02-08 Outros Apensos II May 2007 File 08 Pages 01-08
Report May 2007 Central Brigade Information Analysis
Outros Apensos II - Analysis Report – 28th May 2007 File 08
Analysis Report
1) Introduction
On 28 April 2007, coming from the UK there arrived at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz - Lagos four English couples and the mother of one female member of them. All the couples were accompanied by children, with a maximum age of 4 years.
The Group comprised:
i - Gerald McCann + Kate Healy = Madeleine (4) and Sean and Amelie (twins) (2).
ii - Russel O'Brien + Jane Tanner = E**a (3) and E**e (1)
iii - Matthew Oldfield + Rachael Manpilly = G***e (1)
iv - David Payne + Fiona Payne + (Diane Webster) = Scarlett (1) and Lilly (3)
a) The journey and stay was booked and organised in the UK through Mark Warner, a company with which they already had prior contact, namely a trip to Greece in the previous year.
b) The return from Algarve to UK should have occurred on 5 May 2007.
c) Generally, days spent in the Ocean Club followed a certain routine.
d) The children took breakfast with the parents after which they went to mini clubs, in the area, where they participated in recreation activities suited with to their respective ages. They ate with their parents at lunch time and returned to kid club for the afternoon. About 18h00 the parents went to collect the children to return to the apartments. They gave them a bath and dinner and put them to bed around 19h30/20h00.
e) During the periods that the children were in the mini clubs, the parents indulged in various amusement activities, namely tennis, jogging, reading, etc.
f) Except for the first day, the Group of adults dined in the Tapas restaurant (situated next to the Ocean Club swimming pool) where a table was reserved for nine persons. These dinners started around 20h30/21h00, going on until about 24h00.
g) Given that there was no (or two parents had not been informed) system of monitoring children during the dinner time, the parents resolved to make their own checks of their children by going to the apartments approximately each half hour.
h) This check on the children was performed by their own parents, or, some times, by parents of other children who, when going to observe their children would also check on the others. However, in some cases, this was limited to passing next to the bedroom windows and listening for crying.
i) The McCann apartment is situated on the ground floor, at the eastern end of the building. It is accessible in two ways: - through the main door giving access on the same side as bedroom window of Madeleine and the twins (see photos on page 12); - on the opposite side through two (sliding) glass doors, one into the lounge and the other into the couple's bedroom. These give access to the veranda from which a stairway, through a small gate, gives access to the side street.
j) Because this latter access is most convenient, it being closest to the restaurant entrance, the lounge door stayed closed but not locked in a way that it could be opened from the outside, permitting there to be a gap in which to introduce a hand (i.e. the reporter says that the door would be ajar).
Development of the Investigation
Outros Apensos II - Analysis Report – 28th May 2007 File 08
Analysis Report
1) Introduction
On 28 April 2007, coming from the UK there arrived at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz - Lagos four English couples and the mother of one female member of them. All the couples were accompanied by children, with a maximum age of 4 years.
The Group comprised:
i - Gerald McCann + Kate Healy = Madeleine (4) and Sean and Amelie (twins) (2).
ii - Russel O'Brien + Jane Tanner = E**a (3) and E**e (1)
iii - Matthew Oldfield + Rachael Manpilly = G***e (1)
iv - David Payne + Fiona Payne + (Diane Webster) = Scarlett (1) and Lilly (3)
a) The journey and stay was booked and organised in the UK through Mark Warner, a company with which they already had prior contact, namely a trip to Greece in the previous year.
b) The return from Algarve to UK should have occurred on 5 May 2007.
c) Generally, days spent in the Ocean Club followed a certain routine.
d) The children took breakfast with the parents after which they went to mini clubs, in the area, where they participated in recreation activities suited with to their respective ages. They ate with their parents at lunch time and returned to kid club for the afternoon. About 18h00 the parents went to collect the children to return to the apartments. They gave them a bath and dinner and put them to bed around 19h30/20h00.
e) During the periods that the children were in the mini clubs, the parents indulged in various amusement activities, namely tennis, jogging, reading, etc.
f) Except for the first day, the Group of adults dined in the Tapas restaurant (situated next to the Ocean Club swimming pool) where a table was reserved for nine persons. These dinners started around 20h30/21h00, going on until about 24h00.
