people.
--- The deponent would like now to inform that at some time he was aware that Robert Murat
assisted police officers [by] being the interpreter. Therefore, at some time, but already the following
morning, it appeared to him, he [ROB] approached Robert Murat having asked him [RM] to give
him [ROB] his [RM's] telephone number because he [ROB] considered that at some time he might
need the support of that person [RM] given that he spoke Portuguese correctly. In truth Robert
Murat furnished him with his mobile number which the deponent inserted into the calendar/address
book of his own mobile phone. He doesn't recall exactly the time that happened but has the idea
that it was already during the morning of 4 May [i.e. it was already daylight]. In an analysis of the
calendar/address book of the mobile phone by PJ officers it was verified that the number of Robert
Murat was inserted there immediately before number 914..., indicated as being of David Priest.
Questioned the deponent states that David was an Anglican priest [English vicar?] with whom the
deponent spoke on the morning of 4 May, and [of/from] whom he had asked his [David P.'s]
telephone number. He recalls that the conversation that he had had with that vicar was
accomplished [done/made] already at the end of the morning in the Ocean Club it having been on
that occasion that the deponent introduced that number into his calendar/address book.
--- He has no knowledge of any other facts that might assist in any way the present investigation.
--- The present work was accomplished in the presence of of Mrs. Lieve Van Loock, interpreter
who translated all questions and answers.
Nothing more said. Read, ratifies and will sign.

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

Witness statement of Saleigh Louise Gordon (former holidaymaker in Apartment 5 A) 2008.04.24

 
Statement of Saleigh Gordon.

Occupation: Air Hostess
4 pages
Date: 24th April de 2008
Signature_______________________________


I am married to Paul Gordon, we have two children, our son xxxx who is three years old and our who is two.
I planned our holiday last year and from a series of recommendations from family members, I looked at Mark Warner resorts. I found that the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz met with our requirements. Good price, good facilities for the children, I initially made a reservation for apartment T1 which was changed by Mark Warner to apartment T2 before we travelled.

We left Gatwick for Faro on Saturday 21st April 2007 and when we landed we were received by Mark Warner staff and driven to Praia da Luz. We were handed the keys during the journey and given the location of the apartment which was 5A. The holiday was perfect, the people were kind and friendly. It was a very pleasant break, the area was pretty and relaxing and I would describe it as a sleepy place.

During our stay Paul cut his face whilst shaving and the cut bled for some time. Neither the children nor I injured ourselves and as far as I know nobody died in the apartment. We never noticed that any of our personal objects disappeared or were lost. Nothing strange or worrying to note, just on one occasion I heard Paul speaking to an individual on the patio that looked over the complex's swimming pool. I can't say who he was talking to or what they were talking about. I was inside the apartment washing some of the childrens clothes in the kitchen that faced out onto the road. I did not see anyone pass in front of the window or knock on the door.

I remember Paul entering the apartment and asking where the money was, I asked him why and he said something about a collection for charity. I did not go out to see or speak with the man. It was only after the disappearance of Madeleine and when the news broke that we thought we should contact the police, not because we thought there was anything suspicious about this but simply because we thought the police should be informed.


I would like to add that this was the only time that we saw someone asking for money.

The doors, windows and shutters of the apartment were all in good condition. We noticed that it was only possible to close the patio door from the inside of the apartment, not from the outside. The bedroom shutters made a lot of noise and I find it difficult to understand that opening them would go un-noticed. The bedroom overlooked the parking area and was also overlooked by other apartments from which I think that if anyone had opened the shutters from outside, somebody would have noticed. The front door was easy to open from the inside unless it had been locked. We always used the wooden door overlooking the parking area to enter and exit the apartment.

With regard to the sofas, there were two on the right where you entered and another opposite the dining table - there was also a coffee table between the sofas. The sofa on the right when you entered by the patio door was situated against the wall and it does not seem possible to me that anyone could have passed behind the sofa.

The children slept in the bedroom overlooking the parking area and Paul and I slept in the bedroom with the patio overlooking the pool.

We would have breakfast in the Millenium restaurant, lunch in the apartment so that the children could have a siesta. We also dined in the Millenium except for two occasions when we dined at the Tapas Bar. I had the impression that dining at the Tapas was restricted to once during ones stay, and because of this it surprised me to hear that the McCann group used to dine there every day.

The children would use the club facilities, I think they were called 'Ama 1 and 2'.


They would spend the morning or afternoon, I dont remember them having spent a whole day there. We were always with them when they were not in the childrens club. It was usual to go to the Tapas bar at lunchtime and I know that of 6 occasions they went five times. On one occasion we thought of using the night club and we took the children there with their pyjamas on. When we got there we saw that the club was not for us and we did not leave the children there. We always took the children with us when we went for dinner. We never left them alone.

I remember that at the welcome ceremony we were informed about the 'babysitter' services at 15 Euros per hour, but they told us that that the service would have to be booked well in advance. I remember that when we went for dinner there were couple without children and imagined that these services were often requested, but we never used them.

I cannot speak badly of our holiday and this only changed after the disappearance of Madeleine.

I know that Paul received text messages from Kate McCann as well as voice messages, some of them were heartbreaking. We have tried to collaborate with the police as much as possible. We have been visited by the press at home and have had to face cameras and reporters, asking them to leave us alone.

13- Processo Vol XIII 3924 to 3926
13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3924
13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3925
13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3926

Translation of Father Pachecos Statement to the PJ 30th October 2007

Jose Manuel Conceicao Pacheco

The first time he had contact with the McCann's was on 5th May at about 19.00. This was a personal contact with them in the Ocean Club at their apartment, but not the apartment Madeleine disappeared from. They were accompanied by members of the holiday group.

This was an important meeting for the McCann's and which had not been possible to the fact that they were busy. He knows that on the fateful night the McCann's requested the presence of a priest, but he was only informed the following morning.

On the 5th, the theme they talked about was the disappearance and he gave all possible spiritual comfort and they prayed together. They also agreed that the couple would go to the church the following day to attend a mass.

He also prayed with the McCann's on the 6th and 8th May in their apartment.

He gave them the key to the church on the 7th or 8th May upon the suggestion of John Geraghty, a resident of the parish, so that they could calmly go to the church without any media pressure. Someone from the church gave the key to John Geraghty, who then passed it on to the McCann's, with Father Pacheco's permission.

He does not remember the date upon which the key was returned.

Other contact with the McCann's took place at the end of mass when he would comfort them.

He would also meet with the McCann's after they returned from their trips and remembered they were animated when they returned from Morocco as they thought they would Madeleine there. He also comforted Kate when the news of a child buried in Arau broke, as she revealed great nervousness and anxiety, thinking that the child had died.

When questioned, he said he never heard their confessions, perhaps because they only spoke English.

He never talked to them alone.

He states that they showed great suffering to the loss of their daughter.

He adds that a parish bulletin was published giving spiritual, moral and human support to the couple and to other missing children.

13-Processos Volume XIII, pages 3418 to 3420

TRANSLATION BY INES
13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3418
13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3419
13_VOLUME_XIIIa_Page_3420

Witness Statement of Susan Hubbard

Date: 2007.11.13
Time: 11H30
Nationality: Canadian

' That she comes to the process as a witness

' Is married to Anglican Father Haynes

' Has known the McCann family since three days after the disappearance (Sunday). That she went to Portugal on this date (06 May 2007), not to accompany the family but due to work related to the church, which was previously organized.

' That it is the truth that she only knows them through the church and never met them before.

' States that after getting to know the parents of the missing child, she invited Kate to take part in a meeting, in Lagos, on the 25th of May, with the intention of discussing items related to missing children. That she went to this meeting, with Kate and Kates cousin, Anne. They travelled to this meeting in the deponents car.

' After this occasion, she went various times to the McCann residence in Praia da Luz, and they also visited the deponent, in her home, on various occasions. These encounters had the objective of offering them comfort and support but also allowed for the children of both couples to play.

' She also adds that the McCann's' although being Catholics, attended some masses, where Madeleines disappearance was noted, celebrated by her husband, the Anglican priest.

' Questioned regarding the key to the church, she says that she knows nothing of this. Following the McCann departure to England, she was given the key to handover to the place the McCann's rented in Praia da Luz. She handed this key over the next Monday. Her handling of the key was suggested by one of the McCann family but she does not remember who. She notes that on this Monday, she handed over the keys to the cleaning staff who forwarded the key to the responsible rental agent and whose designation she does not remember.

' Besides these contacts, she did not maintain and other relation with the McCann family.

' Sean and Amelie, she notes, are children of normal behaviour for their age. They are active and dynamic.

' Regarding the parents, Gerald and Kate, she says that, in her opinion, they always presented a normal comportment, given the circumstances. That she noted a certain tranquillity, when in the presence of the twins. Via their gestures, she noted a great sadness and suffering. In their conversations, they would always talk of their missing daughter.

' Regarding Kate, she says that, besides being preoccupied with the health of her daughter, she was scared of what could have happened to Madeleine although she never spoke of her death.

' She describes them as a normal family

' She is not aware of any relevant details for the investigation. She claims that the parents are not involved in the disappearance and knows nothing else, other than what she has related.

' And nothing more was said. Reads and finds it in conformity, and ratifies and signs.

RESTRICTED
Statement number S87B
Printed version of recorded document

Surname: CARPENTER
First name. STEPHEN

Profession: Maintenance Technician
Date of Statement: 21/04/2008- Number of pages : 1

I am the person referred to above and I live at the address provided to the police.
I confirm that I was questioned by DC 4078 Ferguson from Leicestershire police on 21st April 2008.
The questioning began at 10.30 and finished at 11.10 on the same day. The questioning was filmed on DVD and on cassette. This statement was made by me and is truthful according to my understanding.

The questioning took place at the police station in Stevenage, Hertfordshire on the 21st April 2008.
I would be more than satisfied if the evidence presented by me was used and if required to appear at court in Portugal I would need to be notified in advance. .

Statement
Date 21st April 2008
Pages: 1
Statement of Stephen Carpenter

Leicestershire Police Force
Form MG15 (T)

Officer who conducted the questioning: DC 4078 Ferguson

Pages: 26

_____________________________
__
Duration of Interview: 39 minutes

DCF: Do you agree with me reading out your statement'

SC: Yes, I agree, yes.

DCF: Or would you prefer to read out the statement yourself'

SC: No, thats fine, you can read it.

DCF: I thought it would make more sense that way:

SC: Ah ha.

DCF: So when we get to the moment that refers to Portugal, it will refresh your memory.

SC: Please can I take some notes'

DCF: Yes of course. I'll get you a sheet of paper.

SC: Yes, OK.

DCF: I will have to go and get one because I haven't got my bag with me.
.
DC FERGUSON leaves the interrogation room..

DC FERGUSON returns to the interrogation room.

DCF: This was the best I could find.

SC: Yes, that's fine, its just for small details like people's names.

DCF: Yes.

SC: That would be, humm the babysitters and the people I played tennis with. I've got, hummm I almost remember all of their names. .

DCF: I would just like to introduce myself, I am DC Sophie Ferguson. I work for the Main Criminal Unit of the Leicestershire police and we have obviously been working on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, to provide assistance to the Portuguese and the reason for which we are here today is because the Portuguese have asked us to carry out some questioning of some of the witnesses.

SC: Agreed.

DCF: And also, Gerry and Kate have the right to ask the witnesses some questions and for that reason some of the questionings carried out incorporate questions suggested by them.

SC. OK.

DCF: It is now 10.30 on the 21st April.

SC: Yes.

DCF: It is the 21st today, isn't it'

SC: Yes.

DCF: Of the year 2008 and we are in a room in a house on Telford Avenue in Stevenage where neither of us have been before.

