| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Stop wasting time looking for files and revisions. Connect your Gmail, DriveDropbox, and Slack accounts and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio will automatically organize all your file attachments. Learn more and claim your free account.

View
 

Rebuttal of "Fact" 15

Page history last edited by Cath 9 years, 5 months ago

Return to Main Page

 

15. Kate McCann said that when she went to their apartment at 10.00pm on 3 May, she was 100% sure that Madeleine had been ‘taken’. But the McCanns allowed their 7 friends, several staff from the Ocean Club, and others, to traipse all round their apartment, thus contaminating a crime scene where vital forensic evidence could have been found. The police found no forensic trace of any abductor.

 

Verdict - MisleadingSeveral people entered the apartment, but like Jane Tanner were instructed or invited to do so by the PJ. The GNR allowed the housekeeper, Silvia Batista, into the childrens bedroom and the PJ allowed her to go in and remove the twin's toys and a blanket from their cots. According to the forensics reports the police were also partly responsible for contaminating the scene of the crime. Dog hairs and a fingerprint belonging to a GNR officer were found at the scene. There were unidentified fingerprints found (shutters and patio doors) and also unidentified hairs found in the children's bedroom. Until they are examined and DNA identified, it's impossible to state their source. Also the police didn't check Madeleine's bed linen, her comfort blanket or Cuddle Cat for any stranger's DNA.

Sources  - PJ files 

 

Understandably, the situation was very stressful for the parents, but it still wasn’t their responsibility to control the GNR and the PJ from entering the crime scene, nor was it their duty to insist that the crime scene be secured from the outset. It still remained the priority of the police to take the lead and manage the crime scene correctly.

 


 

Summary of Verifiable Facts

 

  1. Some people (including the GNR) searched the apartment, thinking Madeleine was hiding.
  2. The PJ allowed more people into the apartment, like the GNR dog handlers (and their dogs).
  3. The PJ took statements in the apartment, they didn't make Silvia Batista (who was acting as a translator) leave, they even allowed her to go into the children's bedroom and remove things from there.
  4. Jane Tanner was invited by the PJ to enter the apartment and make a statement about the man she had seen.
  5. The PJ gave Madeleine's comfort blanket to the dog handlers.
  6. Numerous hairs were found in the children's bedroom, some were identified, but there are many more that to date remain unidentified.
  7. Unidentified (inadequate) fingerprints were found.
  8. The forensics missed a chance to find stranger's DNA by not examining Madeleine's bed linen or Cuddle Cat.

  

Extracts from the files, with relevant portions highlighted in red

 

Witness Statement Fiona Elaine Payne:2007.05.04 19:20

 On one of these occasions, upon returning, Kate, very scared and nervous, in a panic, told them in the restaurant that Madeleine had gone missing, screaming and frightened. Immediately, they organised search groups, either in the apartment thinking that she could be hidden, or outside, which resulted in nothing, even with the help of the employees. Due to Kate's highly anxious state, she decided to stay with her, giving her all support she needed.

 

Witness statement of David Anthony Payne:2007.05.04

That he never went into the said bedroom occupied by the children

Witness statement of Nelson Filipe Pacheco da Costa: 2007.05.07 18:45. G.N.R. Military Personnel

At reaching the location, the two elements that made up the patrol, the current witness and his colleague, Jose Roque, proceeded into the interior of the apartment, with the goal of investigating the contours which eventually surrounded the disappearance of that minor; In this sentiment, the deponent states that they searched al the dependencies of the residence and all the pieces of furniture, in order to confirm the disappearance -- effectively confirming that that she was not in the interior; The question made, the deponent states that the access to interior of the residence was accessed through a principal door- that is, a wood door which is placed facing north; Inside, the deponent encountered the mother and two siblings of the missing minor;

The deponent stats that he is unable to specify if that entrance door was found open or closed when he reached the apartment during which he was taking in the facts with the witness is now clarifying

 

Witness Statement Vitor Manuel Martins: 2007.12.04 14:00. Occupation : PJ Officer

When questioned he confirms the integrity of the service information drawn up from the stations inquiries carried out in the early morning of 04/05/2007, adding that he arrived on the scene about 30 - 40 minutes after the phone call from the GNR, at about 00.40/00.50.At the scene, there were already some elements from the GNR and some people walking around the OC grounds, searching for the child. In the apartment where the family was staying, there were different persons, including the friends of the girls parents, who were immediately invited to leave the apartment, in order to preserve the scene. Inside the room that was indicated as being that of the missing girl, there were two children, babies, who appeared to sleeping in two cots placed in the middle of the room.A request was made to the OC services director for the family to be re-allocated and accordingly the babies were taken out of the room, so that the site could be searched.

