Doubts on Mrs Fenn's statement?

What I can't understand is why the whole 'Chaplins' episode couldn't be verified.

They either did or they didn't.

Been speculation about it since the beginning but nothing ever proven (afaik).

Unless all hidden in the unreleased files.

Or witnesses have been gagged and paid off by TM.

Bit of a lead balloon the last question.

Will try another....

Does anyone think that Mrs Fenn wasn't immediately questioned by the PJ and therefore that first interview has been withheld.....

And only the latter one released...


This post transferred from the Questions and Answers topic.

Andrew wrote:Bit of a lead balloon the last question.

Will try another....

Does anyone think that Mrs Fenn wasn't immediately questioned by the PJ and therefore that first interview has been withheld.....

And only the latter one released...


This post transferred from the Questions and Answers topic.

I would find it 'really' difficult to believe that Mrs Fenn wasn't questioned within the first 24-48 hours Andrew. My thoughts are her first statement/s have not been released for obvious reasons.

Andrew wrote:Bit of a lead balloon the last question.

Will try another....

Does anyone think that Mrs Fenn wasn't immediately questioned by the PJ and therefore that first interview has been withheld.....

And only the latter one released...


This post transferred from the Questions and Answers topic.

I think it highly unlikely that someone didn't call round to speak to Mrs Fenn by the next morning anyway. You would think that she would have told them about the crying then.
I wonder if at that stage it wasn't deemed important as they were looking at abduction on the 3rd. I, however, think it unlikey as every bit of info is usually recorded, whether relevant at the time or not. Why it is not in the files is a mystery. And even if she didn't mention the crying that day, surely she would have then phoned a few days later to the police to say she just remembered about it. I don't believe 28 August was the first time she spoke of it. But there is no good reason why a first statement would be left out of the released files when her August one was made public.

Exactly... of course she would of been one of the first (outside the tapas lot) to be questioned.

She lives above the 'crime scene' and the PJ didn't get round to speaking to her until the 20th of August... I don't think so.

From having a quick look and read over the road then that's exactly what Tony/Verdi imply.

Ridiculous.

Some posters there making good sense of it all.

Tony and his sock Verdi are not making any sense at all.

Just a desperate attempt to rubbish Mrs Fenn in the exact same way TM have done since the get go.

Imo etc.

@Chirpy... I think a lot of the very 'important' stuff was withheld (when they decided to release the files)

Hence, Mrs Fenn's original.

Imo.

Mrs Fenn would have been spoken to on the night or early hours by officers doing door to door enquires, and I feel sure would have given a statement then, she was after all directly above the crime scene and in all night, we know the cops did go door to door because they knocked on BOD and Jes Wilkins door that night.. It may be that her original statement contains details, names or things pertinent to the enquiry which the PJ would not want made public even after shelving, in case of re opening, which has of course happened. How people can question what she heard, and suggest she was persuaded to lie is beyond me.... For God's sake a little girl was missing, would you just agree to lie because someone asked you to, what would be the point, not one person has come up with a good reason for her to put herself and a little child at risk like this. Would an old lady be fearful of facing charges if caught out lying.. you bet she would. It is totally unreasonable to even suggest she would lie.

Excellent, totally agree.

candyfloss wrote:Mrs Fenn would have been spoken to on the night or early hours by officers doing door to door enquires, and I feel sure would have given  a statement then, she was after all directly above the crime scene and in all night, we know the cops did go door to door because they knocked on BOD and Jes Wilkins door that night..  It may be that her original statement contains details, names or things pertinent to the enquiry which the PJ would not want made public even after shelving, in case of re opening, which has of course happened.  How people can question what she heard,  and suggest she was persuaded to lie is beyond me....  For God's sake a little girl was missing, would you just agree to lie because someone asked you to, what would be the point, not one person has come up with a good reason for her to put herself and a little child at risk like this.  Would an old lady be fearful of facing charges if caught out lying.. you bet she would.  It is totally unreasonable to even suggest she would lie.