SC: OK

DCF: DC Eleanor JOHNSON is monitoring this interrogation Could you please tell m your name in full'

SC: Humm... Stephen John CARPENTER

DCF: And your date of birth'

SC: *******

DCF: Thank you. Would you prefer us to call you Stephen or Steve'

SC: Steve.

DCF: Steve it is then.

SC: Mm.

DCF:Okay, there is a letter for you, a letter to be handed to you ...

SC: Okay, thanks.

DCF: Before beginning the questioning and explaining the reason why you are here.

SC: Okay.

DCF: You can take a minute to read the contents if you wish..

(CARPENTER reads the letter): Yes, that's fine..

DCF: Okay, as I already explained previously this will be filmed so that we can send the CD so that the Portuguese can hear instead of only reading the statement, once they get a copy.

SC: Ah ha.

DCF: And I know that before we begin the questioning, that you showed some concern about the truthful recording of the facts and that they could have had some distortions by what you have read about the event.

SC: Yes.

DCF: Therefore what we have agreed to do is to read your statement and put the facts together.

SC: Ah ha, yes that would seem right to me.

DCF: And afterwards I will ask you whether there is anything else you would like to add.

SC: Okay.

DCF: Or anything else that you would like to discuss and afterwards, afterwards I will ask the questions that we were requested.

SC: Okay.

DCF: And we can talk about this for as long as we need to, there is no time limit.

SC: Yes, fine.

DCF: Are you feeling all right'

SC: Yes, fine.

DC: Good. Right, this statement was taken by a UK police officer on the 17th May and so the facts should be quite fresh in your memory.

SC: Yes.
.
DCF: This is obviously 2007 and begins by explaining the reason for the questioning, in other words, relating to the disappearance of Madeleine. In the statement you say "I will mention the following persons who I will describe with greater detail at the end of the statement" Is it C*** or C******'

SC: C*****.

DCF: C***** is your wife and at the time of the events you had known her for nine years and I****** is your daughter aged three and a half and F***** is obviously your other child aged five months. During the holiday you met the following persons, Gerry and Kate McCann, saw their children, Madeleine and the twins, but don't know their names. J*** C***** whom I met whilst playing tennis, I also met Dan and Georgia who were tennis instructors of the Mark Warner holiday resort (inaudible) I had met Dan on previous Mark Warner holidays at the (inaudible) resort. . I met the following persons when I participated in the searches for Madeleine during the day after her disappearance, Raj and Neil, Mark Warner tourists, John Hill, manager of the MW resort, we also used three babysitters, Pauline, Emma and Leanne. Emma and Leanne would look after our children in the evenings, they were all British and employees of MW. A man with three children whom I met in the Tapas Bar and who I referred to as the "Tapas Guy" and a Portuguese man in a garage whom I will refer to as the "laundry man".

SC: Okay.

DCF:Okay. That was just to set the scene..

SC: Yes.

DCF: Neil and Raj, two MW tourists that I saw in the Tapas Bar who were looking for Madeleine with me, doesn't make much sense, I think it was perhaps explaining who they are and where I met them. I will now describe the resort and to help me with this description I will base myself upon an aerial photograph from the Sun Newspaper dated the 16th May, which we do not have here today, but which is not important. The resort is a closed holiday complex with apartments and some villas. This takes us to the next question which is, how did you appear on the scene. "My wife booked the holidays in the MW resort in Praia da Luz, from Saturday 28th April to Saturday 5th May, at Going Places in Welwyn Garden City." You go on to describe your previous holidays and that you chose this one because you were told that the "baby sitter" service was available. You arrived at the resort on Saturday morning, pardon on Saturday at approximately two in the afternoon and were accompanied to your apartment, FP02 Ocean Club.
At about 4.15 on the same day you went to a crèche meeting where you wee told who the crèche workers who would look after your children were and that your children would be in different groups given the difference in age. I**** was in the group for children between three and four years old, her crèche worker was Emma and it was only after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann that I realised that she was in the same group as I****. That night C****, F****, I**** and I went to the Millenium Restaurant, we did not see any of the other MW tourists there and I remember that I did not see any of the other people I mentioned in my statement there. On Sunday the 29th April C**** and I participated in a coffee morning of the MW tennis group where I met Gerry, Kate, J****, C****, R****, A***, G***, A***'s sister and A***, there were other tourists there whose names now escape me. In total there were approximately some sixteen people at this coffee morning and tennis was one of the activities that the man, or that both subscribed to during the week. I am summarising a bit, because.....


SC: Okay, that's fine..

DCF: I first played tennis with Kate and G***n, there was another lady whose name I can't remember and afterwards I played with Kate and G**** against Gerry and naturally after the game I spoke to Gerry and Kate as well as to the other people present. I think that this is just a setting of the scene.

SC: Yes, OK.

DCF: In this way I got to know Gerry and Kate and spoke with them as I did with other people.

SC: Yes.
.
DCF: And during my stay I would greet them when I met them. Later we pass to your activities during the week, do you remember if there was anything relevant in their activities during this week'

SC: Humm, anything relevant, not really....hummmm... it was normal, possibly after having left and now knowing where Murat was in relation to us, because i don't know whether they showed you the proximity between us.

DCF: No.

SC: Let me show you some things about that, humm....let's see, because...hummm, our apartment was not near to there.

DCF: Mmm mmm.

SC: Here was the club where Gerry was, behind Murat's garden and here we were probably the people closest to Murat.

DCF: Thats true, I see.

SC: The bushes were all around here, we were far away from the rest, it was all open, and this is why I think (inaudible) you know, this is the idea that, humm...I think of when i mentioned in the interrogation that there was a laundry outlet where other things were kept.

DCF: Mmm, yes.

SC: But humm, nothing strange that someone wouldn't do during their holidays, the only thing is thinking about our proximity to Murat's property.

DCF: Yes, I understand, much of this is in the....

SC: Background.

DCF: Yes. When I went to the Tapas Bar and was seen there, talking on the Thurday 3rd May we analysed this in more detail because it was obviously more relevant. "The second time I entered the Tapas Bar was on Thursday 3rd May" which ended up being the day that Madeleine disappeared.

.
SC: Ah ha.

DCF: We arrived at about seven because we had the children with us and I saw a man sitting at the table next to us with three children.

SC: Yes
.
DCF: He was going to take a plane the next day to Switzerland, given that the children's mother lived there, I had never seen him before that night, but he ended up joining us for a coffee, he was a MW tourist. Another couple whose names I do not remember, sat at the table opposite us. A man was sitting on the esplanade having a drink whilst waiting for a take away, I spoke to them briefly, I hadn't realised that the Tapas bar had a take away service. At that time i didn't know their names. At approximately half past eight, Gerry and Kate and their group of approximately ten people were already seated at their table, which was so close to ours that it was possible to converse with them, we spoke of tennis amongst other things, I vaguely remember that Gerry and Kate and other people from the group would leave the table in intervals (inaudible), I think it was to check on the children , but I do not remember with what frequency or how many times the people left the table to check on the children. We did not talk about the system for checking the children or the fact that they had left them alone in the apartment, it was only later upon hearing the news that I realised that they had left the children alone in the apartment and that they were regularly checking to see if they were all right. Between approximately a quarter past nine and half past nine we left the Tapas bar to go home, we walked across the MW reception area, crossed the road and a semi circular path to return to the apartment, were we put the children to bed and a short while later did the same ourselves. I do not remember seeing or hearing anyone during our return to the apartment. When I crossed the road outside the MW reception I remember there were cars parked, I remember taking some time to see if I could cross the road because there were cars parked to my left and I was carrying I****. They were about six metres away from me and i calculate that some (inaudible) metres from the back of Gerry's apartment, I do not remember anything about these cars, it was normal for cars to be parked there and in the morning they were no longer there. My wife mentioned on the following day that she vaguely remembered someone calling "Madeleine, Madeleine", this was after we had crossed the road from the MW reception and before entering our apartment. She does not remember where the sound came from or whether it was in an urgent tone, not paying any more attention to it and only remembered the following day when we heard about Madeleine's disappearance". OK, before going on the next part, do you remember at what time you left'

SC: Humm... vaguely, I think it was what was put in the statement, the same, the leaving the restaurant, the way back to the apartment, looking to my left to check that the way was clear and I didn't see anything....My wife vaguely remembers hearing "Madeleine, Madeleine" and that was all until the following morning when I saw the television.

DCF: Yes, and where you state that it was on GMTV.

SC:: Yes..

DCF: I think that it was reported that it was a three year old child and probably thought who could it be and knew that Kate and Gerry were from Leicestershire and assumed that it was one of their children seeing that they had small children'

SC: Ah.

DCF: And afterwards you left your apartment to see if you could help in any way and as you said previously, everything was very quiet and there was nobody around. Then you say "I went to the MW reception and I met two of Gerry's surfing friends who told me that Madeleine had been abducted on the previous night, I asked if there was anything I could do to help and I think they were waiting for news from the Portuguese police. We walked towards the supermarket and ended up at the 24 hour reception where some men tried to speak to some Portuguese employees in the attempt to make a phone call, but communication became complicated because the employee did not speak English and the man did not speak Portuguese. We returned to the MW reception where I asked whether there was anything I could do to help so that they would let me know and returned to my apartment by the same route as the previous night. Upon nearing my apartment I heard a male voice coming from the garden next to my apartment.

DCF: This would be the voice of Murat, correct'

SC: Yes. This garden is situated at the other side of the passage way from my apartment block and is enclosed by net fence of about 1.80 m in height, the garden is thick and it was not possible to see inside, there was also a passageway along the garden without a wall that was on the way from our apartment to the Millenium restaurant. At some stage I managed to see clearly inside the garden, but I did not know who was the owner of the house and I never saw anyone inside the garden or the house or see anyone leaving until the moment that I heard a voice calling me. Then a voice called me from over the hedge. "What is happening, or what is going on'", I replied that a three year old girl had disappeared, he said "I am going to come round to talk to you" and he did this, walked round to come over towards me and said "I have lived here for fourteen years, I speak Portuguese fluently and I can help to translate", and we introduced ourselves, he told me he was Robert and this was the first time I had seen this man. Robert mentioned that he had a daughter in Norfolk who was the same age as Madeleine, and that is why he was able to understand what they were going through. We walked back along the path that I had taken to Gerry's apartment and I explained that Robert spoke Portuguese fluently, he told Gerry that it was important to have someone who spoke the language so that nothing would be lost in translation.. And that was how Robert Murat was presented as a translator.


DCF: Yes

SC: After he left, he explained that Gerry was frustrated with the way in which the case was being handled and they went to talk to John Hill.


DCF: Yes..

SC: In Mark Warner and he asked that all the Mark Warner rooms be opened so that he could check them and asked the cleaning ladies etc. to help open all the empty apartments that were not necessarily in the Mark Warner complex, but for which they might have the keys. At this moment I also met an English man called Dave who lived in the area and helped the Ocean Club to authorise entry into all the apartments possible, some of the apartments in Gerry's block belonged to local owners and Dave helped to get the keys to these apartments so that they could check them and search them, they checked them all in a general manner.

DCF: Mmm mmm.


SC: Robert and I searched the areas near to the beach.

DCF: During your conversations with Robert is there anything that you would like to comment on'

SC: Humm, no, its probably nothing relevant, the only thing since all of this happened and from reading the papers, I'm not sure if I am right or wrong, but his involvement in the translations was due to my intervention, clearly it was I who, based upon what he told me, took him to see Gerry, humm..and just that, I do not know whether it was already explained and wasn't published in the papers or I do not know why (inaudible) I think that the reason for his involvement was because of me.

.
DCF: Mmm.

