http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post418.html#p418

---

Processos Volume IV p. 949 to 954 — Witness statement of Dianne Webster 2007.05.11 at 11.30 am Interpreter: Robert Murat That she came on holiday to Portugal with the group which included MADELEINE, this group composed of nine adults and eight children. Concerning the individuals in the above mentioned group, she explains that they are four couples (among them was her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID), and their children. Concerning her relationship with the members of that group, adds that she would have no direct relationship with them, despite them being close to the PAYNE couple. She believes the PAYNE couple started a relationship of friendship, insofar as her son-in-law, David, had attended the university together with RUSSEL, which will have been extended to two other couples (McCANN and O'BRIEN), because the members of those couples, except for RACHEL and JANE, were [also] practicing doctors. Asked, she states that it is the first time that she has been on holiday with that group, knowing, however, that some of those couples have already spent holidays together on other occasions. With regard to this trip she explains that she thought all details of the trip to Portugal were handled by her daughter, Fiona; together with her husband David, and aided by the tour operator "MARC WARNER, via Internet. She states that she came on holiday at the invitation of her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID. Adds that she does not know the reasons why Portugal was chosen, nor why Praia da Luz and the "Ocean Club Garden" in particular. She states that she made her own reservation, only with regard to the plane, via Intemet, unlike the other members of the group, whose reservations had been made through the PAYNE couple. Asked, she explains that never before had she been in Portugal, being sure that the first time that she was here was this present holiday. That the whole group arrived in Portugal on April 28 and they have all been housed in the tourist resort buildings identified above, as initially planned. Because she was asked, she clarified that she had stayed in apartment 5H, together with the PAYNE couple and their daughters (Lilly, two years, and Scarlett, one year). Prompted about the routine during the holiday period, she clarifies that she usually took breakfast in their apartment, since the Restaurant "MILLENNIUM" was quite removed from the building in which she was staying. Still, she explains, on May 2, the eve of disappearance of MADELEINE she had taken her breakfast in the restaurant "MILLENNIUM", since it was raining that day and she did not have an opportunity to partake of the morning sports. She added that in the days preceding the disappearance of Madeleine, after breakfast she would play sport (especially tennis), after which she would go to the supermarket BATISTA to make the purchases for lunch. Upon return, she points out that several families who made up the group met in the PAYNES' apartment to have lunch together, explaining that this was due to the fact that it is the larger apartment. After lunch the children took a nap, usually staying in her care, since they [the adults] went with the PAYNEs to continue, together, the leisure activities to which the holidays were dedicated. Concerning those activities, she clarifies that it was usual to go to the beach, pool and practice several sports monitored by the resort. She also went to the beach sometimes, she helped the PAYNE couple to look after the children, during the periods when they were not at the KIDS CLUB. In the late afternoon, from 16.45 to 17.30, the children had dinner at Restaurant "TAPAS", after which they were taken to the apartment to prepare for sleep, which usually occurred at 19:00. After that, the PAYNE family, the deponent included, prepared for the dinner that usually occurred around 20.45 in the restaurant "TAPAS." In reply to a question, she added that the restaurant always reserved the same table for the group, as it was the only table that was capable of seating nine people. In reply to a question, she states that, although it is positioned in front of the balconies at the rear of the residential block, the angle of vision can not permit full control over possible access by people to the interior of ground-floor apartment patios that are there - especially since the restaurant is covered by a transparent oilcloth which hampers vision. Asked who has done the booking of the restaurant, says that it has been done by RACHEL, explaining that although the dinner is scheduled for 20:30, the group never gathered before 2OH45/21HOO due to successive delays of several couples. The question asked, regarding the fact that, possibly, on the first day it was RUSSEL who had made the reservation at the restaurant, she admits that as possible, although she cannot be sure which of the two (RACHEL or RUSSEL) would have done it. Prompted, she says that, from memory, the dinners usually ended at around 23:00, the time at which they returned to their apartments where they slept. Concerning May 3, the date of the occurrence of the facts now under investigation, she states that she did the things she has generally described above being unaware of anything, nor having seen anything, that might relate to the disappearance of Madeleine. Prompted to report the events that had unfolded in period between 19H00 and 22H40 of that day, the deponent states that around 19:00 she had gone together with the Payne couple and their children to the apartment in order to prepare them for bed. Then, as usual, the adults prepared themselves for dinner. In this matter, she recalled that they had been late with these preparations because they only managed to get to Restaurant around 21.00. Asked, she adds that she went to the restaurant in the company of her daughter and son-in-law. Asked directly if someone had gone to her apartment to call them (herself and the PAYNE couple) for dinner the witness said no. Asked if there was the possibility of having crossed paths with someone during the journey between her apartment and restaurant, the witness said no. That night she believes she arrived at the restaurant at around 21:00 in the company of the PAYNE couple. That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant along with the other members of the group. In this regard, asked specifically whether, on the journey to the restaurant, if they had passed either of the two individuals described in the preceding paragraph, she answered categorically not. Questioned about the members who, during the dinner, had absented themselves from the restaurant, the witness says that, as she recalls, there were some people who left, failing to identify which, except for RUSSEL who had left the restaurant and taken a little more time than usual due to, from what she knows, his daughter had been sick. Asked, she states that it would be normal for one member of each of the couples to get up regularly in order to check in their apartments if the children were well. She clarifies that the practice was for each couple to check their own children, it not being usual for anyone to check the children of other couples. The question asked, she thinks that up to the date of the disappearance it had never happened that anyone had entered the apartment of another couple in order to check their offspring. Nevertheless, it seems that the couple PAYNE and the witness, did not make any trips to apartments, because they had an intercom called the "baby monitor", through which sounds or noises of the children could be heard. Prompted to state for the record the movements that occurred that night, during the above dinner, the witness reiterated that she could not say specifically who had left nor when they had done so. Therefore, she can only say with precision that, at around 22.00 Kate McCann returned to the restaurant, seemingly in panic, communicating to others the fact of Madeleine's disappearance. Asked about the reaction of other members of the group when they heard the above from KATE, the witness says that everyone, except the witness, left the restaurant and went to the apartment of the couple McCANN in order to find out what was going on. In turn, as relates to her, the witness says she stayed at the restaurant for about five minutes, then, noting that the remaining members of the group had not returned, she followed in the direction of the McCANNS' apartment. In that apartment she found that KATE was completely in panic, in "state of shock ". Because she was asked, she states that she entered the apartment by the sliding glass door of the patio at the back, which gives access to the lounge. Then she went to the children's bedroom, noting that there she found KATE and the twin siblings of MADELEINE . She added that she did not remember too much detail about the scenario that she found in that bedroom, other that what she said above. However, she states that KATE had repeatedly commented that, on arriving at the bedroom, she had found the window of the room, with its shutter, both open. Yet, she [DW] did not notice, upon entering the room, if the window was or was not open. However, she wants to stress that immediately afterwards, she went outside the apartment in order to ascertain whether she would be able to raise the shutters by hand from the outside, and found it was impossible for her. Consequently she infers that at the time of her arrival at the apartment the window would have been closed already. Because she was asked, she says she does not know if the window, and the shutter, of the couple's bedroom were open or not, in that she did not enter that room. Prompted about the conditions of light inside the apartment at the time, the witness believes that they were good, judging that the lights were lit as she recalls no darkness. Regarding the bedroom previously occupied by Madeleine, she does not remember if the lights were lit, but knows that when she entered the twins were still sleeping in their beds, which makes her think that maybe those lights were switched off. She added that, for her to see the twins and their cradles, and the bed of MADELEINE, the darkness would not be complete, but that the room had some light she thinks must have been from the light of the lounge. She adds that that night, and after the occurrence of the facts under investigation, she was in the apartment on two separate occasions. At the time described above she remained about 10 minutes in the apartment. After this time she returned to the restaurant to get her handbag as well as the MCCANN couple's camera and "baby monitor" of her daughter, and was soon back again in the apartment. The question being asked about the people that were inside the apartment of McCANN at that time, the witness said that the McCANN couple were present (although on the first occasion she had no recollection of having seen GERRY), and FIONA, not remembering any other people that were there. However, she admits the possibility of there being [others] inside the apartment, including David, in that, as mentioned above, all of them had gone to the apartment following the news that KATE had given. The question asked, she states to know that male members of the group undertook a search around [outside of] the apartment to try to locate Madeleine, which was absolutely fruitless. The deponent states that FIONA had asked her to move to their daughters to make sure that everything would be well with them, hence the deponent will have returned to her apartment from which she did not leave anymore. Asked, she states to be unaware of any type of problems affecting the family, professional, loving, etc., for any of the group members, either in our country or anywhere else in the world. She does not know if any of the group members knows anyone residing in Portugal, particularly in the Algarve, or anyone who has been here on holiday in the same period. Prompted she says that during these holidays all group members made their movements on foot, denying that any of them had rented cars or that they could possibly have driven cars of others, [nor that] they were occasionally available. She adds that none of the group members left the village of Praia da Luz. During that period, as far as she is aware, none of the group had formed any kind of acquaintance or relationship with other persons. Prompted, she explains that in all the dinners during the holidays only members of the group had participated, never having any strangers with them at the table that they usually occupied. Asked, she says that in the days leading up to the disappearance of MADELEINE, or at any other time, she neither saw nor found any abnormal situation that could by itself be interpreted as having any correlation with the facts of the investigation.

