Goncalo Interview on Portugal TV 23.04.16

niklasericson wrote:It would be very easy for PJ to look in the records.
Who drove the coffin?
What time exactly took the cremation place?
Who was the lady in that coffin?
Did someone back in the UK had any kind of connection to this lady?
What did and where was the people,priests etc.around the McCanns at the time for this cremation?
The police can also take a look at the phone pings around the cremation area that day.

I would imagine no phones would have gone on this trip, if it happened.

We should not forget, that it's nine years later now. I wonder, if anyone was aware of "pings" at the time ...

canada12 wrote:There was a lot of speculation in 2007 that Madeleine's body had been cremated but iirc, the focus was on animal cremations and a nearby animal crematorium that had been shut. The speculation was that somehow they'd managed to hide Madeleine's body inside the body of an animal that had been taken to the crematorium. But I can see how this might have been a diversionary tactic to divert the speculation away from a more obvious conclusion, that her body had been hidden inside a coffin in the church. This makes complete sense if true. The McCanns asked for the key to the church and had unprecedented access. IIRC there was speculation at the time that her body had been hidden in a coffin but I'm not sure anyone was ever able to identify who had died around that time, or, indeed, IF anyone had died around that time. Obviously if this is true, the police will have had access to all the church records concerning the funeral and the cremation, and they will know what happened to the ashes. If they're lucky, the ashes are still held somewhere. I know from personal experience that sometimes not all of a body is reduced to ashes. Things like teeth and bone fragments often survive the fire. If they are able to identify, for instance, a tooth or a partial tooth that's obviously a child's tooth, then that might be the smoking gun. Or a bone fragment that can be identified as having come from a child rather than an adult. I wonder if you can extract DNA from cremation ashes. If you can't, then I wonder if sometime in the future it would be possible. If so, and the ashes are still held, then it might be something that a Cold Case investigation might solve at some future point.

Interesting development.

Interesting. And of course it is on record that on the night of the 'abduction' Gerry is wandering the streets and asks a policeman where the church is. This is odd. He is supposed to be looking for his abducted child, not the church! Is it possible that Madeleine's body was hidden in the church that night? Gerry wouldn't have asked that question unless the church was important and sensitive. The church was at the front of his mind.  I wonder whether it was an attempt to pretend to the police that he didn't know where the church was?


And of course it is also on record that Matt is searching along 'Cemetary Road' and he remembers the name.....

Does anyone know what date the cremation of the woman took place? I thought it was a month after the disappearance but I've seen other suggestions that it was much later?

ETA: The Smith sighting? Is it possible that the Smiths spotted Gerry carrying Madeleine's body to be hidden in the church? The direction he was heading in was towards the beach and towards the church?

Could the knowledge that he had been spotted by a family of nine have prompted the creation of the unbelievably flimsy 'Tanner-man' sighting? I think Tanner-man was hatched in the early hours of Friday morning? Does anyone know exactly when Jane Tanner told police about her 'sighting'? I am pretty sure it was quite a few hours after 10pm. Was it after Matt accompanied by OC resort manager visited Jez Wilkins and Bridget's apartment at around 1.30pm? The timing of this visit is hugely significant, imo. As well as the fact that Matt chose to be accompanied by an (independent?) eye-witness. Also significant is that Jez wasn't visited sooner by any of TM, despite the fact that Gerry claims he bumped into him at around 9.15pm.

Kate (page 105, Madeleine): "I was crying out that I could see Madeleine lying, cold and mottled, on a big grey stone slab."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html

Châtelaine wrote:We should not forget, that it's nine years later now. I wonder, if anyone was aware of "pings" at the time ...

I would imagine they would be aware of how mobile signals work. They were supplied with pay as you go mobiles by Simon Aldridge or Oldridge the b in law of Fiona Payne. However the phones were registered to a Dave Middleton from Doncaster. Simon's business was based in Doncaster. There is a suggestion that they had possession of Portuguese mobiles very early on, before Simon could have got them to them. This from FP rog.

However, Fiona Payne does divulge in her rogatory interview (2008) about the portuguese mobile phones that they arranged to have sent to them from her brother in law Simon Oldridge (a very wealthy businessman) His name is mispelt as Aldridge in statements).

Both Fiona Payne & her mother Dianne Webster were questioned about telephone calls/texts sent/recieved on the 4th & 5th of May.There were lots of calls apparently made to/from Simon Oldridge on DP & DW's phones over these two days. Although there's more confusion here because the phone wasn't registered to Simon Aldridge but someone called Dave Middleton. (this is in Dianne Webster's statement, linked below).

Were they using the portuguese phones as early as the 5th of May? It certainly looks like it from this line of questioning.

Fiona Payne Interview snipped to relevant part (& just when she thought it was all over)