SC: And then the first thing that he said was "Well, I did not actually offer my services, I "bumped" into this individual.

DCF: Yes:

SC: That is the only, only thing that I would correct and I think it is a bit strange that someone would state that they offer themselves as a volunteer, or the way in which it really happened after having told me that he spoke Portuguese fluently, I said to him "Well, in this case that could be useful" and afterwards accompanied him - and that was how he (inaudible) thought that it was a bit strange. Because the way he said it gave the impression that it was voluntary.

DCF: Yes.

SC: Whereas now the version is a bit different.

DCF: Yes, yes. And do you remember what you talked about whilst you were searching with him'

SC: Humm...he obviously talked to me about his daughter.

DCF: Yes.

SC: They had a team of sniffer dogs on site, they came from Lisbon according to what I was told, and afterwards we walked to the beach in the attempt to find the scent, to see of she had got lost alone or had fallen into the sea, and it was just him and me and the dog handlers, so that there was not any big theme of conversation, just walking the route - or on the way back, when we arrived we talked with different Portuguese police
Officers and afterwards with the officer who appeared to be leading the operation, a man who appeared to be from Forensics, but as I say now nothing appears very clear to me.

DCF: Yes.

SC: Humm... where Robert presented himself as being capable of speaking both languages and they couldn't, they tried to use him in order to obtain a maximum of information from the English side, so that the Portuguese could understand what the people were saying and what state they were in... that was the involvement with the police and afterwards we tried to enter all the apartments that they had seen to where Gerry and Kate were staying.

DCF: Yes..

SC: And it was just talking about, you know...trying to get possible access and trying to open a maximum of doors in the area, and I think that was all.

DCF: You go on to describe in a little more detail the searches in the apartments neighbouring on Gerry and Kate's apartment, then you met Neil and Raj who began to talk and told you that they had collaborated in the searches the night before.

SC: Yes. .

DCF: And they explained to you that they had seen a man with dreadlocks and they felt there was something suspicious about him, that they were not satisfied with him.

SC: Yes, yes.

DCF: Then he introduced himself saying that he lived in Portugal and that he had just bought an apartment block.
.
SC: Yes.

DCF:
They were staying opposite Gerry's block, that meant that they were more concentrated in that area.

SC: Yes, because Raj in particular said that he felt there was something strange and that he was not certain, and the fact of where they were staying, the fact that the back of the apartment block was opposite Kate and Gerry's apartment, humm...and the fact that they even discussed the purchase price and how much he had paid, but the following morning there was no sign, even knocking on all the doors of the apartments that were occupied and those that were empty, we did not find anyone, he said, and that is why we thought it was strange that someone who had been available and collaborated in the searches and who lived in the area, was not found the following morning, because as you know, we were not contactable.

DCF: No sign of him and you remember that you were worried about this man who was described as being fifty years of age with grey hair.

SC:Ah ha.

DCF: And it seemed strange that a person who helped so much on the previous night disappeared the following morning.

SC: Yes, I suppose there was something that even the local Portuguese would be incapable of identifying (inaudible) or recognising for the description of a poster especially.

DCF: Who it was.

SC: Hummm.. then it was just a question of asking who he might be, where he was and to be able to eliminate him from the list of suspects, so that he would be at least one less person to worry about.


DCF: And did you speak to Robert about this as the person who was also on the scene'


SC: Ah ha.

DCF: On Saturday morning, the 5th May you spoke to a BBC reporter.

SC: Yes.

DCF: You told them that you remember that some of the reporters were being unfair and incorrect because they were treating the situation as that of a missing child and not of a child whom had been abducted.

SC: Yes.


DCF: And you go on to say that you spoke to Robert that day about how the Portuguese Police were unhappy with the incomprehensible way in which the British press treated them.
SC: That was what he said. What he explained to me.

DCF: Yes.

SC: Yes.
.
DCF: Yes, you met Gerry in the swimming pool area on Saturday afternoon, he told you that the fifty year old man had not been taken into consideration, that the Leicestershire police were on their way and you gave him your phone number and returned to England that night.

SC: Yes.

DCF: You certainly followed the events on television.

SC: Yes.


DCF: Humm... afterwards you say that on the 17th May you sent an email to Sky News about the description of an individual aged about fifty, humm.... on the 14th May you saw a report at the end of the news which mentioned that Robert Murat had been named a suspect.


SC: Yes (inaudible) I spoke to a Sky reporter, I think it was Ian Woods, hummm...did I write that down there'


DCF: Its here, yes.

SC: Ah yes, yes and afterwards, humm...with Murat well...I just caught a glimpse of him on TV, it was rather my wife who phoned Philomena afterwards who then suggested that we contact the police support service.

DCF: Yes.

SC: And that is what I did, and afterwards the Hertford police contacted us.

DCF: Yes.

SC: Two days later I think.

DCF: Exactly, you phoned the criminal support number and was transferred to the Operational Squad of the Leicestershire Police Force which is where we are working.

SC: Ah ha.

DCF: And we made a request to the local police to collect your statement and it was in this sequence that your statement arrived. It is likely that my papers are not in order because this page is more about the details of the search of the apartments near to Gerry's apartment and mentions the man from the laundry.

SC: Yes, yes.

DCF: And about the searches carried out.

SC: I remember that, yes.

DCF: You spoke to a man who later showed you a garage where there was a bed.

SC: Yes, well what happened was that, Gerry's apartment was here because it was not a flat area, it was more or less like this and that is why the opposite apartments were higher.

DCF: Correct.

SC: That is why it could obviously be seen, these apartments could be looked over from above and all the lower parts and where we, hummm.. this is where the grey haired man was.

DCF: Right.

SC: Who had supposedly acquired a property, and that is why I strongly suggested that we should open the maximum possible number of doors,...I can't remember the name of the man who I also met by chance and who was doing some translating, what was his name again, who helped open the doors.


DCF: Was it John HILL'

SC: No, John Hill was a Mark Warner employee, I can't remember his name, but he...humm also knew the local estate agent and different people who helped to get the keys of the properties from the letters, some of whom were on holiday.

DCF: Yes.

SC: And once the garage door was opened, it was not just a garage for a car, it was a type of "capsule" of about six by nine metres in size which became longer where there was a bed in the corner, and it was when we were searching this, the English man with grey hair whose identity I did not know, but who had explained this to me.


DCF: Yes.

SC: Humm... this garage belonged to a Portuguese man, the man from the laundry.

DCF: Yes.

SC: And when we entered the garage I asked who lived there, he replied that his son lived there and then there were distractions and because I was concentrated on the fifty year old English man, this man is Portuguese, it was only afterwards when I thought later about what we were searching for, it didn't occur to me and I think it is because of this that i mentioned it in my statement two weeks later, because I remember that there had been some distortions.

DCF: Yes.

SC: Of course with Murat there is Murat and the Russian individual, you know....I thought that we might well be looking for the totally wrong person and the fact that a bed existed in the garage and some children's toys.

DCF: Yes.

SC: I thought, ohhh...its worth mentioning this and that's the reason I mentioned it in my statement.
DCF: Fine, now (inaudible) describe the Portuguese man, the laundry man to me, yes'

SC: Yes.
I am certain that I read about this at the beginning, which (inaudible)' I think that afterwards, and afterwards coincides with the fact that he was the man from the laundry and of the van parked there, because as i have already explained, we were here in a small street here above which linked to the main road and to everything beside here on top, the rest was all pathways and I remember that on two or three occasions I thought...this is a dead end road, the van was parked there, I never saw anyone and more than once assumed that it would be cleaning staff and only this thought coincided with the presence of the man from the laundry, and if there were any reply to be made in relation to the link between the van parked there and the laundry man.
DCF: Yes.

SC: Murat here, I think and the laundry thing here.

DCF: Yes

SC: And I would once again give the reason why I mentioned the subject..

DCF: Of what age did the laundry man appear to be'

SC: Humm, I do not remember clearly what I said, but obviously at times Europeans appear older than they are, because of

DCF...(inaudible) the sun.

SC: Yes with the sun, that was what I said in the statement (inaudible).

DCF: I am going to try to locate the first pages where it was mentioned, but there is no description.

SC: Forty five to fifty years old, I think.

DCF: I'm just trying to think what age the man would be, it is difficult to say for the man that I saw, but he would have been of an age that implied that he could have a small child living in the garage or it could be expected that the had a grown up child.

SC: Oh, I think he would have been about, you know.... eighteen years, twenty or twenty two years old to live in the back of a garage because it had large cupboards and other things, but to live in a garage would mean that he had to be eighteen or more, because of a question of safety and because it was not the best way to live.

DCF: No. Then as you say the children's toys seemed to you to be out of context'

SC: Yes, yes.

DCF: Yes.

SC: Yes, mainly because I would think of someone aged eighteen or slightly more.

DCF: And then the Mark Warner staff, obviously it was after your return when this was still being investigated, the staff had photos of Madeleine that the man handed to an individual called C**** and his girlfriend to be distributed.

SC: Ah ah, yes.

DCF: Its in the part where it mentions that there was a van, and says that it was parked at the back of Robert Murat'' garden, and that you never saw anyone use the van, but you remember that it had something to do with the cleaning staff.

SC: Yes, to transport the bedlinen and towels.

DCF: Yes. It says here that you never saw anyone drive it, you just know that you saw it parked, did you ever notice that it was missing or do you remember always seeing it there'

SC:Humm, no...no it was not always there, I saw it about two or three times.

DCF: OK. And it continues, obviously there are some details about the van and its description in case it would be necessary to come back to this statement. So during the week, you played tennis with Gerry about three times'

SC: Ah ha.

DCF: On Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, it says here that you got on well, that he communicated easily, he was fun, he talked to you about golf which was his favourite sport, that he wanted to improve his tennis during the week. On Sunday or Monday he twisted his ankle, but managed to keep on playing, and on Sunday morning he only played tennis with Kate, that you saw them both playing sport and they passed by you at the bar on the beach and this was Sunday or Monday at about mid day.

SC: Mmm, mmm.

DCF: And you saw both Gerry and Kate at the Tapas Bar on Sunday and afterwards on Thursday in the evening, apart from these occasions you just saw them in passing at the resort and you had no opportunity to get to know Kate'

SC: No.

DCF: OK. Is there anything else that you would like to comment on or talk about in relation to the time that you were in the resort before the police, or before the disappearance of Madeleine'

SC: In relation to the holiday or to something strange that I remember'

DCF: Yes, is there anything in your memory that you think could be significant but that you didn't mention before because you thought it was a bit...

SC: No, no...until that moment it was an extremely enjoyable holiday, I think that we had already been at other Mark Warner resorts and they were more than a complex and because of that all the people in the area were Mark Warner tourists, here it was different because we could meet the same person two or three times a day, others could spend three or four days without seeing them because some were staying at this side and others on the other side and so, you know...we were not...it was not a large holiday centre but this was reasonably normal.

DCF: OK. Do you agree with me putting these questions now'

SC: Yes, that's fine, are they the questions from the police'

DCF: Yes, from the way they are written, I think they are all from the Portuguese police.

SC: OK.

DCF: Because sometimes translations are a bit different.

SC: OK.

DCF: However, I think there are no questions from Gerry and Kate that would be necessary to ask you, as I have stated previously, there are other interrogations where that was necessary.

SC: Oh.

DCF: Fine, on what day between the 28th April and 3rd May did you meet Gerry McCann and Kate Healy, I think this has already been mentioned in the statement that we have just gone through.

SC: Yes, yes.

DCF: However I am going to read this and you do not have to reply again. How frequently would you meet up between the 28th April and 3rd May and once again we have just been through this.

SC: From there onwards.

