NUIPC-201/07.0 GALGS

Intercalary report

For the attention of the
Criminal Investigation Coordinator

Madeleine Beth Maccann was born on the 12th of May 2003.
She has been missing since the 3rd of May 2007, a fact that took place in Praia da Luz, in Lagos.

She is the daughter of Gerald and Kate McCann and her birth was desired and planned.
The mother’s difficulty in becoming pregnant should nevertheless be mentioned, as well as the resulting necessary treatments and the ‘cost’ thereof.
She was born from ‘in vitro’ insemination, but the tracing of the child’s DNA shows that she is in fact the McCann couple’s daughter.

It is a scientific fact that the medical treatments to overcome some of the causes for the lack of pregnancy increase the likelihood of twins being born from a so-called normal pregnancy.

In this case, we can see that a pregnancy, although desired and planned, turned a family of three into a family of five.
Moreover, caring for one child is not the same as caring for three, all of tender age.

***

At around midnight on the 3rd of May 2007, through a phone connection between the GNR in Lagos and this police station, the disappearance of a child, an English subject, was communicated.

We went on location in order to perform the necessary judiciary inspection.

Faced with the fact, the disappearance of a child, the investigation “drew out” the various possible scenarios.

The child’s parents immediately attributed the fact (disappearance) to the action of a third party, defending the ABDUCTION.

While [abduction] being one of the possible scenarios, the family’s actions led into that direction, by publicising the fact in a manner that had never been seen before.

In fact, on the very next day, English television stations ‘opened’ their newscasts, already advertising the child’s disappearance / abduction.

The defence of this scenario was the ‘truth’ of the facts under investigation, for the media.

Time went by and that scenario was not confirmed as its presuppositions were not ‘fulfilled’. No ransom was ever demanded in exchange for information or for the child itself.
Nevertheless, and considering the deposition by one of the friends, Jane Tanner, we could be looking at said scenario.

Meanwhile, diligences continued in order to collect all kinds of information and always with the purpose of working all scenarios that were still a possibility.

***

The information that was initially collected with family and friends was uncertain and had been “worked” upon by the group, in order to strengthen the version that had been presented and defended.

According to the version of the parents and of the GROUP, they went out to dine and all of them left their children, asleep, in their apartments.

The group’s members held a meeting during which they agreed on certain rules that sustained a version of continuous checking of the children, while they dined.

The process includes a manuscript by one of the group’s members that supports this thesis.

These principles, which in this manner, have been shared by the entire group, have the effect that for the English public opinion the whole GROUP is always cleared, rendering any abnormal event that might last longer than 30 minutes impossible, given the fact that they all agreed that was the time lapse in which the children were checked.

The version that someone from the group went to the apartments to check that everything was well, every 15 or 30 minutes, collapses!!

Total incoherence results from the GROUP’s statements, which makes it easy to verify that everyone lies.

We can verify that one of the group’s elements, wishing to make the group’s version about the checking, more consistent, gives it a personal touch: the checks on the children were carried out in two manners, one just to listen if anyone was crying, and in case of silence all was well, and the other one by actually checking.

On his turn to check on the children, one of the group’s elements, Matthew, did just that, as he even told Kate that all was well, with no further explanation. Kate recalls this detail.

But the truth is that this information leads the investigation to wander about, to waste time and resources.

It is not understandable that this information is given at the beginning and sustained throughout time, despite the fact that anyone can verify the damage that results from it, for the investigation.

After all this time, the version is upheld !! as well as the public, insistent statement that what they want most is to “assist the investigation”.

The investigation was forced to assume the information was incorrect, and move forward.

This only!! results in:

If someone checked on the children and all was well, the disappearance took place between 9.30 and 10 p.m.;

If the information wouldn’t be counting on said witness (?), then the disappearance would have taken place between 9 and 10 p.m., widening the time period (presuming that the father speaks the truth).

But there is another question about the timing which is:

The last time that the child was seen outside of the group, by someone who can prove that moment, was at around 5.35 p.m., when the parents went to pick her up at the crèche, which may widen the time lapse between the disappearance and the alert, into four hours.

***

Continuing to analyse the information that was offered, we have one of the group’s members, Jane Tanner, becoming a supposedly important witness, due to what she told us: she saw someone crossing the street at dinner time: from the location of the disappearance into the direction of Robert Murat’s house.

This information directed and occupied the investigators’ work for a long time. This may be an example of how information that is not correct, may not only delay, but may have led to losing the little girl.

By insisting on the information, scenarios were outlined which failed to match said information with reality, but still long and intense work was carried out on that arguido.

