MADDIE: SEVEN YEARS ON – A CMTV SPECIAL (First Half)
by Zizi & Paula
This programme was first broadcast by CMTV (Lisbon) on the 7th May 2014.
It was presented by João Ferreira and counted with the participation of Dr. Gonçalo Amaral – the ex- PJ senior detective who coördinated the initial phase of the investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance – and Professor Paulo Sargento – a criminal psychologist and university professor.
In this frank discussion, Prof. Paulo Sargento gives the impression to support many of Dr. Gonçalo Amaral Occam’s razor views based on suspect testimonies, evasions, forensics and circumstantial evidence.
Moreover, Prof. Paulo Sargento believes there is only one way to understand Scotland Yard‘s on-going shenanigans – namely by assuming “they must be under the orders (following the instructions) of someone” (quote) – suggesting perhaps “Operation Grange” is nothing but a reputation management exercise on behalf of the McCanns’.
This is otherwise an opinion held by bloggers, commentators and criminal profilers world-wide in spite of (cynics have argued) “the covert efforts of Burson Marsteller – the global reputation management company directed by Clarence Mitchell – the McCanns’ spokesperson and a candidate for David Cameron‘s party in the forthcoming UKGB general elections for .” (quote).
Please read on and draw your own inferences (…)Translators’ note: It is important to reiterate here that we do not held any views in favour or against the McCanns’ exhausted abduction theory. We believe in freedom of opinion based on facts and their free interpretation. We certainly do not believe police resources and tax-payers money should be used for the “reputation management” of child neglecting parents, for political promotion or indeed as an investigative tool. We would like to express here our special thanks to the courageous and indefatigable Joana Morais – blogger extraordinaire – for her sense of opportunity, without which this source material would not have been made available for translation.
TRANSLATION OF THE FIRST HALF OF THE PROGRAMME
That was the beginning of one of the most, if not the most widely covered case in the history of Portuguese justice. A case which has caught the public’s imagination and is still being reported around the world.
Seven years later – with more setbacks than advances in the interim – Maddie remains unaccounted for and British justice may, at any moment, render the status of the English child as “presumed dead”.
In October last year, the case was re-opened in Portugal on the basis of a (potential) new line of investigation that connected her disappearance with a number of sexual abuses to English children which took place in the vicinity of Praia da Luz.
Female Voice Over (FVO): Five English children victims of sexual abuses. Five cases that happened years before Madeleine McCann disappeared from the Ocean Club complex in Praia da Luz on the 3th of May 2007 – exactly seven years ago. It was on the basis of these unsolved cases and the cross-checking of files, the Judiciary Police (PJ) requested the re-opening of the process.
In October 2013 – the Portuguese Republic Prosecutor General acceded to the request. The Maddie case was re-opened and the investigation resumed.
Euclides Monteiro who had once worked for the Ocean Club was but one of the persons targeted by the investigation.
CMTV knows the report elaborated by Porto’s PJ (Judiciary Police) admitted the possibility this man – who has since died – could have assaulted all the five children. Maddie would have been the sixth victim; at some stage, things could have gone wrong and the child ending up dead.
However, the PJ does not limit its investigation to this man alone.
There are other lines of investigation under consideration and suspects which are still being investigated, but the overall conviction is, these six cases may be inter-related.
Overall, the Portuguese police now believes the kidnapping of Maddie may have been sexually motivated and that something went wrong during the assault – this is in essence, the PJ on-going line of investigation.
And so, we now have this new hypothesis of a sexual assault on Maddie, who was sleeping together with her twin brothers inside their parents’ apartment in Praia da Luz. Unfortunately, without any indications of where the child might be, dead or alive, no one is willing to give any assurances this in fact was the case.
Homicide and occultation of the cadaver, remain the most likely scenarios in a process that has dragged itself for seven years. A process that at one stage had its own suspects but, was later archived.
Back to the studio
Presenter (JF): Seven years after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, the English police bets everything on the hypothesis of a sexual predator who was in the habit of breaking into houses and then, among other things, lying next to the children asleep inside (…)
One particular suspect used a T-shirt which Scotland Yard investigators considered rare.
A unique T-shirt which they said “was not easily available to the public”. Notwithstanding, CMTV, soon found this “rare T-shirt” on sale on the Internet for just €4,99 – roughly £4 (…)
Male Voice Over (MVO): After analysing dozens of potential clues and following many tracks, the English police seems to be concentrating now on the man who (they say) entered these homes where English children were asleep.
