The List of People the McCanns Wanted Interviewed

GERALD PATRICK MCCANN and KATE MARIE HEALY, better identified in the documents referenced above, approach, very respectfully, to set forth and request, Sir, the following:

1 - Since the applicants stopped being considered witnesses, moving to suspects of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, witnesses central to the discovery of truth were not questioned, or re-questioned.

2 - With the recent investigations, witness interviews and interrogations of the applicants, new questions were raised and doubts aroused, broadening, in this way, the object of the investigation, as well as matters of fact considered relevant to the investigations.

3 - Indeed, the Investigation departed from confining itself to the disappearance of the minor, proceeding to embrace other matters, allegedly connected with her.

4 - It is therefore essential to hear these witnesses who can explain facts now very relevant, such as the way the couple treated their children, their personality and routine and, even, the reactions manifested by them after the disappearance and the consequent psychological and emotional state.

5 - So, and because it is believed essential and indispensable for the establishment of the facts and consequent discovery of the truth, they come to request the hearing of the following groups of witnesses, all present and with direct knowledge of the facts:

Group 1 (persons with whom the couple dined every night during the holidays)
David Payne, with address at ...> (Leicester) (0,774,884 ####)

Fiona Payne to address in ...> (Leicester) (0,779,627 ####)

Diane Webster, with address at ...> (Renhold, Bedford) (0,123,477 ####)
Russell O'Brien, with address at ...> (Exeter) 0,771,325 ####)
Jane Tanner, with address at ...> (Exeter) (6,780,858 #####)
Rachael Oldfield, with address at ...> (London) (0,777,159 ####)
Matthew Oldfield, with address at ...> (London) (0,777,159 ####)

Group 2 (independent customers and employees of the Ocean Club who saw the behavior of Kate and Gerry on the day of the disappearance):
Dan Smith, with address at ...> (Ocean Club, c / o Mark Warner)
Steve Carpenter, with address at ...> (Ware, Herts) (0,781,577 ####)
Carolyn Carpenter, with address at ...> (Ware, Herts)
Jeremy Wilkins, with address at ...> (London)
Catriona Baker, with address at ...> (Surrey) (0,785,823 ####)

Group 3 (people who saw and/or spoke with Kate and Gerry at the time they noticed Madeleine's disappearance):
Patricia Cameron, with address at ...> (Dumbarton) (079,122 ####)
Paul Seddon, with address at ...> (Salford) (079,262 #####)
Michelle Thompson, with address at ...> (Liverpool) (0,151,280 ####)
Emma Kinghts, with address at ...> (Ocean Club, c / o Mark Warner) (3,519,614 ####)
Alan Pike, with address at ...> (Skipton) (0,781,212 ####)

Group 4 (people who knew the daily routine of Kate and Gerry and their relationship with their children before coming to Portugal):
Janet Kennedy, with address at ...> (Rothley, Leics) (0,118,230 ####)
Amanda Coxon, with address at ...> (Leicestershire) (0,794,042 ####)
Karen McCalman, with address at ...> (Leicesterhire) (0,116,269 ####)
Patricia Cameron, with address at ...> (Dumbarton) (0791 202 ####)
Sharon Lewin, with address at ...> (Leicester) (0,788,780 ####)
Hayley Plummer, with address at ...> (Syston) (0,778,987 ####)

Group 5 (persons closely involved in the routine of Kate and Gerry in Portugal after the disappearance of Madeleine and their emotional state)
Sandy Cameron, with address at ...> (Dumbarton) (0,793,399 ####)
Michael Wright, with address at ...> (Skipton) (0,777,556 ####)
Clarence Mitchell, with address at ...> (Bath) (0,779,628 ####)
Linda McQueen, with address at ...> (Merseyside) (0,780,956 ####)
Nicky Gill, with address at ...> (Liverpool) (079,004 ####)
Justine McGuiness, with address at ...> (Dorchester) (0,780,109 ####)

Group 6 (Professionals who can confirm that there was no abnormality in the way Kate and Gerry treated their children):
Dr. Phil Hussey, with address at ...> (Leics) (0,116,260 ####)
Dr Ian Schofield, with address at ...> (Mountsorrel) (0,116,230 ####)

6 - It is certain that some of these witnesses have already been heard, at least once, in the investigation.

7 - But, at that time, the direction of the investigation was apparently different, [that being] the reason why some of these witnesses were not heard on the matters mentioned above, currently considered relevant to the prosecution of the investigation and who already were, furthermore, the object of actual proceedings, namely the questioning and the interrogations of the applicants.