DCF: Oh yes, not from there, it was even before Madeleine disappeared. Did you see them with Madeleine and the other two children'
.
SC: Humm...I don't remember what I said in my statement, I am not sure about this because when I think about the past, and I know that he was playing tennis and I imagine something different, that's why...humm I can't specify hours and dates.

DCF: Ok. If you can remember the occasion upon which you saw them, how was the children's behaviour'.

SC: Humm. I can't reply because I was not concentrating on this type of thing, that's why...hmmm, I cannot even reply to this.

DCF: No, but I was thinking from the point of view of common sense, after the disappearance of Madeleine, any doubt that you could have had.

SC: Oh, after the disappearance'

DCF: No, what I was thinking here was that after her disappearance, you would probably have reflected upon whether you saw anything.

SC: Hummm... I remember talking to Gerry, because I had to go and fetch I*** and they were playing in the small garden and he was (inaudible), I***** and I thought it was Maddie, I am not absolutely sure but, he seemed to me to be a decent type, a good father, affectionate with his children, very easy to talk to, very good with the children, with a comfortable manner even when talking to I**** about little things, completely dedicated to the children.

DCF: OK, I'm certain that if there were anything strange in his behaviour, you would certainly remember that.

SC: Yes, certainly.

DCF: Did you see either of them in a car'

SC: See either of whom'

DCF: I think this refers to the McCann family, did you ever see them in a car'

SC: Humm, during that week'

DCF: Mmm, mmm.

SC: I think not.

DCF: Did you see Kate or Gerry on the Thursday 3rd May, obviously this was the day when Madeleine disappeared already mentioned in your statement.

SC: Yes, in the restaurant, yes.

DCF: Do you remember if you saw them before the evening'

SC: Humm... I think that we played tennis during the afternoon on Thursday.

DCF: Yes.

SC: I'm not certain, I remember that it was on Thursday that there were four individuals with whom we used to share the tennis courts, and I think that I mentioned this in my statement, I would say that it was on Thursday that we played tennis and I think that this was what we talked about in the Tapas bar.

DCF: OK, do you have any idea of what time you played tennis with Gerry'

SC: Humm... from two to four or from two until any time in the afternoon, I remember it coincided with leaving the kids in the crèche and picking them up.

DCF: OK, and it asks here what his behaviour was like on Thursday, 3rd May'

SC: His behaviour during the day or'

DCF: On all the occasions that you saw him.

SC: Always very good.

DCF: When did you realise that Madeleine had disappeared, you have already said that it was on the following day.

SC: On Friday morning.

DCF: And you took part in the searches as you have already described. Did you see Kate or Gerald after Madeleine's disappearance'

SC: Yes.

DCF: When'

SC: Hummm, the first time was when I introduced Robert Murat to Gerry, I think that he was alone at that moment...humm, or Kate was there, I'm not sure, but afterwards I saw him on Saturday before returning home, but thinking of the time on Friday morning when I introduced Murat, I think that I did not see him again until Saturday.

DCF: OK and the next question is what was their reaction and I think this means their reaction to Madeleine not being there'
.
SC: Destroyed, like any father or mother would be.

DCF: At what time did you arrive at the Tapas restaurant on 3rd May (inaudible)'

SC: At seven, I think at seven, yes.

DCF: Yes and you say that Kate and Gerald arrived at about half past eight, what was the theme of the conversation'

SC: I think it was just holiday chat, I think that we talked about our tennis and the good and bad aspects.
DCF: And who else was at the restaurant, well.... you have already referred to this in your statement.

SC: Yes.

DCF: Did you see Kate or Gerry leave the table before you'

SC: (Inaudible).

DCF: I think that this means the coming and going of people during the evening.

SC: Yes, I remember that people would absent themselves intermittently at different times, but I did not know why.

DCF: no.

SC: But as we discovered later, it was to check on the children.

DCF: And I imagine that your attention was directed towards your family and (inaudible).

SC: Yes, because we obviously had our two with us and we were on this side of the table, the single man with three small children was here and I****was playing with them, so we were more or less a group if you would like to call it that, of which they were a part, I think that all the ten members were there and some of us would speak to others here and on the other side of the table.

DCF: At what time did you leave the Tapas bar'

SC: I think it was at about half past nine.

DCF: I think that is what you said.

SC: Yes.

DCF: And you were accompanied, you replied that you were with your children and your wife. Where did you go afterwards, it says here...before going back to your apartment, can you describe the route you took'

SC: Directly to the apartment.

DCF: Did you see anyone outside the Tapas Bar or outside the apartments'

SC: If I saw anyone outside the Tapas bar or, hummm.. on the way home presumably'

DCF: Yes, is there anyone you remember that night, did you see anyone in the area'

SC: No.

DCF: At what time did you go to bed'

SC: Almost immediately, we put the children to bed because it was already quite late for them, humm... about half past ten, yes, about half past ten (inaudible).

DCF: And that's it, those were the questions.

SC: OK.

DCF: So I would say there were no surprises. Is there anything else that you think we should talk about'

SC: Hummm, no I think that's all, I spoke about Murat, hummm, about the meeting, no there is nothing more to add.

DCF: OK. Lets check with Eleanor to see if we have missed anything.

DCF leaves the interrogation room.
DCF enters the interrogation room.

DCF: No and I cannot think of anything else so we can close the interrogation.

SC: Fine.

DCF: It is 11.10, although my watch does not have numbers, so this is an approximate time.

SC: OK. And the interrogation ends here, I'm sure that Eleanor will unplug the recorder in the next room.

SC: Fine, ok.

DCF: Now we just need to write...the CD stopped and began again showing the time as 10.38.10.

05-Cartas Rogatorias Vol V Pages 9 - 10
cr5_9
cr5_10
Statement by: Stephen Markley

Occupation: Police Officer

This statement (composed of 2 pages and signed by me) is true and in accordance with my understanding.

Date: 25th April 2008
Signature____________________


I am police officer Markley of the Leicestershire Police currently working in the criminal unit.

In 2007 and in relation to the Portuguese investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, I was detached to Portugal in the role of family communication officer.

According to the Portuguese PJ Letter of Request, I was asked to respond to the following question:

Was there anything done or said by Kate or Gerry McCann in your presence or during your various meetings that could raise any suspicion that they had any knowledge about what could have happened to Madeleine, beyond the circumstances described to the Portuguese investigators?

My reply to the question was: No.

However, in relation to the above, I would like to add the following: At about 20.00 on Saturday 5th May 2007, I arrived at the apartment where Kate and Gerry were staying, with other officers. During the meeting Gerald and Kate had a number of questions to which they wanted follow up and responses from the PJ.

One of these questions was that they wanted the PJ to be aware of was Madeleine's revelation about Wednesday night, when she said that she was left alone during the night. She told Kate and Gerry that she remembered the twins crying and that she wanted to know why neither her mother nor her father had gone to the room to see what was happening.

They also wanted to know whether the PJ had any evidence that would suggest that the person who took Madeleine had used any substance to facilitate the abduction.

This statement was made by me and is truthful in accordance with my understanding.

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

Processo, Volume VIII, pages 1959-1964

WITNESS STATEMENT OF ARGUIDO: ROBERT MURAT

Date: 2007/07/11; Time: 10:00; Location: DIC Portimão
Officer: Paulo F., Inspector.

Defence attorney: Dr. Francisco Pagarete
Credentials no.: 498F
Office: Rua Conselheiro Joaquim Machado

The constitution of defendant status and the formalities provided for in Articles 58 and 196 of the CPP have been met in this case.
He was warned that the lack of response or falsehood about his identity and criminal background does incur criminal liability.

Name: ROBERT JAMES QUERIOL EVELEIGH MURAT

Asked if he wanted to respond on the facts that are imputed against him, he responded:

---- Yes, he intends to continue to answer the questions that will be put to him.

---- Relating to the listing of phone numbers obtained from the agenda of his mobile, that was present yesterday with him, he remembers now that the numbers for Roger 447... and 447... are mobile phone numbers of two partners who buy and sell land with whom he is related professionally.

---- Asked he says that before the events under investigation in this inquiry he was in England for about a month, carrying out the reconstruction of the house that was previously his grandmothers and is now his mothers. He made this trip at the request of his mother, given that they had agreed that he would carry out the repair in exchange for his mother investing in Romigen.

---- The trip, as well as all the money used in reconstruction, were the costs of his mother.

---- While in England he basically associated with his relatives who reside near there, the sister, the brother-in-law, the nephews, as well as with his friend of long-standing M.R.C. (Checo) who also resides in the area (Exeter).

---- There the defendant lived in the house of his mother. During his stay in that place he continued to make contacts, via the Internet, with the future partners Jorge Sxxxx and Jason, as well as with Michaela.

---- Questioned he affirms that he does not remember for certain if he contacted in that way, or any other, Sergey Malinca, he being sure that that, in doing so, such messages or contacts with Sergey are kept on his computer given that he does not remember having deleted anything off the computer. The computer that he used in England is one of those that were subsequently seized during the search carried out at his home.

---- During the contacts that he made with the future partners it happened that the negotiations stalled. Therefore he decided to travel to Portugal to try to progress that matter because he believed that that could only be done personally.

---- He made the travel reservation to Portugal for 01 May. This reservation was made through the Internet, having used the site [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

---- Questioned he answered that the reservation was made exactly for 01 May, being sure that he did not anticipate/advance nor anticipate/advance such a reservation.

---- The night before the trip he slept in his brother-in-law Steve's home, where his sister and nephews also were.

---- He recalls that the flight that brought him from Exeter to Faro airport was in the morning, and it was his sister Samantha who drove him to the airport.

---- Questioned he affirms that during his stay in England he did not contact with any of the people who he later came to find here in Portugal, namely those who were involved in the disappearance of Madeleine. He is not aware that any of his family has made any contacts or know any of those people, namely anyone close to the McCann couple.

---- Having been asked for the record if on the night that Madeleine disappeared he was in the Ocean Club helping in the searches and in contact with several people, about 23h30 to 24h00, the defendant replied categorically that he was not. He affirms that he was not on that night helping in searches given that, as he had stated he did not leave the house from 19h30 on 03 May until the morning of 04 May.

---- For the record, at 12:00 noon, this interrogation was interrupted in order to proceed with an interview of confrontation between the defendant and witnesses RACHEL MARIAMMA JEAN MAMPILLY, RUSSEL JAMES O'BRIEN, and FIONA ELAINE PAYNE, the competent document having been drawn up.

---- After that diligence and for the record, 12:40, this interrogation is interrupted to continue opportunely.

---- At 14:30 the present interview was restarted.

---- Questioned the defendant reaffirms that in truth on the afternoon of 03 May he arrived at Casa Liliana around 19:00/19:30 having left the VW stopped in front of the house, that is outside the property, immediately entering into the property. Questioned he does not remember the clothes he was wearing at the time. Nor does he remember if his mother was at home or not. Nor does he recall in detail what he did. He remembers that at one time he spoke with his mother, however he cannot recall whether she arrived meanwhile or she was already there. He remembers that they were sitting in the kitchen and the defendant remembering that he ate, how long with his mother he does not remember. Confronted with the testimony of his mother who told that she arrived at the house around 20.30 and that Robert had also arrived at that moment, he says that he cannot account for having arrived at the same time as his mother.

---- Questioned he says that when he heard the sound of a siren he was with his mother in the kitchen, still talking, it would be about 22:00/22:30, the time he estimates taking into account that they had the television on. Questioned he said not to recall if the sound was continuous or discontinuous. He remembers only that at that time there was the sound of voices from both their talk and the sound of television, not recalling other sounds in the background. He remembers well having heard that sound given that after it he commented to his mother that it seemed that he was in her house in England given that there he assiduously heard the sound of sirens. He was not aware of other noises namely raised voices or the dogs barking outside the property.

