The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!


Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

Post by tigger on 26.06.12 7:15

I found these amongst the many articles on McCannfiles.com (what would we do without him?) I'd love to hear views on this because it was mostly news to me and I've not seen it mentioned elsewhere. I tried to snip but it's better to have the full article. Sorry for the length.


Tuesday 03 June 2008
Friends are the PJ trumps 24horas
 
In a secret visit to Portugal, three people who had dinner at the Tapas Bar shattered the McCanns and Jane Tanner versions.
 
Fiona Payne, her mother Dianne Webster, and the husband David Payne are the main trumps of the Public Ministry that will lead the parents of Madeleine McCann, the missing girl, on the 3rd of May 2007, from an apartment in Praia da Luz, Algarve, to be accused of the crimes of exposition and abandonment since they left the girl alone that critical night. It is a crime that is punishable up to ten years of prison and allows the respective preventive arrests, like 24horas announced last week.



These three witnesses returned to Portugal, on the 11th of July 2007, with travel paid by the Portuguese State, and were accommodated in a hotel unity of Portimão. They were questioned by Gonçalo Amaral’s team, the superior coordinator who was removed from the case, and they contradicted the McCann’s version regarding what went on in the night of the disappearance.

Remember that Kate, Gerry and the other two couples with whom they had dinner, assured that they were taking turns in the vigilance to the children. A fact that was contradicted to the authorities in the above-mentioned secret travel by Fiona Payne and that had already been put in question in two previous statements, given on the days that followed to Maddie's disappearance, by her mother and her husband.



Jane Tanner Contradicted


"Fiona Payne gave three statements to the authorities, as well as Matthew Oldfield and his companion, Rachel. Dianne Webster's statement [Fiona's mother] was very solid and there was no need to question her again”, revealed to 24horas a judicial person in charge connected with the process. In accordance to the same source, "other persons who had dinner with the McCanns - Jane Tanner, her companion, Russell O'Brien, Matthew Oldfield and his wife, Rachel – gave contradictory statements". And the judicial person in charge exemplifies: "Jane Tanner always said that she went out from the restaurant to see her oldest daughter. Fiona, David and Dianne guaranteed to the PJ that she never left the restaurant before the alarm was given by Kate. This information was corroborated by several workers of the Tapas Bar restaurant”. These witnesses also stated that Gerry McCann did not even go to check on the children, when he went away of the restaurant, and that he only stayed at the apartment of Praia da Luz entrance.

The only person who stayed in Tapas Bar

Dianne Webster, of 63 years old, mother of Fiona Payne (36 years), was one of three people who were available to return to Portugal to help the authorities in the reconstruction of the facts taken place on the 3rd of May 2007.
 
She was the only one that was quiet and calm when Kate McCann entered in the Tapas Bar shouting "they’ve taken her!". The authorities were suspicious of her attitude and she told them that she did not believe in the version of the McCanns. She also pointed out to the PJ that each couple was responsible for their own children and that no one entered in the apartment of the friends [in each other's apartments].
 unquote


The People : EXCLUSIVE Fury at Maddie smear Sick claim in cop's book
 By David Jeffs Assistant Editor
6 July 2008
 
Madeleine McCann's parents last night angrily denied shameful allegations from a disgraced former Portuguese cop linking them to her death.
 
Ex-Chief Inspector Goncalo Amaral, who was leading the Maddie inquiry until he was sacked, said she died in the family's holiday FLAT.
 
And he claimed he was on the verge of bringing a potential key new WITNESS to Portugal on the day he was fired.
 
"The PJ (Judicial Police) had to pay travel and accommodation and that was being sorted. But afterwards the important witness never came to Portugal and was never interviewed." unquote

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 50
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

Post by tigger on 26.06.12 8:38

From Jornal de Noticias 3/5/08:

The Smiths:
in April, this family was contacted by detectives of Método 3. The JN discovered that since that contact the certainties of the Smiths ended. unquote

Taken together with the depositions of the Paynes and Diane Webster as seen above, the PJ were building a fairly solid case in 2007.
The Smiths' sighting, the waiters' evidence (there was one waiter who actually went into hiding), the above testomonies of the Paynes given on the 11th July 07 all seem to point that way.