We submit that, their testimony [being] essential to the discovery of the truth, and given that the witnesses designated above actually live in the United Kingdom, where they will be found, (except Dan Smith and Emma Knights who will be found in Portugal), it is requested further, under Arts. 229 and following of CPP, 145 and following of Law 14-4/99 of 31 August (Law of International Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters) and 3 and following of the European Convention on Mutual Legal Support in Criminal Matters, that a Rogatory Letter be expedited for them to be heard in the United Kingdom.

They ask that the request be granted

The Advocates
CARLOS PINTO DE ABREU
ROGERIO ALVES

Apparently, the McCanns were quite within their rights to request these interviews.  

I'm no legal beagle but I find it an extraordinary situation considering Madeleine disappeared whilst on holiday with her parents in Portugal.  For the most part they are character witnesses - why would the parents McCann need character witnesses residing in the the UK to assist the Portuguese investigation into the disappearance of their precious three year old daughter?

Whatever happened in Portugal, the McCanns are 100% responsible - no extenuating circumstances.  Painting a glossy picture of their characters makes not one iota of difference to the fact that Madeleine's fate was/is/will always be their responsibility and their responsibility alone.

It's a defence initiative - nothing more nothing less.  Question is - why the need for a defence initiative if completely innocent?  Why not take the alternative route and cooperate with the police.  In short - tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, without relying on friends and relatives to bail you out !  Eh?

Why did they have the ROTHLEY SECRET MEETING in late November (prior to the rogatory interviews) and invite Catriona around that date (and how many others?)


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

"This meeting is highly suspicious".

It was.

Hymn sheets were probably handed out.

I’ve wondered since I first read the above lists why Alan Pike is placed in the group he is. Was he contacted by someone on the night of 3/4 May, almost as soon as Madeleine was reported to have been abducted?


Re: the Rothley meeting, we also know that witnesses like Jeremy Wilkins/Bridget O'Donnell were visited in the homes by Leicestershire Police Officers in November 07, for a chat.


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


If it were a political matter, the term would be whipping in.

On the assumption that the text in post [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] is as written, it's interesting how the phraseology is directed :

Group 1 (persons with whom the couple dined every night during the holidays) 
Group 2 (independent customers and employees of the Ocean Club who saw the behavior of Kate and Gerry on the day of the disappearance)
Group 3 (people who saw and/or spoke with Kate and Gerry at the time they noticed Madeleine's disappearance)
Group 4 (people who knew the daily routine of Kate and Gerry and their relationship with their children before coming to Portugal)
Group 5 (persons closely involved in the routine of Kate and Gerry in Portugal after the disappearance of Madeleine and their emotional state
Group 6 (Professionals who can confirm that there was no abnormality in the way Kate and Gerry treated their children)

Form example, why is Group 6 not worded "Witnesses who can comment on the way Gerry & Kate treated/interacted with their children". Already one is told they didn't treat them abnormally. And "professionals" are required to confirm that.

BTW, what was Dan Smith's role ?

polyenne wrote:BTW, what was Dan Smith's role ?

An error I believe. The only person that could possibly be a Dan Smith was the Irish witness Martin Smith's son - Peter Daniel Smith. It ain't going to be him!

It's most likely the name should have been Dan Stuk. He was the tennis coach who worked at the Ocean Club.

Perhaps when the McCanns submitted their request for persons to be interviewed, they were having a Clement Freudian slip.

Group 2 (independent customers and employees of the Ocean Club who saw the behavior of Kate and Gerry on the day of the disappearance):
Dan Smith, with address at ...> (Ocean Club, c / o Mark Warner)

Daniel James Stuk witness statement - 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.

He is a functionary of [employed by] the tourist operator Mark Warner, working as a tennis instructor in the precinct of the Ocean Club resort

Asked, he relates that he usually works from 09:00 to 19:30 and has his day-off on Saturday.

Asked, the deponent relates that the only tennis instructors of Mark Warner are himself and his colleague called GEORGINA.

The deponent started to work in Portugal, in the indicated functions and place, on 23 March last, having concluded a contract with Mark Warner in England with those conditions.

Questioned, he relates that he knew the McCann family as part of his work, since he gave them tennis lessons, as a couple, parents of the missing Madeleine, as well as the other couples who accompanied them.

He reports that the group iniciated contact with the tennis instructors on the 29 April, the day immediately after their arrival at the Ocean Club.

His colleague Georgina has the calendar of classes given by her and by him to the McCann couple.

He relates that a first lesson of instruction was done in the morning of 29 April, it being that, on that day, they had no more lessons.

On the following days the parents of Madeleine, whom the deponent identified as Gerry and Kate McCann, scheduled 16 tennis classes, together and/or separately, at different times of the morning or afternoon, classes that were conducted by either him or by Georgina depending on their booking calendar.