g) Given that there was no (or two parents had not been informed) system of monitoring children during the dinner time, the parents resolved to make their own checks of their children by going to the apartments approximately each half hour.
h) This check on the children was performed by their own parents, or, some times, by parents of other children who, when going to observe their children would also check on the others. However, in some cases, this was limited to passing next to the bedroom windows and listening for crying.
i) The McCann apartment is situated on the ground floor, at the eastern end of the building. It is accessible in two ways: - through the main door giving access on the same side as bedroom window of Madeleine and the twins (see photos on page 12); - on the opposite side through two (sliding) glass doors, one into the lounge and the other into the couple's bedroom. These give access to the veranda from which a stairway, through a small gate, gives access to the side street.
j) Because this latter access is most convenient, it being closest to the restaurant entrance, the lounge door stayed closed but not locked in a way that it could be opened from the outside, permitting there to be a gap in which to introduce a hand (i.e. the reporter says that the door would be ajar).
2) The Event
a) On the night of 3 May, at 20h30, the McCanns were the first to arrive at the 'Tapas'. The others were arriving up to about 21h00.
b) At 21h00 Matthew went to see his daughter. He said that he listened next to the bedrooms of the other children and all was quiet.
c) At 21h05/21h10 Gerald went to see his children. He entered by the sliding door. It was strange that the door from the lounge into the bedroom was a little more open than they had left it when they went out. But, he thought that Madeleine had got up and returned to bed. He saw that Madeleine and the twins were in their respective beds and quiet [peaceful/undisturbed]. He went to the WC and left by the sliding door. In the street, near to the gate, he met Jez, whom he knew from tennis, with whom he spoke for 3 to 5 minutes.
d) At this time (21h15), coming from the restaurant and going to see her children, Jane Tanner passed by them. She says that at that moment she saw walking on the road perpendicular [to the road on which she was walking], about 10 metres away, a man carrying a child in his arms (see diagram and photo on pages 50/51). The child was barefoot and [dressed] in pyjamas, but she thought only that it was strange [for the child] not to be covered. She did not notice if the external blinds of Madeleine's bedroom were down or raised.
e) Neither Gerald nor Jez noted the passage of Jane nor did they see the man with the child in his arms.
f) At 21h30 Matthew left the 'Tapas' to go to see his children. He said to Kate that he would check her children. He entered the 5A lounge by the sliding door. He thought that the bedroom of Madeleine and the twins was brighter than usual, it appearing to him that the external blinds could have been lifted.. However, he paid no attention to it and limited himself to looking into the bedroom through the door that was open enough [for him to see]. He says that he saw the twins were in the cots and that all was quiet. As Madeleine's bed was against the nearside wall he did not see if she was in her bed.
g) At 22h00 Kate went to her apartment. She entered by the sliding door and, at once, noticed that the bedroom door was fully open, the window was open, the external blinds raised and the curtains pulled to the sides. The twins were sleeping in the cots but Madeleine had disappeared.
h) Only later, after knowing the colour of the pyjamas, did Jane come to the conclusion that the child she says she had seen in the arms of the man could have been Madeleine.
2.1 Time Line of the Group (Annexe 2)
A time line was prepared, based on the statements of the Group members, trying to determine the time at which Madeleine disappeared.
2.1.1) Conclusion
a) From what was stated, and if the child carried in the arms of the man referred to by Jane Tanner was Madeleine, then the abductor (given the very limited time between Gerald leaving and the moment Jane says she saw him) was already inside the apartment when Gerald went there at 21h05/21h10, having exited immediately afterwards.
b) If it was not Madeleine, and Jane, later, unintentionally, had created that conviction, the disappearance could have occurred after [later]. Either between Gerald's exit and Matthew's entrance (21h30), or between his exit and Kate's arrival (22h00).c) From any manner [Anyway], everything leads one to believe that the author [of the time line] exercised control over the Group of 9.
