Return to Main Page
23. Some months after they returned to England, the McCanns and their friends were asked by Portuguese police to take part in a reconstruction of the events of 3 May 2007. They all refused.
Verdict - False. The McCanns didn't refuse to participate in a reconstruction.
Source - Police files and website FindMadeleine
Summary of Verifiable Facts
- The McCanns did not refuse to participate in a reconstruction.
- The reconstruction would only take place if all the indicated witnesses (Kate and Gerry, their friends and Mr Wilkins) would attend.
- Mr Wilkins (not a friend) was the first who refused to participate.
- Some of the friends refused because of Legal Advice and/or they did not feel it would help to find Madeleine.
- Not all key witnesses were invited for the reconstruction.
- The date of the reconstruction was changed several times. When Carlos Pinto de Abreu (Gerry McCann's lawyer) asked to set another date, because on the new date(s) he had to attend Court, it was refused.
Extracts from the files, with relevant sections highlighted in red
Public Ministry of Portimao
Case Section
Case 201/07 GALGS
Dear Sir
Public prosecutor
Kate Marie Healy arguida in the case referred to above, having been notified (page 3947) expresses her availability to participate in the reconstruction of the events on the second of the dates suggested, in other words on the 15 and 16th of next May. Her husband, Gerry McCann has also already expressed his availability.
Rogerio Alves
Lawyer
(Sent by email)
From The Public Prosecutor's Office, Portimao Circuit, Conclusion on 2-5-2008
Although this is considered to be a very important diligence for the investigation, it will only take place if the witnesses indicated below are present, taking into account that the arguidos have already manifested their availability to participate in the reconstruction.
The objective is that all the participants (the arguido's Gerald McCann and Kate Healy, the witnesses who on 3rd May 2007 were dining in the Tapas Restaurant and would leave to check whether their children were sleeping in their respective apartments, as well as another witness who spoke to the aguido Gerald) repeat what they did that day, as faithfully as their memory allows them to, in order to check what was said in the statements in the process files, enabling conclusions to be made about how things took place at the scene and thereby make adjustments to enable the investigation evaluate the need for any additional procedure.
The reconstruction in which the persons referred to previously would participate, as well as incidentally any other protagonist whose presence may be necessary in order to visualise the events, would take place between 17.30 and 23.00 on the 15th,being the day destined for formalising all diligences, this being the date previously combined and of which all participants were informed, which is not susceptible to change given the circumstances of time and place in which this would occur.
From : Jes Wilkins (<email address quoted>)
Sent : 16th April 2008
To : Prior Stuart
Subject : Re : Re-enactment questions
Thanks Stuart,
As discussed with your colleagues last week I still feel reluctant to agree to thisfor a number of reasons including family and work commitments, the likelyhood of media intrusion and a lack of information about anything tangible or constructive that is likely to be achived by doing this.
I am happy to discuss further if necessary.
Jes
From : Jes Wilkins ( Jes@xxxxxx.uk.com )
Sent : 30th April 2008 12.09 pm
To : Prior Stuart
Subject : Witnesses' Questions
Thanks for this and for your message.
I'm not sure what they mean by witnesses' being compelled to attend as my understanding is that I am under no obligation ?
My position remains the same really. As you mentioned in your message last night if everyone else is on board and I am the only outstanding person saying no I would be more likely to reconsider.
Feel free to call me if you wish to discuss it further.
Best
Jes
More correspondence re reconstruction.
From the Public Prosecutor, Portimao Circuit, Conclusion on 8-5-2008
It was noted that the circumstance of the date designated for the reconstruction is not compatible with the formalities required for the notification of witnesses.
Therefore the days now designated are the 29th and 30th May 2008
Date: 12 May 2008 [date on stamp signed by Justice Officer no 841347(signature unintelligible)]
To:Excellency Public Ministry Magistrate Portimao Public Ministry Services
Gerald Patrick McCann, arguido identified in the above mentioned process acts, has been today notified that the days 29 and 30 May 2008 were designated for the reconstruction of facts [translator note: events],
He requires to your Excellency the postponement of the said step [diligence], given the impossibility of his mandatory [representative] to attend on the designated days, since on 29th May he will be at the audience of the judgement (of an arguido subject to the obligation of remaining at his residence [in PT: T.I.R. - Termo de Identidade e Residencia]) of the process number 9872/06.4 TDLSB, which is happening at the 2nd Criminal Court of Oeiras District and, on the 30th May will be in the last session of the audience of the judgement of the process no. 1774/02.0 TAALM, which will happen at the 3rd Court of Criminal Competence of Almada's district, where the final allegations will take place. Adding that the above mentioned diligence, set for the 30th, was inclusively, subject of a postponement since it coincided with the date initially set for the reconstruction.