1485 “Okay. Alright. At this stage I have got nothing else to say to you”.
Reply “Umm”.
1485 “As you are aware, the interview is being monitored and it may well be that they have some further questions, but at this present moment, there are no more further questions”.
Reply “Okay”.
1485 “Alright. Actually there is. Sorry. Do you have your phone?”
Reply “Yeah”.
1485 “I just want to clarify your, did you take your mobile with you?”
Reply “I didn’t. My mobile had actually broken before we went on holiday, so we just had Dave’s mobile”.
1485 “Right. So did anybody use your mobile whilst you were away?”
Reply (shakes head)
1485 “No?”
Reply “They couldn’t have done, no”.
1485 “No. Could you just see if you have any of these numbers in your phone?”
Reply “Yeah”.
1485 “07XXX XXXXXX”.
Reply “07XX. I’ll look for 07XXX”.
1485 “The last digits are going to be XXX, that is going to be easiest”.
Reply “XXX”.
1485 “Sorry, you must have loads. Also look for one that ends in XXX as well”.
Reply “Ah XXX. Is it 07XXX XXXXXX?”
1485 “Yeah”.
Reply “That’s my, Simon XXXXXXXX, my brother-in-law”.
1485 “It is who, sorry?”
Reply “Simon XXXXXXX, he’s my brother-in-law”.
1485 “Is there any reason why he would have been called?”
Reply “We did speak, well it couldn’t have been off my phone, is this from my phone?”
1485 “Well it is possible that it, no, it wouldn’t have been off your phone”.
Reply “No”.
1485 “It would have been off”.
Reply “It would have been off Dave’s”.
1485 “Dave’s, yeah”.
Reply “We did speak to him, yeah”.
1485 “Did you actually make any calls yourself?”
Reply “Erm, I used, I Dave’s phone. I’m trying to think who phoned Simon. I think Dave phoned Simon the following morning, erm, just because he’s another pragmatic, sensible thinking person”.
1485 “Yeah”.
Reply “Erm, I mean, you know, we would have phoned all our family that following day anyway”.
1485 “Umm”.
Reply “But we had a lot of calls from him. Plus he’s, he was, erm, just wanting to be of help really, so he did phone a fair bit as well, just in terms of, he organised for, erm, mobile phones, erm, you know, Portuguese mobile phones to be sent out to use, he, you know, he runs a business in XXXXX, erm, and financially as well, he was offering help if we needed, you know, money”.
1485 “Is there anybody other than family that you rang then?”
Reply “Erm, I rang the Children’s Nursery, tut”.
1485 “Have you got that number in there?”
Reply “Erm, yeah. I think I might have texted them. Erm, XX, sorry, it’s 01XXX XXXXXX”.
1485 “Okay”.
Reply “What was the other ending that you wanted, XXX?”
1485 “XXX, yeah”.
Reply “Sorry, I didn’t get to the last ones. 07XXX XXXXXX?”
1485 “That is it, yeah”.
Reply “That’s Dave’s number”.
1485 “That is Dave’s number, is it?”
Reply “It’s his mobile number, yeah”.
1485 “Another one that ends in XXX?”
Reply “(inaudible). XXX. 07XXX XXXXXX, that’s Karen XXXXX, which is Dave’s sister”.
1485 “The next one is a Portuguese number, well it is a short number, it is 91XXXXXXX?”
Reply “I don’t, I wouldn’t have that in this phone, erm, it’s a Portuguese number. Is it a Portuguese mobile number?”
1485 “I don’t know. It is just too short for, because ours are normally eleven, aren’t they?”
Reply “Yeah, we, because, as I say, Simon did organise, erm, a Portuguese mobile phone for us to use out there, erm, which we’ve still got at home, I couldn’t tell you what the number was for that mobile, but I used that once I was out there, you know, to contact, you know, Dave or, or any of them, I’ve texted on it”.
1485 “Somebody would have rang it or texted it?”
Reply “Yeah, tut, I’m just trying to remember how much I used it, you know, every day. Again, I mean, if I had Dave’s mobile phone bills, which I think we did give to somebody actually, it might have been Kate and Gerry’s Lawyers actually, but we did use those. I can’t remember how much I used them and how much I used the Portuguese phone, but we certainly had a Portuguese mobile”.
1485 “Yeah. It sent a text to XXX, which is Dave’s phone”.
Reply “Uh hu”.
1485 “On the fourth of the fifth, so it is the following night”.
Reply “Yeah”.
1485 “At twenty-two zero two”.
Reply “So we would have been at the Police Station”.
1485 “And then twenty-two zero eight”.
Reply “Sorry, from which phone, because we wouldn’t have had the Portuguese phone by then?”
1485 “It would have sent, the Portu, well I’ve got the Port”.
Reply “I don’t know how quickly the phone arrived”.
1485 “Yeah”.
Reply “I can’t imagine it was that quick”.
1485 “The Portuguese phone, or that number, sent a text to Dave’s number at twenty-two zero two on the fourth, the following night?”
Reply “So it was when I was being interviewed that evening. I don’t think our phones came out that, I can’t imagine they would have been out by then, on the Friday night, so I don’t know. I’ll just check it isn’t, are you sure it’s a Portuguese number? Just read the number out again, I’ll just check it”.
1485 “It is 91XXXXXXX”.
Reply “Yeah, it is a funny number, isn’t it?”
1485 “It has only got nine digits as opposed to our eleven”.
Reply “Yeah. No, I haven’t got that number on and I can’t think, I can’t think who could have sent a Portuguese number at that point. Dave might recall when our

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id252.html

Snipped Dianne Webster Interview

PC: "Do you know a Dave MIDDLETON?"
DW: "Dave MIDDLETON? (Shakes head)."

PC: "No?"
DW: "No."

PC: "Do you know anybody in Doncaster?"
DW: "No, but Louise, my middle daughter, she's married to Simon ALDRIDGE who, his company Doncaster, I'm sure it's around Doncaster where his business is."
PC: "The person that's bought the phone or registered the phone must be called Dave MIDDLETON. Okay, so that's your son in-law then?"
DW: "Yeah. Well not the Dave MIDDLETON, he's not."...

PC: "No."
DW: "No. My son in-law's..."

PC: "Simon ALDRIDGE."
DW: "Yeah."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm

Another possible theory regarding the cremation and the mileage on the car.

What if, when the McCanns hired the car it was used to drive Madeleine a fair distance from PdL and hide her. Then, when the coffin was seen in the church and/or the cremation was heard about, they drove to where Madeleine's body had been hidden, brought it back and placed it in the coffin.

Poster,in reply to your post above,the spot where GM is seen by the Smith family is indeed in the direction of the church.
The church is a mere 2 minute walk away.

dandaar wrote:Poster,in reply to your post above,the spot where GM is seen by the Smith family is indeed in the direction of the church.
The church is a mere 2 minute walk away.

Welcome.

Just to include a map of that (with thanks to google images)





This is an old one from Pat, but worth a refreshing read:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-on.html

Andrew wrote:

dandaar wrote:Poster,in reply to your post above,the spot where GM is seen by the Smith family is indeed in the direction of the church.
The church is a mere 2 minute walk away.

Welcome.

Just to include a map of that (with thanks to google images)



This is an old one from Pat, but worth a refreshing read:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-on.html

It just strikes me that it was very odd for Gerry to ask a policeman where the church was late on Thursday night or in the early hours of Friday morning? He was supposed to be looking for his daughter, not the church, for heaven's sake...

It simply makes no sense in the context of trying to find a missing child.

