Re: PLANNING THE ABDUCTION HOAX. Was it done over four days, or four hours?

by Phoebe Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:19 am

The children were not customers/diners at the Tapas Bar restaurant in the traditional sense of the word. They did not sit at tables, read the menu, give their orders to waiters who approached each table, then wait to be served. Instead they all ate a suitable, set menu, on a terrace adjacent to the normal Tapas Bar dining area. The children's tea seemed to kick off around 4.45.p.m when they were all brought from their various creches by the nannies to the Tapas area to eat. Tea ended at 5.30 after which the nannies were off duty. During this time the Tapas was still serving its regular adult customers. I suspect the very few waiters on day-shift were occupied with the latter and that the children's tea was brought out by various kitchen staff helped by a nanny or two. In this way I can well imagine the cook (N.B. not chef) helping to bring food to the children's table. Therefore, Maria Jose (the Tapas day cook) may well have ventured out of the kitchen when helping the nannies. Whether she really saw Madeleine or not I couldn't say, but I see no reason why she would claim to have seen children when she didn't. Why would she bother to lie? I'm also sure the P.J. asked her how she, as a cook, came to be out of the kitchen! They aren't stupid. Remember, all statements are but an agreed precis after a much longer interview, not a verbatim recording of every single word that had been uttered during that interview.

by **HiDeHo** Wed Mar 07, 2018 3:33 am

Verdi wrote:
Ruffian wrote:Witness Statement
Maria Manuela Antonia Jose
Date: 06 - 05 - 2007
Place of Work: OC

She has worked at the OC, since 25 March 2006, in Luz, as a cook in one of the restaurants within the complex, called the Tapas Restaurant.

Not knowing the layout of the Tapas restaurant I can't be precise but you need to question exactly where this employee was working. The logical assumption would be a kitchen. Could be al-fresco but that I doubt when talking of feeding a crowd of hungry kids - I can't imagine BBQ was on the menu.

Good point there worthy of consideration - what did they eat? I don't think it was ever mentioned, not that there is any reason why it should have been but it raises the question whether this Tapas high-tea ever happened as regards the McCanns and their group of friends. It doesn't appear to accord with the crèche register.

That aside, I ask how a cook inside or outside the kitchen, would be able to say with any degree of certainty that s/he could identify a strangers child (amidst a number of other children). The witness statement was taken on 6th May 2007, three days after Madeleine's alleged disappearance, the most she could have seen is the photograph/s circulated for identification purposes. As has been discussed ad-infinitum, the images provided by the McCanns to assist the investigation bore no true resemblance to the Madeleine seen in the playground and poolside photographs.

I venture to suggest it being impossible for an Ocean Club restaurant cook to be able to say she saw Madeleine at a specific time and day. I doubt if the cook saw Madeleiene at any time on any day.

Not reliable!

I could not consider Maria the cook statement as being a confirmation of seeing Madeleine for a few reasons...

Firstly, she admits to not knowing Maddie and only recognised her from the photos of her. (The photos of a much younger Maddie?)

She describes a child who spent the day in the creche next to the tapas restaurant. We KNOW Maddie went to the kids club above the reception 10 minutes away.

I suspect she was mistaken...

PLANNING THE ABDUCTION HOAX. Was it done over four days, or four hours? - Page 3 Maria_12

This leads me to another issue that is questionable...

'Manuela' the cook claims to have cooked for the McCanns table that night.

This could not have been Maria Jose as she left the tapas at 6.45pm and did not return until the following evening.

So WHICH tapas cook was it on the video?

Here is the staff rota for the Tapas... The 'cooks' are highlighted. Three of them. Which one is in the video?

PLANNING THE ABDUCTION HOAX. Was it done over four days, or four hours? - Page 3 Tapas_12

'Manuela' claims to have been cooking on the grill that night, but also had knowledge of Madeleine going to the creche near the tapas... (Madeleine did not go to that creche she went to the kids club above the reception)

How could it be Maria Manuela Antonia Jose? She left at 6.45pm until the following day and wasn't at the tapas that night.(See statement above)

It wasn't Maria de Jesus R. Almeida as Thursday was her day off.