---- Questioned about if he considers it normal or abnormal the fact of not having made nor received calls on his mobile phone between 15:00 on 02 May until the night of 03 May he said that that fact seems normal to him since in that period of time he had been accompanied by Michaela she being the person with whom he usually speaks to on the phone. However, he states that he had assumed no purposeful position [given no thought to] that that fact had happened.

---- Questioned he states that he rented a grey Hyundai car on Saturday, 12 May, from the Auto Rent firm in Praia da Luz. He thinks that he picked up the car in the afternoon of that day. This car was returned by his mother on Tuesday 15th of that month. Basically he used the car in the area of Lagos and Portimão. He did not leave the Algarve with it. He does not remember how many kilometres he drove with the car, however he estimates about 100 to 200 at most. He informs having rented it because his mother was using the VW in the information table [she had set up] and the Skoda was in the workshop and he had no other means of transport. Confronted with the fact that there is information that that car had done 700 km during the rental period, he says this is not true. He denies having gone so many kilometres in that car, adding that to have more mileage than what he indicated that this will be an error of whoever read the mileage [odometer], the defendant was the only person to use the car.

---- Questioned he says that never in his life has he entered the apartment where Madeleine was when she disappeared, neither before nor after the events under investigation.

---- Questioned if he knows anyone who is the owner of a boat he said that his uncle has a boat stored in the back of his property but that is on land. Last year, when he worked in Remax, he sold an apartment to an English man that he knows is the owner of a boat, but does not know however where this boat would be, nor had he ever seen it. His relationship with this person was strictly professional. There is also a friend of Luis, the husband of Michaela, whom he thinks is called Steve and that he said that he has a boat. The defendant has never seen that boat nor does he even know if that is true or not. He has no contact with this person. Nelson Pxxxxxx, who is in his mobile phone address book, is the son of a man called Carlos Pxxxxxx who is the owner of a vessel that the defendant however never saw nor knows where it is.

---- Asked if on the day of the disappearance of Madeleine or in subsequent days he was in any marina or in any port, he said no, that he was not in any of those places on those days.
---- For the record, the defendant having been shown a photograph in which one can observe the defendant speaking with an individual on '25 de Abril' road, in Praia da Luz, he said that such person is one known to him, a resident of Praia da Luz, who knows Robert, and that he knows him to be of Romanian nationality. He met this individual on an occasion in which he, the Romanian, did some gardening work at Casa Liliana, which he thinks was contracted by his mother. The contact that happened when they were photographed was based on a request that the defendant [should be: the Romanian] made to Robert in the sense of him [RM] making a translation of an appeal in the Romanian language regarding the disappearance of Madeleine.
---- Asked about if at any time he had used used computers in the cyber café either in Praia da Luz or in other places he responded negatively, that is, he had never used computers in those locations. He affirms further that [n]either Michaela [n]or Sergey also [n]ever did so in the presence of the defendant.

---- For the record the defendant was asked if he has had conversations with any person, besides his lawyer, about the way he could prove his innocence, be it personally, be it by telephone, be it in café, or in any other place, conversations that could conflict with police techniques to prove the guilt or innocence of a person.

---- For the record the defence attorney requested some time to explain the question to the defendant and he was permitted a short break in order for them to converse.

---- Resuming the interrogation the defendant said yes he had spoken about this subject but he did so primarily with the family and with intimate friends. In particular he states that he remembers having spoken with Inspectors of the PJ on an occasion at his home when he asked them if they could, through the antennas of mobile phones, prove that he was at home at a given moment, to which they replied that it would be possible but that he should not be concerned about it because that matter was going to be handled. Questioned he responded that he thinks he had not asked anyone else.

---- For the record it being asked of him if he knows a British police officer by the name of Phill, he answered yes. It also being asked of him if he had not asked this British police officer about the method that British police had to locate a person in a particular place and at a particular time, he said yes. Asked if that conversation was had on a personal level [in person] or by phone he responded that it was personal [in person]. For the record the transcript of of the telephone intercept recorded on pages 1681 to 1690 being shown to him, he states for the record that effectively he continues to not recall having telephoned Phil nor having spoken with him on the phone, although he does recall a conversation that he had with this individual at the home of his aunt, perhaps in the bar, repeating it in the following manner: He had asked Phil if the Police could locate him in the house through the mobile phone to thus prove his innocence. Phill had replied that such would depend on the distance from the antennas [masts], namely their active radius. It being asked of the defendant if he had or had not asked [Phil] if he, the defendant, could be located to within a distance of one meter of the place where he was, he responded yes. It being looked for from him the reason for such a question when his home, without the adjacent land, is about 300 square meters not justifying, perhaps, that he had asked the question about the location of the defendant within a meter, unless the defendant had been elsewhere, he did not respond. It being asked of him for what reason he resorted to a British official given that he had already said previously he had good relations with the PJ and GNR, he said that when he asked officers of the PJ it was done to know if that technology was already in the possession of the Portuguese police.

---- He states not remembering if after that contact he had had any further [contact] on this matter with whomever that was.

Asked what he did after suspecting he was being followed by the police, he answered that he eventually wrote down the license plate number of a car and that PJ inspector Reis Santos told him that the PJ had no such vehicle. Asked, he said that he did talk about this situation with Michaela and other people, either in person or by telephone. After reading his testimony, the defendant wanted to clarify that he did not answer the question in lines 128 and 129 because his attorney advised him not to. The day after talking with Phill the defendant met him again at his aunt’s house and Phill told him that he could no longer speak to the defendant about this case for his superiors had told him not to.

Read and found it in agreement, ratifies and will sign.

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

05-Processo, Volume V, pages 1298 -1304 (7 pages)

Witness Statement

Date 2007/05/15 Time: 17H50m Place: Praia da Luz
Officer: Santos Martins, Inspector.

Name: JENNIFER ANNE MURAT

She confirms being the mother of arguido Robert Murat, and is willing to make this statement.

--- She comes to the case as a witness.

--- The deponent is the mother of the arguido ROBERT MURAT and therefore was advised of the conditions of Art 134 and following of the CPP, she wished to make a statement to better clarify the facts and thus contribute to the discovery of the truth.

--- The deponent is English, having settled in Portugal for 40 years and therefore understands, reads and speaks Portuguese without difficulty.

--- Concerning the events, the deponent has to clarify that she knew [found out] about the disappearance of the English child called Madeleine on 4 May, Friday, that is the day following it happened.

--- She says further that it was her daughter, Samantha, residing in England in the city of Exeter, who telephoned her to give her the news because by the morning our news was already running in the press of that country.

--- She states that her daughter's phone number is 00441932****38 and her mobile is 0044781*****42.

--- Relative to her life in Portugal, she states that she came to live in this country in 1968/69.

--- She had contact with the Algarve in 1959/60 by virtue of her late husband having bought a small house in Burgau.

--- It was only later they decided to settle in Portugal the husband, John Murat, having started a property business.

--- Thus they maintained themselves during the time until 25 April 1974 which began a big crisis in the property business obliging her to start work in the Lagos Hospital, as a nurse (her original profession).

--- She is mother to three children, Richard (28), Samantha (36) and Robert born on 20 November 1973.

--- Robert, the same as the other children, was born in England, in London.

--- About one month old he came to Portugal to live with the family in Atalaia in Lagos.

--- The son Robert started his schooling in the Barlavento School (English school) where he did his primary education. Later he was enrolled in the International School where he continued to study for a further two years. Later on he enrolled in a public school in Lagos where he studied until he was 16 years old at which time he travelled to England to be with his maternal grandmother.

--- There he started to work in a firm that sold double-glazing. He worked also as a car salesman for 'Nissan'.

--- He was in England for more than 10 years, always in Norfolk. Furthermore it was in that city that he met the woman whom he later married.

--- In those 10 years he was in England, Robert came to Portugal several times, perhaps three time a year, roughly.

--- Asked, she says the is not certain on which date Robert was married but she knows that his wife in English and 10/12 years older than him and she knows only that her name is Dawn.

--- From this marriage came a daughter, Sophie or Sofia (she is not certain), who was currently four years old and who was born in October 2002, living with her mother in Norfolk [full address given].

--- Robert's wife already had a son, David, from a first marriage who was over 20 years old and who also went by the name Murat while his mother and Robert were married.

--- The marriage ended in 2003 though the deponent does not know if the divorce was ever finalised. She knows, moreover, that her son Robert maintains a good relationship with his ex-wife, with his daughter and with David.

--- [When] Robert travels to England he always stays in a house inherited by the deponent, which is being 'renovated' and which is in Sidmouth, Devon. Robert is dealing with that situation and she knows that when he is there his daughter will be found with him.

--- It is a semi-detached house, vacant since 2003 ((the date of death of the maternal grandmother), and is situated exactly at [address given], Sidmouth, Devon

--- Returning to the family history in Portugal, more or less in 1981, the witness and rest of the family, including the three children, left Atalaia and went to Almadena, more specifically to a property called Eiras Velhas. It was a property of just over two hectares, which included several houses in ruins. These were rebuilt and the property served as the family address until 2002, when it was sold.

--- During the almost 20 years that the witness lived in that property in Almadena, they used the house for rural tourism which consisted of renting rooms to tourists. She notes that that business was always legal, having a license for it.

--- Robert lived with the family for several years in that house and later, after opting to go to England, he was always accommodated in the family home when when he returned to Portugal.

--- In 2001, the witness sold the property in Almadena and bought the house where she lives now. It is 'Casa Liliana'.

--- Initially she came to live in "Casa Liliana" accompanied by a friend (they had a companion relationship after being widowed), who currently resides in France. Later came the mother of the witness who lived there until her death in 2003 at the age of 93 years.

--- The companion of the witness, currently in France, never had a close relationship with Robert nor with the witness' other children.

--- Still in 2003, Robert came to Portugal with his wife DAWN and daughter, who was a baby, and stayed for about two months. At that time they had the idea to settle here. However, his wife did not adapt because of the language and the fact of being away from family and friends. So, she finally left Robert and returned to England with her daughter.

--- Robert began to work in the business of real estate having been initially with "Remax" then with "Portuguese Homes," having returned later to "Remax". The failure of the employers to pay, or the difficulty in receiving his rightful commissions, led Robert to start a project, a property business through the Internet, teaming up with a friend called M1CHAELA.

--- The witness knows Michaela, knows she has a daughter who she knows only as "Titinha", who is about 8 or 9 years old, is a Portuguese national, and lives in Lagos. She knows that Michaela is still married to an individual named Louis and she is a Jehovah's Witness.

--- Asked, the deponent refers that she does not know if her son Robert maintains a relationship with Michaela it being certain that she never slept in her house.

--- Asked, she clarifies that she never knew of any loving relationship of her son beyond that with his wife Dawn. She asked her son never to bring anyone hone to 'sleep'. That is not to say that her son had had no relationships.

--- About the son Robert, she knows only of a health problem that resulted in the blindness in the right eye.

--- Maybe when he was about 9 years old, the witness noticed that he had a small disorder in his vision having taken him to several specialists. He was diagnosed with dislocation of a retina, of traumatic origin, that was not corrected after being operated on. It left the right eye unusable.

--- She also knows that he has an hereditary thyroid problem.

--- She does not know of any other physical, psychiatric or dysfunction problem.

--- Asked, the deponent says that she has the idea that her son had been hospitalised only once, specifically for the problem with his sight.

--- That said, when he was about ten years old, Robert had a small injury to his knee, of unknown origin, having led to surgery in the United Kingdom.

--- She does not know if that physical problem led to Robert being admitted.

--- The question asked, she says that to her knowledge, Robert takes only one medication on a regular (daily) basis, a drug called 'Letter" or "Levothyroxine", specifically for the thyroid problem which, as already said, is hereditary.