But of course Gerry wasn't looking for a missing child. We know that for sure.

If it really was Gerry who the Smiths saw on Thursday night carrying a child that could have been Madeleine, then I think there are two possibilities:

1. It was Gerry carrying Madeleine's body (possibly to hide in or near the church).
2. It was Gerry carrying a decoy child to promote the abduction story as someone else was supposed to have faked the abduction (at 9.15pm hence the botched timelines) and flaked out at the last minute.

I wonder if Gerry asked the police where the church was in order to convey the idea that he didn't know where it was. When he did. Perhaps 'brain leak' and Gerry does love to play mind games. ..

Still, surely a bit risky to do this if the body had been hidden in or near the church. But then again, perhaps a double bluff?

The church is certainly of great importance in this case and we know that the McCanns were given keys to it after the alleged 'abduction' so they could go there to pray in privacy - allegedly...

poster wrote:
I wonder if Gerry asked the police where the church was in order to convey the idea that he didn't know where it was. When he did. Perhaps 'brain leak' and Gerry does love to play mind games. ..

Still, surely a bit risky to do this if the body had been hidden in or near the church. But then again, perhaps  a double bluff?

The church is certainly of great importance in this case and we know that the McCanns were given keys to it after the alleged 'abduction' so they could go there to pray in privacy - allegedly...

A bit like in Columbo, when the murderer knows exactly what time it is, but he's fixed it so it looks like the murder took place earlier or later than his alibi, and just to make sure everyone knows where he was during that alibi, he asks someone for the time so they remember him.

canada12 wrote:

poster wrote:
I wonder if Gerry asked the police where the church was in order to convey the idea that he didn't know where it was. When he did. Perhaps 'brain leak' and Gerry does love to play mind games. ..

Still, surely a bit risky to do this if the body had been hidden in or near the church. But then again, perhaps  a double bluff?

The church is certainly of great importance in this case and we know that the McCanns were given keys to it after the alleged 'abduction' so they could go there to pray in privacy - allegedly...

A bit like in Columbo, when the murderer knows exactly what time it is, but he's fixed it so it looks like the murder took place earlier or later than his alibi, and just to make sure everyone knows where he was during that alibi, he asks someone for the time so they remember him.

Yes absolutely. Spot on Canada.

Andrew wrote:

canada12 wrote:

poster wrote:
I wonder if Gerry asked the police where the church was in order to convey the idea that he didn't know where it was. When he did. Perhaps 'brain leak' and Gerry does love to play mind games. ..

Still, surely a bit risky to do this if the body had been hidden in or near the church. But then again, perhaps  a double bluff?

The church is certainly of great importance in this case and we know that the McCanns were given keys to it after the alleged 'abduction' so they could go there to pray in privacy - allegedly...

A bit like in Columbo, when the murderer knows exactly what time it is, but he's fixed it so it looks like the murder took place earlier or later than his alibi, and just to make sure everyone knows where he was during that alibi, he asks someone for the time so they remember him.

Yes absolutely. Spot on Canada.

Interesting.....these little 'tricks' are definitely a feature of this case, imo.

So we have David Payne visiting apartment 5A at around 6.30pm and finding all the children dressed predominantly in white and looking like angels - allegedly.

We have Matt Oldfield checking that the twins are breathing at 9.30pm - allegedly.

We have Matt Oldfield searching along Cemetery Road which he notices the name of because it must somehow resonate with him.

Kate claims Madeleine was 'exhausted' on Thursday at bedtime.

All this strongly indicates to me that Madeleine was dead by late afternoon/early evening on Thursday. Quite possibly before this of course.

Quick question.... Is there actually a road called cemetery (cemiterio) road in Praia da luz....

As I can't see one.

poster wrote:

Andrew wrote:

dandaar wrote:Poster,in reply to your post above,the spot where GM is seen by the Smith family is indeed in the direction of the church.
The church is a mere 2 minute walk away.

Welcome.

Just to include a map of that (with thanks to google images)



This is an old one from Pat, but worth a refreshing read:

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-on.html

It just strikes me that it was very odd for Gerry to ask a policeman where the church was late on Thursday night or in the early hours of Friday morning? He was supposed to be looking for his daughter, not the church, for heaven's sake...

It simply makes no sense in the context of trying to find a missing child.

But of course Gerry wasn't looking for a missing child. We know that for sure.

If it really was Gerry who the Smiths saw on Thursday night carrying a child that could have been Madeleine, then I think there are two possibilities:

1. It was Gerry carrying Madeleine's body (possibly to hide in or near the church).
2. It was Gerry carrying a decoy child to promote the abduction story as someone else was supposed to have faked the abduction (at 9.15pm hence the botched timelines) and flaked out at the last minute.

I wonder if Gerry asked the police where the church was in order to convey the idea that he didn't know where it was. When he did. Perhaps 'brain leak' and Gerry does love to play mind games. ..

Still, surely a bit risky to do this if the body had been hidden in or near the church. But then again, perhaps  a double bluff?

The church is certainly of great importance in this case and we know that the McCanns were given keys to it after the alleged 'abduction' so they could go there to pray in privacy - allegedly...

I agree the church does seem to be significant in many ways. I remember a poster who
lived in Praia da Luz who pm'd on several occasions and there information re-the church
was very interesting to say the least. According to 'her' the McCanns had a free reign as far as the church was concerned laptops et al.

If we assume GM was seen by the Smith family taking his daughter to an apartment near the church with a view to awaiting for an opportunity to have MBM cremated, how come the scenic car came to have the DNA of Maddie as evidenced by the dogs?

Was the body of MBM driven to the crematorium in the scenic and the other body due for cremation taken in another car?

costello wrote:
I agree the church does seem to be significant in many ways. I remember a poster who lived in Praia da Luz who pm'd on several occasions and there information re-the church was very interesting to say the least. According to 'her' the McCanns had a free reign as far as the church was concerned laptops et al.

They took laptops into the church? i thought they went to the church to pray for Madeleine.It would be ignorant anyone taking a laptop or even an active mobile into a church,but if they did that it is disgusting and somewhat dodgy.