PLANNING THE ABDUCTION HOAX. Was it done over four days, or four hours? - Page 3 Maria_11

It wasn't Svetlana Starikova Vitorino as she claims 'During the times meals are served, she works outside the restaurant for some of the time, near to the grill and it is possible that she saw the girl on some occasion. However, she says that she does not have a clear idea of Madeleine, as many children were about, who looked quite similar to her.'

PLANNING THE ABDUCTION HOAX. Was it done over four days, or four hours? - Page 3 Svetla10

For those that question the research on 'who saw Madeleine' I think you can see clearly that the above detailed research shows there is NO CONFIRMATION that any of the cooks in the tapas have confirmed they saw Maddie whether in their statement or in the video.

Most of the above was my very early research in 2008. Can anyone show me if there was ANOTHER cook that I may have missed?

I just want to add that I find it very tedious when 'people' (I'm NOT referring to members in here..lol I understand that many may disagree and thats ok) claim that there were lots of sightings of Maddie. They CLEARLY have NOT done any research themselves yet choose to discredit mine!

by Basil with a brush Wed Mar 07, 2018 4:23 am

Somebody most definitely died in their apartment. The only person not to return home from that holiday was their daughter. So I'll guess it was her the hounds sniffed out, and they did sniff her out. Make no bones (sorry) about that.

The only supposed sighting on the said night, comes from somebody who visited the rest of the crowd for a meeting back in the UK. That just doesn't wash does it? So Thursday is most definitely out. That would cause me to think at the very least, she was gone a day or two before.

I don't think it was premeditated, but I do strongly believe sexual abuse had taken place and that this along with medication contributed to the death/disappearance.

The holidaying group are absolutely involved in some way. Very possibly one in particular, who liked all the children he was holidaying with, to be very clean. This group's general silence since, speaks volumes to me.

I'm still struggling to work out how and who transported her or materials associated with her after her demise, but whoever it was, wasn't careful enough with that hire vehicle, that's for sure.

As for those that still believe the crazy possibility of an abduction. The mother made a couple of vital errors. Firstly she ran away from her other two children (put a couple of million other mothers in that scenario and see what they do) and secondly, she didn't answer those (awfully taxing, when your little girl is supposedly experiencing God knows what) questions. She was guided very poorly here. Still, you can't be expected to get it all right. As has been mentioned, there's no such thing as the perfect crime.

by Ruffian Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:27 am

by Ruffian Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:31 am

The above stills show the iconic photo of MM being broadcast on the 4th May. The Cook states she recognised madeleine from watching TV.

Witness Statement
Maria Manuela Antonia Jose
Date: 06 - 05 - 2007
Place of Work: OC

She has worked at the OC, since 25 March 2006, in Luz, as a cook in one of the restaurants within the complex, called the Tapas Restaurant.

With relation to the facts being investigated, she confirms that on the 4 May 2007, at about 18h30, when arriving for work at the complex, she heard from her supervisor, Steve, that a female child who was staying with her parents and siblings at one of the OC apartments had gone missing on the previous day (3rd May 2007).

When she was informed about the disappearance she did not realise which child this was, it was only later, upon watching the television news that night and after seeing pictures of the missing child on television, that she realised who the girl was, referring to her as Madeleine (the name used by the journalists) remembering only at that moment that she had seen her during the meals provided to the children at the crÃ¨che, and which take place at the restaurant where she works and during arrivals at the crêche where Madeleine spent the day, located immediately next to the restaurant.

by Ruffian Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:51 am

Whilst in Amsterdam, for the launch of the Dutch version of his book 'A Verdade da Mentira', Gonçalo Amaral took time out to answer some questions.

The questions/anwers are not verbatim but from notes:

Q: Have you considered the possibility that Madeleine died on the previous night or even when Mrs. Fenn heard the crying?

A: Naturally - the investigation begins with establishing if the person who disappeared, does actually exist and then, who was the last person to see her - the investigation shows clearly that she was last seen around 17.30.