--- Relative to the facts concerning the disappearance of the English child, the deponent states that because she has been in Portugal for a long time and knows many people, she decided to mount a "post" to collect information in order to be able to determine things about the subject and thus could channel them to the competent authorities. For three days (Friday 11/05, Saturday 12/05 and Sunday 13/05) she was at the "post" mounted near to the cinema having obtained some information that she gave to Robert who, in turn, gave it to the Police.

--- Her idea was to try to sensitise people not to feel intimidated by the presence of police and lead them to give all the information that they knew.

--- Still relating to the facts which occurred on the evening of 03 May 2007, the deponent states that on that night she was at home with her son Robert. They followed their normal routine: About 19h50 she went to the "Batista" supermarket to buy bread. Then she went back to the house where she arrived more or less at the same time as Robert. Later they sat in the kitchen where they were talking for some time, having also eaten. She recalls that they were talking until close to midnight about Robert's project, related to the property and called 'Romigen.Com". Finally they went to their bedrooms to pass the night.

--- Asked, she explains that while they were talking in the kitchen, she is not able to say when, she recalls having heard a siren ringing at least once. Although not usual, she also did not "connect" because it could possibly have been an ambulance. (She recalls that sometimes, when the wind blows in a certain direction, it is possible to hear in the house sirens of police cars or ambulances that pass on the EN125).

--- Questioned, she says that during that night she also heard no noise or strange movements of people and also no one knocked on the door to ask or to request help to find the missing girl.

---Asked, she assures that her son Robert did not leave the house that night. Furthermore, she says that he usually gets up first. On that day she does not remember if that was what happened.

--- Asked, she explains that Robert travelled to England on March 20 and returned on May 01, 2007, at 09h40, she herself having gone to the airport in Faro to collect him.

- End -

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

Translation
DVD Rogatory Letters 3rd volume

Martin Grime

Dated May 14 2008

I am a retired police offer, previously at the service of the South Yorkshire police. Between August 1-8, 2007, and while working for the South Yorkshire police, I collaborated with the Judicial Police, Portugal, as regards their Operations Task Force.
On the 17th of August 2007, I completed a report for the Head of Investigations of the Judicial Police, which was submitted by the Leicestershire Police. This report is exhibited as MG/1 and identified by the label bearing my signature. The Judicial Police is in possession of the originals of the search reports and the videos showing all searches performed and the reaction of the dogs. In addition to the report, Sam Harkeness of the Progresso National Police Agency sent me by email several written questions sent by the Judicial Police together with a request for a written deposition. This deposition was submitted without me having seen or having knowledge of the final report from the forensic agency responsible for analyzing the evidence submitted in this case.

Questions and Answers:

'Could you explain the methodology regarding the performance of the dogs bearing in mind the searches that were performed''
Please refer to my original report included in the summary (MG/1).

'Could you provide a detailed summary of the orientation capacity of the dogs, as well as an interpretation of the indications provided by them in the specific cases''
Please refer to my original report included in the summary (MG/1).
The interpretation of any alert is given when the dogs recognize a specific odour as a result of a response to the behaviour for which they were trained. This response must then be submitted to a forensic examination in order to draw conclusions.

'In order to establish the accuracy of the dogs' performance with respect to the alerts given when recognizing blood and a body, to what extent are these indications viable in this particular case''
The dogs' alerts are to be considered as an area of interest or possible testing. When specific and reliable this can only be measured for confirmation. In this case in particular, where the dogs alerted there was confirmation by positive results from the forensic examinations. It is the investigators' responsibility to apply the results of the forensic analysis to the suspects, witnesses and crime scenes.

'Based upon the dogs' behaviour, is it possible to distinguish between a strong signal and a weak signal'.
The dogs' passive CSI alert provides an indication as per their training and does not vary. They only give an alert when they are 'positive' that the target of the odour is present and immediately accessible. If they had any doubts they would not give an alert. EVRD gives an alert by means of a vocal bark. The variations in the vocal alert can be explained by many reasons such as 'thirst' or 'lack of air due to effort'. Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.

'Can you confirm if the signal given regarding the stuffed toy corresponds to a concrete alert of detection of a cadaver, or a mere trick played by the dog''
The dogs were not taught any 'tricks'. EVRD 'signalled' the toy, which at my request was retained by the Judicial Police for future forensic analysis. I have no knowledge of the results of any forensic analysis on the toy.

'With respect to the cadaver odour on Kate's clothes, could it be undoubtedly affirmed that those clothes had been in contact with a cadaver'
OR
Could the alert have been given because the clothes had been in contact with other items of clothing, surfaces or objects that could previously have touched a cadaver, thereby allowing the odour to be transferred''
There is always a possibility of contamination of odours by transferral. EVRD does not make a distinction; he responds with a certain behaviour for which he was trained when he recognizes an odour. He does not identify the reasons for the presence of the odour nor does he identify suspects. Forensic confirmation and specialized investigation methods will determine the reasons and the suspicions. In order to undoubtedly affirm there must be a confirmation of the alert signals made by the dog.

'The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.

'Taking into account the signals of CSI, could the dog alert to other biological fluids''
The dog that alerts to human blood is trained exclusively for this purpose, and includes its components, plasma, red cells, white cells and platelets. Given the nature of the training, the dog will not alert to urine, saliva, semen sweat, nasal secretion, vaginal secretion or human skin unless these are mixed with blood. The components of blood are approximately:
Red cells 40-50%
Plasma 55% (of which 95% is water)
White cells
Platelets
DNA can only be removed from white cells.
This would suggest that, of the samples signalled by the dog looking for human blood, approximately 5% are available for DNA tests.

'Is there any chance, however remote, of any confusion'
The dogs do not get confused. They transmit a behavioural response inspired by the recognition of the odour for which they were trained.

'How long does a cadaver have to be in contact with a surface or an object for the odour to be detected''
Cross-contamination is immediate.

'How long can a trace of blood remain at a scene and be detected by the CSI dog''
During both training and operations, the CSI dog correctly located and signalled the presence of blood from 1960. This is not at all surprising. If enough blood is present so that the dog can recognize its odour, he will locate it and alert to its presence. There is no time restriction as regards the recognition of the odour by the dog. Blood, however, is subject to deterioration such as time and other natural processes such as dilution due to rain and other reactive chemical agents.

'Can the dog mix up traces of human odours with others that are non-human''
I cannot comment on what the dogs think. However, from a forensic point of view and from confirmations of scientific testimonies, the dogs appear to be extremely exact. But, forensic confirmation is required in all cases so as to be included as proof. The CSI dog is trained using only human blood. And using a wide spectrum of donors to ensure that the dog does not individualize them.
EVRD used to be trained using swine (pigs) as their odour is the closest to that of humans. But most of the time, however, the dog was trained using the odour of a human cadaver. Operationally, the dog has ignored large amounts of animal remains/bones when locating human decomposition.

'Based upon your experience with the dogs, can you specify whether the positive signals given by them have always matched the scientific results''
I cannot. In this case, for example, not all the alert signals have been investigated by the appropriate agencies in order to provide forensic comparations, in spite of indications to the contrary. It also should be taken into account that the procedures for forensic testing are still less discriminating than the system of dogs' smell.
During training, the dogs are barely rewarded for positive alert signals regarding targets of known substances.

'At any time, did Gerald McCann address, either in Portugal or the United Kingdom, the performance of the dogs in this case''
I never met nor spoken to Gerald McCann. However I do know that he addressed my head supervisor at the time, the South Yorkshire Head of Police, or Mr. Meredith Hughes.

This deposition was made by me and is true according to my understanding.

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

04-Processo 4 Pages 949 to 955

TRANSLATION BY ALBYM
04_VOLUME_IVa_Page_949

Diane Webster 11 May 2007

That she came on holiday to Portugal with the group which included MADELEINE, this group composed of nine adults and eight children. As to the purpose of the individuals in the above mentioned group, she explains that they are united [together] in four couples (among them was her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID), and their children.
- Concerning her relationship with the members of that group, adds that she would have no direct relationship with them as they are individuals close to the PAYNE couple.
- She thought the PAYNE couple started a relationship of friendship, insofar as her son-in-law, David, had attended the university together with RUSSELL, which will have been extended to two other couples (McCANN and O'BRIEN), because the members of those couples, except for RACHEL and JANE, were [also] practicing doctors.
- Asked, she states that it is the first time that she has been on holiday with that group, knowing, however, that some of those couples have already spent holidays together on other occasions.
- With regard to this trip she explains that she thought all details of the trip to Portugal were handled by her daughter, Fiona; together with her husband David, and aided by the tour operator "MARC WARNER, via Internet.
- She states that she came on holiday at the invitation of her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID - Adding that she does not know the reasons why Portugal was chosen, nor why Praia da Luz and the "Ocean Garden Club" in particular.
- She states that she made her own reservation, only with regard to the plane, via Intemet, unlike the other members of the group, whose reservations had been made through the PAYNE couple. Asked, she explains that never before had she been in Portugal, being sure that the first time that she was here was this present holiday. That the whole group arrived in Portugal on April 28 and they have also been housed in the tourist resort buildings identified above, as initially planned. Because she was asked, she clarified that she had stayed in apartment 5H, together with the PAYNE family and their daughters (Lilly, two years, and Scarlett, one year).
- Prompted about the routine during the holiday period, she clarifies that she usually took breakfast in their apartment, since the Restaurant "MILLENNIUM" was quite removed from the building in which she was staying.
- Still, she explains, on May 2, the eve of disappearance of MADELEINE she had taken her breakfast in the restaurant "MILLENNIUM", since it was raining that day and she did not have an opportunity to partake of the morning sports.
She added that in the days preceding the disappearance of Madeleine, after breakfast she would play sport (especially tennis), after which she would go to the supermarket BATISTA to make the purchases for lunch. In return, she points out that several families who made up the group met in the PAYNE's apartment to have lunch together, explaining that this was due to the fact that it is the larger apartment.
- After lunch the children took a nap, usually staying in her care, since they [the adults] went with the PAYNEs to continue with, together, the leisure activities to which the holidays were dedicated. The purpose of those activities, it is clear, that it was usual to go to the beach, pool and practice several sports monitored by the resort. Also she went to the beach at times with the Paynes and the children when they were not at the Kids Club.
- In the late afternoon, from 16.45 to 17.30, the children had dinner at Restaurant "TAPAS", after which they were taken to the apartment to prepare for sleep, which usually occurred at 19:00. That said, the family PAYNE, the deponent included, prepared for the dinner that usually occurred around 20.45 in the restaurant "TAPAS." The question asked, she added that the restaurant always reserved the same table for the group at the only table that was capable of seating a group composed of nine people. Asked, she states that, although it is positioned in front of the balconies at the rear of the residential block, the angle of vision can not permit full control over possible access by people to the interior of ground-floor apartment patios that are there - especially since the restaurant is covered by a transparent oilcloth which hampers vision. Asked who has done the booking of the restaurant, says that it has been done by RACHEL, explaining that although the dinner is scheduled for 20:30, the group never gathered before 2OH45/21HOO due to successive delays of several couples.
- The question asked, regarding the fact that, possibly, on the first day it was RUSSELL who had made the reservation at the restaurant, she admits that as possible, although she cannot be sure which of the two (RACHEL or RUSSELL) would have done it. Prompted, she says that, from memory, the dinners usually ended around 23:00 the time at which they returned to their apartments where they slept. Concerning May 3, the date of the occurrence of the facts now under investigation, she states that she did the things she has generally described above being unaware of anything, nor having seen anything, that might relate to the disappearance of Madeleine.
- Prompted to report the events that had unfolded in period between 19H00 and 22H40 of that day, the deponent states that around 19:00 she had gone together with the Payne couple and their children to the apartment in order to prepare them for bed. Then, as usual, the adults prepared themselves for dinner. In this matter, she recalled that they had been late with these preparations because they only managed to get to Restaurant around 21.00.
- Asked, she adds that she went to the restaurant in the company of her daughter and son-in-law.
- Asked directly if someone had gone to her apartment to call them (herself and the PAYNE couple) for dinner the witness said no.
- Asked if there was the possibility of having crossed paths with someone during the journey between her apartment and restaurant, the witness said no.
- That night she judges to have arrived at the restaurant close to 21:00, in the company of the PAYNE couple.
- That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant along with the other members of the group.
- In this regard, asked specifically whether, on the journey to the restaurant, if they had passed either of the two individuals described in the preceding paragraph, she answered categorically not.
- Questioned about the members who, during the dinner, had absented themselves from the restaurant, the witness says that, as she recalls, there were some people who left, failing to identify which, except for RUSSELL who had left the restaurant and taken a little more time than usual due to, from what she knows, his daughter had been sick.
- Asked, she states that it would be normal for one member of each of the couples to get up regularly in order to check in their apartments if the children were well. She clarifies that the practice was for each couple to check their own children, it not being usual for anyone to check the children of other couples.