@ kylie

Yes I agree, but 'seemingly' they were given all the privacy they needed, and what better place than the church!

Andrew wrote:Quick question.... Is there actually a road called cemetery (cemiterio) road in Praia da luz....

As I can't see one.

Is that why there was a (map on the table? IMO)

Andrew wrote:Quick question.... Is there actually a road called cemetery (cemiterio) road in Praia da luz....

As I can't see one.

There is, but not by the church. It's connected to Rua Primeiro de Maio which leads to the church.

http://www.mapmyride.com/pt/lagos-faro/rua-do-cemit-rio-to-em537-course-near-pr-course-622819

https://www.mapquest.com/portugal/luz/8600/rua-do-ramalhete-37.088930,-8.732281

I don't know if this has been copied over?


You are here: Home | Amaral | CMTV | Debate | Maddie | TV | CM Special: 'Maddie, The Mystery'
CM Special: 'Maddie, The Mystery'
25 APRIL 2016 | POSTED BY JOANA MORAIS LEAVE A COMMENT


Debate panel from left to right: Tânia Laranjo, CM journalist; Manuel Rodrigues, former PJ inspector; João Ferreira, CMTV news anchor; Gonçalo amaral, former PJ inspector & Rui Pereira, former Minister of Internal Affairs

Anchor João Ferreira - This special by CMTV 'Maddie, the Mystery', is going to focus on the book that I hold in my hands: "Maddie, the Truth of the Lie". It was written by Gonçalo Amaral, former Judiciary Police (PJ) coordinator. The man that was at the forefront of the investigation during the first months of the case, a case that has been dragging on for the past nine years. It's the book where Gonçalo Amaral reveals his truth about the mystery of the Maddie Case, a truth for which he was removed from the investigation and the reason why he requested an early retirement from the Judiciary Police (PJ), after 26 years of service. A truth, according to which the little girl died accidentally. Following that death, an unwanted and accidental death, the parents concealed their own daughter's cadaver. This is the truth that we are going to analyse in this special, where the man that wrote this book - and has just been acquitted by the Appeals court of Lisbon and absolved of having to pay a compensation of 500,000 euro to the McCann couple - will break the silence. A special where we are going to ask uncomfortable questions to Gonçalo Amaral, where we will confront his truth with other possible truths. Right now, let us have a look to the truth revealed in this book that is now allowed to see the light of day.

News Segment 1

Kate McCann (archive footage 2007) - (in Portuguese) Please, give our little girl back.
(in English) Please, give our little girl back.

Voice Over Mónica Palma - Abduction, defend the McCanns. Accident and concealment of the cadaver is the belief of Gonçalo Amaral.

Gonçalo Amaral (archive footage 2014) - If Madeleine McCann is truly dead, I doubt the body still exists. In that church there was a coffin with the cadaver of an elderly British lady which in the following day was going to Ferreira do Alentejo to be cremated. It was possible for the body of a child of that age and size to be concealed underneath that cadaver.

Voice Over - After six months of investigation, the former PJ inspector is removed from the Maddie Case, and this is one of the issues that was the object of his reflection. In the book that Gonçalo Amaral published, "Maddie, The Truth of the Lie", there is a chapter dedicated to that topic: the removal of a coordinator from an investigation, conspiracy or subservience?, questions the former PJ inspector. And it is precisely due to the 220 pages written by Amaral and a DVD with a documentary about Maddie, that the PJ inspector became the target of a lawsuit, a legal process that has been dragging for numerous years. In 2009, the McCann couple went to justice, demanding from Gonçalo Amaral a compensation of 1,2 million euro. The McCanns considered the publication and the documentary defamatory, they alleged to have suffered moral damages. The British couple considered that their rights, liberties and guarantees of the family were violated. The defence of the McCann family considered that Gonçalo Amaral could not have revealed information that appeared in the process of the investigation to Madeleine's disappearance. The defence also alleged that the book was ready three days after the prosecutor of Portimão, Magalhães e Menezes, redacted the dispatch that archived the process against the McCann couple, which had the date of 29 of July of 2008. In the book, the former criminal investigation coordinator of the PJ, Gonçalo Amaral, defends the thesis that Maddie's parents were involved in the disappearance and in the concealment of the 3-year-old girl's body. The McCann's defence lawyer, Isabel Duarte, argued that the author, Gonçalo Amaral, used unauthorized documents from the process, documents that were prohibited. This was a process that dragged in court for years, with successive postponements of court sessions and an attempt to an extra-judicial settlement between the parties, which never came into fruition.

Kate McCann (archive footage, press conference 2014) - We took on this case because of the pain and distress that Mr. Amaral has brought to us and our children.
Gerry McCann - We want to get justice for Madeleine.

Voice Over - In January 2015, the civil court, ended up condemning Gonçalo Amaral to pay to each one of the members of the McCann couple, Kate and Gerry, the amount of 250,000 euro. 250,000 euro plus interest, counting back from January 5 of 2010. Besides this payment, the civil court also decreed the prohibition of sales of new editions of the book and DVD, as well as the negotiations to transfer the copyright of both book and documentary. Gonçalo Amaral appealed, and there was a turnaround in this process. The Court of Appeals of Lisbon ruled in favour of the PJ inspector and revoked the sentence. The judges understood that Amaral acted within the framework of the legitimate right to exercise an opinion. The court considered the facts presented in the book and DVD, were, some of them, divulged by the McCanns themselves in numerous interviews all over the world. Gonçalo Amaral will not have to pay the indemnification of 250,000 euro to each member of the McCann couple. Gonçalo Amaral's book will soon return to the bookshops, however, Kate and Gerry have already stated that they will appeal to the Supreme Court of Justice. Kate and Gerry, who have always maintained that Madeleine was abducted, were constituted as arguidos (suspects) in September 2007, but were cleared in July 2008 for lack of evidence to sustain the hypothesis advanced by the investigation to the alleged accidental death of the little girl.
Maddie, disappeared on May 3, 2007, just a few days before of her fourth birthday. The English girl disappeared from this apartment (image of apartment is shown) in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, where she was sleeping along with her younger twin siblings.