In the same manner, we can verify the discrepancy about the subject, in statements from Gerald and Jane. How they passed each other at only two or three meters’ distance, yet failed to see each other; can they position themselves in such a reduced space, and both fail to see the same person walking by; more correctly, one sees and the other doesn’t.

Even the location where they supposedly crossed ways is not very well defined by both.

The moment chosen by the witness Jane to make her statement about what she had “seen” and the explanation for that moment is unreal, which is to say, it is not easy to accept that any witness (from the group) upon seeing someone with a child in the arms getting away from the McCann’s place, hadn’t immediately acted or spoken, being certain that the description of the person was being consecutively altered, “perfected”. Therefore, there isn’t much credibility in this deposition.

***

Until now we have been analyzing small distortions in the information that was initially transmitted, “small” alterations (distortions) of the truth taking place, thus relating them with the investigation and with the direction it forced it into.

The investigation didn’t follow the command or the will of anyone; the family and group information that is fundamental in this type of crime, was always distorted.

The fact that the individuals were foreigners prevented, until now, that direct information about the persons of the GROUP could be collected.

***

The parents of the minor live in a society, the British, known through the press, as being very demanding. The profession of both parents, medicine, completed by the fact that the father is a surgeon, increases this degree of demand and consequent tiredness.

In a society that is identified internationally and in the Media as being very demanding and with many and tight rules to establish those standards of exigency, it makes it obligatory that people rest; make a professional retreat; take their holidays.

Gerald McCann is a cardiovascular surgeon.

In many moments of his professional career he had to make decisions in thousandths of a second, which ‘gives’ him a certain coldness, and certainly provokes an increased tiredness.

The enjoyment of a period of holidays supposes a rest through non-ordinary practices and freedom and exemption from schedules.

The social life in such a holiday, in the present case, was facilitated by the fact that they travelled as a group.

But that social life may, in a certain way, be touched by the presence and constant needs of accompanying the minors.

This fact and need was clear in the deliverance of the children to the respective child centres and crèches (according to their ages). The holiday time was not shared between parents and children.

***

The 3rd of May of 2007 had gone by, until around dinner time, in a natural way according to the adopted style.
After fetching the children from the nursery and the crèche they went to the apartment, shortly after 17:35h.
But…Kate went running for half an hour on the beach and then went to the apartment and…Gerald went to play tennis.

While the tennis match was taking place, another member of the group, who had been in touch with Kate, in the apartment, for a period of time that took between 30 seconds, according to Kate, and 30 minutes, according to Gerald, showed up.

In thirty seconds we may ask if everything is well and if anything is needed, little more.
In thirty minutes we can go ahead and do something that is requested from us…

They put the minors to bed and to sleep, at around 19:30h. They remained at home until around 20:30h, going to the Tapas restaurant afterwards. They were the first to arrive, out of the group.

After the entire group was at the table and when the meal started, the “checks” on the children began, in a way that is neither coherent nor acceptable; it could not be confirmed and only the group defends it, in a sort of “unique version”.

Although they say in their statements that their strategic position in the Tapas restaurant allowed them, the McCanns, to see the apartment where they’d left their underage children asleep, the examination of the spot reveals it is false.

It must be noted, also, that according to the investigation. everything points to their position at the table being with their backs to the apartment.

On that NIGHT, around 22:05h, according to her version, it was Kate that went to the apartment to check the children, coinciding with the end of the dinner, at which she had arrived at around 20:30h.

So, she returned to the apartment about one and a half hours later, the time lapse during which she didn’t see her children.

It took her about 10 minutes!!. She then showed up at the restaurant and told the remaining members about the disappearance of her daughter Madeleine.

It must be noted that Kate knew that, going back to the restaurant as she did, she would leave the twins, Amelie and Sean, in the same dangerous situation.

It is not understandable why she didn’t use the mobile phone to call Gerald or the group or, even simpler, that she didn’t walk out on the balcony from where she could be perfectly heard by the members of the group.

***

The authorities, the GNR, were alerted at around 22:40h, and the alerted population started the searches for the child.

The divulgation of the facts wasn’t kept within the authorities and the normal channels. On the following day, British and Portuguese televisions were broadcasting the news.

However, the GROUP had been reunited. The search was circumscribed to the interior of the apartment.

Even before any search by the authorities in the surroundings started, the news about the possible abduction was already running along.

By reasons, they said, of counselling and support, the parents asked for the presence of a priest, at around 02:00h/03:00h on the 04th of May.

From the informal depositions they gave, during the judiciary inspection on location, the information immediately induced the thesis of ABDUCTION.

Simple things became disinformation: the question of the open or closed window; the shutter up or down; the open balcony door…the front door, merely shut or locked by key.