- The question asked, she thinks that up to the date of the disappearance it had never happened that anyone had entered the apartment of another couple in order to check their offspring. Nevertheless, it seems that the couple PAYNE and the witness, did not make any trips to apartments, because they had an intercom called the "baby monitor", through which sounds or noises of the children could be heard.

- Prompted to state for the record the movements that occurred that night, during the above dinner, the witness reiterated that she could not say specifically who had left nor when they had done so.

- Therefore, she can only say with precision that, at 22.00 Kate McCann returned to the restaurant, seemingly in panic, communicating to others the fact that of Madeleine's disappearance. Asked about the reaction of other members of the group when they heard the above from KATE, the witness says that everyone, except the witness, left the restaurant and went to the apartment of the couple McCANN in order to find out what was going on.
In turn, as relates to her, the witness says she stayed at the restaurant for about five minutes, then, noting that the remaining members of the group had not returned, she followed in the direction of the apartment McCANN.

- In that apartment she found that KATE was completely in panic, in "state of shock ".
- Because she was asked, she states that she entered the apartment by the sliding glass door of the patio at the back, which gives access to the lounge. Then she went to the children's bedroom, noting that there she found KATE and the twin siblings of MADELEINE

- She added that she did not remember too much detail about the scenario that she found in that bedroom, other that what she said above. However, she states that KATE had repeatedly commented that, on arriving at the bedroom, she had found the
window of the room, with its shutter, both open. Yet, she [DW] did not notice, while at the entrance to the room, if the window was or was not open.
- However, she wants to stress that immediately afterwards, she went outside the apartment in order to ascertain whether she would be able to raise the shutters by hand from the outside, and found it was impossible for her. Consequently she infers that at the time of her arrival at the apartment the window would have been closed.

- Because she was asked, she says she does not know if the window, and the shutter, of the couple's bedroom were open or not, in that she did not enter that room.
- Prompted about the conditions of light inside the apartment at the time, the witness believes that they were good, judging that the lights were lit and she recalls no darkness. Regarding the bedroom previously occupied by Madeleine, she does not remember if the lights were lit, but knows that when she entered the twins were still sleeping in their beds, which makes her think that maybe those lights were switched off. She added that, for her to see the twins and their cradles, and the bed of MADELEINE, the darkness would not be complete, but that the room had some coming from the light of the lounge.

- She adds that that night, and after the occurrence of the facts under investigation, have been in the the apartment on two separate occasions. At the time described above she remained about 10 minutes in the apartment. After this time she returned to the restaurant to get her handbag as well as the camera of the couple McCANN and "baby monitor" of her daughter, and was soon back again in the apartment.

- The question being asked about the people that were inside the apartment of McCANN at that time, the witness said that the McCANN couple were present (although on the first occasion she had no recollection of having seen GERRY), and FIONA, not remembering any other people that were there. However, she admits the possibility of their being [others] inside the apartment, including David, in that, as mentioned above, all of them had gone to the apartment following the news that KATE had given.

- The question asked, she states to know that male members of the group undertook a search around [outside] the apartment to try to locate Madeleine, which was absolutely fruitless. The deponent states that FIONA had asked her to move to their daughters to make sure that everything would be well with them, hence the deponent will have returned to her apartment from which she did not leave.

- Asked, she states to be unaware of any type of problems affecting the family, professional, loving, etc., for any of the group members, either in our country or anywhere else in the world.

- She does not know if any of the group members knows anyone residing in Portugal, particularly in the Algarve, or anyone who has been here on holiday in the same period.

- Prompted she says that during these holidays all group members made their movements on foot, denying that any of them had rented cars or that they could possibly have driven cars of others, [nor that] they were occasionally available.

- She adds that none of the group members left the village of Praia da Luz.
- During that period, as far as she is aware, none of the group had formed any kind of acquaintance or relationship with other persons.

- Prompted, she explains that in all the dinners during the holidays only members of the group had participated, never having any strangers with them at the table that they usually occupied.

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

- Asked, she says that in the days leading up to the disappearance of MADELEINE, or at any other time, she neither saw nor found any abnormal situation that could by itself be interpreted as having any correlation with the facts of the investigation.

Surname: Gordon

Forenames: Paul Anthony

Occupation: Marketing Manager

Statement Date: 06-05-2007

On Saturday 21st April 2007, I went on holiday with my wife and two children to Portugal. We went to an area of the Algarve called Praia da Luz and stayed at the Mark Warner Ocean Club Resort. Our apartment was a two-bedroomed ground floor one, which was situated in block G. The room number was 5A. To the front of the property was a bedroom and a kitchen, and to the rear was another bedroom and lounge. Myself and my wife shared the rear bedroom and the two children had the room to the front. From the rear bedroom and lounge you can access a private balcony. From the balcony are approximately ten steps down to a gate and small enclosed patio area. This area is exclusive to the apartment and not used by other residents. Running parallel to the patio area was a footpath and on the other side of this was a swimming pool and Tapas restaurant. I am quite sure, from seeing recent news events, that this is the same apartment that a young girl has recently gone missing from.

During our stay at the apartment on either Wednesday 25th April or Thursday 26th April, I was sun-bathing alone on the patio area. My wife and children were in the apartment and I know that the children were sleeping. At approximately 14.30 hours (I know it was around this time as the children always slept between 13.00 and 15.00 hours and it was nearly time to get them up) I was approached by an unknown male. He came to the light green barred gate which leads to the road running adjacent to the apartment. I can't remember exactly how he initiated conversation, but he introduced himself and started to explain that he had permission to be on site in order to collect money for either a charity or project. I went over to where he stood, and he explained some more. I remember him making reference to the fact that he was only allowed to collect for one week of the year (or something about one week) and that the money would go towards the orphanage. I got the impression that the orphanage was not nearby. I got the distinct impression that I was being had over, but gave the man ten Euros just to get rid of him. He was perfectly polite and good-natured and showed me some sort of identification. I didn't look closely at this, but saw there was a photograph of him on it and possibly his name. I am sure the photograph was of the same male, but he had a 'goatee' beard in the photo which he no longer had. The man also had with him, a pad of paper (perhaps a clip board) and an old looking brochure of some sort. He also had a receipt book, which he filled in when I gave him the money. He gave me a receipt, but I know (sic) longer have it. All in all, I stayed chatting to the man for about 5-10 minutes. I had to go inside during this time to get the money for him but was only gone for a few seconds. Once this meetings had finished, the male walked of (sic) down the hill towards the supermarket and I went into the apartment. I would describe the male as Portuguese looking, very tanned, medium build and about 5ft 7" to 5ft 10" tall. He looked between 40 and 45 years old and spoke really good English with a foreign accent. He had short dark black hair with possibly some grey around the sides. His hair was not perfectly straight and I would imagine that should he have grown it longer, then it would be wavy. He had no facial hair and I'm quite sure that he wasn't wearing glasses. He had a few wrinkles on his face and was quite presentable. He was wearing a light blue or green pale polo shirt with short sleeves. It was plain and had no logos or writing on it. I believe he was wearing light tan coloured trousers and dark brown shoes. I think they were slip - ons. I had never seen this man before that date, and I did not see him again. I am confident that I would recognise him, should I see him again. I have produced a map of the apartment and surrounding area which I can now produce as my exhibit,
PAG/01.
I am willing to attend court if need be and will support any police action.

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

Name: Gail Cooper

Occupation: Community Care Manager

Date: 21/05/2007

I am the above named person and I live at the address shown overleaf. Due to celebrating my 50th birthday, myself and my John as well as a number of my children of which the youngest is 20 years of age and two grandchildren aged 9 and 11 years all flew out to Portugal on 18th April 2007 with a return date of Wednesday 25th April 2007.


We were stopping at a villa in Portugal which was booked through The Vila Agency. The villa we stopped at was at Beladea, Monte Lemos, Lote 14, Luz, Algarve.


We all flew from East Midlands airport on Wednesday 18th April 2007 and landed at Faro airport at about 9 AM of the same day. We them travelled to the villa and got there about 11 AM. We all settled into out holiday and were joined by further members of our family in later days who were stopping in neighbouring complexes.

On Friday 20th April at about 4 ? 5 PM I was sat on the terrace area of our bedroom villa watching the grandchildren playing in the pool. I was sitting with my daughter, D*** whilst other members of the family were having an afternoon kip and my husband and D****?s husband went out.

The villa we stopped at is described as a 5 bedroom 3 storey villa which is built on a hill and overlooking the village which would have been about 500 metres away and estimated to take about 10 minutes to walk to the village. The first and second floors of the villa comprised of balconies which almost spanned the length of the building allowing you to look into the garden area. To the front of the villa upon walking out of the front door was a six foot wall that went all the way around the villa. There were two main entrances to the villa via an electrically operated gate situated to the left of the villa and a smaller gate which ran directly in line with the front door to the villa and was only secured by a normal latch. To the rear of the building was a swimming pool which was 8 metres by 4 metres and was situated slightly to the right of the building.

As I sat with D**** watching the children, I heard the door bell sounding and thinking that it was my husband and son in law returning, I went to the front door and opened it. There is a camera on the Intercom system which I believe activated itself automatically upon the bell being activated however I do not know of any recording facilities that may have captured the image of the person I am about to describe. I opened the door and was surprised to see a person described as olive skinned male roughly 40 ? 45 years of age, 6.0? to 6.02? tall and of slim to medium build. He appeared to be Mediterranean however due to his appearance and mannerism I did not feel that he was Portuguese. I also noticed that he had a Mexican looking moustache which was dark brown or black in colour and was very thick and bushy and drooped down the sides of his mouth. His chin was clean shaven. He wore a khaki coloured waist length heavy cotton jacket and a green or blue round neck T shirt. He also had khaki coloured combat type trousers with pockets on the side of the trousers but they were plain trousers with no other patterns o markings on them . I did not notice his footwear. This man also had a black leather type bumbag around his waist with one zip across the top. He smelt funny as though he had been cooking as he smelt of onions or garlic which appeared to be on his clothing and very strong. In his left hand he was holding an A4 size leaflet with foreign writing on it and a small yellow receipt like book roughly 4? by 3?.