The rogatories changed all that and most likely this was all arranged during the Rothley meeting of the T9 in November.

Gerry's blog doesn't mention a happy reunion with his best friends but it does mention this:
11/7/07.
The Portuguese police interviewed three of our friends again today, to clarify points in their initial statements. As most of you will know, there is a lot of misleading information being published, both in the press and on the internet, about the events leading up to Madeleine's disappearance and the criminal investigation. We would like to give more information, especially about inaccurate and hurtful reports, but cannot for fear of prejudicing any subsequent court proceedings. The Portuguese police have made it clear to us that all witnesses should not divulge or discuss the information they have provided. Kate and I are, of course not party to all of the information coming into the inquiry for sound operational reasons. unquote

Nothing in the diary and no personal meeting with the Paynes? Very strange. thinking

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 50
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

Post by Guest on 26.06.12 11:40

Good one Tigger, I had not seen this either...
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

Post by sweetex on 26.06.12 14:27

News to me too.

What saddens me really...... and I'm actually speechless at the moment... if the above mentioned is true (which I believe it is) - why on earth are these two people (McCanns) still free. How are they getting away with this :-( The obvious is clear. How and Why are there still people believing they are innocent.

I don't get it wft Evil or Very Mad

eta: Then again, was it not Fiona Payne who supported Kate with the book trial in PT earlier this year when Gerry had to go back home due to other commitments?

I also think the witness they talk about "flying back to PT on the the day GA was fired" is actually one of the Smith's.

regardless, I still think GA had and still has a very good case..... but why are they still free?
avatar
sweetex

Posts : 281
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-04-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

Post by tigger on 26.06.12 15:02

I don't know if these statements made to the PJ on the 11th July were released with the files. I also don't know how these statements would tally with the RIs of the Paynes and Diane Webster.

What I found interesting is that the three were flown over 'in secret'.
Their statements tallied with that of the staff at the Tapas bar.
They don't seem to have taken the opportunity to say 'Hello' to their dear friends the McCanns. Which they could have done after the interviews.

There are therefore many depositions by these particular witnesses:
the week starting the 3rd May 07.
11th July 2007
April 2008

It's also in April that the Smiths are contacted by Metodo3 and suddenly seem to be less sure as to what they witnessed.

The mid November meeting in Rothley is fairly crucial as far as the witness statements are concerned imo.

The Home Office had delayed the rogatory interviews for many months to the frustration of the PJ. Otherwise they might even have taken place in 2007.
As it was, they took place nearly a year after the event and I expect it could be argued in a court of law that by then their answers were inconsistent because it was so long ago.

Fiona Payne may still be Kate's best friend, but I don't think this is the case between any of the men of the group. For them, the McCanns have proved to be rather toxic.


____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 50
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

Re: Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

Post by Badboys on 26.06.12 19:58

It was said that when the ris happened they interviewed two witnesses that were vital,they had all the information they needed.

One reason police can't proceed with a case is because while they know what happened,exact details are unknown.

Badboys

Posts : 69
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2011-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

Post by jd on 27.06.12 0:17

This topic is hugely interesting. I never knew of the secret visit & the potential new witness

Diane Websters statements always intrigue me, as the first one made at the time feels quite genuine though non committal, but the RI seems to be a U-turn, clearly been got at by brian 'bulldozer' kennedy in the November 2007 meeting. Would love to read the July 2007 statements
avatar
jd

Posts : 4151
Reputation : 26
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

Post by tigger on 27.06.12 6:42

@jd wrote:This topic is hugely interesting. I never knew of the secret visit & the potential new witness

