The Information in the files that is with-held

matthew wrote:

Autumn wrote:MW guests who were dining at the Tapas that evening do not appear to have had statements taken:

EDMONDS

MANN

BULLER

IRWIN

SPERREY

PATEL

COX ... no initial statement altho' one was later obtained from her partner - PATEL


______________________________________

Should Wayne Thornhill and partner and Carolyn Carpenter be on that list or did they make statements?

Maybe not in the files incase of a reconstruction?

Hmmm looks like she gave a statement but, like a few others, has been with-held. Her husband Steve's original statement is also missing but his Rog interview is available.

Statements missing from UK holiday makers:

Stephen Carpenter

Original statement taken on 17th May 2007 by a UK Police Officer:

Stephen Carpenter original

Rajinder Balu.

Rogatory statement refers to ?original statements?:

Rajinder Balu. original

Neil Berry

Rogatory statement refers to ?original statement?:

Neil Berry original


Carolyn Carpenter

Rogatory interview not included in DVD:

2. Page 18 Interview Carolyn Elizabeth CARPENTER, she was interviewed on 21st April 2008, the interview was recorded on DVD, please see enclosed 1 copy of the transcript, 1 copy of the DVD, 1 copy of her statement and a copy of the
Detective's statement evidencing the interview.

Carolyn Carpenter page 18


Carole Tranmer

Original interview and identikit not included in DVD:

In the interview of Carole Tranmer on 22nd April 2008, as recorded on DVD, reference is made more than once to a statement given by her to Leics police on 8 May 2007, and to an identikit that was created with the assistance of a police officer from Reading.

Carole Tranmer transcript

At about 23.30 a white fair haired man aged about 30, one of the friends of the McCann group was seen by Valerie Kerr and her family when he asked them if they had seen Madeleine. They were near to the chapel. Valerie and Laura returned to their apartment, changed clothes and went to help with the search.

No statement from the Kerr family in the files missing pages

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRIGADE-OF-INFORMATION.htm

AnnaEsse wrote:

margaret wrote:I've always said it was Gerrys job to tamper with the shutters but he couldn't do that when Jez appeared. Initial newspaper reports said Jez spotted Gerry 'by the shutters' or 'tampering with the shutters' because l was horrified when l read it and thought that no-one else seemed to be putting 2 and 2 together!

Explains everything nicely.

I recall reading that article about Jez finding Gerry by the shutters. It appears to have disappeared.

Might it have been one of those articles which the newspapers fully admitted were untrue and paid substantial damages for having printed such untruths?

Is it a possible but very logical inference from the absence of statements that unless there is some clear indication elsewhere that the statements were taken then it is perfectly possible that the PJ never did take them?

It may be true that we think those statements should have been taken but that does not mean they were.

platinum wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

margaret wrote:I've always said it was Gerrys job to tamper with the shutters but he couldn't do that when Jez appeared. Initial newspaper reports said Jez spotted Gerry 'by the shutters' or 'tampering with the shutters' because l was horrified when l read it and thought that no-one else seemed to be putting 2 and 2 together!

Explains everything nicely.

I recall reading that article about Jez finding Gerry by the shutters. It appears to have disappeared.

Might it have been one of those articles which the newspapers fully admitted were untrue and paid substantial damages for having printed such untruths?

No because it was never front page headlines. Let's hope the Met don't uncover a link between payments to you from the Mcs.

Desperate times indeed......

margaret wrote:

platinum wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

margaret wrote:I've always said it was Gerrys job to tamper with the shutters but he couldn't do that when Jez appeared. Initial newspaper reports said Jez spotted Gerry 'by the shutters' or 'tampering with the shutters' because l was horrified when l read it and thought that no-one else seemed to be putting 2 and 2 together!

Explains everything nicely.

I recall reading that article about Jez finding Gerry by the shutters. It appears to have disappeared.

Might it have been one of those articles which the newspapers fully admitted were untrue and paid substantial damages for having printed such untruths?

No because it was never front page headlines. Let's hope the Met don't uncover a link between payments to you from the Mcs.

Desperate times indeed......

Are you suggesting that only front page headline stories were acknowledged by the papers as having been untrue? If so I think you are mistaken. There were over 100 stories admitted by one paper alone as having been untrue.

Your allegation of payments to me is both entirely untrue and I would have thought against the rules of this forum. Why have you chosen to post personal abuse of that nature when you cannot possibly have any evidence to back it up as it is wrong?

platinum wrote:

margaret wrote:

No because it was never front page headlines. Let's hope the Met don't uncover a link between payments to you from the Mcs.

Desperate times indeed......

Are you suggesting that only front page headline stories were acknowledged by the papers as having been untrue? If so I think you are mistaken. There were over 100 stories admitted by one paper alone as having been untrue.

Your allegation of payments to me is both entirely untrue and I would have thought against the rules of this forum. Why have you chosen to post personal abuse of that nature when you cannot possibly have any evidence to back it up as it is wrong?