<!--Please do remove this Google ads because it support Codemiles Free Templates Team by providing small income. If you gust keep it , you lose nothing , but if you removed it we will lose thanks you , Contact : http://www.codemiles.com (phpbb3 Free styles) -->

Processos Volume IV p. 949 to 954 — Witness statement of Dianne Webster 2007.05.11 at 11.30 am Interpreter: Robert Murat That she came on holiday to Portugal with the group which included MADELEINE, this group composed of nine adults and eight children. Concerning the individuals in the above mentioned group, she explains that they are four couples (among them was her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID), and their children. Concerning her relationship with the members of that group, adds that she would have no direct relationship with them, despite them being close to the PAYNE couple. She believes the PAYNE couple started a relationship of friendship, insofar as her son-in-law, David, had attended the university together with RUSSEL, which will have been extended to two other couples (McCANN and O'BRIEN), because the members of those couples, except for RACHEL and JANE, were [also] practicing doctors. Asked, she states that it is the first time that she has been on holiday with that group, knowing, however, that some of those couples have already spent holidays together on other occasions. With regard to this trip she explains that she thought all details of the trip to Portugal were handled by her daughter, Fiona; together with her husband David, and aided by the tour operator "MARC WARNER, via Internet. She states that she came on holiday at the invitation of her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID. Adds that she does not know the reasons why Portugal was chosen, nor why Praia da Luz and the "Ocean Club Garden" in particular. She states that she made her own reservation, only with regard to the plane, via Intemet, unlike the other members of the group, whose reservations had been made through the PAYNE couple. Asked, she explains that never before had she been in Portugal, being sure that the first time that she was here was this present holiday. That the whole group arrived in Portugal on April 28 and they have all been housed in the tourist resort buildings identified above, as initially planned. Because she was asked, she clarified that she had stayed in apartment 5H, together with the PAYNE couple and their daughters (Lilly, two years, and Scarlett, one year). Prompted about the routine during the holiday period, she clarifies that she usually took breakfast in their apartment, since the Restaurant "MILLENNIUM" was quite removed from the building in which she was staying. Still, she explains, on May 2, the eve of disappearance of MADELEINE she had taken her breakfast in the restaurant "MILLENNIUM", since it was raining that day and she did not have an opportunity to partake of the morning sports. She added that in the days preceding the disappearance of Madeleine, after breakfast she would play sport (especially tennis), after which she would go to the supermarket BATISTA to make the purchases for lunch. Upon return, she points out that several families who made up the group met in the PAYNES' apartment to have lunch together, explaining that this was due to the fact that it is the larger apartment. After lunch the children took a nap, usually staying in her care, since they [the adults] went with the PAYNEs to continue, together, the leisure activities to which the holidays were dedicated. Concerning those activities, she clarifies that it was usual to go to the beach, pool and practice several sports monitored by the resort. She also went to the beach sometimes, she helped the PAYNE couple to look after the children, during the periods when they were not at the KIDS CLUB. In the late afternoon, from 16.45 to 17.30, the children had dinner at Restaurant "TAPAS", after which they were taken to the apartment to prepare for sleep, which usually occurred at 19:00. After that, the PAYNE family, the deponent included, prepared for the dinner that usually occurred around 20.45 in the restaurant "TAPAS." In reply to a question, she added that the restaurant always reserved the same table for the group, as it was the only table that was capable of seating nine people. In reply to a question, she states that, although it is positioned in front of the balconies at the rear of the residential block, the angle of vision can not permit full control over possible access by people to the interior of ground-floor apartment patios that are there - especially since the restaurant is covered by a transparent oilcloth which hampers vision. Asked who has done the booking of the restaurant, says that it has been done by RACHEL, explaining that although the dinner is scheduled for 20:30, the group never gathered before 2OH45/21HOO due to successive delays of several couples. The question asked, regarding the fact that, possibly, on the first day it was RUSSEL who had made the reservation at the restaurant, she admits that as possible, although she cannot be sure which of the two (RACHEL or RUSSEL) would have done it. Prompted, she says that, from memory, the dinners usually ended at around 23:00, the time at which they returned to their apartments where they slept. Concerning May 3, the date of the occurrence of the facts now under investigation, she states that she did the things she has generally described above being unaware of anything, nor having seen anything, that might relate to the disappearance of Madeleine. Prompted to report the events that had unfolded in period between 19H00 and 22H40 of that day, the deponent states that around 19:00 she had gone together with the Payne couple and their children to the apartment in order to prepare them for bed. Then, as usual, the adults prepared themselves for dinner. In this matter, she recalled that they had been late with these preparations because they only managed to get to Restaurant around 21.00. Asked, she adds that she went to the restaurant in the company of her daughter and son-in-law. Asked directly if someone had gone to her apartment to call them (herself and the PAYNE couple) for dinner the witness said no. Asked if there was the possibility of having crossed paths with someone during the journey between her apartment and restaurant, the witness said no. That night she believes she arrived at the restaurant at around 21:00 in the company of the PAYNE couple. That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant along with the other members of the group. In this regard, asked specifically whether, on the journey to the restaurant, if they had passed either of the two individuals described in the preceding paragraph, she answered categorically not. Questioned about the members who, during the dinner, had absented themselves from the restaurant, the witness says that, as she recalls, there were some people who left, failing to identify which, except for RUSSEL who had left the restaurant and taken a little more time than usual due to, from what she knows, his daughter had been sick. Asked, she states that it would be normal for one member of each of the couples to get up regularly in order to check in their apartments if the children were well. She clarifies that the practice was for each couple to check their own children, it not being usual for anyone to check the children of other couples. The question asked, she thinks that up to the date of the disappearance it had never happened that anyone had entered the apartment of another couple in order to check their offspring. Nevertheless, it seems that the couple PAYNE and the witness, did not make any trips to apartments, because they had an intercom called the "baby monitor", through which sounds or noises of the children could be heard. Prompted to state for the record the movements that occurred that night, during the above dinner, the witness reiterated that she could not say specifically who had left nor when they had done so. Therefore, she can only say with precision that, at around 22.00 Kate McCann returned to the restaurant, seemingly in panic, communicating to others the fact of Madeleine's disappearance. Asked about the reaction of other members of the group when they heard the above from KATE, the witness says that everyone, except the witness, left the restaurant and went to the apartment of the couple McCANN in order to find out what was going on. In turn, as relates to her, the witness says she stayed at the restaurant for about five minutes, then, noting that the remaining members of the group had not returned, she followed in the direction of the McCANNS' apartment. In that apartment she found that KATE was completely in panic, in "state of shock ". Because she was asked, she states that she entered the apartment by the sliding glass door of the patio at the back, which gives access to the lounge. Then she went to the children's bedroom, noting that there she found KATE and the twin siblings of MADELEINE . She added that she did not remember too much detail about the scenario that she found in that bedroom, other that what she said above. However, she states that KATE had repeatedly commented that, on arriving at the bedroom, she had found the window of the room, with its shutter, both open. Yet, she [DW] did not notice, upon entering the room, if the window was or was not open. However, she wants to stress that immediately afterwards, she went outside the apartment in order to ascertain whether she would be able to raise the shutters by hand from the outside, and found it was impossible for her. Consequently she infers that at the time of her arrival at the apartment the window would have been closed already. Because she was asked, she says she does not know if the window, and the shutter, of the couple's bedroom were open or not, in that she did not enter that room. Prompted about the conditions of light inside the apartment at the time, the witness believes that they were good, judging that the lights were lit as she recalls no darkness. Regarding the bedroom previously occupied by Madeleine, she does not remember if the lights were lit, but knows that when she entered the twins were still sleeping in their beds, which makes her think that maybe those lights were switched off. She added that, for her to see the twins and their cradles, and the bed of MADELEINE, the darkness would not be complete, but that the room had some light she thinks must have been from the light of the lounge. She adds that that night, and after the occurrence of the facts under investigation, she was in the apartment on two separate occasions. At the time described above she remained about 10 minutes in the apartment. After this time she returned to the restaurant to get her handbag as well as the MCCANN couple's camera and "baby monitor" of her daughter, and was soon back again in the apartment. The question being asked about the people that were inside the apartment of McCANN at that time, the witness said that the McCANN couple were present (although on the first occasion she had no recollection of having seen GERRY), and FIONA, not remembering any other people that were there. However, she admits the possibility of there being [others] inside the apartment, including David, in that, as mentioned above, all of them had gone to the apartment following the news that KATE had given. The question asked, she states to know that male members of the group undertook a search around [outside of] the apartment to try to locate Madeleine, which was absolutely fruitless. The deponent states that FIONA had asked her to move to their daughters to make sure that everything would be well with them, hence the deponent will have returned to her apartment from which she did not leave anymore. Asked, she states to be unaware of any type of problems affecting the family, professional, loving, etc., for any of the group members, either in our country or anywhere else in the world. She does not know if any of the group members knows anyone residing in Portugal, particularly in the Algarve, or anyone who has been here on holiday in the same period. Prompted she says that during these holidays all group members made their movements on foot, denying that any of them had rented cars or that they could possibly have driven cars of others, [nor that] they were occasionally available. She adds that none of the group members left the village of Praia da Luz. During that period, as far as she is aware, none of the group had formed any kind of acquaintance or relationship with other persons. Prompted, she explains that in all the dinners during the holidays only members of the group had participated, never having any strangers with them at the table that they usually occupied. Asked, she says that in the days leading up to the disappearance of MADELEINE, or at any other time, she neither saw nor found any abnormal situation that could by itself be interpreted as having any correlation with the facts of the investigation.