Q: Have you any doubt as to the validity of Madeleine attending the creche on 3/5?

A: No doubt whatsoever.

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id173.htm

by polyenne Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:52 am

If "High Tea" was supposedly at 4.45pm, how come all the kids were signed out generally at 5.30pm.

It's all hogwash......................unless of course either the logs were falsified or it was in a position where it could be signed as they were leaving "High Tea"

by Ruffian Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:15 am

by polyenne Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:28 am

Just because they weren't "noticed", doesn't necessarily mean discrepancies weren't apparent.

It is quite obvious (from the hard work that a number of key members put in at CMOMM and other fora) that significant cross-referencing and investigation is required to even begin to see cracks appearing.

This is not to detract from the PJ investigation but it must also be remembered that they were being "leaned on" to reach a specific conclusion.

by sar Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:16 am

polyenne wrote:If "High Tea" was supposedly at 4.45pm, how come all the kids were signed out generally at 5.30pm.

It's all hogwash......................unless of course either the logs were falsified or it was in a position where it could be signed as they were leaving "High Tea"

Who has "High Tea" anyway? Esp. circa. 2007? Described as "Out-dated" and "Elaborate" in dictionary.

by Guest Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:24 am

Ruffian wrote:Whilst in Amsterdam, for the launch of the Dutch version of his book 'A Verdade da Mentira', Gonçalo Amaral took time out to answer some questions.

The questions/anwers are not verbatim but from notes:

Q: Have you considered the possibility that Madeleine died on the previous night or even when Mrs. Fenn heard the crying?

A: Naturally - the investigation begins with establishing if the person who disappeared, does actually exist and then, who was the last person to see her - the investigation shows clearly that she was last seen around 17.30.

Q: Have you any doubt as to the validity of Madeleine attending the creche on 3/5?

A: No doubt whatsoever.

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id173.htm

That was over 9 years ago.

by Phoebe Wed Mar 07, 2018 12:51 pm

I suspect "Manuela" interviewed for the T.V. snippet shown above is a pseudonym - it is pointed out that the woman wishes to protect her anonymity by not allowing herself to be shown during the interview. Therefore, if she wishes to disguise herself "Manuela" is probably no part of her real name.
"High Tea" was so called because it was a substantial meal for the children, taking the place of supper or dinner. I think the reason for so many consistent 5.30 p.m. signings out is because this marked the end of the nannies creche-working day and children were, at the end of tea, returned to their parents' responsibility.
Georgina Jackson claims to have given Madeleine a tennis lesson on Tuesday
"She relates it was one of the preferred activities of the McCann couple in that they had several lessons throughout the days and up to the date of the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine, it being that the child also had a class, on Tuesday, 1 May (10-11h00), that class [in which] she was among a group of children was conducted by the deponent."
This statement clearly implies she saw Madeleine, otherwise she would just have said her group had a class and she cannot specifically remember whether Madeleine was there. On Tuesday morning there were only 6 children in the Lobsters group. Madeleine, Ella, Jessica, Elizabeth, Alexander and William.
Tiago Barreiros says
"According to what he remembers, the missing child's family frequented the Tapas pool where they would take their children. They would stay in the children's play area in the period between 16H45 and 17H30, at the time when babysitters would take care of the children. The babysitters are employees of Mark Warner."

Given that all the above, the nannies, other guests (and we do not know what the sailing instructors told the police about Thurs) claim to have seen Madeleine during the week, it is unsurprising that the the P.J. concluded she had been alive until Thursday. If this is not the case an extraordinary number of people have to be either mistaken or lying. As pointed out above, Dr. Amaral, when asked, was convinced she had not died before May 3rd. His answer confirming this belief may have been given 9 years ago but I don't believe he has stopped pondering the mysteries of this case since then. Indeed, he continues to speculate publicly about how the body may have been stored/destroyed (refrigeration, cremation) yet he has never departed from his belief of when she was last seen.

by polyenne Wed Mar 07, 2018 1:21 pm

David Payne's Rogatory 11 April 2008 :

485 "Right, and you say that Kate and Gerry initially weren't that keen because of, what is it they weren't keen about''
Reply "Well, say from, you know, from recollections and obviously we have discussed you know the situation since.'