3. Development of the Investigation
a) Not leaving out of the assessment two possibilities, however remote: - one, Madeleine walking out by herself, and to have gotten lost, and to be in an unknown place - the other, an attempted robbery (the individual, being interrupted by Gerald's entrance, and allowing that Madeleine had seen him, or something had gone awry, having determined to take her with him.
b) Now, according to all the work performed and all the clues collected, everything points to Madeleine having been abducted.
c) There having been no ransom demand, we believe the following motivations remain:
i - of a sexual nature - 'predator' and/or a paedophile network;
ii - human trafficking;
iii - childless person/couple or substitution for a missing child;
iv - revenge against Madeleine's parents, for professional or impassioned reasons, etc.
d) During the investigation certain clues were determined that, collectively, pointed to a suspect - Robert Murat. Because they were closed associated with him, the investigation focused, also, its attention on his friend/girlfriend - Michaela Walczuch and on a Russian individual, a computer expert - Sergey Malinka, with whom they were associated.
i - of a sexual nature - 'predator' and/or a paedophile network;
ii - human trafficking;
iii - childless person/couple or substitution for a missing child;
iv - revenge against Madeleine's parents, for professional or impassioned reasons, etc.
d) During the investigation certain clues were determined that, collectively, pointed to a suspect - Robert Murat. Because they were closed associated with him, the investigation focused, also, its attention on his friend/girlfriend - Michaela Walczuch and on a Russian individual, a computer expert - Sergey Malinka, with whom they were associated.
3.1 Time Line - the suspects (Annexe 3)
a) A time line was prepared, based on the statements of the arguido and close witnesses referred to above, for the geographic locations and timings.
3.1.1 Time line - Beginning of Robert Murat's participation as translator (Annexe 4)
a) Based on contradictory statements, a time line was prepared from the moment Robert Murat began his activity as 'translator'.
b) It is noted that only three members of the Group of 9, and only after him having been considered suspect, came forward to affirm that he was seen in the area of the apartment on the night of 3 - 4 May, a short time after the disappearance of Madeleine. The rest of the witnesses questioned about his participation [being in the area], namely members of the GNR, affirmed not having seen him, or that they saw him only on May 4.
c) But, generally, they classified his demeanour as being, not like someone who was interested solely in translations, but as having an attitude that exceeded that role, wanting to acquaint himself with the things discovered and 'to drive' [steer; direct] some investigation activities.
4. OBJECTIVE
Supported by the lists of phone calls, to compare the declarations made and to try the clarify the kind of relationship between the participants and/or others.
4.1 Chronogram (timing diagram) of communications (Annexes 5, 6 and 7)
Flow charts of phone calls (Annexes 8, 9 , 10 and 11)
a) The following list of mobile and fixed telephones were determined:
b) Robert Murat: mobile 919****41; fixed 282****16
c) Michaela Walczuch mobile 919****59 and 960****59; fixed 282****89
d) Sergey Malinka mobile 914****57; fixed 282****07
e) Lists of calls made and received were requested from the operators [phone service companies], along with SMS [records] showing the destination and originating phones, and the records from the cell masts activated.
f) Supported by these lists, along with our authority to read the mobile phone call lists, and the authority to read calendars, the respective communication timing diagrams were prepared.
g) In the timing diagrams (Annexes 5, 6 and 7) calls on days 2, 3 and 4 May were reviewed and analysed.
4. OBJECTIVE
Supported by the lists of phone calls, to compare the declarations made and to try the clarify the kind of relationship between the participants and/or others.
4.1 Chronogram (timing diagram) of communications (Annexes 5, 6 and 7)
Flow charts of phone calls (Annexes 8, 9 , 10 and 11)
a) The following list of mobile and fixed telephones were determined:
b) Robert Murat: mobile 919****41; fixed 282****16
c) Michaela Walczuch mobile 919****59 and 960****59; fixed 282****89
d) Sergey Malinka mobile 914****57; fixed 282****07
e) Lists of calls made and received were requested from the operators [phone service companies], along with SMS [records] showing the destination and originating phones, and the records from the cell masts activated.
f) Supported by these lists, along with our authority to read the mobile phone call lists, and the authority to read calendars, the respective communication timing diagrams were prepared.
g) In the timing diagrams (Annexes 5, 6 and 7) calls on days 2, 3 and 4 May were reviewed and analysed.