<!--Please do remove this Google ads because it support Codemiles Free Templates Team by providing small income. If you gust keep it , you lose nothing , but if you removed it we will lose thanks you , Contact : http://www.codemiles.com (phpbb3 Free styles) -->

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post528.html#p528
Processos Volume IV

p. 949 to 954 — Witness statement of Dianne Webster 2007.05.11 at 11.30 am

Interpreter: Robert Murat

That she came on holiday to Portugal with the group which included MADELEINE, this group composed of nine adults and eight children.

Concerning the individuals in the above mentioned group, she explains that they are four couples (among them was her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID), and their children.

Concerning her relationship with the members of that group, adds that she would have no direct relationship with them, despite them being close to the PAYNE couple.

She believes the PAYNE couple started a relationship of friendship, insofar as her son-in-law, David, had attended the university together with RUSSEL, which will have been extended to two other couples (McCANN and O'BRIEN), because the members of those couples, except for RACHEL and JANE, were [also] practicing doctors.

Asked, she states that it is the first time that she has been on holiday with that group, knowing, however, that some of those couples have already spent holidays together on other occasions.

With regard to this trip she explains that she thought all details of the trip to Portugal were handled by her daughter, Fiona; together with her husband David, and aided by the tour operator "MARC WARNER, via Internet.

She states that she came on holiday at the invitation of her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID.

Adds that she does not know the reasons why Portugal was chosen, nor why Praia da Luz and the "Ocean Club Garden" in particular.

She states that she made her own reservation, only with regard to the plane, via Intemet, unlike the other members of the group, whose reservations had been made through the PAYNE couple.

Asked, she explains that never before had she been in Portugal, being sure that the first time that she was here was this present holiday.

That the whole group arrived in Portugal on April 28 and they have all been housed in the tourist resort buildings identified above, as initially planned.

Because she was asked, she clarified that she had stayed in apartment 5H, together with the PAYNE couple and their daughters (Lilly, two years, and Scarlett, one year).

Prompted about the routine during the holiday period, she clarifies that she usually took breakfast in their apartment, since the Restaurant "MILLENNIUM" was quite removed from the building in which she was staying.

Still, she explains, on May 2, the eve of disappearance of MADELEINE she had taken her breakfast in the restaurant "MILLENNIUM", since it was raining that day and she did not have an opportunity to partake of the morning sports.

She added that in the days preceding the disappearance of Madeleine, after breakfast she would play sport (especially tennis), after which she would go to the supermarket BATISTA to make the purchases for lunch.

Upon return, she points out that several families who made up the group met in the PAYNES' apartment to have lunch together, explaining that this was due to the fact that it is the larger apartment.

After lunch the children took a nap, usually staying in her care, since they [the adults] went with the PAYNEs to continue, together, the leisure activities to which the holidays were dedicated.

Concerning those activities, she clarifies that it was usual to go to the beach, pool and practice several sports monitored by the resort.

She also went to the beach sometimes, she helped the PAYNE couple to look after the children, during the periods when they were not at the KIDS CLUB.

In the late afternoon, from 16.45 to 17.30, the children had dinner at Restaurant "TAPAS", after which they were taken to the apartment to prepare for sleep, which usually occurred at 19:00.

After that, the PAYNE family, the deponent included, prepared for the dinner that usually occurred around 20.45 in the restaurant "TAPAS."

In reply to a question, she added that the restaurant always reserved the same table for the group, as it was the only table that was capable of seating nine people.

In reply to a question, she states that, although it is positioned in front of the balconies at the rear of the residential block, the angle of vision can not permit full control over possible access by people to the interior of ground-floor apartment patios that are there - especially since the restaurant is covered by a transparent oilcloth which hampers vision.

Asked who has done the booking of the restaurant, says that it has been done by RACHEL, explaining that although the dinner is scheduled for 20:30, the group never gathered before 2OH45/21HOO due to successive delays of several couples.

The question asked, regarding the fact that, possibly, on the first day it was RUSSEL who had made the reservation at the restaurant, she admits that as possible, although she cannot be sure which of the two (RACHEL or RUSSEL) would have done it.

Prompted, she says that, from memory, the dinners usually ended at around 23:00, the time at which they returned to their apartments where they slept.

Concerning May 3, the date of the occurrence of the facts now under investigation, she states that she did the things she has generally described above being unaware of anything, nor having seen anything, that might relate to the disappearance of Madeleine.

Prompted to report the events that had unfolded in period between 19H00 and 22H40 of that day, the deponent states that around 19:00 she had gone together with the Payne couple and their children to the apartment in order to prepare them for bed.

Then, as usual, the adults prepared themselves for dinner. In this matter, she recalled that they had been late with these preparations because they only managed to get to Restaurant around 21.00.

Asked, she adds that she went to the restaurant in the company of her daughter and son-in-law.

Asked directly if someone had gone to her apartment to call them (herself and the PAYNE couple) for dinner the witness said no.

Asked if there was the possibility of having crossed paths with someone during the journey between her apartment and restaurant, the witness said no.

That night she believes she arrived at the restaurant at around 21:00 in the company of the PAYNE couple.

That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant along with the other members of the group.

In this regard, asked specifically whether, on the journey to the restaurant, if they had passed either of the two individuals described in the preceding paragraph, she answered categorically not.

Questioned about the members who, during the dinner, had absented themselves from the restaurant, the witness says that, as she recalls, there were some people who left, failing to identify which, except for RUSSEL who had left the restaurant and taken a little more time than usual due to, from what she knows, his daughter had been sick.

Asked, she states that it would be normal for one member of each of the couples to get up regularly in order to check in their apartments if the children were well.

She clarifies that the practice was for each couple to check their own children, it not being usual for anyone to check the children of other couples.