I agree with that. Also, if we are to believe, as some people do, that the death happened on the 3rd, when on Earth would there be time to visit Mrs F in the midst of all the panic, to persuade her to say she heard crying on the Tuesday night? They already had supposed witnesses to say M was alive on the Thursday AND they had their wonderful last photo ( ok I don't believe they actually had it but they said they did) so why would they even need to involve an old lady in a lie? Why would they need to prove M was alive on the Tuesday? Why not get her to lie by saying Wednesday? Or even at a push get her to lie and say she heard her crying on the Thursday, briefly at around 9pm just before Gerry's check? Much more helpful to them.
If it was to push the neglect aspect, again it would be better to get her to say M was crying on Wednesday but no one was looking at neglect or suspecting the parents straight away.
Even for those that think earlier death like I do, all the more reason to get her to say it was Wed or Thursday the crying happened.
Tuesday doesn't help TM one bit.

Absolutely. Fully agree as well.

The only people that has a major problem with poor Mrs Fenn has been Team McCann from the off. (I wonder why that is)

And Tony Bennett with his socks. (of course/expected)

Absurd but quite obvious why. Smiths get the same treatment too.

What a sad state of affairs.

Agree, chirps.

Nothing she has said helps TM one bit..

Yet apparently according to 'ARM.. the leader', she is working for TM and is a liar.. etc.

Pied piper and his socks with TM's instructions are failing with this one..

Just as they did with all the Smith stuff.

Desperate times I guess.

Imo.

candyfloss wrote:Mrs Fenn would have been spoken to on the night or early hours by officers doing door to door enquires, and I feel sure would have given  a statement then, she was after all directly above the crime scene and in all night, we know the cops did go door to door because they knocked on BOD and Jes Wilkins door that night..  It may be that her original statement contains details, names or things pertinent to the enquiry which the PJ would not want made public even after shelving, in case of re opening, which has of course happened.  How people can question what she heard,  and suggest she was persuaded to lie is beyond me....  For God's sake a little girl was missing, would you just agree to lie because someone asked you to, what would be the point, not one person has come up with a good reason for her to put herself and a little child at risk like this.  Would an old lady be fearful of facing charges if caught out lying.. you bet she would.  It is totally unreasonable to even suggest she would lie.

That says it all for me Candyfloss. I remember posting an Adiren tweet and in it she says we only have around 25% of the files released. Whether correct or not (I have no doubts)
it would seem like a few of the 'important' witnesses statements have been held back and
I would imagine for good reasons (Smiths included). Just my thoughts.

Must admit.. I thought it was a lot more than 25%.

Regardless, the very 'crucial' stuff would of been held back.

No doubt about that.

Always good to have a look back at the old stuff...

Postby Tony Bennett » Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:39 am

I have seen at least two reports suggesting that the McCanns went to Chaplins Restaurant and Bar on the evening of Wednesday 2 May.

Chaplins has been described as around half a mile (800 metres) away from the Ocean Club apartments. About 8 to 10 minutes' walk.

Up until now, I had thought that the night Mrs Pamela Fenn, the 81-year-old widow, heard Madeleine crying: 'Daddy, Daddy', was Tuesday 1 May.

But the SKY TV programme on Christmas Eve, repeated on Christmas Day, was emphatic in stating that Mrs Fenn heard Madeleine on Wednesday 2 May.

Furthermore, they explicitly said that Madeleine was heard sobbing for 2 whole hours.

I do not think SKY TV would have run with that commentary unless they had solid evidence that Mrs Fenn heard Madeleine for two hours on Wednesday 2 May.

In a sense, it does not really matter whether the McCanns were at Chaplins or in the Tapas bar that night.

To my mind the SKY TV report, though, does point us very much to the night of 2nd/3rd May as the event that triggered, one way or another, the death of Madeleine

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

Madeleine is probably dead, and probably died in Apartment 5a in the Praia da Luz apartments. If so, let us learn all the lessons we can from this tragic and evil event. May her death not be in vain
Tony Bennett

Posts: 626
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:25 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Website
ICQ
YIM
Top

Postby RENATA » Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:27 am

Dear Mr Bennett, in my opinion the Sky program was not "emphatic" about anything pertaining to May 2. Sorry but your use of the adjectives <b>"emphataic"</b> and <b>"explicitly"</b> misleads readers. Can I suggest that most people who watched the Sky program would not agree with the assertion i.e. Martin Brunt put any significance to the night of May 2.

If anyone wishes to see the brief part of the program Mr Bennett refers to, you can click on link below and make your own mind up. The subject merits a total of 21 words throughout the entire program.

Martin Brunt says a neighbour heard Madeleine cry for her parents on a previous night not the previous night. An important distinction?? and they did not mention Mrs Fenn by name, though, granted its fair to assume Mrs Fenn was that neighbour. At no time is the date of this event mentioned in the program. The inference to me re this piece of commentary was to cast doubt on the McCanns claims they regularly checked on their children when out in the evenings. I do think they and their holiday companions did probably lie about this.