1485 "Yeah.'
Reply "Err was that you know Kate had got an uneasy feeling, that's all you know, has come back to her and I remember you know again, whether this is something that's subsequently I feel has happened be, you know before the event, but you know Fiona had certainly mentioned it err that you know Kate wasn't quite you know, didn't feel quite easy about it but there was no explanation that I could give you or you know even subsequently err in discussions that you know there wasn't one thing. Kate, err I think Gerry's very, he's very enthusiastic and I think he's you know, you see the way that he's conducted himself you know over the last few months, he's a very sorted person, a very dynamic person you know he was all you know, don't worry you know it'll be fine and everything''

1485 "Yeah.'
Reply "Will work its way out and you know whether it be the logistics of the situation that err Kate was more concerned about you know I really couldn't answer that question.'

The "logistics of the situation". What "situation" ? And "logistics" ? That usually means how something is going to be made to work.

by sallypelt Wed Mar 07, 2018 3:04 pm

polyenne wrote:David Payne's Rogatory 11 April 2008 :

485 "Right, and you say that Kate and Gerry initially weren't that keen because of, what is it they weren't keen about''
Reply "Well, say from, you know, from recollections and obviously we have discussed you know the situation since.'

1485 "Yeah.'
Reply "Err was that you know Kate had got an uneasy feeling, that's all you know, has come back to her and I remember you know again, whether this is something that's subsequently I feel has happened be, you know before the event, but you know Fiona had certainly mentioned it err that you know Kate wasn't quite you know, didn't feel quite easy about it but there was no explanation that I could give you or you know even subsequently err in discussions that you know there wasn't one thing. Kate, err I think Gerry's very, he's very enthusiastic and I think he's you know, you see the way that he's conducted himself you know over the last few months, he's a very sorted person, a very dynamic person you know he was all you know, don't worry you know it'll be fine and everything''

1485 "Yeah.'
Reply "Will work its way out and you know whether it be the logistics of the situation that err Kate was more concerned about you know I really couldn't answer that question.'

The "logistics of the situation". What "situation" ? And "logistics" ? That usually means how something is going to be made to work.

What a load of gobbledygook:

Reply "Err was that you know … that's all you know,… I remember you know again, …you know before the event, but you know Fiona had certainly mentioned it err that you know … but there was no explanation that I could give you or you know even subsequently err in discussions that you know there wasn't one thing. Kate, err I think Gerry's very, he's very enthusiastic(huh?) . and I think he's you know, …you know he was all you know, don't worry you know it'll be fine and everything''

What IS this man trying to say? And he’s a doctor and an “educated person”. I have heard better grammar from the down and out, and from those who appear on the Jeremy Kyle show. How anyone can say that these people are telling the truth is beyond me.
In the words of John Stalker "Kate and Gerry McCann are hiding a "big secret"

by polyenne Wed Mar 07, 2018 3:12 pm

Might David Payne's "tennis kit" have been "hiding" in a blue bag and that was the real reason he had to go to the apartment to see Kate ?

by Verdi Thu Mar 08, 2018 1:22 pm

Phoebe wrote:Georgina Jackson claims to have given Madeleine a tennis lesson on Tuesday

This statement clearly implies she saw Madeleine, otherwise she would just have said her group had a class and she cannot specifically remember whether Madeleine was there.

Witness Statement Georgina Jackson - tennis instructor
8th May 2007

Due to the witness being British and not having mastered the Portuguese language, the present declarations are taken in the presence of RJQE Murat, a translator named in the official record.