The question asked, she thinks that up to the date of the disappearance it had never happened that anyone had entered the apartment of another couple in order to check their offspring.

Nevertheless, it seems that the couple PAYNE and the witness, did not make any trips to apartments, because they had an intercom called the "baby monitor", through which sounds or noises of the children could be heard.

Prompted to state for the record the movements that occurred that night, during the above dinner, the witness reiterated that she could not say specifically who had left nor when they had done so.

Therefore, she can only say with precision that, at around 22.00 Kate McCann returned to the restaurant, seemingly in panic, communicating to others the fact of Madeleine's disappearance.

Asked about the reaction of other members of the group when they heard the above from KATE, the witness says that everyone, except the witness, left the restaurant and went to the apartment of the couple McCANN in order to find out what was going on.

In turn, as relates to her, the witness says she stayed at the restaurant for about five minutes, then, noting that the remaining members of the group had not returned, she followed in the direction of the McCANNS' apartment.

In that apartment she found that KATE was completely in panic, in "state of shock ".

Because she was asked, she states that she entered the apartment by the sliding glass door of the patio at the back, which gives access to the lounge. Then she went to the children's bedroom, noting that there she found KATE and the twin siblings of MADELEINE .

She added that she did not remember too much detail about the scenario that she found in that bedroom, other that what she said above. However, she states that KATE had repeatedly commented that, on arriving at the bedroom, she had found the
window of the room, with its shutter, both open. Yet, she [DW] did not notice, upon entering the room, if the window was or was not open.

However, she wants to stress that immediately afterwards, she went outside the apartment in order to ascertain whether she would be able to raise the shutters by hand from the outside, and found it was impossible for her. Consequently she infers that at the time of her arrival at the apartment the window would have been closed already.

Because she was asked, she says she does not know if the window, and the shutter, of the couple's bedroom were open or not, in that she did not enter that room.

Prompted about the conditions of light inside the apartment at the time, the witness believes that they were good, judging that the lights were lit as she recalls no darkness.

Regarding the bedroom previously occupied by Madeleine, she does not remember if the lights were lit, but knows that when she entered the twins were still sleeping in their beds, which makes her think that maybe those lights were switched off. She added that, for her to see the twins and their cradles, and the bed of MADELEINE, the darkness would not be complete, but that the room had some light she thinks must have been from the light of the lounge.

She adds that that night, and after the occurrence of the facts under investigation, she was in the apartment on two separate occasions. At the time described above she remained about 10 minutes in the apartment.

After this time she returned to the restaurant to get her handbag as well as the MCCANN couple's camera and "baby monitor" of her daughter, and was soon back again in the apartment.

The question being asked about the people that were inside the apartment of McCANN at that time, the witness said that the McCANN couple were present (although on the first occasion she had no recollection of having seen GERRY), and FIONA, not remembering any other people that were there. However, she admits the possibility of there being [others] inside the apartment, including David, in that, as mentioned above, all of them had gone to the apartment following the news that KATE had given.

The question asked, she states to know that male members of the group undertook a search around [outside of] the apartment to try to locate Madeleine, which was absolutely fruitless. The deponent states that FIONA had asked her to move to their daughters to make sure that everything would be well with them, hence the deponent will have returned to her apartment from which she did not leave anymore.

Asked, she states to be unaware of any type of problems affecting the family, professional, loving, etc., for any of the group members, either in our country or anywhere else in the world.

She does not know if any of the group members knows anyone residing in Portugal, particularly in the Algarve, or anyone who has been here on holiday in the same period.

Prompted she says that during these holidays all group members made their movements on foot, denying that any of them had rented cars or that they could possibly have driven cars of others, [nor that] they were occasionally available.

She adds that none of the group members left the village of Praia da Luz.

During that period, as far as she is aware, none of the group had formed any kind of acquaintance or relationship with other persons.

Prompted, she explains that in all the dinners during the holidays only members of the group had participated, never having any strangers with them at the table that they usually occupied.

Asked, she says that in the days leading up to the disappearance of MADELEINE, or at any other time, she neither saw nor found any abnormal situation that could by itself be interpreted as having any correlation with the facts of the investigation.

---

---

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post442.html#p442

RECORD OF TAPE RECORDED INTERVIEW Police Exhibit No SVF124A
Person Interviewed: Dianne WEBSTER Number of Pages 34
Place of Interview: Force Headquarters, Enderby Signature of Interviewing
Date of Interview: 11.04.08 Officer producing exhibit
Time Commenced: 1026 hours
Time Concluded: 1156 hours Duration of Interview: 90 minutes
Interviewing Officer(s) DC 4078 FERGUSON Tape Reference nos:


PC: "It says we’re recording okay so I’ll just say now that the time is ten twenty six and its Friday isn’t it, the eleventh of April. It is Friday isn’t it?”

DW: "Is it the eleventh?”

PC: "Yeah.”

DW: "Yeah.”

PC: "It says so on the clock here.”

DW: "Oh right.”

PC: "I wouldn’t have known otherwise.”

DW: "Yeah, yeah.”

PC: "And it’s two thousand and eight. We’re in an interview room at the Headquarters at Leicestershire Police and I am DC Xxxxxx XXXXXXXX and I work in the Major Crime Unit at Leicestershire Police. Can you just give me your full name please?”

DW: "Dianne WEBSTER.”

PC: "And your date of birth.”

DW: "Ten, three, forty four.”

PC: "Thank you. What’s your address Dianne?”

DW: "Err fifty nine (inaudible) Road, (inaudible), Bedford.”

PC: "And your home telephone number?”

DW: "X, xxx, xxx, xxxxx, xxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxx, xxxx, one, five.”

PC: "Do you know your mobile without referring to anything?”

DW: "Sorry?”

PC: "Do you know your mobile telephone number?”

DW: "Err no but I can, I’d had to look in my bag for it.”

PC: "Yeah we’ll sort that out later on.”

DW: "(Laughs) I don’t memorise that.”

PC: "Okay, you’re here at the request of the Portuguese Police and you’re obviously aware of the reasons why you’re here and they will at some point, although they’re not monitoring you today, they will be viewing the interview. Now you’ve been given a letter from us outlining the objectives for the interview but please ask if at any time there’s anything that you want clarifying or if you want me to speak up or to talk more slowly…”

DW: "Yeah.”