<!-- m -->https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHreJlcmBns<!-- m -->
see about 05.40 into the segment

I do not usually take the trouble to contradict fellow poster's but Mr Bennett has placed himself in the public eye by attempting to bring a prosecution against the McCanns. He also previously tried to bring a case against Michael Barrymore and wrote a book on the subject therefore I'd assume he endeavours to report the facts based on careful research,and reliable sources. I am not attacking his right to instigate these actions ,but I do take issue with innacurate and misleading statements.

I would however agree with his last comment. Lets hope Madeleine's fate is not in vain and parents take heed and do not neglect their children as the McCanns undoubtedly did.
RENATA

This is from McCannfiles.

THE agonising moment when Madeleine McCann's parents realised she was missing was revealed last night by a fresh witness.

Detectives were told Kate McCann cried hysterically after discovering that her daughter had vanished.

She sobbed "We've let her down, we've let her down" as she and her husband Gerry frantically searched for the little girl. The extraordinary details of the panic and confusion were given by a neighbour of the McCanns at the apartment block in Praia da Luz from where four-year-old Madeleine went missing 112 days ago.

Expatriate Pamela Fenn, 81, who lives in the flat above where the McCanns were staying, was re-interviewed by detectives on Monday after it emerged that she might have fresh clues.

Widow Mrs Fenn told police that two nights before Madeleine went missing she heard a little girl in the apartment crying for over an hour.

She said the toddler, who is believed to have been Madeleine, was crying "Daddy, daddy" constantly between 10.30 and 11.45pm.

The crying had stopped when the parents returned to the apartment.

On the night Madeleine disappeared, Mrs Fenn also heard a child crying, but it was when Kate returned from a nearby restaurant to check on her daughter that she was first aware something was wrong.

A source close to Mrs Fenn said: "She often sits on the balcony at night and heard a commotion downstairs.

"She heard the woman who she now knows to be Kate crying 'We have let her down, we have let her down'."

The source added: "She did not understand what was meant by this, but she asked if they wanted her to call the police. She was told it had already been done."

Mrs Fenn has also told police about an attempted burglary at her apartment several weeks earlier.

She said a man broke in through the first-floor window but she disturbed him and he jumped out of it.

The source said: "She did not think it was significant. She has lived in Luz for some time and at her previous address was the victim of burglaries on a regular basis.

"There are lots of drug addicts in the area who prey on tourist apartments. Nothing was taken so she did not initially report it to the police."

The report of an intruder echoes the experience of a Scottish holidaymaker at the Ocean Club resort just three weeks before Madeleine went missing.

The woman told police that an intruder used a key to enter her apartment at the Mark Warner-run resort on the first night of her stay, making off with personal belongings and £500 worth of currency.

"It was in the same block as the one where the little girl was taken from," she said. "The police were called. They told us someone with a key had got into the flat.

"There was no proof of that but that was their opinion, as there was nothing else disturbed. There were no broken windows and no forced entry."

Mrs Fenn told police that she had a niece from Britain staying with her in the week the McCanns were on holiday there.

Her niece, who has now been interviewed by detectives in Britain, spotted a suspicious looking man hanging around the McCanns' apartment about the time Madeleine disappeared.

She told detectives that he matched the description of a suspect seen by Jane Tanner, one of the McCanns' holiday friends. Miss Tanner reported seeing the man rushing away from the apartment with a child wrapped in a blanket under his arm.

A second witness spotted the man minutes later rushing past the church in the resort and heading to the sea front.

The dark-haired man was wearing white trousers and a dark jacket.

Remarkably, given her close proximity to the scene, Mrs Fenn had not been interviewed fully by detectives in the days after Madeleine vanished.

It was only after a team of British officers were called in that her information was acted upon and officers from Portimao police headquarters spent more than three hours going over her statement in fine detail.

Never heard this before. Also from McCann files but have just lost the link. Will try to find.

Pamela Fenn, who was in an apartment above the family on May 3 - the night Madeleine disappeared - is quoted as saying she believed Mrs McCann sometimes became violent and "out of control" in the room below.

She claimed that "the little girl's screams calling for her daddy were very audible".

Another witness is quoted as saying that Mrs McCann "seemed to have moments of aggressiveness towards her children" and that her husband, "though more absent, had more emotional control".