She relates it was one of the preferred activities of the McCann couple in that they had several lessons throughout the days and up to the date of the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine, it being that the child also had a class, on Tuesday, 1 May (10-11h00), that class [in which] she was among a group of children was conducted by the deponent.
----------

The testimony of this witness refers mainly to the tennis lessons/play, booked by the McCann couple. The witness interview was routine policing i.e. interviewing everybody and anybody in the vicinity during the period of Madeleine's alleged disappearance. Ms Jackson mentions the group of children from the childcare facilities that had a lesson on 1st May, I can see no clear indication that she claims to have seen Madeleine specifically - why would she? Some folk think a childcare worker wouldn't necessarily be able to positively recognize a child in their care every day, how then can a tennis instructor be able to identify a single child she encountered for about half an hour playing alongside other excitable children?

Not reliable!

by Verdi Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:39 pm

Phoebe wrote:The children were not customers/diners at the Tapas Bar restaurant in the traditional sense of the word. They did not sit at tables, read the menu, give their orders to waiters who approached each table, then wait to be served. Instead they all ate a suitable, set menu, on a terrace adjacent to the normal Tapas Bar dining area. The children's tea seemed to kick off around 4.45.p.m when they were all brought from their various creches by the nannies to the Tapas area to eat. Tea ended at 5.30 after which the nannies were off duty. During this time the Tapas was still serving its regular adult customers. I suspect the very few waiters on day-shift were occupied with the latter and that the children's tea was brought out by various kitchen staff helped by a nanny or two. In this way I can well imagine the cook (N.B. not chef) helping to bring food to the children's table. Therefore, Maria Jose (the Tapas day cook) may well have ventured out of the kitchen when helping the nannies. Whether she really saw Madeleine or not I couldn't say, but I see no reason why she would claim to have seen children when she didn't. Why would she bother to lie? I'm also sure the P.J. asked her how she, as a cook, came to be out of the kitchen! They aren't stupid. Remember, all statements are but an agreed precis after a much longer interview, not a verbatim recording of every single word that had been uttered during that interview.

Way too much supposition for my liking - and not a shred of evidence to back it up.

The majority of witness interviews were bog basic policing, this cook for example was not a suspect, she was interviewed exactly the same way as any other member of staff, tourist or local resident. The PJ were looking for anything suspicious in the Ocean Club and the surrounding environment that might assist the investigation.

I've repeatedly pointed out the witness statements are not presented verbatim and therefore are not a reliable source of evidence - as I've repeatedly pointed out the fact that Robert Murat was the appointed interpreter for a number of the witness interviews but it's all that's available so it seriously limits any tangible conclusion. It doesn't however give carte-blanche to fill in the gaps oneself.

You say ... "Remember, all statements are but an agreed precis after a much longer interview...". That is not a fact to be remembered, it's again only your supposition.

by Phoebe Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:32 pm

@ Verdi. It has been my personal experience (not supposition) that witness statements (in the days before video recordings) were drafted and recorded after quite a bit of discussion. The witness, during the interview, recounts whatever information he/she has, then questions are posed by the investigators which the witness answers as best he/she can in order to tease out as much information as possible for the investigation. Then a statement is drafted which the witness is asked to read over, agree to or seek to amend. Then one is asked to sign the statement. Reading the P.J. files shows umpteen concrete examples of this method being used - "Reads, agrees, ratifies and signs"!
With regard to the service during High Tea. Check out any of the sites wherein parents give their verdict on Mark Warner holidays and it is obvious how High Tea operated. As for the involvement of nannies/cooks helping to serve high tea -
From the statement of Kirsty Maryan ..

"relative to the facts of the investigation the witness clarifies that in her daily schedule mentioned she only, on one occasion, had contact with Madeleine McCann, for about 30 minutes 'who was treated as Maddie' in that she had to substitute for her colleague, who, at that time, was responsible for the group whose name is Emma, as SHE HAD TO GO TO THE TAPAS TO TAKE CARE OF THE REFRESHMENTS of Madeleine's group." Indeed, from first hand experience of working in similar camps part of our task was to supervise and help serve at mealtimes and we were always assisted by the cooks who brought out hot plates, dishes, tureens etc.
There were only 3 waiters on day shift (before 6p.m.) at the Tapas restaurant on May 3rd.-
David Miguel Marino Barroso. JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA; Ricardo Alexandre da Luz Oliveira
How likely is it that these waiters ignored taking orders from and serving the adult customers in order to occupy themselves with serving a set menu to a group of kiddies?