These are said to be located in Praia de Luz, Carvoeiro as well as Vale de Parra em Albufeira.
This man would steal a few objects and then would lie down next to children in bed before leaving the scene of the crime. (Unlike the Smith’s suspect) this sexual predator had dark skin, a big belly and an intense and characteristic body odour (a “sweaty dago“?).
The clue Scotland Yard considers most relevant is, the promotional T-shirt that he was wearing – for a Portuguese beer brand.
The élite English police considers this to be, a rare piece of attire not sold to the public. Notwithstanding, CMTV found out this particular t-shirt had been handed out to hundreds of customers of that brand.
With a simple Internet search, CMTV immediately found the very same piece of attire on sale on-line (see still above)
The English authorities claim to have a record of at least four assaults in the Vale de Parra area in Albufeira; but here, in an area favoured by tourists, very few seem to have been aware of this type of occurrence.
Maria do Carmo Bitoque (Villa Parade Estate Agency): I am aware of some thefts which have occurred in this area in the past – that is true – but the idea the thieves then lied down next to the little girls asleep inside… I never heard of such a thing in all my life (incredulous smile as if to imply – “they must be joking!”)
Reporter (R): Has anyone among your clients – including young female groups, came to you with such a report?
(MCB): No! I have never heard of such a thing in my life! Not in this area. It could have happened but, if it did, no one reported it to us. Never!
(R): And in what concerns the t-shirt Scotland Yard considers “rare”, no one here remembers seeing a person wearing one (…)
(MCB): No. I don’t think I have ever seen one. As for big-bellied men, there are many paunch people in this area – with dark and light skins alike!
No, I have never heard of it, nor do I recall ever seeing such person (with such a t-shirt)! Even if I did – which I do not recall – it would never have occurred to me that kind of thing could have happened! It is all very odd. I feel something there is not making much sense (…)
Anyway, I do not know. I never heard of it.
(Reporter inVO): Meanwhile, the British police believes their new list has helped to cut the number of potential suspects, and is confident to find the sexual predator very soon (…)
The English investigators have held regular meetings with their Portuguese counterparts at the Judiciary Police headquarters in Faro (Algarve).
CMTV knows some of their requests – which were included in the three of the rogatory letters the English sent to Portugal – are already being dealt with by the PJ.
Seven years on, in Praia da Luz, all that remains is the apartment where everything happened – apartment 5A at the Ocean Club from where Maddie McCann disappeared seven years ago.
Some security grilles have since been placed on the windows which are more exposed to the public area of the complex. These bars will, hopefully, guarantee more security to the tourists who will sojourn there during their holidays.
The population of Praia da Luz is tired of the case Maddie but a few of the residents here – who declined to speak to our cameras – expressed the view they would like this case to have an end and, if possible, a happy one.
They would like to see Praia da Luz disassociated from this tragic event – the disappearance of Maddie McCann.
(closing credits/reporting team)
Back to the studio
Presenter (JF) During the investigations undertaken by the Portuguese police – led by a team of the PJ from Oporto – a former worker from the Ocean Club appeared in the radar of the investigators as the main suspect for the kidnapping and, possibly, the homicide of the English child.
But, this line of investigation encountered an insurmountable obstacle on its way – the suspect had died in 2009 (…)
(FVO): This is the face of one of the new suspects which led to the re-opening of the inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal.
After an exhaustive analysis and review of all the pertinent information in the process, by a team of Oporto Judiciary Police (PJ) new lines of investigation were suggested- and thus, the investigation into the case was re-opened in October last year.
Euclides Monteiro, a member of staff at the Ocean Club – the holiday complex from where Maddie disappeared on the 3d of May 2007 – became a target of the investigators after triangulation and analysis of mobile phone signals.
This is how the PJ found out, the former employee had been in the vicinity of the Ocean Club the night Maddie disappeared.Translators’ note: Dr. Gonçalo Amaral does not believe this to be possible. Please read on…
According to the PJ, the suspect lived relatively far away and (they reasoned) “had no motive” (verbatim) to be in the neighbourhood of the holiday complex in Praia da Luz .
This immigrant from Cape Verde had been a drug addict in the past, and had a criminal record for theft. He was sacked from the Ocean Club for stealing €5 (about £4) from a cash register (…)
This lead was never pursued – bearing in mind the suspect (at the time of the crime) no longer worked for the holiday complex. For that reason, his name was not in the list of staff given to the police at the beginning of the investigation.
The investigators believed the former employee could have acted in retaliation against the owners who had sacked him; and that behind Madeleine McCann’s disappearance was a burglary that went wrong.