Can you tell me which bit is abusive? Next you'll be telling me l've libelled you.....

margaret wrote:

platinum wrote:

margaret wrote:

No because it was never front page headlines. Let's hope the Met don't uncover a link between payments to you from the Mcs.

Desperate times indeed......

Are you suggesting that only front page headline stories were acknowledged by the papers as having been untrue? If so I think you are mistaken. There were over 100 stories admitted by one paper alone as having been untrue.

Your allegation of payments to me is both entirely untrue and I would have thought against the rules of this forum. Why have you chosen to post personal abuse of that nature when you cannot possibly have any evidence to back it up as it is wrong?

Can you tell me which bit is abusive? Next you'll be telling me l've libelled you.....

The abusive bit is your entirely fraudulent suggestion that I have been paid to post by anyone. And indeed that could be held to be libellous but I wasn't going to be so petty thats why I just called it abusive which it most certainly is.

@ Platinum, this thread is about Information missing from the files. If you have nothing to contribute to this topic then please would you stop trying to disrupt and derail?

All I will say is

Not Born Yesterday wrote:All I will say is

Exactly

Not Born Yesterday wrote:All I will say is

Frisky Python

Digital Spy

Autumn wrote:@ Platinum, this thread is about Information missing from the files. If you have nothing to contribute to this topic then please would you stop trying to disrupt and derail?

You really are having a laugh aren't you?.

I have contributed two posts directly on topic such as this one.

platinum wrote:Is it a possible but very logical inference from the absence of statements that unless there is some clear indication elsewhere that the statements were taken then it is perfectly possible that the PJ never did take them?

It may be true that we think those statements should have been taken but that does not mean they were.

Since then I have been abused personally here and have responded to that abuse. It is clearly not me taking this thread off topic but those who are posting personal comments about me.

The three comments which follow yours prove my point. Why these people are trolling the thread with their nonsense is beyond me but clearly it is not me avoiding debate.

I MENTIONED ON ANOTHER THREAD TEOFILO CASTELA STATEMENT WHICH SAID BERNARDINO SILVA TOLD HIM THAT HE SAW A STRANGE PERSON AROUND THE RESORT,HIS RELEASED STATEMENT DOESN'T MENTION IT.
THEY ARE CERTAIN OTHER STATEMENTS AS WELL THAT ONE CAN WORK OUT AS WELL.

Badboy wrote:I MENTIONED ON ANOTHER THREAD TEOFILO CASTELA STATEMENT WHICH SAID BERNARDINO SILVA TOLD HIM THAT HE SAW A STRANGE PERSON AROUND THE RESORT,HIS RELEASED STATEMENT DOESN'T MENTION IT.
THEY ARE CERTAIN OTHER STATEMENTS AS WELL THAT ONE CAN WORK OUT AS WELL.

Teofilo Manuel Furtado Castela

Date/Time: 2007/05/07 11H15
Administrative Services Manager
Portuguese

Concerning the issue of the process said:
. That he comes to the process as a witness;
. That he is en employee of 'The Green Trust, Inc.' since 1987, the business which is engaged with the administration of the tourist complex The Ocean Club;
. That his work area is in the tourist resort situated on 44 Rua Direita, a local which is 500 meters in distance from the apartment where the English child named Madeleine disappeared;
. Questioned, responded that he became aware of the childs disappearance on Friday, May 04, in the morning, through communication with his work colleagues, after arriving at his office;
. States that until the date of the disappearance of the minor he had never seen an image of said minor or of her family, parents and brothers, who he only came to recognise with the various disclosures made by social communication organs;
. For this reason believes that he never came across them [McCanns] in the resort, since their arrival, or if he did, he did not pay attention;
. States that in the role of his functions it is not customary to establish contact with the tourists lodged in the resort;
. Questioned as to whether in past times he noted or was aware through communication with colleagues of the resort that a strange person/persons
Were seen around the resort, or asked strange questions about the tourists and children who accompanied them or about the proper installations of the resort, the deponent states that only an employee named Bernardino Silva, told him on Friday, the 04 of May, that the day prior, the date the child went missing, that he saw a strange individual around the resort;
. The deponent does not remember any details of what that employee told him but knows that the same employee was already questioned by the Judicial Police regarding these facts;
. Asking, the deponent states that of all the employees that work in the resort and whom he knows, he had no knowledge that any one of them has criminal or social problems.
. The deponent is not aware of situations where the employees of the resort have brought strange people into the aforementioned place;
. States that only since March of this year, more than 50 new employees were admitted, and does not have any idea regarding these new people;
. Regarding other strange situations that could have happened in the resort, like for example, robberies in the interior of apartments, the deponent states that there have occurred some but that he does not know of any recent situation;
. the deponent states that since the disappearance of Madeleine until today, he has not heard anything which could help clarify the motive for the disappearance, and like this, he has no more information that could help to this end.
. And nothing further was said. Having read the statement, he finds it in conformity and signs it;
. The document is duly signed by me, Luis Miranda, an Inspector with this Policia Judiciara




15 Processos Vol XV Pages 4114 to 4115
15_VOLUME-XVa_Page_4114

15_VOLUME-XVa_Page_4115


Witness Statement

Bernardino Abreu Pereira da Silva (previously identified on p 372)

He confirms the integrity of his statement on page 372.