 

Witness StatementCarlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão:2007:05:16. Occupation: GNR Officer

On 4th May he was called at about 01.15 when he was asleep at home, requesting him to appear at the Lagos GNR post as a small girl had disappeared. After arriving at the GNR post with his colleagues Morais and two dogs (Numi and Kit), German Shepherd dogs, which made up the search team, they immediately left for P da L. They arrived at about 02.30. When they arrived at the scene, they entered the McCann's apartment by the front door, and entered the living room, where there were some PJ officers as well as the MCCann couple. The just talked to some colleagues from the PJ and asked for a piece of clothing that Madeleine had worn or used recently. They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed. They began searching with the dogs from the main entrance to the apartment, having given the blanket to his dog Numi to smell and begin to search.

 

Witness Statement Silvia Batista: 2007.07.26

When she arrived at the resort, she went immediately to apartment 5A, where she met several persons both on the inside and on the outside of the apartment. She went into the apartment but left it right away without speaking to anyone, because she was informed that the GNR officers were at the main reception, so she went to meet them.When she arrived near the GNR officers, she verified that Gerry, Madeleine’s father, was behind her, in the company of another individual whose identity she doesn’t remember. At that moment, Gerry placed both knees on the floor, hit the floor with both hands, too, placing himself like a praying arab, and shouted out twice in rage, and it was not possible to understand what he said. Then Gerry got back on his feet and accompanied the deponent and the other individual who was in the GNR car, to apartment 5A. Already on location, the deponent entered the apartment and asked those who were present both for the passports of all family members and photographs of the missing person. The deponent walked Gerry to the GNR car, so he could deliver the requested documents. She states that she carried out these diligences, and other diligences, at the request of the GNR Commander as they used the deponent’s knowledge of the English language to translate the questions that were asked from the missing person’s family members, and the answers that were given.The deponent further recalls that she entered the room where Madeleine had been sleeping. She now remembers that the door was closed. The inside of the room was dark. The shutters were down, and light entered only through its holes. The windows were closed and the curtains slightly open. Gerry, who accompanied the deponent during this visit, withthe GNR officers also present, said that it had been him who had closed the window because the babies were still sleeping inside, which the deponent could verify as true. Gerry mentioned that when he noticed that Madeleine was missing, he had found the window and shutters open, and the curtains fluttering.The deponent recalls that the cots that were used by the babies were placed in the middle of the room and aligned, and therefore she found it strange that someone could have taken Madeleine from the bed where she was sleeping up to the window, because there was no space to get through. The deponent opened the bedroom’s wardrobe to check if eventually Madeleine was hiding inside. Then they all left the room, and someone closed its door again. The deponent remained in the living room for a while, with the GNR officers, Gerry and the other group members that were there in a frenzy, going in and out and speaking on their mobile phones. She noticed that none of the group members, including the child’s mother and father, were busy looking for her. The mother was sitting on the master bedroom’s bed, the father accompanied the deponent and the GNR officers and the other group members walked in and out and spoke on the phone, apparently concerned about informing the press about the event. She thought that the child’s mother was downbeat with the situation, the father showed his concern and also asked both for the press to be alerted and for dogs to be brought in for the search. Concerning the others, she can only recall that Fiona and her husband, Payne, were hysterical about the situation. At a given moment, right after the PJ’s elements arrived, the child’s parents removed the twins from the cots where they still slept, and took them into the apartment on the first floor. At Kate’s request, the deponent removed the soft toys and a blanket from the cots, and also took them to the first floor. The babies’ cots were left only with the mattresses.

 

Rogatory interview Jane Tanner: 2008.04.08 10:00

4078 "Okay. Well tell me about that part then, how did you come to go into Gerry and Kate's apartment?"Reply "Well when the GNR people came, so the first lot of Police, the local Police came, I spoke to them and I think that was through the translator, which was, I think she's called Sylvie, she's the Head of Housekeeping or something, she was doing the translating at that point. So I'd spoken to the GNR Police and then when the PJ came, they came to get me to talk to them to say, to say what, what I'd seen. And then I can remember the same GNR person saying to me later on in the night 'Oh have you spoken to the PJ' and I had by that stage, so". 4078 "So when you went into Gerry and Kate's apartment who else was there?"Reply "I think there was Russ, I think Russell came with me and there was Sylvie who was the translator. I can't remember which, there was some, there was a PJ chap was sitting on the, by the table. And there was Gerry who was standing by the, the bedroom door"

 

Specialist Examination Report 200707060-CR/LRequester: DIC PJ Portimao

Fax: 399 of 8 May 2007

Date: 4 May 2007
Then began the detailed observation of the apartment interior ending with the search and recovery of forensic trace material relevant to the present examination.Initially the search began for latent shoe-prints it being verified that dozens existed on the floor, in the various rooms of the apartment, which invalidated the attempt of identifying those of the perpetrator. Also, innumerable tracks [footprints] that were taken to be canine in origin mixed with red- and white-coloured chemical products, as used to see fingerprints, and an enormous quantity of hairs probably of animal (dog) origin that made it difficult to find possible traces, especially in the bedroom of two single beds and two children's cots from where the minor disappeared, and next to the aluminium window/door leading from inside the living room to the exterior area behind the apartment.