But this line of investigation met an obstacle impossible to transpose – Euclides Monteiro had died in a tractor accident in 2009. Another set back to the investigation (…)
The next step was to interview his family, to build a profile of the suspect and try to find out what he did, and where he was in the days immediately following Maddie’s disappearance.
The family of Euclides Monteiro however, insists the man would have been incapable to kidnap and/or to kill anyone, let alone a child.
Short interview with a member of the family of the suspect
(Family member): They should not expose the life of a person like this! He left a child behind – a son who does not deserve to keep that kind of memory – he died four years ago! First they make a suspect of the father and then, no one comes forward to deny the suspicions. The suspicions will remain like a stain in the child’s memory (…)
(FVO): The investigators searched the grounds around his property in the hope of finding the corpse of Madeleine Mccann.
All of Euclides Monteiro’s steps were retraced but this main suspect dead, the chances of finding the child’s body (if any) were very small indeed.
This suspect of abduction, was indicted for theft back in 1996 when he was 26 years of age. A conviction for this type of felony carried with it the expulsion from Portuguese territory and repatriation to his native country – Cape Verde.
In the end, Euclides Monteiro benefited of a pardon by the President of the Republic – Dr. Jorge Sampaio – and for that reason was never repatriated.
Back to the studio
Presenter (JF): Euclides Monteiro widow – the man who was until recently the main suspect of the new PJ investigators on the disappearance of Maddie – has an alibi for her husband for the night of the crime.
The widow guarantees, he had written a poem at home in his personal computer, about an hour before Maddie went missing – this in spite of the PJ saying it had detected Euclides mobile phone in the area of the Ocean Club on the day Maddie disappeared.
Reporter (R): Euclides Monteiro lived in Portela – a rural area in the municipality of the Lagos – and was at one time considered a main suspect by the Judiciary Police. It was Euclides who led to the re-opening of the case six years after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
Euclides, had an accident with a tractor and died. Euclides’ widow – Luisa Rodrigues – revealed to us Euclides wrote poems and one of them was written on the night of the third of May (2007).
This poem was saved in his computer one hour before the disappearance of Madeleine – around 9 PM . No doubt his new detail will be important to the investigators and gives Euclides an alibi particularly since he is, or has been considered a main suspect by the PJ as the possible perpetrator of Madeleine’s abduction.
CMTV tried to speak with Luísa Rodrigues – the widow of Euclides Monteiro – but Luísa was not at home and therefore not available to speak to us; but a relative of Euclides and Luísa Rodrigues told us that Euclides was in the habit of writing poems almost daily; that he was a sensitive person incapable of hurting (abducting) a child.
Back to the studio
(JF): Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, the former PJ inspector who led the first phase of the investigation into Maddie’s disappearance, and the criminal psychologist Professor Paulo Sargento, are our guests for this special edition.
Good evening! Thank you both for your presence.
Gonçalo Amaral I will start with you, if I may. Did you (by any chance) miss these lines of investigation when you were leading the investigation?
Dr. Gonçalo Amaral (GA): Lines of investigation? This does not seem to me to be a line of investigation!
This is a way of (…) well, in order for this to be considered a line of investigation, it would need to have taken into account everything (in the process files) otherwise, it is not possible to understand what they are trying to achieve …
A lot of water has since passed under the bridge, a lot of time during which, bit by bit, a soap was staged around the presumption a kidnapping took place – but no one, so far, has proven this was a kidnapping. Absolutely no one has proved so.
Instead, what we have is this ongoing stream of news – and these are just more news – and all of them put together are worth zilch.
I was just now listening to that story of the mobile phone (of that suspect gentleman) which they identified and localized exactly in area of the Ocean Club (and I was thinking) that is highly inaccurate (that is a lie).
(GA) Because the (type of) mobile phone antennae that were there at the time, could not possibly have pin-point the exact location from where the mobile phone pinged (it would only tell you which mast was nearest to the user’s phone).
Furthermore, that particular antennae covered a greater area that included not just the area of Praia da Luz (…)
The person (suspect) lived in Portelas de Lagos… it is important to know the terrain, you know… I am not a technician, but I can almost guarantee that particular mast would have also picked up signals from the Portelas de Lagos’ area (…)
This does not mean he could not have been in Praia da Luz, or in the Ocean Club neighbourhood but, for them to go on to assume he had no reason to be there – when they have no idea where he was and why he was (or was not) there – is begging the question.
For all we know, his mobile phone could have pinged from his own home (in Portelas de Lagos).