PC: "Or more loudly just tell me, and your time and co-operation today is obviously appreciated by us. I just ask you to be patient with me as no doubt we’ll be covering things that you have gone over time and time again on your own and, you know, amongst the group and with the Police in Portugal and with me before.”

DW: "Yes, yeah.”

PC: "I’m going to ask you to concentrate as much as you can and try to recall what you heard, saw and did around the third of May two thousand and seven, and as I said earlier, please let me know if you need to take a break. I tend to ask fairly open questions and then sort of more closed questions just to clarify points if we need to, okay?”

DW: "Okay.”

PC: "So just to start off then, you don’t live in Leicester do you?”

DW: "No.”

PC: "You’ve just given me your address, and what’s your connection to the group that went on holiday?”

DW: "Err I’m Fiona PAYNE’S mother.”

PC: "And how much, I say how much did you have to do with the group before, you know have you been away with the group before?”

DW: "Oh no, no and originally err my recollection is that the, the holiday that, that err we eventually went on err I think originally it was Fiona and Dave that err booked it and invited me and my husband along if we wanted to go on it. He didn’t want to go because its not his sort of holiday and then later on it err it grew that there was other, other people going along as well, which I was unaware of at the time and err I sort of said to Dave well you know if you’ve got friends going forget about me, you know, I won’t, I won’t come and he said no, no you must come along and so that’s how I came to be on the holiday.”

PC: "Had you met any of the rest of the group before that holiday?”

DW: "Err yes I’d met them all previously, I knew err Jane and Russell probably better than any of them, I knew Kate and Gerry err Rachael I’d met before but I think, I don’t remember meeting Matt although I think they were at Fiona and Dave’s wedding I may have met him before but err I didn’t meet him really until, or get to know him until that holiday.”

PC: "And was it just at Fiona and Dave’s wedding that you’d met the others or more frequent than that?”

DW: "Well no I knew err Jane and Russell because when they lived in Leicester they, well Russell was Dave’s best man and err I knew, I knew them before, before then err and I’m trying to think actually, I know I’d met Jane but I don’t think I’d met Russell err but they were close friends of err Fiona and Dave until they moved away to Exeter.”

PC: "And were Gerry and Kate…”

DW: "And Gerry and Kate I didn’t meet them till Fiona and Dave’s wedding but I knew of them because I knew they were err Fiona and Dave’s err friends err and I knew they’d been on holiday with them before. I remember seeing photographs of Kate and Gerry on holiday with them and Kate was pregnant with Madeleine at the time.”

PC: "Okay, so just to summarise then, Jane and Russell you were quite familiar with.”

DW: "Mm.”

PC: "And the others you’d sort of met them and you got to know them as the holiday went on.”

DW: "Well I mean I, I’d obviously met Kate and Gerry after Fiona’s wedding several times when they were round at Fiona’s err house visiting, you know if we were up there visiting Fiona and Dave and they came round err so yes I had, I did know them err quite well by the time the holiday came round.”

PC: "Okay, the date of the holiday, the date the holiday began was the twenty eighth of April two thousand and seven.”

DW: "Yes.”

PC: "How did you get over to Portugal?”

DW: "Err we flew from err East Midlands err I travelled up to Leicester the day before we were due to leave and err Kate and Gerry, or Gerry, had organised mini bus, a mini bus or a couple of mini buses to transport us to East Midlands airport so err Fiona and Dave and I err drove to Kate and Gerry’s house, left, left the car at their house and then we all went in two mini buses to the airport. Err I’m trying to think, I think the flight was about nine thirty or something in the morning. Err I think the, the flight, I’m trying to think it was a, maybe a bit later in the evening I can’t quite remember but there was nothing untoward, you know, it was just a normal err journey there. Err when we arrived at you know at, in Portugal I think the other thing that Gerry had err booked, I don’t know whether he did it by phone or online, was a, err a mini bus to take us to the err resort where we were staying err and there was a bit of a kafuffle because we had, he’d asked for several child seats for the err bus because obviously there were five children in the group and I think there was only, I don’t know if it was one seat or two seats, so there was a bit of time spent at the airport trying to find other seats err and I don’t think we did manage to get all six in the end so we just sort of risked it and were driven to Praia Da Luz.”

PC: "And how did the children cope with the journey?”

DW: "Err fine, yeah.”

PC: "They’d do better with (inaudible).”

DW: "I think we were all on a high you know we were starting a holiday, bit of sunshine and err, err you know once we got there and err we checked in we’d driven, driven from the err reception area to the apartments where we were staying and I think it was at that point the driver gave us the keys for the apartment err the other, err Jane and Russell and err Rachael and Matt, they’d flown out from Gatwick, which was where the holiday was originally from, we were all supposed to fly out from Gatwick but the reason we flew from East Midlands is because err I think on the journey back there was, there was something about the timing coming back that wasn’t really suitable for children err the fact that err four of the group, or five of them including me, lived in the Leicestershire area, whereas, whereas err…”

PC: "It’s all a bit of a long drive afterwards.”

DW: "Rachael and Matt are London and err Russell and Jane are Exeter so London was obviously easier for them. Err so that’s right, when we, when we arrived at the holiday resort err Jane and Russell and, and Matt and Rachael were already there, they’d arrived earlier, a couple of hours before us or something err so we went, went to our apartments, I was obviously staying in the same apartment as Fiona and Dave err they’d got a larger apartment err which meant they were on the first floor as opposed to ground floor.”

PC: "Do you remember what the number of the apartment was?”

DW: "Err no, I can’t remember was it G, H, O, five, I don’t know.”

PC: "Right.”

DW: "I really don’t know, it’s not something that I was concerned with, I knew how to get there so.”

PC: "Yeah, and what everyone else has said then, you are the only ones on the first floor.”

DW: "We were the only ones on the first floor, we had the, we had a bigger apartment than the others, err which is what Dave, Dave had originally err asked for anyway because he wanted to have err a separate bedroom I think for the girls, although they were in cots, and err I, I just slept on the err there was a folding bed in the liv, the sort of living room area, and that’s where I slept, although there were two beds in one of the bedrooms, that’s also where L*** was sleeping in her cot so I didn’t err didn’t want to sleep in the same room as her.”