 

INML REPORT 9 JULY 2007

DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL RECEIVED

TRACES
Relating to Apartment n° 5-A in the tourist resort "The Ocean Club" Praia da Luz-Lagos:- 32 hairs in envelope n° 1 recovered from the floor at the entrance to the children's bedroom.- 28 hairs in envelope n° 2 recovered from the floor next to the bed from which the child disappeared.- 4 hair in envelope n° 3 recovered from the top of the bed from which the child disappeared.- 15 hairs in envelope n° 4 recovered from the floor next to the bed that was next to the window in the children's bedroom.- 1 piece of cloth in envelope n° 5 recovered from the bedspread of the bed next to the window in the children's bedroom. Fragment of cloth, mauve/violet in colour with square motifs, circular in form about 10cm in diameter. A small fluorescent spot is observed under a Crime-light.- 31 hairs in envelope N° 6 recovered from the floor of the lounge.- 58 hairs in envelope N° 7 recovered from the entrance hall at the front door of the apartment.[The above were] Delivered by the Policia Judiciaria on 08/05/2007.

5th- In the samples from apartment 5-A, several mitochondrial DNA profiles were found:- Profile identified by letter "C", present in 53 samples, was identical to that of Kate Healy, mother of the victim, meaning those samples were from her or from someone having the same maternal bloodline.- Profile identified by letter "N", present in 24 samples, was identical to that of Gerald McCann, father of the victim, meaning those samples were from him or from someone having the same maternal bloodline.- Profile identified by letter "G", present in 1 samples, was identical to that of Matthew David Oldfield, meaning that sample was from him or from someone having the same maternal bloodline.- Profile identified by letter "I", present in 1 samples, was identical to that of David Anthony Payne, meaning that sample was from him or from someone having the same maternal bloodline.- Profile identified by letter "O", present in 2 samples, was identical to that of Russell James O'Brien, meaning those samples were from him or from someone having the same maternal bloodline.- Profile identified by letter "L", present in the spot on the bedspread of the bed next to the window and in seven hairs, meaning that all these samples came from the same person or from someone having the same maternal bloodline, did not match any of the reference samples (note: this was later identified, belongs to a child of a former occupant)- Profiles identified by letters "B", "D", "F", "J" and "Q" are different from the above, and from each other, and are distinct from reference samples.

7th- The remaining 28 samples analysed, of which 17 were recovered from the apartment, showed mitochondrial DNA from different from each other, and distinct from those above.

There's been unidentified (inadequate) fingerprints found on the shutters (blinds) and on the patio doors. There's no report that mentions examining the inside of the shutters or the outside of the children's bedroom window, or the doorknob of that room.

 

 

Compare MMRG statement with the actual FACTS

  

MMRG quote: the McCanns allowed their 7 friends, several staff from the Ocean Club, and others, to traipse all round their apartment, thus contaminating a crime scene where vital forensic evidence could have been found

 

Actually: Yes, some of the friends entered the apartment, yet it was the police (both GNR and PJ) who failed to prevent further contamination of the crime scene. They even invited people in to the apartment  to make a statement (Jane Tanner), allowed the dog handlers and their dogs to walk in and allowed Silvia Batista to go into the children's bedroom and remove things. According to the forensics report the fingerprint expert made a total mess of it. There were dogs' footprints mixed with the fingerprint powder found in the children's bedroom and next to the patio doors, all of which made it difficult to find possible traces of an abductor that could still have been present in the apartment.

 

MMRG quote: The police found no forensic trace of any abductor

 

Actually: When the police didn't find Madeleine in the apartment, a forensics search for traces of a possible abductor was made the next day. But unfortunately owing to the badly managed crime scene, contamination by the police, it was impossible to make any useful findings. The crime scene was not correctly managed; failure to secure the scene, failure to examine Madeleine's bed linen and Cuddle Cat for traces of a possible abductor, along with fingerprints (inadequate sample) and hairs (both fingerprints and hairs, yet to be identified), all reveal that it is impossible to find traces of any abductor. But that does not mean there was no abductor. How can you eliminate the possibility of an abductor, if all the forensics were not done correctly?

 

 

Conclusion

 

The MMRG implies that the parents intentionally contaminated the crime scene. It is highly likely, that due to the bad management of the crime scene (no fault of the parents or friends or staff of the resort) it would have been impossible to secure any traces of an abductor.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.