by Verdi Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:10 am

Phoebe wrote:@ Verdi. It has been my personal experience (not supposition) that witness statements (in the days before video recordings) were drafted and recorded after quite a bit of discussion. The witness, during the interview, recounts whatever information he/she has, then questions are posed by the investigators which the witness answers as best he/she can in order to tease out as much information as possible for the investigation. Then a statement is drafted which the witness is asked to read over, agree to or seek to amend. Then one is asked to sign the statement. Reading the P.J. files shows umpteen concrete examples of this method being used - "Reads, agrees, ratifies and signs"!
With regard to the service during High Tea. Check out any of the sites wherein parents give their verdict on Mark Warner holidays and it is obvious how High Tea operated. As for the involvement of nannies/cooks helping to serve high tea -
From the statement of Kirsty Maryan ..

"relative to the facts of the investigation the witness clarifies that in her daily schedule mentioned she only, on one occasion, had contact with Madeleine McCann, for about 30 minutes 'who was treated as Maddie' in that she had to substitute for her colleague, who, at that time, was responsible for the group whose name is Emma, as SHE HAD TO GO TO THE TAPAS TO TAKE CARE OF THE REFRESHMENTS of Madeleine's group." Indeed, from first hand experience of working in similar camps part of our task was to supervise and help serve at mealtimes and we were always assisted by the cooks who brought out hot plates, dishes, tureens etc.
There were only 3 waiters on day shift (before 6p.m.) at the Tapas restaurant on May 3rd.-
David Miguel Marino Barroso. JOAQUIM JOSE MOREIRA BATISTA; Ricardo Alexandre da Luz Oliveira
How likely is it that these waiters ignored taking orders from and serving the adult customers in order to occupy themselves with serving a set menu to a group of kiddies?

Apart from this witness statement being largely incomprehensible, I'm interested to learn where the above ^^^, in red, was stated. For the life of me I can't see it anywhere.

Kirsty Louise Maryan

Date/Time: 2007/05/07 14H30
Child Educator

Concerning the issue of the process said;
. That she comes to the process as a witness;

. States that she does not know the Portuguese language and is accompanied by interpreter, Robert James Queriol Murat, translator;

. That she has been in Portugal since the 21st of March, the date in which she began work, of this year, in the establishment known as the Ocean Club, situated in Praia da Luz, in Lagos (Algarve) where she works as an infant educator in the aforementioned establishment, conforming to a work contract previously signed in London. Clarifies that, last year, she began her work in this establishment where she has worked from July to October. The deponent further clarifies that in the period between 21 May 2007 and 07 May 2007, she worked with children between the ages of 6 and 10, known as the 'Junior' group, which is made up of 7 children of both sexes;
. States that her hour of work is very flexible, rotating and coincides with the weekly plan of the children's activities. Because she is asked, she clarifies that she had formal training in England, for two years, in order to exercise her child educator functions;
. The deponent further clarifies that the Junior group does not find itself subdivided from the other groups, in that, at this moment, there are not enough children that permit it;

. relative to the facts of the investigation the witness clarifies that in her daily schedule mentioned she only, on one occasion, had contact with Madeleine McCann, for about 30 minutes 'who was treated as Maddie' in that she had to substitute for her colleague, who, at that time, was responsible for the group whose name is Emma, as she had to go to the Tapas to take care of the refreshments of Madeleine's group. For this, the deponent had the charge of accompanying that group towards the beach until the MiniClub where they stayed for a few minutes, and from where they left for the restaurant, mentioned above, in order to have dinner. She clarifies that when Madeleine ate her food, her parents were close and accompanied her;