Mrs McCann is said to have strongly denied both these allegations in police interviews.


ETA from Daily Mail 12 Seot 2007.

The link for Chirpy's post above.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-481168/Gerry-Madeleines-real-father-The-Portuguese-medias-latest-attack-McCanns.html

Here is Carole Tranmer's description of the man:

CT'Humm... he was blonde, with a lot of hair, very short, not like mine but a little more, humm... but not like a footballer, do you know what I mean' A style close to shaven. Very short, blonde, the head was very sculptured. The shape of the head was very sculptured, more oval shaped. 

DC1485'Yes. 

CT'And, humm... then I believe I saw him wearing a blue-grey T-shirt, it was not dark blue, more of a pallid colour and it was, humm... a type of blue with short sleeves, humm... but I did not see anything below, I did not see the trousers or shoes or anything else, only the top part and he would have, I would say'humm, when looking from above, he was not short, I would say he was about a 1'78, about medium height. He was not thing nor was he muscular. So he was of average stature. I would say he was European but not Portuguese. He was not dark and, he was not short, but I would say that he looked Scandinavian if you will, because he was very light and could have been British or Scandinavian. Even though I was looking upwards, he had big eyes, there is nothing else. He did not have tattoos, nothing like this, humm'a person of common appearance, it was his furtiveness that called my attention, humm, no, I can't' 

DC1485'Could you give him an age' 

CT'Yes, I believe so, I would say that he was between, oh he was not old, 30 to 35, I don't believe that he was older than this. 

DC1485'And his aspect'

CT'It was clear, he was light-skinned, he had no freckles, he was not sunburned, he was not dark, nor bronzed from the sun, he was a light colour, not white, white but you know'humm..he was not one who was exposed to the sun

poster wrote:
Carol's description of the man - who has a distinctive appearance as he is very blond - is very detailed right down to his features, the shape of his head, the haircut and his T-shirt. I think that only someone on a veranda of a flat very close by would be able to have seen him so distinctly. Carol got a prolonged bird's eye view of the man as she was above him but at an angle which allowed her to see his features and to see whether he was clean-shaven, wearing glasses or not and whether he had any jewelry.

poster wrote:
It probably doesn't matter that much really. What I suspect is more important is that CT's sighting (assuming this is Witness Six) has morphed in Kate's book to a man with very dark hair who does not look remotely Scandinavian!

Quite.

Meaning the person Carole Tranmer saw is sensitive, someone relevant to the Mcs who was seen when he shouldn't have been. Morphed into a dark non-Scandanavian-looking  suspect. Just as Smithman was morphed into Tannerman with different hair. Big red flag imo.

Blond, sculptured oval head, large eyes, plentiful short-cropped blond (grey gleaming in the sun?) hair, a blue-grey tee-shirt, coming out of Matt Oldfield's apartment...

Sounds like Russ to me.

Is that a grey/blue tee-shirt?

Yeah probably more like M.O actually.

Missed the bit where she said of 'average height'.

Russ is about 8 foot 6 judging by some of the pics.

The blue T-shirt he's wearing underneath here I guess could be described as pallid depending on the angle/light etc...

Snipped from this:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EXTERNAL.htm

05/05/07

We visited 443 homes, some of which were occupied as the inhabitants of those respective homes were questioned whether they had any information relating to the disappearance of the child, Madeleine McCann or if they witnessed another situation and/or suspicious activity during the dates preceding the events;

In the case of an affirmative answer, these witnesses were taken for formal questioning related to the investigation;

... Now I would be pretty sure that Mrs Fenn would of been one of those taken for formal questioning at that time.

Andrew wrote:What I can't understand is why the whole 'Chaplins' episode couldn't be verified.

They either did or they didn't.

Been speculation about it since the beginning but nothing ever proven (afaik).

Unless all hidden in the unreleased files.

Or witnesses have been gagged and paid off by TM.

IF they did visit Chaplins either on Tuesday or indeed on any other evening then there will be evidence of this. Luz is a tiny community and everybody knows everybody. I would imagine Robert Murat would have been privy to a lot of insider info. Locals will have talked. I think there is an interview available somewhere online where an employee (owner even?) at Chaplins or another local restaurant/bar asks why the McCanns didn't take their children to Chaplins or whatever other restaurant they wanted to visit that week. Can't remember the exact phraseology but I will try to dig out the article. The inference was that this was a local who knew where they had been and was raising eyebrows at their childminding arrangements.