***

Despite everything, until a certain time in the investigation, the family sustained and fed the theory of abduction. However, on a date that cannot be precise it was suggested by the family that a person should be consulted that could, eventually, indicate the probable location of little Madeleine’s cadaver.

This fact became inexplicable to the members of the investigation, given the fact that it was the members of the family themselves who raised the hypothesis little Maddie’s death.

Nevertheless, for the media they continued (and continue) to declare their hope of finding their daughter alive: the first time that the hypothesis of the little girl’s death was raised it was, effectively, suggested by the McCann couple.

***

While keeping several investigation lines open, it was decided to advance in the direction of a new inspection of the spot where the girl disappeared.

The inspection technique is commonly used in the United Kingdom and consists of the use of especially trained dogs.

Naturally, the dog’s smelling sense is the ‘sense’ at use. In the case of this ‘sense’, the difference between the human and the dog is of 5 million cells to 200 million cells.
It must be highlighted that the use to this kind of inspection is frequent in the UK and the success rate is of 100%.

One of the dogs is trained to detect cadaver odour and the other to identify traces of human blood.

We now stress that the location of the cadaver odours signifies that physically the body (cadaver) is not on the place, marked by the dog, but certainly it has been there, as long as the dog signals it.

As can be read in the process files, in this inquiry, the dogs inspected the following locations and items, with the results described below.

All the inspections were recorded in sound and image and were directed by our British colleagues that accompany the dogs.

Among the great number of items and locations that were inspected, the dogs marked the following locations and items:

1. Apartment 5 A, Ocean Club resort, the place from where the child disappeared
1.1. Cadaver odour detection dog:

* master bedroom, in a corner, by the wardrobe
* living room, behind the sofa, by the side window

1.2. Blood dog:

* living room behind the sofa, by the side window (exactly the same spot that had been signalled by the cadaver dog);

2. Front garden of apartment 5A:
2.1. Cadaver odour detection dog:

* one of the flower beds (the dog handler commented on the “lightness” of the odour)

3. Apartments where the rest of the group were staying:

* NOTHING was detected by the dogs

4. McCanns’ present residence (at that time):

* NOTHING was detected in the house by any of the dogs

5. In Aldeia da Luz village:

* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs

6. McCann family’s clothes and belongings:
6.1. Cadaver odour detection dog:

* two pieces of clothing belonging to Kate McCann
* one piece of clothing belonging to Madeleine
* Madeleine’s soft toy
* the cadaver odour was detected when the toy was still inside the residence (the McCanns’, at that date)
* it was confirmed under out of the house conditions

7. The vehicle that was used by the McCann family:
7.1. Cadaver odour detection dog:

* marked the car key
* marked the inside of the car boot

7.2. Blood dog:

* marked the car key
* marked the inside of the car boot

8. Car that was used by a family friend that was staying in the same resort, on some of the same days :

* nothing was detected by any of the dogs

9. All the cars that were used by arguido Robert Murat and the people that are close to him:

* nothing was detected by any of the dogs.

(In a total of 10 cars the cadaver dog and the blood dog only marked the car of the McCann family, rented on the 27th of May!!!)


The locations and items that were marked and signalled by the blood dog are being subject to forensic exams, part of which are already concluded.

Not less relevant is the refinement of the results that point towards Madeleine’s DNA as being present in apartment 5A, behind the sofa, a spot that was marked by the cadaver and the blood dog. In every place marked by the blood dog, the laboratory confirmed that DNA was present.

***

The media attention that has been given to the case and the search for information by said media has led to an evolution in Madeleine’s parents’ statements.

All the information that was made public, has contributed to the rebuilding of the story, adapting it to eventual police questions, and to attempts to justify the indicia and consequent evidence that is being collected.

Let’s see: the media suggested the possibility that the children could have been sedated to be kept asleep and allow the parents some rest.

Distant in time, Kate’s father, the grandfather of the child, Brian Healy, admits to the press that Kate could have administered some medication to the little girl, Calpol, to help the child (the children??) to sleep, contrary to what his daughter Kate has been stating.

Kate, through the PJ inspector that acted as “liaison” with the family, asked why samples weren’t taken from the twins in order to test that hypothesis. She knew well enough at that time, more than 3 months later, that such an exam would be worthless.

She went even further and said that we – the investigation – should verify that the abductor had sedated Madeleine, in order to accomplish his action and that he had also sedated the twins…to consummate the act…however she didn’t say that at the right moment.

What we certainly know is that the sedatives have timings to act and timings to be expelled, that vary between six and 200 hours.
The McCanns’ medical knowledge is enough to know this, even if their professional activity never included performing toxicology exams.

When the media informed that blood had been detected “in the car and in the apartment”, Kate and members of her family come to the public with the simple excuse that it had been someone, who had access to the apartment, that had placed the evidence.