h) All phones were identified where possible, whether Portuguese, English or other nationality. Telephone lists from PT, TMN, VODAPHONE and OPTIMUS [the four service operators] were used. Collaboration from officers of the UK police was relied on to identify telephones of that country. Similarly, they correlated all the phone numbers in the inquiry and the calendars under review.
i) It was sought to compare and to correlate, whether through the flow charts of calls, or through the cell masts activated by the mobile phones, by place/time, the declarations made by each one of those seen.
j) No discrepancies were found between the time line (statements of RM, MW and SM) and the timing diagram, either in terms of the time that calls were made or received, or in terms of masts activated. But there were omissions, due to forgetfulness or intent.
k) In this way, one realises, only for him, it is not proven, for determined periods of time, where Robert Murat was located, specifically in the period in which Madeleine disappeared.
4.2. Observation
a) There should be new inquiries made of Robert and Michaela in order to clarify the calls between them on 3 May from 20h15 to 20h25 (fixed), from 23h20 to 23h29 (mobile), from 23h55 to 23h37 (mobile), 23h40 to 23h47 (mobile) and from 23h53 to 24h01 (fixed).
j) No discrepancies were found between the time line (statements of RM, MW and SM) and the timing diagram, either in terms of the time that calls were made or received, or in terms of masts activated. But there were omissions, due to forgetfulness or intent.
k) In this way, one realises, only for him, it is not proven, for determined periods of time, where Robert Murat was located, specifically in the period in which Madeleine disappeared.
4.2. Observation
a) There should be new inquiries made of Robert and Michaela in order to clarify the calls between them on 3 May from 20h15 to 20h25 (fixed), from 23h20 to 23h29 (mobile), from 23h55 to 23h37 (mobile), 23h40 to 23h47 (mobile) and from 23h53 to 24h01 (fixed).
b) And the call of 30 seconds from Robert to Sergey at 23h39 ' the only such call on those days.
c) In the flow charts (Annexes 8, 9, and 10) there were considered and analysed connections on days 1, 2, 3 and 4 May 2007, relating to each telephone.
d) In the flow chart (Annexe 11 - combination of call in Annexes 8, 9 and 10) there were considered and analysed connections on the days 1, 2, 3 and 4 May 2007, together with the target numbers.
i - In the period under review, calls by phone and SMS between RM and MW are demonstrated, ether by mobile or fixed service phones.
ii - No calls are recorded between MW and SM. Between RM and SM only one call is recorded.
iii - No common numbers are shared between SM and RM, nor between SM and MW.
iv - Only one common number was found between RM and MW 707960000 UZO (Call Centre)
5. Conclusion
The flow of calls analysed, from fixed and mobile phones, and the respective comparison with witness statements, found no evidence of significant discrepancy.
a) A close, ongoing relationship between RM and MW was noted.
b) There exists a relationship between RM and SM, but in the period looked at there was only a single call.
c) There were no telephone contacts common to the three people.
d) For the reasons presented, it is not possible, in this way, to better clarify the, possible, participation of any of them in the events under investigation.
Lisboa
c) In the flow charts (Annexes 8, 9, and 10) there were considered and analysed connections on days 1, 2, 3 and 4 May 2007, relating to each telephone.
d) In the flow chart (Annexe 11 - combination of call in Annexes 8, 9 and 10) there were considered and analysed connections on the days 1, 2, 3 and 4 May 2007, together with the target numbers.
i - In the period under review, calls by phone and SMS between RM and MW are demonstrated, ether by mobile or fixed service phones.
ii - No calls are recorded between MW and SM. Between RM and SM only one call is recorded.
iii - No common numbers are shared between SM and RM, nor between SM and MW.
iv - Only one common number was found between RM and MW 707960000 UZO (Call Centre)
5. Conclusion
The flow of calls analysed, from fixed and mobile phones, and the respective comparison with witness statements, found no evidence of significant discrepancy.
a) A close, ongoing relationship between RM and MW was noted.
b) There exists a relationship between RM and SM, but in the period looked at there was only a single call.
c) There were no telephone contacts common to the three people.
d) For the reasons presented, it is not possible, in this way, to better clarify the, possible, participation of any of them in the events under investigation.
Lisboa
28th May 2007
No comments:
Post a Comment