As I made eye contact with the male I said ?Ola? (hello) to which I expected a greeting back or a handshake which is common practice with the Portuguese people from what I have seen from visiting the country over the past 9 years on 2-3 occasions per year. There was no greeting by this male who said, speaking in English that had an accent to it that once again did not sound Portuguese ?I am collecting for a local orphanage in a nearby village, Espiche?, I was quite surprised at his presence which I thought intimidating and did not say anything. He then said ?Do you know of it? to which I replied ?No?. As he was speaking he was waiving (sic) the A4 leaflet held in his hand and quickly flash a photo ID card that appeared to be laminated. I could not clearly see what was on the card or the leaflet due to the way he was waving them about. He told me that the Portuguese government allow them to collect money once a year and that he could give me a receipt for any money that I give him. He then went on to tell me about an English family that had been killed on the EN125 motor way 3 days prior and that three children from that family had been looked after by the orphanage.

I told him that I did not have any Euros in the villa and that my husband was out so he would have to come back. He asked me for Stirling (sic) and once again I told him that I did not have any money at the villa. This person was very pushy and seemed intimidating but he was not threatening however he did make me feel very uncomfortable and did not appear to be Portuguese and his English was very good.

In total the man was stood roughly 3 feet away from me for a duration of 10-15 minutes, as he tried to persuade me to part with some money. The sun was shining and there was a light shower, however I had a clear unobstructed view of this male who I did not know and had not seen before or after this incident. I do think I would easily recognise him if seen again. I saw the male walk away due to realising that I was not going to give him any money and turned left from our property. I later spoke to members of my family about the incident and my 28 year old son told me that he saw the male from the first floor balcony and he noticed that the male walked past the next property without attempting to make a collection. My son has medical problems and is not suitable for making a statement. I did not notice any vehicles connected with this male and do not know whether this may be of any relevance as whilst on holiday we were not aware of any children being abducted. Our first knowledge of this incident was when we returned to the UK which would be about a week after our return 25/04/07. Since hearing about the abduction I have checked our holiday photographs, however, could not see this person on them and cannot identify anything that would be of value.

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

Testimony of: Peter Neal Patterson

Age if less than 18 years old:
Occupation: Attorney/Solicitor

This testimony (comprised of three pages and signed by me) is the truth and in accordance with my understanding. I give this testimony with the knowledge that, knowingly making false statements may subject me to legal action.

Date: 08 May 2008
Signature:

I am the above referenced person and live at the address previously provided to the police.

I was questioned by DC Ferguson and by DC Messiah of the Leicestershire Police at the request of the Portuguese police whose charge is to investigate the disappearance of Madeleine.

As regards the questions, I can offer the following information:

I became known Kate and Gerry since 2002. My wife (Bridget) and Kate both trained in general medicine and have become good friends. We have also learnt that Kate attended the same university we did in Dundee even though she was not there when we attended. My wife faced some clinical problems (a miscarriage and an ectopic/tubal pregnancy). We discovered after that Kate and Gerry were also having problems conceiving. This brought Bridget and Kate even closer. This occurred in mid-2002. I believe that we tried to get pregnant five years ago. Suddenly Kate became pregnant with Madeleine and my wife and I had our first child, a boy, who was born after Madeleine's birth. Later Kate again became pregnant with Sean and Amelie. Our youngest son was born nine months ago today.

My wife maintains regular contact with Kate and as a result we visited them once in Queniborough. We have yet to visit their home in Rothley. I saw Madeleine for the last time on my sons birthday, the 1st of September of 2006. The friendship between Kate and Bridget is focused on themselves and the children. I have met Gerry and know him well enough to maintain a casual conversation.

Madeleine disappeared on Thursday night of the 03rd of May 2007. Normally I have a habit of listening to the news every morning but on Friday, the 04th of May 2007, I have an early morning meeting and for this reason did not see the news. After the meeting I received a text message from my wife informing me of Madeleine's disappearance. The rest of the week was spent listening to the news, and trying to prevent my son from recognising Madeleine as he has asked what was going on.
My wife and I decided to travel to Portugal. We caught a flight to faro on Tuesday, the 08th of may 2007. We did this in the hopes of offering our help and support and to do something other than just sit at home watching from afar. My wife sent a text message to Kate telling her of our flight. We reached Praia da Luz around 11 or 11:30 that morning.

I caught a ride from the airport to Praia da Luz with someone I knew. There were two receptions in the resort. I asked the functionaries about helping out with the volunteer searches and they told me to head to the hotels principal reception where people would come together every morning. The group that day had already departed and for this reason I caught a taxi to Lagos to try and find a place to stay.

I was at a slight advantage relative to other Brits because I have a slight understanding of the different laws in Portugal. Most people do not understand the difference between the adversarial system of justice in the U.K. and the inquisitorial systems of Europe.

I met Kate and Gerry on Friday after having made contact with them via written messages during the week. They knew I was participating in the searches that week. I felt dispirited because there appeared to be no coordination or leadership to the searches. Many people went searching without adequate local equipment, like for example people were cutting their feet on the rough terrain or on the shrubs in those locales. Many people wore sandal and walked over tough land. I never saw any police involvement in the operations carried out by civilians.

On Friday the 11th of May 2007 we heard rumours that the Portuguese were going to stop the searches. After having passed this information to Kate we met up in the Tapas bar in the resort between 9:30 and 9:45 in the morning. We met for only a half hour to 40 minutes as Kate had to attend a police interview.

During this meeting, I offered Kate a bible. This happened in the sequence of emotions that Kate was obviously feeling and after our having sat down to speak. We did not know each other well as she is predominantly my wifes friend. I am the leader of a South Wigston team run out of the Corporation for Exercise and Salvation, Leicestershire. I have a particular interest in the bible and the form in which it was written. I frequented the course ?Alpha Course? (an introduction to Christianity) a recommended to Kate some of the passages in the bible that she could rand to help comfort. There was a dedication from me to my wife on the first page, as it had previously been a gift from me to her. I have a tendency to mark pages and passages in the bible and even though this was my spouses bible, there were many marked/tagged passages relevant to the both of us. This happened before Madeleines disappearance.

I encouraged Kate to read Psalms X and XX of the Old Testament as I felt these were relevant to her. They are both believers. The Psalms reveal a confidence in God, in his justice and in the question which can be asked ?Why do bad things happen?. Psalms XX is a small oration asking Him to guide and illuminate our path in times of anguish.

The passage which is marked in my wifes bible I believe is Samuel 2:12. This passage is very significant for me and my wife but likely has so significance for Kate. I interpret this passage as saying that even though we cannot be with the two children that we have no lost, we will find them one day.

After meeting with Kate, I returned to Lagos and caught a taxi to Portimao where I had previously (May 2003) visited a Christian bookstore. I went with the purpose to acquire a new bible to help me through the rest of the week. Unfortunately, I did not find the bookstore.

Kate asked me to pray at the Marina, which I did, a number of times during the week. I returned home on Sunday, 13th of May, 2007, leaving from Faro at 9:30.

This testimony was made by me and is the truth in accordance with my understanding.

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

REPORT OF EXTERNAL WORK [Investigation Activity]
Date: 2007/05/04 Location: Praia da Luz
Entity that determined the activity: superiorly determined
Funcionario [employee] that executed it: Miguel P*** and Duarte F****, Inspector

Description and outcome of the investigation:
-------- On this date, we went to the Tapas restaurant, owned by the Ocean Club, located in Praia da Luz (Lagos), where we spoke with various employees of the restaurant, who were on duty there last night. ----------
-------- The subject of conversation was the disappearance of little Madeline MCCAN, especially the behavior of the elements of the group that dined at that restaurant yesterday, which was partly made up of the parents of the missing child, as well as if [whether or not] they had seen an individual suspect, with a blonde "rastas" [hairstyle] in camouflage pants. ----------

-------- JERONIMO TOMAS RODRIGUES SALCEDAS (Phone No "91 768 ####) - bartender:
- He saw the missing Madeleine, for the last time, yesterday at 16.45h next to the restaurant;
- He did not notice if from the group of British citizens (in number 8 or 9) that yesterday dined in restaurant (which was partly made up of the parents of the missing [child]), someone left [absented themself] during such dinner;
- He saw a walkie talkie on top of the table of the group, [like] those that are used to monitor noises of children, from a distance;
- He did not see a person of blonde "rastas", while he was working last night. ----------
SVETLANA

------- STARIKOVA VITORINO (Russian citizen, with the telephone No "96635 ####) - kitchen assistant:
- Said that, yesterday, one individual, purportedly the father of the missing, left the dinner table where a group of friends (in number 8 or 9), for about 30 minutes. After having returned, a woman whom she believed to be his wife, also left the table, there having passed a few moments, all the guests left the table in question, except one elderly lady, who told her [Svetlana's] colleagues that that child had disappeared.
- During the time that she was working yesterday (between 14:30 and 23:00) she did not see any individual with blonde "rastas".

-------- MIGUEL SALCEDAS COELHO (BI No 1426####, telephone 91920####) - cook
- He did not know the missing or her parents, he knew only that they were part of a group of British citizens who usually dined there;
- As he works in the kitchen, rarely did he go to the tables, so he saw nothing;
- He did not see any person with blonde "rastas", while he was working (14.30 and 23.00) ----------

--------- JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA (residing at Rua Ilha Terceira, no. 15, Lagos, Telephone No 91 277 ####) - table employee [waiter].
- Of the group of 8/9 British citizens who dined at the restaurant last night, as usual, of which the parents of missing were part (he didn't know them) he noticed that two individuals left the table, of the male gender.
- The first to leave was about 40/45 years old (tall, skinny, white complexion, with large [a full head of] hair of color gray) and the period of his absence was about 15 minutes, being that they had to [re-]heat his food, which had cooled;
- The second to leave (about 40/45 years of age, having the physical characteristics of the first, but having less bulky hair) did so for about 30 minutes, and that shortly after he returned, all left the table, except for an elderly person, who told him that a child had disappeared, the daughter of a member of the group, due to which he thought that the second person to leave could have been the father of the child;
- Of the times in which this group had dined in that bar it is [was] often [for] someone from the group to go to check at the apartments the state of the children (their offspring) who were sleeping there.
- He did not see any person with blonde "rastas", while he was working (16h00 and 00.00). ----------

-------- JOELSON FABIO SOARES SANTOS L?IO (telephone No 96948#### - was contacted in another restaurant of the [Mark Warner] group, situated in the same locality) - pantry boy
- As he works in the pantry, he never goes to the area where are the tables, so he saw nothing;
- He didn't know the missing or her parents;
- He did not see any individual with blonde "Rastas", in the period in which he remained in service (15:30 and 23:30. ----------

--------- RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA (as he was on his day off, he was contacted by telephone No 91 397####) - table employee.
- Of the group of 8/9 British citizens who dined at that restaurant yesterday, like they usually did, which was partly made up of the parents of the missing (he did not know them) he noticed that absent from the table, for about 15 minutes, [was] a man (tall, little more than thirty years of age, normal physical stature, white complexion and hair color light brown);
- It was usual [for] someone of that group, to leave to go to the apartments to check the children (children of the group members) who slept there;
- At the table, he always noticed [saw] the existence [presence] of an intercom;
- He did not see any person with blonde "rastas", while he was working (16h000 and 00h30).----------

------- As for the kitchen employee, MARIA MANUELA ANTONIO JOSE, given that she was not in service yesterday [neither] during the dinner [nor] when the disappearance of the child occurred, she was not interviewed. ---------
MICHAEL SPERREY
CLARE SPERREY


------ In the main reception (open 24h) of the Ocean Club, the signatory [undersigned] was able to observe a person with long hair, curly, blonde in colour, with camouflage shorts and green sweat-shirt, which fit the description of the suspect of the "Rastas", it being that I questioned the receptionist about him, who said that this individual and his wife are guests in the hotel and he has been tireless, since yesterday, in search of the missing girl. Attached are photocopies of their passports as well as the hotel registration form. ----------