PC: "Okay.”

DW: "Err, you want me to go through the whole week do you?”

PC: "Well yeah, I know it’s a tall order.”

DW: "Yeah I mean it is difficult because err…”

PC: "If you could just begin by just describe, telling me where your apartment was in relation to the other apartments, just so that I can get a picture of it.”

DW: "Right, well ours err Kate and Gerry’s was the end apartment on the ground floor and then err I think err it was Matt and Rachael next, next to them, and then I’m not sure if there was a, a gap or an empty apartment then Jane and Russell, because our apartment was above, it was sort of between err you know if I looked from the balcony above I could see Kate and Gerry’s, I could see Matt and Rachael a part of their garden on that side and then on the other side I think it was Russell and err Jane, I could just see a bit of theirs, err so I think there might have been an apartment between that was empty, I’m not sure.”

PC: "Yeah I think you’re right on that.”

DW: "Yeah, I’m not sure though.”

PC: "How did you get to your apartment? What was the route that you had to take?”

DW: "Err well we went err we generally went err right up to the end of the, we went through the front entrance if you like, not the, not the entrance that overlooked the, err pool or anything, I don’t think there was an entrance. We didn’t have a, we only had one exit really apart from the, err because veranda you couldn’t go anywhere.”

PC: "No.”

DW: "You just went out onto the balcony, err so the only exit was through, through the front door either down the lift or down the stairs which took you down into err a covered area which err there was the doors to the other apartments and then you went out from there into the car park area and then out there onto the road.”

PC: "When you say there was doors for the other apartments, was that to anybody in the groups apartments?”

DW: "Err well yes I mean I remember us seeing a, a, there was Jane, Jane and Russell’s apartment and err Matt and Rachael’s.”

PC: "Okay.”

DW: "But I never ever actually went along that err subsequently talking to Dave and Fiona as they said you could go along that way and get into Kate and Gerry’s as well but I, I’d never explored that area if you like.”

PC: "Right okay, I’m a bit clearer in my mind now.”

DW: "Yeah.”

PC: "I’m just thinking of the route that you would take, so you wouldn’t, you wouldn’t have to pass Gerry and Kate’s apartment? You’d only sort of pass the doors of Jane and Russell’s and Matthew and Rachael’s to get up to your apartment, is that right?”

DW: "Well it depends where you’re coming from, I mean if, if we were coming from the, err, the pool area of the Ocean Club then yes we would, we would pass Kate and Gerry’s apartment on the outside because there’s was on the end err if we were coming up the road there.”