Anchor João Ferreira - In the studio, in this special, we have Gonçalo Amaral, former PJ coordinator; Rui Pereira, CMTV commentator and Minister of Internal Affairs at the time of Maddie's disappearance; Manuel Rodrigues, former chief inspector of the Judiciary Police and also a CMTV commentator and Tânia Laranjo, Correio da Manhã and CMTV journalist, who followed closely the investigations to the Maddie case. Good-evening gentlemen, good-evening madam, it's a pleasure to be here with you all. Gonçalo Amaral, I'll start with you, good-evening, thank you for being here.

Gonçalo Amaral - Good-evening, thank you for the invitation.

Anchor João Ferreira - Did this investigation destroy your career?

Gonçalo Amaral - No, it interrupted my career. I had a dignified professional path in terms of work and progress in the hierarchy, I was an officer, an inspector, then chief-inspector, then I was a coordinator and could have gone a bit further, in fact at the time of the disappearance, when the case happened, I had applied for the role of superior coordinator of the Judiciary Police, it was a matter of time. So, that was the interruption, the life change, the career change, if I had stayed maybe I could have been in another professional position.

Anchor - Do you feel like a victim of the circumstances?

Gonçalo Amaral - No, I never considered myself as a victim then nor now. I felt at a certain point in time and this was part of the reasons that motivated me to write the book, that there was a full campaign of defamation and insults. A campaign that is likely to begin again given the court result, I have no doubts that it may happen again. That is usual under the circumstances associated with this case. So, I was a target of that. I requested at the time, I almost demanded it in fact, that is, demand between inverted commas, for the Judiciary Police direction to come out in our defence. Not only in my defence, but in the defence of all the officers that were working on the case and were called names such as drunks, alcoholics, of being lazy, incompetents, and so on. There were intrusions on our private lives, we were under surveillance, a series of things. Nothing was done about that. Then I begun to understand that the process was going to be archived, a conversation on that subject took place and it was then that I decided that it was enough. There was a preceding moment where I went to Faro (PJ headquarters)...

Anchor - After you were removed from the investigation?

Gonçalo Amaral - Yes, removed from the direction, from being the officer in charge of Portimão. I thought that everything would end there, but no, the attacks went on. I asked at that time to Dr. Alípio Ribeiro, to send me to...

Anchor - The National Director of the Judiciary Police?

Gonçalo Amaral - Yes, he was the director of the Judiciary Police. I asked him to let me go to the Azores, so I could regain some peace. I wanted to get away of these issues. They understood that I should stay and do my job in Faro, there I stayed, things went on until I've decided to.. I couldn't stand it any longer.

Anchor - But you asked to the Direction of the Judiciary Police to write this book? To reveal your truth?

Gonçalo Amaral - Yes, it does have to do with that. There was a problem, either I would write the book and stay in the Judiciary, and then the Judiciary would be liable or I could leave the Judiciary and anything that might happen would be on me. So, I set the Judiciary Police aside of the problem, and I left the Judiciary Police in order to regain the plenitude of my rights.

Anchor - Did Alípio Ribeiro pull the rug from under your feet?

Gonçalo Amaral - No, he did not. No one pulled the rug from under anyone's feet. There were a series of circumstances that lead to this outcome. A colleague of mine is present here today, and he knows that it's very unlikely for the PJ's direction to defend its men. Maybe with another director, I'm recalling Dr. Marques Vidal - to whom I express my gratitude for his support since the very outset, right from when the book was published, he presented the book - maybe it would have been different, maybe the protection of the officers would have been another. But Dr. Marques Vidal was an unique case, a director of the Judiciary Police that we will never have again.

Anchor - A leader more brave than others?

Gonçalo Amaral - He had a great understanding of the officers, he was a very humane man, and defended those that risked, that worked at times almost without a net, he was there, present. I could tell you several stories, from the time of the Cavacos, the support that Dr. Marques Vidal gave to the men on the ground. These are facts that can be verified, but we're digressing from the topic. I would like to add, that I have nothing against Dr. Alípio Ribeiro.

Anchor - But do you think that Alípio Ribeiro didn't resist the pressures?

Gonçalo Amaral - No, no, I believe that... For example, in this issue of requesting to the Direction of the PJ to speak in our defence or to allow me to speak, I wrote a letter addressed to the directorate of the Judiciary Police, addressed to Dr. Alípio Ribeiro. Later, I learned that that letter never reached his hands, he never read it. The letter stopped at his assistants, therefore I can't accuse him of anything, it's not his fault, it's the fault of the structural machine that exists, additionally the PJ direction does not usually come out in defence of its officers. Note that we're talking about the direction of the Judiciary Police but we could equally talk about the ASFIC (Association of the Criminal Investigation Officers of the Criminal Police), I ask - what did ASFIC do for the officers, for its members, that were on the field, then and after? For example, right now, until now, what did they do? Has ASFIC direction, at any time - regarding myself, a retired officer with success on the work I did - ever called me? Either to congratulate, at this point in time or whatever. Nothing at all.

Anchor - Why do you think is that, Gonçalo?

Gonçalo Amaral - Maybe it's our culture, of the Portuguese, who knows? Maybe because I'm no longer in the police, have nothing to do with the PJ.

Anchor - Are you saying that there is fear from the people in the Judiciary to come out in your defence?

Gonçalo Amaral - I wouldn't say fear. I find it strange, a very odd situation. Those who have congratulated me at this point in time, for this decision - a decision that has not yet been rendered final, and may still be the target of an appeal - but those who have congratulated me were colleagues that are retired, not colleagues in active functions. Not even a single colleague on the active congratulated me. On the other hand, I had the support of colleagues in the active from the British police, who also have been present along the years.

Anchor - Let us move now to your truth, the truth that is here in this book...

Gonçalo Amaral - Well, that is another issue. That is not my truth...

Anchor - It's the factual truth.

Gonçalo Amaral - Not even that, that book represents the elements of the Judiciary Police...

Anchor - So, it's the material truth of the Judiciary Police?

Gonçalo Amaral - We could even say that the book is the opinion of the Judiciary Police until September 2007. Not my truth alone.

