Thursday 14 July 2016

Chapter 9: MAJORCA, SEPTEMBER 2005

Madeleine McCann is two and a half years old and the twins just a few months when they go on holiday to Majorca with their parents. Three couples and their children go with them: David and Fiona Payne with their one-year-old daughter (Fiona is pregnant with their second child), S. and T., with their two children aged 1 and 3; finally S.G. and K.G., who have a one and a half year old daughter, E. (K.G., is also expecting a child). The trip was organised by David Payne. The latter rented a villa big enough to accommodate all of them.

S.G. got to know Madeleine's mother at university in Dundee, between 1987 and 1992. K.G. met Gerry McCann for the first time at his wedding to Kate in 1998. They became good friends, see each other regularly, spend weekends together and phone each other often. 

After dinner on the third or fourth evening in Majorca, the friends are all settled on the patio. They are having a drink and chatting when K.G. witnesses a scene which flabbergasts her and makes her fear for the safety of her daughter and the other children. She is sitting between Gerry McCann and David Payne when she hears the latter ask if she - probably Madeleine - did "that": he then puts a finger in his mouth and begins sucking it while putting it in and out - the sexual connotation is obvious - while with the other hand, he traces small small circles around his nipple in an extremely provocative way. While K.G. stupefied, regards Gerry and David, an uneasy silences settles around the table. Then they all start chatting again as if nothing happened. K.G. starts to distrust the way David Payne relates to the little ones. On another occasion, she sees David Payne making the same gestures while. speaking about his own daughter. At this time it's the fathers who give the children their baths, but K.G. no longer lets Payne near her daughter. After the holiday, K.G. will only meet the Paynes on one occasion, and she will not speak to them. Over the next two years, relations between K.G., S.G. and the McCanns become distanced; they will only see each other now at children's birthday parties.

The witness statement from the couple, S.G. and K.G., is taken by the English police on May 16th, thirteen days after Madeleine's disappearance. That information, very important for the progress of the investigation, was never sent to the Portuguese police. When the Portuguese investigators learn about similar events which allegedly took place during a holiday in Greece - without, however, obtaining reliable witness statements -, they tell the English police, who, even at this point, refrain from revealing what they know on the subject.

It will only be after my removal from the investigation, in October 2007, that this statement will finally be sent to the Portuguese police. Why did the British keep it secret for more than six months? It is all the more surprising that David Payne, who had planned the trip to Majorca - of whom it was known that his behaviour towards the children was, to say the least, questionable -, is the same person who organised the holiday in Portugal, that he is one of those closest to Madeleine and that he is the first friend of the family to have been seen with Kate McCann just after the disappearance (we will talk further about this). He was still present in Vila da Luz when the English police received that witness statement: why wasn't he interviewed immediately? Without doubt, the Portuguese police could have made progress with the investigation thanks to that lead: such behaviour would merit close attention. Were we looking in the right direction? Might we have established a link with the events of May 3rd? It is difficult to seriously doubt these witnesses. 


Join us here ~ Madeleine McCann Know The Truth

Chapter 10: RETHINKING THE FACTS


May 3rd 2007, 5.30pm. Terrace of the Paraiso Restaurant, Praia da Luz, 600 metres from the resort complex.

Apart from the McCanns and Diane Webster, Fiona Payne's mother, the whole group of friends are having something to eat. The children are running and playing on the terrace. Others of Madeleine's age, are coming and going between the restaurant and the beach. Everything is peaceful on this late afternoon. At 6.13pm, the men leave the table and go on foot to the resort. A quarter of an hour later, it's the turn of the women and children to go back. A few minutes go by. David Payne catches up with Madeleine's father, who is playing tennis, and asks him where Kate is. Gerry replies that she has gone back to the apartment with Madeleine and the twins. David goes there immediately.

What did he go there to do? How long did he stay there? How were the children? Did he see them? Did he play with them? From that moment on, the witness statements differ. According to Gerald, he stayed in the apartment for 30 minutes; according to Kate, on the other hand, no more than 30 seconds. The difference of opinion is important enough to be taken into consideration. It's not the only one. David Payne allegedly went to the McCanns' apartment to find out if Madeleine's mother needed anything, if he could help her to take the children to the play area. He relates seeing Madeleine and the twins; the image apparently evoked for him that of three immaculate angels. Let's note that at 7pm, the last person to see Maddie - apart from her parents - is David Payne.

There is a whole other version of that late afternoon, that of Fiona Payne. According to her, Gerry was not playing tennis but was in the apartment with Kate and the children. Apparently, she accompanied her husband when he went
to the McCanns' apartment. Who is telling the truth? The photos taken on the terrace of the Paraiso prove that Fiona, her friends and their children left the restaurant 15 minutes after the men's departure - one of them David. What do these easily discernible contradictions signify?