Probably the PJ has already tested and established that, anyway. It is very simple to do.
All you need is to use a mobile phone and see if it pings any of those antennas – of course, bearing in mind there could have been (topological) changes in the area – with the construction of new buildings in between – (and the technology in use then) but, at the time, the area was almost an open field.
Carrying on that way, I am afraid they are not going to arrive anywhere (…)
First of all, they must prove there was an abduction, and then take it from there – which is of course something they have not done (…)
(JF): Is that a possibility about which you are not in favour…
(GA) What? The kidnapping?
(GA) Look, seven years have since elapsed and no one has been able to prove there was an abduction. Why do we must assume this was an abduction?
There are important elements in the investigation which should have been taken into account when the process was re-opened.
If the investigation that is now taking place is a serious one – and I am inclined to believe it could be because there are serious people involved in it – at least on the Portuguese side of the investigation… here we have quite number of people (genuinely) interested in solving this case…
But for that to happen, they must first take into account important elements they have put aside (or ignored). Particularly in what concerns that group of people (the McCanns and their friends).
No point in them talking about paedophiles, serial predators in the Algarve – from Vila Moura to Praia da Luz – I am hearing now of 18 cases! Cases which are not even filed with our police!
Furthermore, around that time, there was already considerable awareness in the police for these type of crimes. We had the Casa Pia case in Lisbon and the Joana case nearby, so to suggest our police suppressed all these and then to come out with all these stories, is mind-boggling.
Let us stop for a moment and think. Let us think objectively and see what in fact is there (…)
And what is there (in the process) is a report to the British police of an English couple (*) which says (words to that effect) a certain gentleman, two years (before the crime) expressed certain thoughts and made certain gestures towards the missing child highly suggestive of paedophilia (cannot think of a fancy word to put it otherwise)…(*) Translators’ note: Dr. Gonçalo Amaral is, no doubt, referring here to the Gaspars’ report to the English police – a report that was withheld from the Portuguese investigators (…) The Gaspars’ were a couple of medical doctors who, two years prior to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, had spent a holiday in Majorca together with the McCanns’, David Payne and other friends.
(JF): Are you referring to David Payne – a friend of the McCanns’ family?
(GA): Yes, I am. And now, I hear that gentleman (Andy Redwood) talking about a thieve who broke into houses and then (believe it or not) lied next to children in bed. No doubt he considers such acts as paedophilia and the question I pose (to him) is this:
Aren’t those (David Payne’s) gestures and words reported by those two doctors to the English authorities about that holiday in Majorca, as stated in the process et etcetera (overstates) suggestive of paedophilia?
What happened to those statements? I ask. What are they looking for now?
Let us first investigate properly what is there in the process.
That so far, has not been done – certainly not in the rogatory letter (one and only) the PJ went to carry out in England. The Gaspars’ report has never been addressed.
(JF): It is then your conviction this gentleman, David Payne – of the McCanns’ inner circle of friends – or indeed the McCanns’ themselves, could have had have anything to do with what happened to the child?
(GA): Well, I have written a book about the case in which I expressed my own opinion and that of the Judiciary Police at the time.
(JF interrupts): ? At the time you wrote the book, right?
(GA continues). The book is based on a police report which, by the way, is in the process (case files).
Those are the conclusions we had arrived at; and the conclusions we arrived at did not suggest a kidnapping. (The evidence suggested) anything else but a kidnapping – possibly an accidental death followed by an occultation of the body.
However, it is important to underline, that although the investigation had reached an advanced stage, it was not closed – some details needed to be looked into.
A reconstruction and other diligences were needed. For instance, interviewing that couple of medical doctors who reported Dr. David Payne to the English police (…)
A number of elements needed to be addressed, including those they are now deliberately ignoring.
It is as if they are saying: “Let’s forget all that, let’s leave that behind and concentrate on something else instead! (said with irony) – which leaves me with the impression they are following some kind of agenda (obviously).
There is a good number of incongruences (…) I give you another example:
There was a testimony from Ms. Jane Tanner – a woman who was a friend of the couple and holidaying with them – a testimony that went along the lines (words to that effect): “I saw a man who was carrying a child in his arms walking in that direction. He was dressed in such and such a way”.
Her testimony places into question – by the manner of her description, the time and exact place where she saw the man – indeed challenges, the testimony of the father (Gerry McCann)! And then what happens?