Diane Websters statements always intrigue me, as the first one made at the time feels quite genuine though non committal, but the RI seems to be a U-turn, clearly been got at by brian 'bulldozer' kennedy in the November 2007 meeting. Would love to read the July 2007 statements

Yes, that's what I forgot to say - those statements must be amongst the files that weren't released.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 50
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

An unreliable 24horas article

Post by Tony Bennett on 27.06.12 6:54

@tigger wrote:I found these amongst the many articles on McCannfiles.com (what would we do without him?) I'd love to hear views on this because it was mostly news to me and I've not seen it mentioned elsewhere. I tried to snip but it's better to have the full article. Sorry for the length.

Tuesday 03 June 2008
Friends are the PJ trumps 24horas

QUOTE

In a secret visit to Portugal, three people who had dinner at the Tapas Bar shattered the McCanns and Jane Tanner versions.

Fiona Payne, her mother Dianne Webster, and the husband David Payne are the main trumps of the Public Ministry that will lead the parents of Madeleine McCann, the missing girl, on the 3rd of May 2007, from an apartment in Praia da Luz, Algarve, to be accused of the crimes of exposition and abandonment since they left the girl alone that critical night. It is a crime that is punishable up to ten years of prison and allows the respective preventive arrests, like 24horas announced last week.

These three witnesses returned to Portugal, on the 11th of July 2007, with travel paid by the Portuguese State, and were accommodated in a hotel unity of Portimão. They were questioned by Gonçalo Amaral’s team, the superior coordinator who was removed from the case, and they contradicted the McCann’s version regarding what went on in the night of the disappearance.

Remember that Kate, Gerry and the other two couples with whom they had dinner, assured that they were taking turns in the vigilance to the children. A fact that was contradicted to the authorities in the above-mentioned secret travel by Fiona Payne and that had already been put in question in two previous statements, given on the days that followed to Maddie's disappearance, by her mother and her husband.



Jane Tanner Contradicted

Fiona Payne gave three statements to the authorities, as well as Matthew Oldfield and his companion, Rachel. Dianne Webster's statement [Fiona's mother] was very solid and there was no need to question her again”, revealed to 24horas a judicial person in charge connected with the process. In accordance to the same source, "other persons who had dinner with the McCanns - Jane Tanner, her companion, Russell O'Brien, Matthew Oldfield and his wife, Rachel – gave contradictory statements". And the judicial person in charge exemplifies: "Jane Tanner always said that she went out from the restaurant to see her oldest daughter. Fiona, David and Dianne guaranteed to the PJ that she never left the restaurant before the alarm was given by Kate. This information was corroborated by several workers of the Tapas Bar restaurant”. These witnesses also stated that Gerry McCann did not even go to check on the children, when he went away of the restaurant, and that he only stayed at the apartment of Praia da Luz entrance.

The only person who stayed in Tapas Bar

Dianne Webster, of 63 years old, mother of Fiona Payne (36 years), was one of three people who were available to return to Portugal to help the authorities in the reconstruction of the facts taken place on the 3rd of May 2007.

She was the only one that was quiet and calm when Kate McCann entered in the Tapas Bar shouting "they’ve taken her!". The authorities were suspicious of her attitude and she told them that she did not believe in the version of the McCanns. She also pointed out to the PJ that each couple was responsible for their own children and that no one entered in the apartment of the friends [in each other's apartments].


UNQUOTE
I am not sure what reliance, if any, can be placed on this 24horas story.

The main and possibly only purpose of the 'secret' visit of 11 July was to arrange the 'confrontation' in Portimao Police Station between Robert Murat and the 'Tapas 3' (RO, O'B and FP) over who was telling the truth about Murat being seen 'hanging around the Ocean Club' after Madeleine was reported missing. The 'Tapas 3' said he was; Murat denied it.

The article doesn't even mention this key fact!