Anchor - And that opinion, Gonçalo Amaral, describes a scenario where the little girl Maddie suffered an accidental death...

Gonçalo Amaral - That is what is described in the PJ report written by the Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida.

Anchor - ...a death unwanted by the parents and in face of that death the parents concealed the cadaver.

Gonçalo Amaral - Yes, there was an infringement. What that means is...

Anchor - So, for you Gonçalo the parents should be behind bars? Should they be punished for these crimes?

Gonçalo Amaral - No, no, it doesn't have to do with that. For us to read and understand that book, we also have to understand the moment, the progress of the investigation. And we need to understand that an investigations as a beginning, a middle and an end, as my colleague Moita Flores says an investigation is always zigzagging and he's right about that. At that point in time of the investigation, when the archival was decided, the archival was decided in early October of 2007... Whomever lead the process after me, was there to adjust the process so it could be archived. Any colleague of mine can see that it is the adjustment of the process so it can be archived; all of us have at some point in time archived processes when reaching a dead end and we all know what to do so no investigative leads are left unfinished. So, at that point in time of the investigation that was the line of reasoning of the Judiciary Police. Not my line of reasoning alone, it's of the whole team, of the Judiciary Police as an institution. I will go further, after that, nothing was done concerning that line of investigation that...

Anchor - Of the accidental death.

Gonçalo Amaral - ...we can say, of the probable responsibility of the parents in the mysterious disappearance of the child, with all that entails, but this is the essential. Yet, that line of investigation was set aside. Even the Scotland Yard investigation and so on, never explored that line of investigation, and now they've reached a dead end. They constituted, derided in my opinion, - this is what this is all about, opinion and freedom of expression - in my opinion as coordinator, as an investigator, that increase, that creation of numerous arguidos was a derision of that institution. There were two or three arguidos - the English didn't even know the meaning of arguidos was - and they decided to constitute even more arguidos, and now we have an ocean of arguidos. Before we had a few drops and now we have an ocean where virtually nothing can be seen, a way to bury, to obscure.

Anchor - I would like for you to tell us in detail your explanation for the disappearance of the body, you have a thesis..

Gonçalo Amaral - No, I don't have one.

Anchor - ... in this book...

Gonçalo Amaral - No, in that book there isn't anything concerning what we just saw me saying on the news piece that was shown. Because these are elements, these are information that appeared afterwards and were never investigated. It's just an hypothesis, and when considering that hypothesis...

Anchor - An hypothesis that Madeleine's body could have been hidden, could have been incinerated, right?

Gonçalo Amaral - There's an information here, in the police, that mentions that. That in a night, three figures were seen carrying a bag, entering the church...

Anchor - In the Praia da Luz church.

Gonçalo Amaral - In that church was a coffin of a woman, a woman from the United Kingdom...

Anchor - Of a British woman.

Gonçalo Amaral - ... and in the following day that coffin was transferred to Ferreira do Alentejo to be incinerated. But no one is saying that the parents did that, or saying who did that. It's something that someone who is on the field investigating has to ascertain, must investigate thoroughly.

Anchor - But you concede that hypothesis, that possibility of Madeleine's cadaver being taken to the church, and then incinerated is a plausible hypothesis...

Gonçalo Amaral - We're practically starting by the end, first is the disappearance, if you allow me to explain, to explain to the viewers... [overlapping speech]

Anchor - I'll allow you, but just so not to lose this train of thought, is this hypothesis plausible for you?

Gonçalo Amaral - It is plausible, and I say plausible in this sense, that that body would fit underneath the cadaver that was already there.

Anchor - And it would fit?

Gonçalo Amaral - It would, yes. At the time, when I was already out of the Judiciary Police I obtained the opinion of people that dealt with that, of funeral agencies, and they said that it was a possibility. It's an opinion that is not officialized but it's a possibility. If it happened like that or not, we don't know, there are several hypotheses to make a body disappear.

Anchor - Let's go back to the beginning then Gonçalo, on the disappearance. What are the indications, post-disappearance that helped construct the material truth that appears here in the book?

Gonçalo Amaral - Nine years have passed, I would have to look at the book pages and explain them to you in detail. There were several indicia, the contradictions, the discrepancies in the statements of those people, other witness statements that said they saw the father carrying the child at a certain hour, there are a series of indications that point towards that. To give you a full report on that would be tiresome, I believe most people know or are already aware. That was talked about numerous times throughout years. So, indicia and some evidence, evidence in inverted commas, concerning the vestiges that were collected and sent to the English forensics laboratory for analyses, it is said that there could have been a manipulation of all that data, it's still not clear what happened. I recall that before we had the official report, we had a preliminary report which indicated that the fluids found in the car rented a month after the disappearance belonged to Madeleine McCann. And when the report arrived, it was no longer like that. It was said at the time that the profile with a series of alleles matched Madeleine's, yet they said that anyone in that laboratory could have contributed to that profile. So, why did it match to Madeleine's, and not, say to the US president profile? There's something very strange about that analysis, something that should be questioned, verified, investigated. I believe that when forensic analyses are done, the laboratory technician has to keep a record of what he is doing. I don't know if that was destroyed or not, but it should exist along side the report.

Anchor - Of course. Gonçalo Amaral before I'll return to you, let us now pay close attention to the next news segment. The disappearance of Madeleine Mccann was since the start embroiled in mystery. Maddie disappeared in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve on May 3, 2007, a few days before her fourth day. Let us now watch a reconstitution of that fateful Thursday.

Reconstruction segment*

Images of the crime scene, inside and outside apartment 5A, appear on the screen; also of Madeleine McCann and her twin brother and sister, followed by the caption “Where is Maddie?” – then the programme starts.

Voice Over Rui Pando Gomes - On that Thursday of the 3rd of May, 2007, the McCanns’ decide not go to the beach with the other three couples – their friends. Instead, Gerry and Kate spend their day at the Ocean Club.

That day, the couple never leaves the holiday compound but, even so, they do not keep their children with them. Maddie aged three, and the twins Amelie and Sean, aged two, spend their day at the Ocean Club’s crèche (the children’s day care centre).

At 9:10 AM, Gerry delivers the children to the crèche.