. Questioned, she states that Madeleine McCann related to the group of children 'MiniClub' who are supervised by a colleague of hers, whose name is Amy, and who coordinates her workers, for who she only knows first names, Cat and Emma, employees who worked with the group during the week in question, from 29 April to 04 May, 2007;
. Questioned, she states that the minor in questions appeared to her a calm child, happy, but quiet. States that Maddie was a very pretty child, notwithstanding, she did not stick out for this fact. However, she furthers that the same child, from what she saw, was a child who did stick out, precisely as she was calmer and shier that the others;
. Questioned, she furthers that she had no contact with [Maddie's] parents;
. That on the 03 of May, 200, at around 22h30, after having left the apartment where she is living, close to the establishment mentioned, together with two more colleagues, also residents there, whose name are Leanne and Sarah, she found her colleague Amy. That during their discussion she was informed that Madeleine McCann had disappeared and that they were looking for her. For this reason, together with her colleagues, they also began searching for Madeleine McCann;
. That during the search she carried out, together with her colleagues (employees of the Ocean Club) others were also participating from the establishment ion question;
. Subsequently, she cannot precisely state the hours but indicates that at around midnight, she noticed that the locale also consisted of local authorities who were taking notice of the occurrence and initiating respective measures for this type of situation;
. Questioned, the deponent states that the searches made by elements of the Ocean Club terminated around 04H00 on the following day, 04 May, 2007, to negative results. That morning, close to 08H30, the began searching anew in the complex, and the deponent was with a group who looked for the child in a part of the tourist complex;
. Questioned, the deponent states that she did not have direct contact with the minor at issue, Madeleine McCann, and is not aware of her habits or that of her parents, nor was she told about any strange situation regarding the child or f another period of time in which she worked in Portugal;
. It was about one week ago, on a date for which she cannot be precise, while she was accompanied by her friend Leanne, and going in the direction of her residence, on a street located close to the building where she lives, when they were cornered by an individual who passed by them, very slowly, at the wheel of a vehicle of make and model she did not know but the time but it did not seem recent. At passing, the individual invited them for a beer, to which they quickly declined. She adds that she did not pay the individual much attention, so that he would not continue to bother them, but this fact only allowed her to retain his physical characteristics' he had short, black hair. Urged, she states if she was confronted by this person or his photograph, she would not be capable of identifying him. That she did not observe any other characteristics signs of the individual like the vehicle that he drove. A few days later, in conversation with her colleagues, Leanne, Cai and Rhiannon she was told that an individual in a white commercial vehicle, had cornered them. That in none of these situations was it possible for Leanne to capture the license plate of the commercial vehicle mentioned above. Questioned, she states that she saw never saw the above referenced individual again;
. Questioned, the deponent states that beyond this situation, on another occasion, an event caught her attention. An individual of the male sex, in Praia da Luz, next to a caf' whose name she does not know, was playing a guitar until the day of the facts, now under investigation. on the night Maddie disappeared and while she was involved with a group searching, mentioned prior, they encountered a vehicle, whose make and model she does not know, of while colour, commercial, parked on top of a hill, where, she cannot identify. At this point, some of the group elements banged on the window of the vehicle and the back doors and saw the person who habitually played the guitar on the beach. He was covered with blankets, reading a book and drinking a beer, with the help of a flashlight. Questioned, they did were not able to observe in detail the interior of the vehicle. She add that the individual was asked whether he had seen a minor of about four years of age and the same responded, jocularly, that on that night, no one knocked on the doors of his vehicle;
. For the reason she was asked, she state that she never spoke to anyone who were not her colleagues, regarding the children with whom she worked;
. Adds that she has no knowledge of any type of situation which she finds strange and/or another which could be directly or indirectly related to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann;
. Nothing more said, having read the statement, finds it in conformity and signs it;
. The document is duly signed by me, Pedro Florindo, an Inspector with this Policia Judiciaria
----------

That aside, I don't understand why you've used the witness statement of Kirsty Maryann to respond to an observation about a cook. I haven't questioned whether or not the childcare workers were involved with feeding the kids at this high tea arrangement, if indeed this high tea did happen I'd take it for granted that the careworkers worked the arrangement. Nor do I understand why you raise the subject of the Tapas restaurant waiters, I certainly haven't mentioned them.