What I find peculiar about the whole quiz night thing is that if Ocean Club were going to have a quiz night surely they would hold it at the Millennium so it would be open to everybody, rather than the Tapas where only a few were able to get bookings? And why have two so close together - Sunday and then again on Tuesday? Doesn't make sense.

What would make more sense, imo, would be for there to have been a quiz night at Millennium that week - maybe early on - Saturday or Sunday night perhaps? It seems odd for there to have been another quiz night particularly if both were at the Tapas? Maybe one at Millennium and one at Tapas but not both at Tapas.

Or maybe only one quiz night that week at Ocean Club. And maybe the McCanns really did go to Chaplins that week and perhaps even took part in their quiz night on Tuesday?

Interesting post in the link below from faithlilly who appears quite genuine and was on holiday at OC the very same week as TM with her daughter and granddaughter.  She claims that the McCanns went to Chaplins on 2nd May and MW staff went to find them because of crying coming from the apartment. According to her account MW offered the McCanns a free babysitter on 3rd May but the McCanns cancelled it. She says she was at Chaplins at the same time as the McCanns were. Definitely worth a read. I find her account quite credible. What is confusing, though, is that Mrs Fenn heard crying on 1st May.

Snipped from faithlilly's post in link below:

The McCann’s were at Chaplin’s. I do know that for sure because me, my daughter and granddaughter were there at the time. I didn’t see the McCann’s being asked to return to see to their child because we left fairly early as my granddaughter was tired.

I did overhear some of the MW staff talking about this fact the next morning who were chatting amongst themselves as I was in the reception area waiting for my daughter and granddaughter to meet me there, that was the same day that Madeleine went missing.

Their opinion of the parents attitude of leaving their children alone each night wasn’t exactly flattering and according to them, that’s why MW’s offered them a babysitter for free for the night of the 3rd of May. I don’t deliberately listen to other people’s conversations but if you are standing round waiting for someone you can’t block out what you hear people talking about.

I also overheard a woman telling the police on one of the following days about a child was crying for a long time as I was standing fairly close by, but I didn’t know that she was talking about Madeleine at the time.

All the people on holiday gave statements to the police and anything that was said to the PJ has to stay known only to them until they wish it to be made known to the public or not, so I can’t tell anyone about that either.


-------

If BOTH Mrs Fenn and the poster above are right then that would mean that there was crying coming from the apartment both on Monday 1st May and on Tuesday 2nd May. And in both cases crying that was serious enough and went on long enough for other people to take action. What is astonishing - or perhaps not - is that the McCanns then cancel the babysitter for the 3rd May.

Those poor, poor children. What the heck was going on that week...

http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann/Individual-Topics/Chaplins-1-1182017.html

If BOTH Mrs Fenn and the poster above are right then that would mean that there was crying coming from the apartment both on Monday 1st May and on Tuesday 2nd May. And in both cases crying that was serious enough and went on long enough for other people to take action. What is astonishing - or perhaps not - is that the McCanns then cancel the babysitter for the 3rd May.

Those poor, poor children. What the heck was going on that week...

http://forum2.aimoo.com/MadeleineMcCann/Individual-Topics/Chaplins-1-1182017.html

poster

You have confused the dates Poster. Tues was the 1st, which was the night Mrs Fenn heard crying.It therefore now makes sense that they were in Chaplins that night. Trouble is faithlilly seems to be implying the Chaplins visit was Wednesday night as she overheard staff on the Thursday morning. ( the same day Madeleine went missing)


I also overheard a woman telling the police on one of the following days about a child was crying for a long time as I was standing fairly close by, but I didn’t know that she was talking about Madeleine at the time

I think this will not be Mrs Fenn but perhaps a member of staff mentioning the crying that prompted them to fetch the Macs from Chaplins ( if indeed that did happen)
But here is where I have some doubts. Unless this lady speaks Portuguese or the other woman was speaking English, how would she know what was being said? Also how would faithlilly not know it was M that was being spoken about? The news would be all over the place and her name would have been broadcast. Everyone in that resort would have known that a child called M was missing. Perhaps she didn't put 2 and 2 together. But then why would the woman be reporting crying to the police if not related to the case?


ETA Just realised this has gone OT. Perhaps Poster's post and my reply should be on the Mrs Fenn thread.

Your wish is my command!