The crèche staff take the children to the beach. Between 10:30 and 11 hours, Madeleine plays on the beach with other children . Kate collects the children from the crèche at 12:25 and returns them (to the crèche) at 14:50 hours.

A few hours later (around 16:00) Kate is jogging on the beach. At 17:30, she returns to the crèche to pick up her three children and to take them back home to apartment 5A.

At the same time Kate McCann is collecting her children from the crèche, their friends (that is the other three couples) drink on the esplanade (terrace) of the restaurant Paraíso, in Praia da Luz (17:35 hours on the CCTV video caption).

The CCTV cameras of the restaurant capture the presence of the British group in a buoyant mood. Their children are with them. (It looks like) a tranquil (and enjoyable) end to their afternoon.

Short break in the voice-over with more images shown

At exactly 18:13 hours, the men from the group – David Payne, Russell O’Brien and Matthew Oldfield abandon the restaurant and head in the direction of the Ocean Club.

The women, Fiona Payne, Jane Tanner and Rachel Oldfield remain sitting on the (restaurant’s) esplanade. They get up from their chairs at 18:30 hours – about 15 minutes after their husbands who, by then, have already arrived back at the Ocean Club.

At 18:30, David Payne goes to meet Gerry who is (already) playing tennis (on the courts). He asks him where Kate is. Gerry tells him, Kate is in the apartment with the children. David heads towards the apartment.

No one knows for sure how long David stays in the apartment with Kate – his visit is shrouded in mystery.

Gerry McCann says his friend was in his apartment for about half an hour while he played tennis, but Kate McCann says he was not there for more than 30 seconds.

To deepen the mystery further, Fiona Payne attests she accompanied her husband to their friends’ apartment and the couple, both Gerry and Kate, were at home.

One thing seems certain; the (McCanns’) first floor neighbour, Pamela Fenn, saw David Payne, around 19:00 hours, on the McCanns’ balcony.

David Payne will later tell the Judiciary Police (PJ) that he had gone to the apartment “to find out whether Kate needed help with the children” and that he had seen Maddie and the twins there – a moment he had come to remember as “the vision of three immaculate angels.”

Dinner time approaches.

The four couples dine together at the Tapas Restaurant in the Ocean Club – a routine they had followed since their arrival together, on the 28th of April. They do not bring their children with them – a few months old baby and seven young children (toddlers) are left asleep, unattended in their apartments, while their parents, free from care, dine until around midnight; their children well out of their sights.

In the evening of the 3td of May, Gerry and Kate are the first to arrive at the restaurant. The time is 20:35 hours.

The oval table, near the swimming pool, is reserved for the British group. By 20:45 they are all sitting at the table; Gerry and Kate, David and Fiona Payne, Russell O’Brien and Jane Tanner, Matthew and Rachel Oldfield and Dianne Webster – Fiona’s mother.

Kate for example, cannot do without her usual “daiquiri” as an apéritif (a rum cocktail). The group is in the habit of drinking eight bottles of wine – four red and four white (…)

That evening, they ordered grilled fish and meat on the spit. As they sit and dine at the oval table, most have their backs turned against their apartments; (but) even if they were facing the apartments, the wall and the edges (which were in the way) would not allow them to see (the back of) the ground floor apartments where the children are sleeping alone. An opaque, plastic wind-breaker placed between their table and the apartments, further obstructs their vision. Furthermore, the (ground-floor) window of the bedroom where Maddie sleeps, is located on the other side (front) of the apartment block which (obviously) cannot be seen from the restaurant.

The McCanns and their friends, assured the police, they had a scheme of vigilance (an arrangement for checking on the children). Each one of them, in turn, would get up from the table to see if everything was all right (to check on the children).

According to the members of the group, the (checking) rounds took place every half an hour and sometimes, every fifteen minutes.

But the truth is; (exactly) what the group actually did during that dinner – the evening Maddie disappeared – has never been (fully) clarified.

After the authorities were alerted to Maddie’s disappearance, Russell O’Brien provides the police with a schedule of the (checking) rounds done (on the children) that evening. He drafted it himself on the back of a cover he tore off from a children’s book (activities & stickers).

Days later, the police find among Kate’s papers a manuscript (draft) with the hours of the rounds (checking) written on it – except, this differed from the one her friend Russell gave to the PJ.

There are lapses in the memory of the McCanns’ friends (account of events) and (worst) contradictory versions of the same (alleged events). The police never knew with rigour, (with any degree of certainty) the steps (movements) of each of them during that dinner. There are only four moments that coincide; (and these are) the only ones corroborated by witnesses.

At 21:00 hours, two men get up from the table – one is Russell O’Brien; the other Gerry McCann.

They set off to the apartments (ostensibly) to check on their children. In order to reach the apartment, Gerry has to leave the Ocean Club and walk 20 meters of a dimly lit street to reach the small access gate to his apartment.

(After checking on the children and ) on the way back to his dinner, Gerry encounters Jeremy Wilkins, a BBC producer whom he had met during this holiday.

It is now 21:05 hours. Jeremy is strolling, pushing a pram, trying to lull his baby son into sleep. The two men greet each other and chat for a while. The street is deserted.

(Meanwhile) Jane Tanner, the partner of Russell O’Brien, worries about his absence from the (dinner) table and gets up (to look for him).

Later, she assures the police that between 21 and 21:05 hours, she saw a stranger carrying a child in his arms at the (top of) the same narrow street (she was walking up) and on which, at that very same time, Gerry stood chatting with Jeremy. (But) nor Gerry or Jeremy saw anyone passing by, nor even for that matter, noticed Jane Tanner’s presence (walking past them.)

Around 21:30 hours, Gerry returns to the restaurant’s table. Russell had not yet arrived back (from his check). He finally returns close to 22 hours – nearly half an hour after Gerry. Russell explains his older daughter had vomited, that he gave her a bath, changed her clothes and put her back to sleep.

At 21:55 PM, as soon as Russell O’Brien arrives at the restaurant’s table, Kate McCann gets up to check on her children.