Therefore, given the impossibility of postponing the abovementioned audiences [trials] and due to the essentiality of the presence of the undersigned in the reconstruction of which he was now notified for the reconstruction of the facts and on the two above mentioned diligences [the trials], it is requested to your Excellency to start proceedings to set a new date for the making of the reconstruction. Thus, manifesting here the complete availability in the agenda for the days 5 and 6 of June and 19 and 20 of the same month.
sent: legal duplicates
Signature and official lawyer's order stamp
Carlos Pinto de Abreu
sent via fax on 09.05.2008 Friday, at 22.05
Request made by Gerald McCann presented at 22H26 on 9-5-2008 by fax:
The days 29 and 30 May 2008 designated for the reconstruction, already represent an alteration that it was necessary to make with regard to the dates originally foreseen because of taking into account the approximation to the conditions in which the events occurred.
The this is added the fact that the type of action necessary for the reconstruction involves complex logistics in order to find a balance between the various interests and factors in play, given that the site where the reconstruction would take place is a tourist resort with much presence, namely of foreigners on holiday, having all the inconvenience that this would bring.
It is therefore not viable to proceed to the new alteration, unfortunately because of the balance mentioned above not being able to count with the interests referred by your illustrious self on the arguido Gerry McCann, however, in the hope a solution is found. The altered date should therefore be deferred.
Further correspondence re reconstruction
From : fiona webster, Sent : 12th May 2008, 12.32, To : Prior Stuart, Subject : Re : Portugal Re-enactment.
Dear Stuart
We have now had time to consider the advice received from our legal team. Taking into account the advice given along with our many concerns previously mentioned to you; we feel we are unable to participate in the propoed (sic) re-enactment in Portugal.
From: Russell O'Brien, Sent: 23rd May 2008, To: Prior Stuart, Subject: RE: Re-enactment Dates
Dear Stuart,
We gather that Rachel has already contacted you saying they won't be returning for any re-enactment. Once again, it seems an academic matter if there is not going to be 100% attendance.
Furthermore, we think it is hard to imagine a productive return to Portugal whilst Kate and Gerry remain arguidos. Secondly, the Prosecutor astonishingly referring to them as 'offenders' in their letter implies they are already considered to be guilty, and will be treated as such by the police and press. Furthermore the leaking of the date even before your email completely contradicts the letter's pretence to secrecy for the re-enactment.
Extracts from website, with relevant sections highlighted in red
FindMadeleine - The proposed reconstruction: The suggestion of a reconstruction of our movements and other key witnesses at the crime scene and/or surrounding area in the early days following Madeleine's abduction was declined by the PJ as 'not usual' for Portugal. When the PJ finally requested a reconstruction to take place in 2008, Gerry and I were still arguidos and as such would have attended for a reconstruction. Some key witnesses (including some of our friends) declined to attend the planned reconstruction as they were not convinced of the aims and usefulness of it. In particular, as the reconstruction was not to be shown to the media (and hence the general public), they did not feel it would help to find Madeleine. Had the intention been to show it to the general public, it may have 'jogged' memories and encouraged people to come forward with information. It should be added that other key witnesses were not invited to attend.
(note other key witnesses like the waiters, other guests at the restaurant)
Compare MMRG statement with the actual FACTS
MMRG quote: Some months after they returned to England, the McCanns and their friends were asked by Portuguese police to take part in a reconstruction of the events of 3 May 2007. They all refused.
Actually: The McCanns never refused to take part in a reconstruction. Jes Wilkins (not a friend) was the first who refused to participate. The friends (though they raised questions about the usefulness of the reconstruction) were willing to participate until the tone of the conversation changed and they felt they had to seek Legal Advice. After seeking Legal Advice, some of them refused to participate. The PJ/Prosecutor changed the date of the reconstruction last minute, but refused to take into account that Gerry McCann's lawyer was unable to attend on the new dates. He had to attend hearings in Court, some of which were already postponed/reconvened for that date, because they were originally set on the first proposed date for the reconstruction.
Conclusion
The MMRG is again misrepresenting the facts. We can only guess why they keep doing this. Are they suggesting all the witnesses, including Jez Wilkins, are conspiring to hamper the investigation into what's happened to Madeleine? Would a reconstruction this long after the event (and without participation of all the witnesses of that fateful evening) really put anything useful forward?
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.