Seven years later, on the basis of a robot-portrait put together outside the investigation – an e-fit done by the couple’s private detectives, months if not years after the event – Scotland Yard then comes out and says someone said: “Around 9:30 PM? That was me carrying my daughter! I had just collected her from the day care centre around the corner. Look! I still have the clothes I was wearing then” – adding, pay attention! – “and I also have the pyjamas she was wearing that night” (words to that effect).
(JF): I see.
(GA): This some four years later! Surely, this is another detail that needs clarification. All that was needed here, was for someone to pick up a phone, call the day care centre and, ask…
(JF): “At what time does the day care centre closes?”
(GA): Exactly! “At what times does the crèche close?” Then, perhaps find out why this gentleman had picked up his child that late (hours after the crèche had closed). Simple.
Instead, the (élite) English police conveniently dispenses with the cross-checking (seemingly) and instead goes for (a staged) reconstruction with actors, adds some mis-en-scène and, afterwards, reaches the conclusion: “The important suspect was not this one but, the one walking down the street later on that sighted by the family Smith.” This – Scotland Yard believed – was their man!
Having said that then, they come up with another, different, suspect.
This time a (sweaty) dark man with a paunch (wearing a “rare” t-shirt) who does not resemble, in the least, the man sighted by the Smith’s family! In other words the Smith’s sighting ceased to be of their interest (…)
(JF): I would like to go through some of the most significant portraits (e-fits) that have been circulated in the media but, before I do so, I would like to place a question to you and I would ask you to give me a precise, concise answer, if possible.
(GA): If possible, but I cannot guarantee whether it will be (smiles).
(JF): Why where you removed from the investigation?
(GA): Why was I removed from the investigation? (GA seems to ponder the question). That’s a good question.
What I can tell you is, before I was removed from the investigation we were asked, or (if you prefer) it was suggested to us, to just allow the process to be archived. There seem to have been concerns about the results of the investigation so far (or the direction the investigation was taking) …
(JF): Who suggested that?
(GA): Suffice it to say, it was suggested. We cannot go into more detail here.
(JF): Someone from the Ministry or the Judiciary Police?
(GA) Yes! From the Judiciary Police (…)
Translators’ note: By the manner of saying it – a kind of dismissive emphasis – GA seems to suggest both, that is, the Public Ministry and the Judiciary Police
Then, there were some impromptu comments I made to a journalist – on the first of October (2007) to be precise. I remember that well for it was the eve of my birthday – which in turn coincided with the day I was removed from the investigation.
This was also around the time Gordon Brown, then the British Prime-Minister, visited Portugal – ostensibly in connection with the Lisbon Treaty. Anyway I digress…
… the journalist phoned me about a sighting (of Madeleine) in Morocco and what I told her then is what I reiterate now (…)
The British police was at the time rather concerned about us (? unclear) probing the extent of the parents’ involvement, or if you prefer, their responsibility in their daughter’s disappearance.
We were not talking about a homicide or anything that sinister. We simply wanted to know more about what had happened that night, with that group – including the parents (of Madeleine). Simply because (as a matter of protocol) the parents are always the main suspects (to start with).
Then, suddenly, they come up with (the argument) of the news of the missing child sighted in Morocco!
This assumption was made on the presumption there were no blonde children in Morocco. But as it turned out there were – I understand the mother of the child was Belgian – which only goes to show the English are not smarter than we are – or the Moroccans for that matter, but I digress…
To put it simply: my removal from the investigation was but the first step to have the process archived. Some time later it was shelved.
Then (surprise! surprise!) it was re-opened, suggesting perhaps another initiative, another objective or perhaps the same (…)
And so the media is telling people “the parents have been cleared of all suspicion” – as if the couple had been (properly) tried!
Now, concerning this story (of the parents having been cleared of all suspicions) we have to ask:
Exonerated? But how? Has there been a proper investigation? Did they examined all the elements in the process? Please, let us not talk about the parents having been exonerated!
(JF) It is apparent that for you, there are still many lines of investigation that need to be addressed.
(GA) Yes. there are still many questions crying for an answer.
(JF): It is also our special guest tonight for this CMTV special edition dedicated to the Maddie Case, Professor Paulo Sargento.
Professor Paulo Sargento (PS): Hello!
(JF) Professor, I beg you to excuse us.
(PS) No problem at all!
(JF) I will hand over the word to you in a moment – given today’s date (and the theme of the programme) Gonçalo Amaral comments were particularly important to us, but before I do so, let us look at another CMTV reportage.
Scotland Yard has released several robot-portraits; e-fits which could help to solve the mystery.