May 4th 2007, 7am Sargacal, a village close to Vila da Luz

Y.M., an English woman, aged 52, a social worker with child protection services for more than twenty-five years, is spending her holiday in the Algarve. She is watching an English television channel when she hears the news about Madeleine's disappearance in Vila da Luz. She decides to go there immediately to support the parents. Shortly after 9.30am, with the help of police officers on the spot, she manages to approach them. They are in the company of a man who is introduced to her as a friend of the family. The McCanns are deeply upset, and Kate cries a lot. Y.M. starts to ask them questions, to find out the frequency of visits to the children during dinner - they respond that the visits took place every hour - and asks Gerald if he is the biological father in order to immediately eliminate the hypothesis of parental abduction. 

Little by little, Kate starts to get annoyed: she thinks it's up to the police to ask these questions; besides, there should be more of them looking for her daughter; she insists that it was a couple who abducted her...Y.M.assumes that the McCanns distrust her. So, she shows them the official documents issued by the police and the English government certifying her professional qualifications. The friend of the family examines the papers and confirms their authenticity. In spite of this, Madeleine's parents don't seem to be very appreciative of this offer of collaboration. Y.M. tries to take Kate aside to speak to her quietly and ask her for more information about this couple who allegedly abducted her child. But she refuses, reacts aggressively and refuses to be separated from her two companions. Y.M. worries about the extreme state of agitation that Kate is in and notes that the latter has still not been examined by a doctor when she really needs to be.

During this encounter, Kate tells Y.M. that her daughter disappeared thirteen hours ago. If you do the calculation, that means that Madeleine would have been abducted at 9pm and not at 10pm. That contradiction is important; It has to be taken into account in analysing the abduction scenarios that the McCanns and their friends will relate to the police.

The couple's spokesman, the friend who has been present throughout the encounter, ends up telling Y.M. that the McCanns want her to leave. Before leaving the scene, she advises them not to trust the media and to remain silent. Y.M has the feeling that she has already met this man, his face seems familiar to her. Was he, perhaps, mixed up in one way or another in a case she had dealt with in the context of her work? She will later learn that he is David Payne, organiser of the trips, the same person whose sleazy attitude had been reported by S.G. and K.G. There is nothing incriminating in his past and, as we were able to verify, he has no criminal record. What we are sure of is that he has been a close friend of Madeleine's father since university.


Join us on facebook ~ Madeleine McCann Know The Truth


Monday 4 July 2016

Chapter 11: ANALYSIS OF A CRIME SCENE. APARTMENT 5A.

It's 10am. After dealing with everyday matters, I join the team of investigators responsible for the Madeleine case. The Leicestershire police are present at these meetings, as well as Jose Freitas. The latter, aged 46, is descended from Portuguese people who settled in Madeira and emigrated to the United Kingdom to find work and a better standard of living. Violent crime, abduction and illegal confinement are the speciality of this high-ranking Scotland Yard officer, who joined us eighteen days into the investigation - the English authorities consider that the presence of a man who knows Portugal and its culture could facilitate the investigation. He speaks our language with a British accent: until he left - at the time of the McCanns' return to England -, he never managed to say imprensa, which he always pronounced empresa. *

We take stock of the different operations set up, then we examine the photos taken on the night of May 3rd.

The apartment is made up of two bedrooms, a lounge, a kitchen and a bathroom. What is immediately apparent is the order that prevails in the bedroom where Madeleine and the twins were supposed to have slept. There is nothing to indicate that any abductor had passed through the window.

- How high is the window ledge?

- 91 centimetres. There is a bed against the wall under the window, where it looks like someone had slept. At the foot of the bed, against the same wall, there is a wicker armchair. No shoe prints were found on it. 

- What distance between the bed and the window ledge?

- 40 centimetres. But no footprints on the bed either. 

- OK, so either or: either that window plays no role, or we have a case of two people, one inside and one outside.

(*These two words, with similar pronunciation, are very often confused by those who do not speak fluent Portuguese, which can give rise to misunderstanding. The first means "press," and the second "business.")

Looking more closely, the room is not as tidy as it looks. The bedroom window is protected by a shutter that only opens from the inside. A black-out curtain, that keeps out the light, comes down to the window ledge. At the sides, just brushing the floor, are two other curtains with tiebacks; they are drawn towards the centre of the window, but not completely closed.

The right-hand tieback has fallen between the foot of the bed and the wicker armchair - the back of which is stuck to the curtain. On the left, the tieback is hanging from its holder, but the curtain isn't straight, as if someone had tried to close it in a hurry. While the tiebacks should have been hooked up, none was in the correct position. Kate insists that the curtains had been completely closed, and that the abductor must have half-opened them to facilitate his escape through the window. But the tiebacks serve to hold the curtains to the sides while they are open; to close them, of course, they must be unhooked. So, it's in pulling the curtains to close them that they would inevitably be in that position. It could reasonably be thought that the abductor had tried to close the curtains after he went through; that would only have slowed him down.