You say.. "Reading the P.J. files shows umpteen concrete examples of this method being used - "Reads, agrees, ratifies and signs!" Those few words at the foot of a witness statement do not indicate the method of conducting a witness interview.

My own experience of being interviewed by the police in connection with criminal investigations (before the advent of interview recordings), both as a person of interest and as a witness, is contrary to your observations. I always thought the UK police had a global policy for conducting witness interviews - just goes to show! Of course at the conclusion of any interview I was required to read, agree and sign the recorded document, even though the proceeds of the interviews were so vastly different from your own experience.

by Phoebe Fri Mar 09, 2018 10:19 am

@ Verdi. I presumed it would be obvious that the text of Kirsty Maryan's statement being cited was contained between both sets of inverted commas, since this is the usual mechanism to denote direct speech being quoted? - "relative to the facts of the investigation the witness clarifies that in her daily schedule mentioned she only, on one occasion, had contact with Madeleine McCann, for about 30 minutes 'who was treated as Maddie' in that she had to substitute for her colleague, who, at that time, was responsible for the group whose name is Emma, as SHE HAD TO GO TO THE TAPAS TO TAKE CARE OF THE REFRESHMENTS of Madeleine's group."

You claimed in a previous post that my assertion re. it being quite possible that the cook helped serve the children at high tea involved
" Way too much supposition for my liking - and not a shred of evidence to back it up."
My response intended to point out that the children were not tended in the usual manner of "diners". The nannies helped out. There were but 3 waiters available during high tea on May 3rd while the Tapas was also open to serve adult customers. Given that no orders had to be taken from children and their dining experience hardly required silver service, I feel it quite reasonable to accept that the cook is not lying and may well have brought items to children's table or assisted in serving in some way.
With regard to the format for taking witness statements - I can only give you my personal experience, but I have asked others, and they all confirm that they spoke freely before before the actual business of drafting a statement began, pointing out that not everything they had mentioned during their preamble was deemed relevant for inclusion in the final statement while other facts, elicited as the response to direct questioning after their initial accounts, were. Your experience of giving witness statement was, you say, in the U.K.
"I always thought the UK police had a global policy for conducting witness interviews - just goes to show!"
It should be remembered that Maria Jose, the cook, was questioned in Portugal as part of a Portuguese P.J. investigation which would have no reason to adhere to "U.K. global policy" for witness-interviewing techniques.

by Verdi Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:59 pm

I give up

.

by Mark Willis Fri Mar 09, 2018 3:32 pm

In which case, can I borrow your hat?

by Skingdavid Sun Jun 17, 2018 5:36 pm

For those of you who believe that she died much earlier than the Thursday . how do you explain the reported rushed scribbling of timelines on Maddie's stickerbook. Surely timelines would already have been done if the death had happened four days before ?

____________________________________________________________________________________

Topics merged. Mod

by NickE Sun Jun 17, 2018 6:08 pm

Skingdavid wrote:For those of you who believe that she died much earlier than the Thursday . how do you explain the reported rushed scribbling of timelines on Maddie's stickerbook. Surely timelines would already have been done if the death had happened four days before ?

IMO.
I believe what's happened down there was pre planned, either in the UK or some kind of plan B down in the Algarve.
The final time line preparations for the staged abduction was made in Restaurant Paraiso on Thursday afternoon.

by Skingdavid Sun Jun 17, 2018 8:03 pm

NickE wrote:
Skingdavid wrote:For those of you who believe that she died much earlier than the Thursday . how do you explain the reported rushed scribbling of timelines on Maddie's stickerbook. Surely timelines would already have been done if the death had happened four days before ?
IMO.
I believe what's happened down there was pre planned, either in the UK or some kind of plan B down in the Algarve.
The final time line preparations for the staged abduction was made in Restaurant Paraiso on Thursday afternoon.

are you suggesting that they went to Portugal with the intention of killing her and staging an abduction ???