Processos Volume IV p. 949 to 954 — Witness statement of Dianne Webster 2007.05.11 at 11.30 am Interpreter: Robert Murat That she came on holiday to Portugal with the group which included MADELEINE, this group composed of nine adults and eight children. Concerning the individuals in the above mentioned group, she explains that they are four couples (among them was her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID), and their children. Concerning her relationship with the members of that group, adds that she would have no direct relationship with them, despite them being close to the PAYNE couple. She believes the PAYNE couple started a relationship of friendship, insofar as her son-in-law, David, had attended the university together with RUSSEL, which will have been extended to two other couples (McCANN and O'BRIEN), because the members of those couples, except for RACHEL and JANE, were [also] practicing doctors. Asked, she states that it is the first time that she has been on holiday with that group, knowing, however, that some of those couples have already spent holidays together on other occasions. With regard to this trip she explains that she thought all details of the trip to Portugal were handled by her daughter, Fiona; together with her husband David, and aided by the tour operator "MARC WARNER, via Internet. She states that she came on holiday at the invitation of her daughter FIONA and son-in-law DAVID. Adds that she does not know the reasons why Portugal was chosen, nor why Praia da Luz and the "Ocean Club Garden" in particular. She states that she made her own reservation, only with regard to the plane, via Intemet, unlike the other members of the group, whose reservations had been made through the PAYNE couple. Asked, she explains that never before had she been in Portugal, being sure that the first time that she was here was this present holiday. That the whole group arrived in Portugal on April 28 and they have all been housed in the tourist resort buildings identified above, as initially planned. Because she was asked, she clarified that she had stayed in apartment 5H, together with the PAYNE couple and their daughters (Lilly, two years, and Scarlett, one year). Prompted about the routine during the holiday period, she clarifies that she usually took breakfast in their apartment, since the Restaurant "MILLENNIUM" was quite removed from the building in which she was staying. Still, she explains, on May 2, the eve of disappearance of MADELEINE she had taken her breakfast in the restaurant "MILLENNIUM", since it was raining that day and she did not have an opportunity to partake of the morning sports. She added that in the days preceding the disappearance of Madeleine, after breakfast she would play sport (especially tennis), after which she would go to the supermarket BATISTA to make the purchases for lunch. Upon return, she points out that several families who made up the group met in the PAYNES' apartment to have lunch together, explaining that this was due to the fact that it is the larger apartment. After lunch the children took a nap, usually staying in her care, since they [the adults] went with the PAYNEs to continue, together, the leisure activities to which the holidays were dedicated. Concerning those activities, she clarifies that it was usual to go to the beach, pool and practice several sports monitored by the resort. She also went to the beach sometimes, she helped the PAYNE couple to look after the children, during the periods when they were not at the KIDS CLUB. In the late afternoon, from 16.45 to 17.30, the children had dinner at Restaurant "TAPAS", after which they were taken to the apartment to prepare for sleep, which usually occurred at 19:00. After that, the PAYNE family, the deponent included, prepared for the dinner that usually occurred around 20.45 in the restaurant "TAPAS." In reply to a question, she added that the restaurant always reserved the same table for the group, as it was the only table that was capable of seating nine people. In reply to a question, she states that, although it is positioned in front of the balconies at the rear of the residential block, the angle of vision can not permit full control over possible access by people to the interior of ground-floor apartment patios that are there - especially since the restaurant is covered by a transparent oilcloth which hampers vision. Asked who has done the booking of the restaurant, says that it has been done by RACHEL, explaining that although the dinner is scheduled for 20:30, the group never gathered before 2OH45/21HOO due to successive delays of several couples. The question asked, regarding the fact that, possibly, on the first day it was RUSSEL who had made the reservation at the restaurant, she admits that as possible, although she cannot be sure which of the two (RACHEL or RUSSEL) would have done it. Prompted, she says that, from memory, the dinners usually ended at around 23:00, the time at which they returned to their apartments where they slept. Concerning May 3, the date of the occurrence of the facts now under investigation, she states that she did the things she has generally described above being unaware of anything, nor having seen anything, that might relate to the disappearance of Madeleine. Prompted to report the events that had unfolded in period between 19H00 and 22H40 of that day, the deponent states that around 19:00 she had gone together with the Payne couple and their children to the apartment in order to prepare them for bed. Then, as usual, the adults prepared themselves for dinner. In this matter, she recalled that they had been late with these preparations because they only managed to get to Restaurant around 21.00. Asked, she adds that she went to the restaurant in the company of her daughter and son-in-law. Asked directly if someone had gone to her apartment to call them (herself and the PAYNE couple) for dinner the witness said no. Asked if there was the possibility of having crossed paths with someone during the journey between her apartment and restaurant, the witness said no. That night she believes she arrived at the restaurant at around 21:00 in the company of the PAYNE couple. That, at that time, the whole group were at the restaurant. The witness did not recall, but thinks that perhaps Gerald and MATT had not been in the restaurant along with the other members of the group. In this regard, asked specifically whether, on the journey to the restaurant, if they had passed either of the two individuals described in the preceding