Five minutes later, around 22 hours, she shouts from the apartment’s balcony (at the back) facing the restaurant: “They have taken her! They have taken her!” . No one from the group is able to see her. They can only hear her. Then, they all rush towards the (McCanns’) apartment (…)

More images in and around the village of Luz (Light), followed by the caption – “Where is Maddie?” and back to the studio.

Anchor João Ferreira - The investigation to the Maddie case pursued several lines of inquiry. There were political pressures that marked the beginning of the investigation, which, during a first moment, shielded the parents from becoming suspects. Kate's diary, seized a few months later, revealed the whole machinery set up by the family to feed the abduction thesis.

News segment 2

Voice Over Tânia Laranjo - 3 of May of 2007, just a little before midnight the Judiciary Police was alerted, a four-year-old English girl disappeared from a tourist resort in Praia da Luz. The parents dined in a near-by restaurant. It was necessary to proceed with caution, these were doctors, unsuspicious, victims of an abduction, of a hideous crime. Portimão was still living with the hangover of the Joana Case, Leonor Cipriano was condemned but the delay at the start of the investigation turned out to be tragic, the remnants of the little girl were never found. The Judicial condemnation didn't erase the doubts. In Praia da Luz, on that night, moments of tension were felt. When the PJ arrived on the scene, dozens of people had already been inside the apartment. They had contaminated vestiges, moved what could have been evidence, destroyed indicia that no one knows what they could have clarified.

The English government acted swiftly so the parents wouldn't be investigated, to focus on the search for the abductors. Kate's diary, seized a few months later, revealed other pressures. On the morning of the 23rd of May, 20 days after the Maddie's disappearance, before leaving to Fátima's sanctuary, Kate and Gerry left a voice message to Gordon Brown. Maddie's mother described it as a way to increase the political pressure, she disclosed that Tony Blair's successor called back only three hours later. He spoke with Gerry, was very sympathetic and gave them strength, said Kate, who described the visit to the catholic sanctuary as overwhelming, powerful and emotional.

Apart from the contacts with Gordon Brown, Kate's diary also revealed other important allies. From the hiring of Clarence Mitchell as an advisor, who was working for the government at the time, to the conversations with the wife of the former British prime minister, Tony Blair. Mitchell, in fact, had a pivotal role in the propaganda machine that was set up by the McCanns within a few days. They counted on the assistance from the British diplomacy in all the trips that were carried out. The first trip and the one with the most intense media coverage was the trip to Rome. They were received by the Pope Benedict XVI, the trip had been suggested by their advisor on the 27th of May, after speaking to Francis Campbell, the British ambassador at the Vatican. The visit to Rome was described by Kate as being very emotional, positive and important, and that loads of journalists and photographers had appeared, this was an ongoing concern present in the couple's lives. After Rome, Madrid, Berlin, Morocco followed, trips made with the objective to divulge Madeleine's face, followed by visits to consulates or receptions given by British ambassadors or by political representatives of the respective countries.

Amidst all that, was an investigation marked by breakthroughs and setbacks. Kate and Gerry started as victims, four months later Maddie's mother was constituted as an arguida for negligent homicide. The British dogs, requested by the couple, found the little girl's trace inside the boot of the car. A vehicle that was rented after the disappearance, where DNA vestiges were also found which suggested that Maddie had been transported in there. The genetic markers weren't sufficient. The doubts grew, the mystery thickened. Nine years later the narrative of the pressures remain, of a failed investigation, of a little girl who, dead or alive, has never been found. Where is Madeleine McCann? - the answer never came.





ongoing


Broadcast by CMTV, S16 EP20, CM Special: Maddie, the Mystery, April 23, 2016 - first draft

*Same reconstruction that had been broadcast in the CMTV Special in 2013, see Zizi's full translation with extra notes

seahorse wrote:

Andrew wrote:Quick question.... Is there actually a road called cemetery (cemiterio) road in Praia da luz....

As I can't see one.

There is, but not by the church. It's connected to Rua Primeiro de Maio which leads to the church.

http://www.mapmyride.com/pt/lagos-faro/rua-do-cemit-rio-to-em537-course-near-pr-course-622819

https://www.mapquest.com/portugal/luz/8600/rua-do-ramalhete-37.088930,-8.732281

Cheers for that, Seahorse.

Couldn't see it at all last night. At one point I was literally walking around the streets in one of those 'street view' google map things, trying to navigate myself around.

Got totally lost and ended up in Spain.

What a walk! You must be exhausted then

Days later, the police find among Kate’s papers a manuscript (draft) with the hours of the rounds (checking) written on it – except, this differed from the one her friend Russell gave to the PJ.

To me, at least, this is really interesting.
This third timeline is not something I believe we have heard of before - and is not something documented in the PJ files as far as I am aware.
Nor is it something that appears to be discussed with KM in any interviews with the police.
The fact that it is mentioned so clearly here is quite striking given its previous non-visibility.
I wonder how badly it contradicts the other timelines, and also whether it contradicts Kate's own various accounts.
Certainly its very existence seems yet another suspicious jigsaw piece.

Cheers for posting the rest of it up @ Mo.

Was going to say the same thing @ GBWales. If they found that only a few days later then why no mention of it, ever, until now..

Slept like a log @ Seahorse.

I'm wondering if a statement by Mrs Fenn has been held back as I haven't seen this before: This was the visit by DP to the McCann's apt.


One thing seems certain; the (McCanns’) first floor neighbour, Pamela Fenn, saw David Payne, around 19:00 hours, on the McCanns’ balcony.

gbwales wrote:

Days later, the police find among Kate’s papers a manuscript (draft) with the hours of the rounds (checking) written on it – except, this differed from the one her friend Russell gave to the PJ.

To me, at least, this is really interesting.
This third timeline is not something I believe we have heard of before - and is not something documented in the PJ files as far as I am aware.
Nor is it something that appears to be discussed with KM in any interviews with the police.
The fact that it is mentioned so clearly here is quite striking given its previous non-visibility.
I wonder how badly it contradicts the other timelines, and also whether it contradicts Kate's own various accounts.
Certainly its very existence seems yet another suspicious jigsaw piece.

Is it def a 3rd timeline? It couldn't be the other version of the sticker book timeline which we always thought was handed over that night.