Questioned about the class times of G&K McCann on last Thursday, 3 May, he related that the mother of MBM had a group class at 09-10h00 conducted by Georgina; the father had a group class at 10-11h00 conducted by him.

Later, at 15-15h45, the couple had a private class, together, conducted by him - and finally, GM participated in the men's social tennis event at 18-19h00.

Questioned about whether, yesterday, he had conducted tennis lessons for an individual called Jeremy Wilkins, who was commonly known as Jez, the deponent relates that that individual booked, and attended, some tennis lessons and that all of those had been given by him.

He relates that, as they had group lessons together GM and Jez had had some conversations, but he thinks that it is only because they shared some classes and that those [conversations] will not have given rise to a firm friendship, but rather to a simple acquaintanceship due to which they would have conversed when they met each other.

Questioned about the couple and their behaviour, both between the family and with the other group members, the deponent relates that he never noted any issue between them, and that the behaviour of everyone was like any other group of tourists that take their holidays in the resort every day.

There never appeared any problem between them and other people. It being asked of him, the deponent relates that the McCann couple and the remaining group members had often been together, not always all of them, but the majority of the people were sociable with each other.

He relates that they spent most of the day within the OC resort, in the pool, also they went to the beach but they did not use any of the OC activities there, and they centred their attention on the developed activities of the resort, it being that the couple preferred, unquestionably, tennis.

The four couples had children who were, for part of the day, under the care of the child care workers of the Ocean Club.

Questioned, he relates that he does not know where the group took their meals or under what circumstances.

Asked if at some time he was aware of the presence of some individual who had watched the group, whether the adults or the children, he relates that no, he never had the perception of any situation that aroused his curiosity and that everyone acted normally just like any group of friends on holiday.

Because it was asked of him, he relates that he knew about the disappearance of little MBM that same night, about 22h20, because he was contacted by a resort worker having attended and participated in the searches.

Prompted, he affirms that he has no further useful information that might help in locating MBM or that may have led to the disappearance.

737 to 738 External diligence carried out in Ocean Club with tennis instructors 2007.05.08

ETA: For clarification - I don't believe Daniel 'Smith' Stuk was interviewed again (after 8th May 2007) despite the McCanns request.

Most of these are the McCanns family and friends including some of the Tapas gang. When exactly was this request made? The must have been in touch with those on the list. Was this after the friends meeting? Were the other witnesses at that meeting?

The PJ wouldn't have taken this request from their suspects seriously, but Op Grange may have given into it. Since when do the suspects run the investigation?

The McCanns request for specific persons to be interviewed/re-interviewed, was formally presented in October 2007, shortly after the McCanns were made arguidos and fled Portugal for safety back at Blighty.  Apologies for omitting the information from my original post, my concern at the time was only the list of names, I should have included the official request leading up to the named persons. It's here  ..

Letter regarding rogatory content from Carlos Abreu

Faxed from Society of Attorneys 16 Oct 2007 to Ministerio Publico in Portimao.

GERALD PATRICK MCCANN and KATE MARIE HEALY, better identified in the documents referenced above, approach, very respectfully, to set forth and request, Sir, the following:

1 - Since the applicants stopped being considered witnesses, moving to suspects of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, witnesses central to the discovery of truth were not questioned, or re-questioned.

2 - With the recent investigations, witness interviews and interrogations of the applicants, new questions were raised and doubts aroused, broadening, in this way, the object of the investigation, as well as matters of fact considered relevant to the investigations.

3 - Indeed, the Investigation departed from confining itself to the disappearance of the minor, proceeding to embrace other matters, allegedly connected with her.

4 - It is therefore essential to hear these witnesses who can explain facts now very relevant, such as the way the couple treated their children, their personality and routine and, even, the reactions manifested by them after the disappearance and the consequent psychological and emotional state.

5 - So, and because it is believed essential and indispensable for the establishment of the facts and consequent discovery of the truth, they come to request the hearing of the following groups of witnesses, all present and with direct knowledge of the facts:
----------

This was sent by Carlos Pinto de Abreu, the McCanns lawyer in Lisbon.

ETA:  It should be noted here, although the McCanns made the request identifying specific persons and outlining their rationale, the PJ took the opportunity to include a detailed list of questions to be posed during the rogatory interviews conducted in the UK by Leicestershire Constabulary.  Not that the interviews developed the investigation in any way I can see - it's necessary to clarify this point in order to explain why the interviews were so lengthy and to a certain extent, detrimental to the McCanns.

Then again, the McCanns and their support network had no idea all this information would eventually be made public. They must rue the day they ever tried to outwit the world - no wonder they went into overdrive after the PJ files were released into the public domain. I doubt the UK establishment were aware of this bombshell until it was too late.