paragraph, she answered categorically not. Questioned about the members who, during the dinner, had absented themselves from the restaurant, the witness says that, as she recalls, there were some people who left, failing to identify which, except for RUSSEL who had left the restaurant and taken a little more time than usual due to, from what she knows, his daughter had been sick. Asked, she states that it would be normal for one member of each of the couples to get up regularly in order to check in their apartments if the children were well. She clarifies that the practice was for each couple to check their own children, it not being usual for anyone to check the children of other couples. The question asked, she thinks that up to the date of the disappearance it had never happened that anyone had entered the apartment of another couple in order to check their offspring. Nevertheless, it seems that the couple PAYNE and the witness, did not make any trips to apartments, because they had an intercom called the "baby monitor", through which sounds or noises of the children could be heard. Prompted to state for the record the movements that occurred that night, during the above dinner, the witness reiterated that she could not say specifically who had left nor when they had done so. Therefore, she can only say with precision that, at around 22.00 Kate McCann returned to the restaurant, seemingly in panic, communicating to others the fact of Madeleine's disappearance. Asked about the reaction of other members of the group when they heard the above from KATE, the witness says that everyone, except the witness, left the restaurant and went to the apartment of the couple McCANN in order to find out what was going on. In turn, as relates to her, the witness says she stayed at the restaurant for about five minutes, then, noting that the remaining members of the group had not returned, she followed in the direction of the McCANNS' apartment. In that apartment she found that KATE was completely in panic, in "state of shock ". Because she was asked, she states that she entered the apartment by the sliding glass door of the patio at the back, which gives access to the lounge. Then she went to the children's bedroom, noting that there she found KATE and the twin siblings of MADELEINE . She added that she did not remember too much detail about the scenario that she found in that bedroom, other that what she said above. However, she states that KATE had repeatedly commented that, on arriving at the bedroom, she had found the window of the room, with its shutter, both open. Yet, she [DW] did not notice, upon entering the room, if the window was or was not open. However, she wants to stress that immediately afterwards, she went outside the apartment in order to ascertain whether she would be able to raise the shutters by hand from the outside, and found it was impossible for her. Consequently she infers that at the time of her arrival at the apartment the window would have been closed already. Because she was asked, she says she does not know if the window, and the shutter, of the couple's bedroom were open or not, in that she did not enter that room. Prompted about the conditions of light inside the apartment at the time, the witness believes that they were good, judging that the lights were lit as she recalls no darkness. Regarding the bedroom previously occupied by Madeleine, she does not remember if the lights were lit, but knows that when she entered the twins were still sleeping in their beds, which makes her think that maybe those lights were switched off. She added that, for her to see the twins and their cradles, and the bed of MADELEINE, the darkness would not be complete, but that the room had some light she thinks must have been from the light of the lounge. She adds that that night, and after the occurrence of the facts under investigation, she was in the apartment on two separate occasions. At the time described above she remained about 10 minutes in the apartment. After this time she returned to the restaurant to get her handbag as well as the MCCANN couple's camera and "baby monitor" of her daughter, and was soon back again in the apartment. The question being asked about the people that were inside the apartment of McCANN at that time, the witness said that the McCANN couple were present (although on the first occasion she had no recollection of having seen GERRY), and FIONA, not remembering any other people that were there. However, she admits the possibility of there being [others] inside the apartment, including David, in that, as mentioned above, all of them had gone to the apartment following the news that KATE had given. The question asked, she states to know that male members of the group undertook a search around [outside of] the apartment to try to locate Madeleine, which was absolutely fruitless. The deponent states that FIONA had asked her to move to their daughters to make sure that everything would be well with them, hence the deponent will have returned to her apartment from which she did not leave anymore. Asked, she states to be unaware of any type of problems affecting the family, professional, loving, etc., for any of the group members, either in our country or anywhere else in the world. She does not know if any of the group members knows anyone residing in Portugal, particularly in the Algarve, or anyone who has been here on holiday in the same period. Prompted she says that during these holidays all group members made their movements on foot, denying that any of them had rented cars or that they could possibly have driven cars of others, [nor that] they were occasionally available. She adds that none of the group members left the village of Praia da Luz. During that period, as far as she is aware, none of the group had formed any kind of acquaintance or relationship with other persons. Prompted, she explains that in all the dinners during the holidays only members of the group had participated, never having any strangers with them at the table that they usually occupied. Asked, she says that in the days leading up to the disappearance of MADELEINE, or at any other time, she neither saw nor found any abnormal situation that could by itself be interpreted as having any correlation with the facts of the investigation.

<!--Please do remove this Google ads because it support Codemiles Free Templates Team by providing small income. If you gust keep it , you lose nothing , but if you removed it we will lose thanks you , Contact : http://www.codemiles.com (phpbb3 Free styles) -->