This is how Goncalo Amaral reports the matter in his book:

On July 11th at 10am, a confrontation is organised between the witnesses, Rachael Oldfield/Mampilly, Fiona Payne and Russell O'Brien, and Robert Murat. Nothing new comes out of it. The former persist in stating that the suspect was definitely in the area on the night of the disappearance. Murat denies the whole thing and even accuses them of lying. Each side stands its ground. The only positive aspect of this meeting: the McCanns' friends undertake to return to Portugal for the purpose of the investigation. That will not happen.

The previous day, 10 July, Murat had been re-interviewed and, on being confronted by mobile 'phone data obtained by the police, confessed he'd not told the truth about his movements on 1 May, 2 May, 3 May and 4 May. He made at least 17 significant changes in his account of events on those four days.

I discussed all this in Chapters I and J of my long article on Robert Murat ('From arguido to applause'); here's a reminder of part of that article:

I. A summary of Murat’s 17 changes of story about what he did on 1, 2, 3 and 4 May

You may by now have lost count of the number of changes in Robert Murat’s story about what he was doing between 1 and 4 May, so here’s a convenient summary of his new account of events, and how these contradicted his earlier account of events:

1. Remembers that on 1 May he tried to contact Jorge da Silva.

2. Remembers that on 2 May he didn’t leave home at 10.30am but instead had a meeting with Sergei Malinka at the Batista Supermarket.

3. He had in fact taken Michaela and Malinka back to his mother’s house in Praia da Luz for a further discussion, something he’d omitted to tell the police in the first interview.

4. He now remembered visiting his bank and paying in 287.51 euros.

5. He now remembered he’d called at the home of Francisco Pagarete, his lawyer, that morning.

6. He now remembers that he had met Francisco Pagarete that afternoon.

7. He now remembers that another of Jorge’s sons was present at their meeting in the café in the afternoon.

8. The meeting in the café went on much longer than he had said previously.

9. He thinks that Michaela Walczuk’s husband Luis Antonio may not have been present at Michaela’s house that evening, contrary to what he had previously said.

10. On 3 May, he had not woken at 9.00am as previously stated, but at 8.00am.

11. He had not driven to Michaela’s house that morning after 10.00am as previously stated; instead he had left home at 8.45am for a 9.30am meeting with the owner of the business tourist complex called ‘Gold Bunker’ in the Espiche district and her father-in-law.

12. He now remembered that he and Michaela had visited two apartments for about 30 minutes, probably on the afternoon of 3 May.

13. He and Michaela had lunch with the owner of the ‘Gold Bunker’ complex and her father-in-law, a fact he had not disclosed to police before.

14. Michaela’s daughter C______ was not with them that day, contrary to his previous story.

15. They went to the Palmares Golf Club in the afternoon, another fact Murat had failed to disclose.

16. He now admitted to making two telephone calls, to Sergei Malinka and Michaela, at 11.39pm and 11.40pm that night.

17. He previously said he had woken at 9.00am on Friday 4 May. He now admitted he had telephoned Michaela at 8.27am and must have got up earlier.

A possible interpretation of these changes of story could be along these lines; namely that during his first statement, Murat did not want to admit to:

· meeting with Sergei Malinka at the Batista supermarket on 2 May at around 10.00am

· he and Michaela being in the Espiche/Almádena area at around 9.30am on 3 May

· his meeting with the owner of the ‘Gold Bunker’ complex

· he, Michaela and the da Silvas being at the Palmares Golf Club on the afternoon of 3 May

· that he had visited two apartments on the afternoon of 3 May.

We make no other comment on the large number of changes of story but leave the reader to form his or her own judgment as to why there were so many changes. We will however add this discussion by a poster on the ‘maddiecasefiles’ internet forum, who analysed these discrepancies in Murat’s account of those few days:

“Jorge Miguel Rocha da Silva tells us that even on the day Murat returned from Exeter (1 May), he tried to get in touch da Silva at the children’s clothing shop that he runs with his wife. He couldn’t, as it was a public holiday. On the following two days (2 & 3 May) he insisted that that da Silva meet him at short notice. A few days later, three days before Murat was made an arguido, Michaela Walczuk was still inviting him to get-togethers at her apartment.