When asked, he says he no longer works for the MW OC for health reasons, he made the decision to resign.

When questioned about having made a telephone call on 3rd May at 21.00.11 having activated antennas in P da L, when his working day finished at 20.30, he says that on this day, as well as on others, he was delayed because he had to carry out the transport, even though it was late, of some tourists. At this time he was driving the minibus belonging to the establishment. H e also says, that on this day, as well as the transport already referred to, he was late because of the fact that some tourists did not have the key to their apartment.

With regard to the number that he dialled on that day at that time, he says it was the number 966****** corresponding to his wife?s number, which was confirmed in this file.
He has nothing else to add.
Reads, ratifies, signs.

_________________________________________________________-

Hmmmm Badboy, strange Bernadino da Silva made no mention in his statement,

Autumn wrote:

Badboy wrote:I MENTIONED ON ANOTHER THREAD TEOFILO CASTELA STATEMENT WHICH SAID BERNARDINO SILVA TOLD HIM THAT HE SAW A STRANGE PERSON AROUND THE RESORT,HIS RELEASED STATEMENT DOESN'T MENTION IT.
THEY ARE CERTAIN OTHER STATEMENTS AS WELL THAT ONE CAN WORK OUT AS WELL.

Teofilo Manuel Furtado Castela

Date/Time: 2007/05/07 11H15
Administrative Services Manager
Portuguese

Concerning the issue of the process said:
. That he comes to the process as a witness;
. That he is en employee of 'The Green Trust, Inc.' since 1987, the business which is engaged with the administration of the tourist complex The Ocean Club;
. That his work area is in the tourist resort situated on 44 Rua Direita, a local which is 500 meters in distance from the apartment where the English child named Madeleine disappeared;
. Questioned, responded that he became aware of the childs disappearance on Friday, May 04, in the morning, through communication with his work colleagues, after arriving at his office;
. States that until the date of the disappearance of the minor he had never seen an image of said minor or of her family, parents and brothers, who he only came to recognise with the various disclosures made by social communication organs;
. For this reason believes that he never came across them [McCanns] in the resort, since their arrival, or if he did, he did not pay attention;
. States that in the role of his functions it is not customary to establish contact with the tourists lodged in the resort;
. Questioned as to whether in past times he noted or was aware through communication with colleagues of the resort that a strange person/persons
Were seen around the resort, or asked strange questions about the tourists and children who accompanied them or about the proper installations of the resort, the deponent states that only an employee named Bernardino Silva, told him on Friday, the 04 of May, that the day prior, the date the child went missing, that he saw a strange individual around the resort;
. The deponent does not remember any details of what that employee told him but knows that the same employee was already questioned by the Judicial Police regarding these facts;
. Asking, the deponent states that of all the employees that work in the resort and whom he knows, he had no knowledge that any one of them has criminal or social problems.
. The deponent is not aware of situations where the employees of the resort have brought strange people into the aforementioned place;
. States that only since March of this year, more than 50 new employees were admitted, and does not have any idea regarding these new people;
. Regarding other strange situations that could have happened in the resort, like for example, robberies in the interior of apartments, the deponent states that there have occurred some but that he does not know of any recent situation;
. the deponent states that since the disappearance of Madeleine until today, he has not heard anything which could help clarify the motive for the disappearance, and like this, he has no more information that could help to this end.
. And nothing further was said. Having read the statement, he finds it in conformity and signs it;
. The document is duly signed by me, Luis Miranda, an Inspector with this Policia Judiciara




15 Processos Vol XV Pages 4114 to 4115
15_VOLUME-XVa_Page_4114

15_VOLUME-XVa_Page_4115


Witness Statement

Bernardino Abreu Pereira da Silva (previously identified on p 372)

He confirms the integrity of his statement on page 372.


When asked, he says he no longer works for the MW OC for health reasons, he made the decision to resign.

When questioned about having made a telephone call on 3rd May at 21.00.11 having activated antennas in P da L, when his working day finished at 20.30, he says that on this day, as well as on others, he was delayed because he had to carry out the transport, even though it was late, of some tourists. At this time he was driving the minibus belonging to the establishment. H e also says, that on this day, as well as the transport already referred to, he was late because of the fact that some tourists did not have the key to their apartment.

With regard to the number that he dialled on that day at that time, he says it was the number 966****** corresponding to his wife?s number, which was confirmed in this file.
He has nothing else to add.
Reads, ratifies, signs.

_________________________________________________________-

Hmmmm Badboy, strange Bernadino da Silva made no mention in his statement,

YES,VERY STRANGE,DID MENTION IT ON A THREAD FURTHUR DOWN THE MAIN PAGE.