Another hypothesis is to suppose is that the curtains had been arranged like that after the disappearance. In that case, we would instead be dealing with an attempt at faking the crime scene.

The first observations are not the only ones that lead us to consider a set-up. The way the bed sheets were arranged but also the child's soft toy equally raise doubts.

- Do you see how the sheets are lying? You'd think the child got out by herself....or she didn't sleep there.

- Someone could have unintentionally touched the curtains while looking for the little girl inside the apartment.

- And the soft toy she slept with? That's not in a natural position either. How would she have found it, along the pillow like that?

- The mother says that the soft toy was beside the pillow when she noticed the disappearance, which, according to her, was its usual place.

- Which means that the little girl slept without holding it? Children normally clutch their security object to fall asleep. But if that's not the case, the way it's placed doesn't seem natural. She would inevitably have moved it turning over in her sleep.

- The pink blanket is also really tidy, almost folded.

Where cases of missing children involve the close family, modification of the crime scene is common. But the comings and goings and searches inside the apartment might be the source of these changes. We have to be absolutely sure that it's not a deliberate attempt to put up a smokescreen.

- What does the father say?

- That when he came to see the children, it was all like that, the blanket and the soft toy.

We carry on looking at the photos of the bedroom: the two cots are in the middle of the room and are in the way of an adult moving around.

- Why is there nothing more than mattresses? All the bed linen has been removed. I really wonder why...

- Perhaps a child vomited or soiled the sheets, and they didn't want to leave them in that state...

The twins only woke up when they were being transferred to the other apartment. They sleep deeply, those English children...

- OK, no joking!

- Actually, I'm not joking, I'm thinking aloud...All the same, it's extraordinary. These English little ones are on holiday; in spite of the excitement they must be feeling, they go to sleep every day at the same time. Their sleep is so deep and so calm that they are almost to be envied.

We then examine the photo of the lounge. This room has three openings: two windows and a patio door that opens at the back onto a balcony, from where you can see the area with the swimming pools and restaurants and the road. It is this patio door - and not the front door - that is used when you want to get into the apartment more quickly, coming from the restaurant. We notice that the sofa, situated under one of the windows, has been moved: the back of it is crushing the thick curtains. If these were closed to keep the light out of the room, it's curious that those at the other window were left open.

- That sofa could have been moved when they searched the apartment for the little girl.

- It's possible, but consider: the window is 3 metres above the road and directly overlooks the pavement. You can bet your life that the parents were not going to leave the sofa pushed against the wall, risking seeing their children climb onto it and falling.

- Nothing surprises me anymore on the part of those parents.

- Yes, but why did they push the sofa back under the window so hastily, judging by the position of the curtains. 

- No doubt it was during the searches; that could have been done by a police officer or anyone else who was present in the house. 

It's the father who clarifies this point for us. He, himself, pushed the sofa against the wall because the children would not stop playing behind it. He did not consider the possibility of a fall from the window. The role of this sofa is important if you imagine the hypothesis, not of an abduction, but of an accident inside the apartment itself. If it was really away from the wall before the abduction, it may be that Madeleine had climbed onto it and fallen down the other side.

At this stage of the investigation, we have already requested the holiday photos from all of them. On the dining table, we notice a digital camera and we decide we must acquire its contents.

- We are really going to need the photos. That would allow us to see what exactly happened during dinner, how they were seated round the table, what they drank, what they ate, how they were dressed, everything is important.

- In fact, do you know that the little girl's father got on his knees imploring the GNR police officers to help him when they arrived?

- That man, usually so cold, apparently lost control?

- ???

- Contamination...deliberately make his trousers dirty to hide compromising marks...

- I think you're watching too many thrillers. Don't forget that it's his daughter who has disappeared!

- There are two beds in the parents' bedroom, which have been pushed together; there is a wide space on the right, up to the wardrobe. One of the two days has visibly not been occupied.

- I don't understand the point of leaving so much space on the right.

- Normally, one of the two cots was there.

- So, the couple slept in that bedroom with the twins, and Madeleine in the other? OK...but why, on that night, are the three children sleeping alone in the other bedroom?

- Not necessarily alone. In the photo you can clearly see that the second bed, under the window, has been occupied.

- So, only one person slept in the parents' bedroom.

- The mother would have left the father to sleep alone? That could mean there was trouble between them?

- Now, they walk around hand-in-hand. And if something had happened during the holiday?

- So many issues to be clarified...Is that a little box of.....pills? 

- No, no, it's Band-aids.

- Where is their medication? None has been found, not even a bit of Benuron*.For doctors...

- Perhaps they took it with them when they took the twins from the apartment. Now, it's a bit late to clear up that detail.

- The little ones weren't ill, so why were their parents eager to take the medication with them?

- Perhaps it was intentional, perhaps not..

- Or it's quite simply at the bottom of a bag, and no one thought to ask them about it.

(* Medication for everyday use - paracetamol - for pain and fever)


Join us on facebook ~ Madeleine McCann Know The Truth