Now they even admit it was the criminal investigation body that placed the “false” evidence (blood and cadaver odour in the apartment and in the car).

In an attempt to justify the blood, Kate went even further, informing, on that occasion, that Madeleine sometimes suffered nosebleeds.

***

On the day that the house search was performed, at the McCanns’ residence, written papers were found in the master bedroom, as well as a bible, written in English. It was open on the pages whose copies are annexed to this report, with the translation.

***

ABDUCTION is a situation with which, unfortunately, in the United Kingdom, most of the public opinion is acquainted, due to the rate of this kind of crime.

Intelligent people should have a minimum of knowledge that publicity damages the investigation of an abduction crime and is especially threatening to the safety of the abducted person.

They should wait for the decisions from the police authorities; there is strong evidence that the crime scene was altered, and some furniture was moved around.

Those changes are indications of simulation.

***

On the night that little Madeleine disappeared, the family was contacted by a lady that identified herself with documents that credited her as somebody that worked with minors in the United Kingdom.

She identified herself with documents/certifications that are used in the UK, with hospitals and child care centres. She offered her help in whatever was needed.
No doubt this person could have been of valuable help, even about procedures, but she was dismissed.

***

From everything that was established, the facts point in the direction that the death of Madeleine McCann occurred, on the night of May 3rd of 2007, inside apartment 5A, at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, which was occupied by the McCann couple and by their three children;

There is a coincidence between the marking of cadaver odour and blood, according to the (partial) Laboratory Report that has been annexed to the process files.

Said marking occurred behind the living room sofa (cadaver odour / blood / DNA), which indubitably proves that said piece of furniture was pushed back by someone, after the death of Madeleine McCann was verified. Because of the few traces that were recovered on location and subject to examination, it has to be admitted as a strong hypothesis that it was subject to a “washing”, at a moment following the occurrence of death.

In the same manner, the soft toy that was used by the dead child, which was found at the top of the bed where she usually slept (cf. photos from the initial inspection) reveals that someone put it there at a moment posterior to death, given the fact that the bed doesn’t have any cadaver odour. This is to say, an intentional modification took place, in order to simulate a “picture” that doesn’t match reality, in an attempt to take advantage for the simulation of an abduction scenario;

It must be added that the cadaver odour detection dog strongly signalled the bedroom where the McCann couple slept, which may indicate the moving of the corpse from the actual death spot (living room) into a non visible part of said bedroom;

Furthermore a strong marking of cadaver odour was made on Kate McCann’s clothes, which may indicate that she was in touch with the cadaver;

There was also a strong marking of cadaver odour in the car that was used by the McCann couple (since the 27th of May 2007), which in conjugation with the blood dog’s marking and based on the forensics that are included in the process files, which indicate the presence of Madeleine McCann’s DNA in the car boot, lead towards not excluding a strong hypothesis that this vehicle may have possibly been used move the cadaver, 24 days after the death;

The indication from the cadaver odour detection dog, as well as from the blood detection dog, on the key of the aforementioned vehicle, where the laboratory would confirm the existence of Gerald McCann’s DNA, cannot be dismissed. This last signalling was obtained by the dogs after the key was put far away from the vehicle, in a non visible location.

***

From everything that is exposed, the process files result in the following:

A) the minor Madeleine McCann died in apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of the 3rd of May 2007;

B) a simulation of an abduction took place;

C) in order to render the child’s death impossible before 22H00, a situation of checking of the McCann couple’s children while they slept was made up;

D) Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the concealment of the cadaver of their daughter, Madeleine McCann;

E) at this moment, there seem to be no strong indications that the child’s death was not the result of a tragic accident, yet;

F) from what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, doesn’t want to deliver the cadaver immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility that it was moved from the initial place of deposition. This situation may raise questions concerning the circumstances in which the death of the child took place.

***

Therefore, we suggest that the case files are sent to the Republic’s Prosecutor, in the Lagos legal district, for:

G) a possible new questioning of the arguidos Kate and Gerald McCann;

H) an evaluation of the measure of restraint to be applied in this case;


During the house search at the McCann couple’s residence, a diary style manuscript was found, already photocopied, possibly authored by Kate McCann; admitting that it may contain information that may help to reach the material truth of facts, WE PROPOSE THAT:

I) the photocopies of said document are presented to the illustrious Judge for the purpose of its apprehension, if legal, its translation and eventual collection of information to be included in the process files, as necessary for the investigation.

At this date, I subject the case files to your appreciation, for you to determine whatever you may see as convenient, hence I open:


CONCLUSION

On the tenth of September, two thousand and seven

Chief Inspector

(Tavares de Almeida)