Only one of these has been discarded. The other four have been showed around the world but, so far, without any conclusive results (to no effect).
(FVO): Five robot-portraits have given a face to the suspects – men which the elite British police believed were involved in the disappearance of Maddie McCann.
These e-fits were put together at the time of her disappearance and again disseminated last year, during Scotland Yard much publicized reconstruction of the night Maddie was seen for the last time. This was the first e-fitTranslators’ note: Scotland Yard’s reconstruction shown last year on prime-time British TV (“Crimewatch”) was perceived by expert forensic analysts in Portugal as amateurish, biased and inaccurate. Please refer to the first two postings of these blog for more details.
The first image on (top-left) was the first to be publicized. It shows the two faces that were supposed to belong to the same suspect. On the left, how he may have looked in 2007 and, on the right, how he may have looked in 2013 (…)
The information for these portraits were provided by two witnesses who, guaranteed, to have seen this man carrying a child in his lap the night the child disappeared, near the complex where Maddie was staying with her parents.
The following (below) is supposed to have been the same man, except it turned up to be an innocent father who had gone to collect his daughter from the Ocean Club crèche (…)
And so this particular hypothesis has been eliminated but the others are still being shown around the world. None of these, however, have since been identified (…)
It is now seven years since Maddie McCann disappeared. In accordance with British Law these number of years fulfils the lapse of time required to declare a child (anyone) who has disappeared, as presumed dead.
The parents hesitate but at least Kate (McCann) admits her daughter could have died.
3 May 2007: This was the last day Maddie was seen and the first day of a long, systematic investigation, publicized world-wide, the likes of which have never quite been seen.
Day after a day, the GNR (National Republican Guards) and the PJ (Judiciary Police) sought clues to the mystery, but to no avail.
(in the background, images of a British forensic dog sniffing around the McCanns’ rented car and barking!!!)
These are exclusive CMTV images of the forensic dogs who detected the smell of blood and the scent of death in the McCanns’ car.
There are many loose ends to this case and seven years later many possibilities remain open to speculation. Where is after all Maddie McCann? (What happened?)
Under British law, Maddie could be dead. The law states that seven years after a person disappearance the same may be considered “presumed dead” – making its death official, as it were.
However, Kate McCann, in a statement to the British media said, she was not underestimating the possibility, the shock, of finding her daughter had died. That would not be easy but (in any case) they needed to find out what happened to her.
“We still have hope. We know of many cases of missing children who have been declared dead and then, many years, decades later, found alive.” She said.
Kate and Gerry need to sign the “presumed dead” certificate but at the moment they refuse to do so. Kate and Gerry are both aware of the existence of this law but they believe their daughter is alive and for that reason they do not wish to sign the certificate.
In any case, the status of “presumed dead” does not herald the end of the investigation, besides Kate and Gerry do not give up their determination to find out what happened to their daughter.
Back to the studio
(JF) In an interview given to the Lusa (News) Agency, Kate and Gerry were adamant – they will only accept Maddie’s death when irrefutable evidence of her death point in that direction.
Clip from Gerry and Kate interview:
Gerry McCann (GMC): In the anniversary of Madeleine we usually have a service and a gathering for people to remember Madeleine. It is a difficult day for us. It does mark another year. It is (particularly) hard on her birthday. Just nine days later was much more poignant which is normally the day that we celebrate Madeleine and the fact she is no longer with us. These are special days and it is quite difficult (…)
Interviewer (I): What else do you do at the anniversary. Just the service…
Kate McCann (KMC): Her birthday? No! We always mark it some way. Usually just as a family, so…you know…which is what we’ll do with the other children, so… we have decorations and she has her presents…
Back to the studio
(JF): We interrupt this interview given by the McCanns’ to the Lusa News Agency due to a technical problem. We seemed to have lost the subtitles. Meanwhile, we will take a short break to try and recover the interview and also to review a reconstruction made by CMTV – unprecedented in Portuguese TV – a reconstruction during which the numerous incongruences of this case are exposed.
See you shortly then…
(End of Part I).Translators note: Part2 is far more interesting with in-depth comments from Dr. Gonçalo Amaral and Professor Paulo Sargento. Please read on (…)
FOR THE VERY LATEST ON THIS CASE, FROM PORTUGAL, LINK TO: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/
FOR THOUGHT-PROVOKING ANALYSIS AND OPINION, LINK TO:http://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/
FOR AN EXPERT CRIMINOLOGIST’S ASSESSMENT OF WHAT SCOTLAND YARD IS OR MAY BE UP TO LINK TO: http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/