“The official line from Murat is that he was talking to da Silva to persuade him to invest in his and Michaela’s venture: ‘Romigen’. Yet to this day, Romigen appears to be no more than a ‘shell’ company, just a paper idea for selling property via the internet. It doesn’t seem as though the company required any significant cash injection. And if we look at da Silva’s statements, if Murat had any intention of buying land to make money out of it, this was never made apparent to da Silva even after several hours of apparently unprofitable conversation - or rather, so it's been said, of long and puzzling silences.

“On his first full day back in Praia da Luz (2 May), Murat did manage to get in touch with da Silva at the shop. He took da Silva and his two sons to a café bar for the first round of talking. We know that Murat rang his lawyer no less than four times that day. In addition, in da Silva’s first statement to the PJ, he said that: “They did some talking in Mrs Murat’s VW Transporter”. He says rather vaguely that the discussion was ‘to develop some details of the intended business’.

“The following day (3 May), Murat, Michaela, Jorge da Silva and his sons met again for a long session on 3 May, at the Palmares Golf Club. It is hard to understand from Jorge da Silva’s account what all these meetings were really about”.

So what could they have been about? Was the true content of these discussions being concealed?

We know that Murat came back to Portugal in apparent haste on 1 May.

His own account says that he booked his ticket on that very day. He seems to have booked his flight ticket at between midnight and 2.00am. His sister Samantha took him to the airport to catch the 7.00am flight. Murat must have been up and about at not long after 4.00am that morning to get up, travel by car to the airport and check in etc.

There seems to be, without doubt, a significant degree of urgency about Murat’s movements on 1 May. In his statement he said that he met only his mother (who fetched him from Faro airport) and Michaela that day, but since then we’ve learnt that he called at Jorge da Silva’s shop. Why did da Silva have these long discussions with Murat? Was it really just about Romigen?

Was his sudden early morning flight from Exeter to Praia da Luz just in order to get ‘Romigen’ moving, or to finalise his divorce as he claimed on another occasion? Did he really need to meet urgently with a top local lawyer for that reason? Two years later, Romigen appears to be still only a ‘shell’ company, or at most a ‘front’ for something else.

So we pose this question: did something significant happen on Monday 30 April which required him to jet out to Portugal immediately and confer with a number of powerful and well-connected people in Praia da Luz?

J. Other problems with Murat’s account of events

We have summarised the 17 changes of Murat’s story. Here we shall just pick out a few other queries raised by Murat’s two, highly contradictory accounts...

[SNIPPED]

____________________

The amazing symbiosis between bees and flowers:

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/god-created-plant-pollinator-partners/  

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14901
Reputation : 2996
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Two 'new' reports on witnesses.

Post by tigger on 27.06.12 7:27

Gerry's blog only mentions 'three of our friends'.
24Horas specifically mentions the Paynes and DW.
Amaral describes a confrontation with Murat by RM, ROB and FP.
All are agreed on the 11th July.

24Horas may be as unreliable as any tabloid. I don't know it.

It does seem very short notice to bring those three back to PdL after interviewing Murat on the 10th of July again. Unless of course this was arranged earlier purely for the identification of Murat - once again.
It's just that the article goes into detail about the checking of children and also mentions the staff at the Tapas.

It's also possible that they had little time to see the McCanns - in my long trawls through the files it is becoming apparent that the friendship between the men seems rather to have disappeared. Certainly little contact is apparent.
The women seem to have been given the job of keeping up appearances, JT still supporting KM, RM taking part in the same charity runs, FP still mentioned by KM. They were drinking buddies as students.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
avatar
tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 50
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile http://fytton.blogspot.nl/

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum