Estrela da Luz Resort Hotel

THE detective who led the initial investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance believes her abductor was caught on camera – but revealed that the film was wiped before detectives saw it........
The camera belongs to the Estrela da Luz resort hotel. “I believe that the person carrying a child in his arms was captured on film from that very camera,” he said......

“I asked my officers to gather all the CCTV footage in Luz but, by the time they got to this hotel, the film from this camera had been wiped over. It was a mistake and I will always regret it. I do feel Madeleine was let down.” .........
see full article at:

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/210032/Madeleine-McCann-Did-the-camera-hold-vital-clue


Did someone from the hotel resort Estrela da Luz wipe the tape?

It's a possibility, seems bit of a coincidence that this could have obtained vital
information and it gets wiped.

ONE OF THE OWNERS COMES FROM CHESHIRE?

Badboy wrote:ONE OF THE OWNERS COMES FROM CHESHIRE?

Fagan and Manchester native Burgess are obviously well-respected by Jordan, who was presented with a Waterford Crystal decanter and glasses at the official signing of a deal that boosts Oceanico’s golf and property portfolio beyond €2 billion.

http://www.irishgolfdesk.com/news-files/2007/3/5/gerry-fagan-and-the-125-million-deal.html

Interesting that Martin Smith is from the same smallish port town, Drogheda in Ireland that the owner of the Estela da Luz is from - Mr Gerry Fagan.

His son Peter Smith says he knew nothing about the child's disappearance until the morning of May 4th at Faro Airport. In his Police Statement he says that an acquaintance of the Smith family - who was the son of the man who built the Estela da Luz complex - told him about it. He was heading out of Portugal too on that morning

Martin Smith - retired at 58! - goes to the Estela da Luz apartment he owns
at least three times a year - according to his son Peter Smith.

So let's get this straight:

On May 26th after Murat becomes an arguido, Martin Smith who says he has met Murat on a few occasions in the past - gives statement to Police saying the man carryin the child is definitely NOT Murat.

Amaral says that the CCTV footage from the Estela da Luz apartments was wiped before he could get it.

Amaral says it is likely the Estela cctv footage would have had the man carrying the child on.

Smith is from the same town in Ireland as the Estela owner.

His son says he knows the son of the Estela builder - and that he was at the airport on May 4th.

Martin Smith in September 2007 - suddenly realises that the man he saw was Gerry McCann.

Yes Autumn, though the Estela da Luz apartments parts are new information to me and interesting information, just trying to get my head around it

Cheshire has come up an awful on past analyses about different parts of this fairytale, this is also right in the heart of kennedy and smethurst territory

So we have Kate and Gerry, the tapas lot, Mr Murat, part of the Smith family, the hotel owner, and the hotel builder all in cahoots, no wonder my head is getting blagged

The Oceânico Group was launched by Simon Burgess and Gerry Fagan in 2000 and is already one of the leading players in Golf Resort development in Europe.
Earlier this year Englishman Burgess and Fagan, from Ireland, took the Oceânico Group into the elite stratosphere of Golf Resorts, purchasing Lusotur Golfe, S.A. from Andre Jordan

Further info:

Gerry Fagan and the 125 euro Million Deal

http://www.irishgolfdesk.com/news-files/2007/3/5/gerry-fagan-and-the-125-million-deal.html

I wonder if gerry realised he got caught on film

Hope he had done his ' just for men'

Does anyone have a link to Peter Daniel Smith's police statement which, according to The Whistler Blog, was revised by Pamalam?

Witness testimony of Peter Daniel Smith, 26 May 2007

Date of Diligence: 2007.05.26
Location: DIC Portimao
Name: PETER DANIEL SMITH

The witness states:

• That he comes to the process as a witness.
• Being of Irish nationality, he does not understand Portuguese in its written or oral form and is accompanied by an interpreter.
• States that his father owns an apartment in the Luz Villa, Lagos, in Estrela da Luz, corresponding to A1C. His father comes to Portugal at least three times per year. This was the deponent’s first time to Portugal.
• In that which concerns the period in question, states that he arrived in Portugal on the 26th of April of 2007 and had his return passage booked for the 4th of May of the same year. He arrived at Faro airport via Dublin. This he arrived a few days before his father. He was accompanied by his wife, S***, and his two children T**** and C***.
• He would like to clarify that on the 3rd of May, he and the family went to the Dolphin restaurant, situated in Praia da Luz, where they dined. Around 12H00, they left the restaurant and headed toward Kelly's Bar which as about one minute away via foot. In Kelly's Bar (he does not remember the name of the street it is on) they had a few drinks and left there around 21H50/22H00.
• They left the bar, and went up a set of stairs that give access to a road just above. On this road, they walked towards another street (whose name he does not know) and headed for home. At the very start of their journey on this road, the saw an individual holding a child. This individual was walking normally although, in quick steps as he was coming down the street. It appeared to him normal, as if this was father and daughter. He adds that this individual was coming down the street, contrary to the direction of the deponent and his family. He does not know the destination the individual took as he only saw him while crossing the street.
• Urged, states that when he passed this individual it was around 21H55/22H00 and did not know at the time that a child had disappeared. He only found out about the child the next morning from someone he knew in his complex who was also leaving to go home. The deponent went to the airport as he had booked a flight to return home on this day.
• At this time, he did not associate the individual with the disappearance. Only after did he connect the coincidence of the time. From this he supposed that it could have been MADELEINE who was with this individual.
• The description of this individual is as follows: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 metres. He was around 35, or older. He was somewhat tanned as a result of sun exposure. He had a normal complexion, in good form. He had short hair, brown in colour. He does not remember if he used glasses, a beard of a moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details as the lighting was bad.
• He also does not remember the clothing the individual wore or his shoes. He states that he did not look at this detail as his pregnant wife was somewhat ill and he was constantly looking at her to make sure she was okay.
• He states the child was female. She was perhaps two or three years old. She appeared to be a bit smaller than his niece. It was a child with a normal complexion. She had blonde hair, medium in length, not very light. Her skin was white, typically British. He did not look at her eyes as she was asleep and her eyelids were closed.
• He does not remember her clothing very well but believes it was light summer clothing, light in colour. He does not remember is she was covered in a blanket. He cannot affirm whether she was barefoot.
• Having already seen various photographs of MADELEINE alongside her images on television, states that she may have been the child he saw. He cannot state this as fact but is convinced that it could have been MADELEINE. Indeed, this is the opinion of his family.
• Questioned, states that the individual did not speak nor did the child as she was sleeping deeply. He adds that the individual did not try to hide his face or to look downwards. He did not notice anything strange.
• States that it would not be possible to recognise the individual in person or via photograph.
• At being asked, says that when he saw the individual, the deponent was accompanied by his wife, S***, his father MARTIN, his mother MARY, his children T**** and C***, his sister AOIFE and his two nieces A******* and E*****, children of his sister.
• States also that when he passed the individual, the individual was descending to his right, and went around the deponent in the middle of the street. At that time the traffic was minimal or non-existent.
• He adds that the group was separated by some metres so that they were able to see the individual from various distinct positions.
• He has added a sketch indicating his locale and the sighting.
• Adds also that his son T**** was questioned in Ireland and told that the individual was wearing a long-sleeved coat, back in colour, and that the child was barefoot.
• He has no other elements to offer the investigation.
• And nothing more was said. Reads and finds it in conformity, ratifies and signs together with her interpreter.

mccann files have got his statement, not sure if that is one you mean, sorry wont allow me to post link yet, not been here seven days

cherry1 wrote:mccann files have got his statement, not sure if that is one you mean, sorry wont allow me to post link yet, not been here seven days

Cherry no worries. Here's the link to The Whistler's Blog:

http://rosaleen-thewhistler.blogspot.com/2010/11/madeleine-mccann-cctv-camera-evidence.html


According to blog, part of Peter's statement was missed in translation and revised by Pamalam. Would someone who knows more about the statements mind having a look and confirm this to be so?

chrissie1 wrote:Witness testimony of Peter Daniel Smith, 26 May 2007

Date of Diligence: 2007.05.26
Location: DIC Portimao
Name: PETER DANIEL SMITH

The witness states:

• That he comes to the process as a witness.
• Being of Irish nationality, he does not understand Portuguese in its written or oral form and is accompanied by an interpreter.
• States that his father owns an apartment in the Luz Villa, Lagos, in Estrela da Luz, corresponding to A1C. His father comes to Portugal at least three times per year. This was the deponent’s first time to Portugal.
• In that which concerns the period in question, states that he arrived in Portugal on the 26th of April of 2007 and had his return passage booked for the 4th of May of the same year. He arrived at Faro airport via Dublin. This he arrived a few days before his father. He was accompanied by his wife, S***, and his two children T**** and C***.
• He would like to clarify that on the 3rd of May, he and the family went to the Dolphin restaurant, situated in Praia da Luz, where they dined. Around 12H00, they left the restaurant and headed toward Kelly's Bar which as about one minute away via foot. In Kelly's Bar (he does not remember the name of the street it is on) they had a few drinks and left there around 21H50/22H00.
• They left the bar, and went up a set of stairs that give access to a road just above. On this road, they walked towards another street (whose name he does not know) and headed for home. At the very start of their journey on this road, the saw an individual holding a child. This individual was walking normally although, in quick steps as he was coming down the street. It appeared to him normal, as if this was father and daughter. He adds that this individual was coming down the street, contrary to the direction of the deponent and his family. He does not know the destination the individual took as he only saw him while crossing the street.
• Urged, states that when he passed this individual it was around 21H55/22H00 and did not know at the time that a child had disappeared. He only found out about the child the next morning from someone he knew in his complex who was also leaving to go home. The deponent went to the airport as he had booked a flight to return home on this day.
• At this time, he did not associate the individual with the disappearance. Only after did he connect the coincidence of the time. From this he supposed that it could have been MADELEINE who was with this individual.
• The description of this individual is as follows: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 metres. He was around 35, or older. He was somewhat tanned as a result of sun exposure. He had a normal complexion, in good form. He had short hair, brown in colour. He does not remember if he used glasses, a beard of a moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details as the lighting was bad.
• He also does not remember the clothing the individual wore or his shoes. He states that he did not look at this detail as his pregnant wife was somewhat ill and he was constantly looking at her to make sure she was okay.
• He states the child was female. She was perhaps two or three years old. She appeared to be a bit smaller than his niece. It was a child with a normal complexion. She had blonde hair, medium in length, not very light. Her skin was white, typically British. He did not look at her eyes as she was asleep and her eyelids were closed.
• He does not remember her clothing very well but believes it was light summer clothing, light in colour. He does not remember is she was covered in a blanket. He cannot affirm whether she was barefoot.
• Having already seen various photographs of MADELEINE alongside her images on television, states that she may have been the child he saw. He cannot state this as fact but is convinced that it could have been MADELEINE. Indeed, this is the opinion of his family.
• Questioned, states that the individual did not speak nor did the child as she was sleeping deeply. He adds that the individual did not try to hide his face or to look downwards. He did not notice anything strange.
• States that it would not be possible to recognise the individual in person or via photograph.
• At being asked, says that when he saw the individual, the deponent was accompanied by his wife, S***, his father MARTIN, his mother MARY, his children T**** and C***, his sister AOIFE and his two nieces A******* and E*****, children of his sister.
• States also that when he passed the individual, the individual was descending to his right, and went around the deponent in the middle of the street. At that time the traffic was minimal or non-existent.
• He adds that the group was separated by some metres so that they were able to see the individual from various distinct positions.
• He has added a sketch indicating his locale and the sighting.
• Adds also that his son T**** was questioned in Ireland and told that the individual was wearing a long-sleeved coat, back in colour, and that the child was barefoot.
• He has no other elements to offer the investigation.
• And nothing more was said. Reads and finds it in conformity, ratifies and signs together with her interpreter.

Thanks Chrissie but the bit that has supposedly been put in by Pamalam is missing from this statement. Has anyone seen the revised statement?

From MCF

Post subject: Re: Smith family statementsPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 5:35 pm


Forum Admin



Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 9:03 pm
Posts: 7053 Revised Translation


Processos Volume VI
Pages 1615 to 1624

Policia Judiciaria


Witness Statement

Date of Diligence: 2007.05.26
Time: 15.30
Location: DIC Portimão

Responsible Officer: Inspector João Carlos

Name: PETER DANIEL SMITH

Nationality: Irish

Profession: Commercial Manager

The witness states:

That he comes to the process as a witness.
Being of Irish nationality, he does not understand Portuguese in its written or oral form and is accompanied by an interpreter, Lidia Nascimento.

His father owns an apartment in the Luz Villa, Lagos, specifically in the Estrela da Luz complex, corresponding to A1C. His father comes to Portugal at least three times a year. The witness went the first time he travelled to Portugal

With regard to this period he states that he arrived in Portugal on the 26th of April 2007 and had his return passage (which he complied with) booked for the 4th of May of the same year. He arrived at Faro airport having left from Dublin. He arrived a few days before his father, by choice in relation to the days available. He was accompanied by his wife, S***, and his two children TA*** and CO** aged 13 and 6 respectively.

He would like to clarify that on day of the 3rd of May, he and the family went to the Dolphin restaurant, situated in Praia da Luz, where they dined. At around 21H00, they left the restaurant and headed toward Kelly's Bar, which is about one minute away on foot. In Kelly's Bar (he does not remember the name of the street it is on) they had a few drinks and left there around 21H50/22H00.

They left the bar, and went up a set of stairs that give access to a road just above. On this road, they walked towards another street (whose name he does not know) and headed for Estrela da Luz. At the beginning of this road, he saw an individual carrying a child. This individual was walking normally although with somewhat quick steps as he was walking downwards. He appeared normal to the witness, as if this were father and daughter. He adds that this individual was coming down the street, in an opposite direction to that of the witness and his companions. He does not know the destination the individual took as he only saw him while they passed each other.

When asked, he states that when he passed this individual it was around 21H55/22H00 and he had absolutely no knowledge at that time that a child had disappeared. He only found out about disappearance of the girl the next morning by means of someone he knew, the son of the builder of Estrela da Luz, who was also at the airport. The witness went to the airport given that, as planned, he intended to return to Ireland on this day.At this time, he did not associate the individual with the disappearance, however after having thought about the subject and about the coincidence of the time, he inferred that Madeleine could have been the girl who was being carried by the individual he saw.

As regards the description of the individual carrying the girl he says: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 cm in height. He was around 35, or older. Slightly brown skin as a result of sun exposure. He had a normal complexion, in good form. He had short hair, brown in colour. He does not remember if he wore glasses, or if he had a beard or a moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details as the lighting was bad.

Neither does he remember the clothing the individual wore or his shoes. He states that he did not look at these details as his pregnant wife was somewhat indisposed and he was constantly looking at her and therefore did not pay attention to observing the individual.

He states the child was female. She was perhaps two or three years old. She appeared to be a bit smaller than his niece of the same age. It was a girl with a normal complexion. She had blond hair, of medium tone, without being very shiny. Her skin was white, typically British. He did not see her eyes as she was asleep and her eyelids were closed.

He does not remember her clothing very well but believes it was light summer clothing light in colour. He does not remember if she was covered by any blanket or covering. He cannot say whether she was barefoot.

Having now seen various photographs of MADELEINE and television images, he says that the child being carried by the individual might have been her. He cannot state this as fact but is convinced that it could have been MADELEINE. Indeed, this is the opinion shared by his family.

When asked, he states that the individual did not say a word nor did the child as she was sleeping deeply. He adds that the individual did not try to hide his face or lower his gaze. He did not notice anything strange.

He says that it would not be possible to recognise the individual in person or from a photograph.

When asked, he says that when he saw the individual, the witness was accompanied by his wife, S***, his father MARTIN, his mother MARY, his children TA*** and CO** aged 13 and 6 respectively, his sister AOIFE aged 12 and his two nieces AI****** and EI****, aged 10 and 4, the children of his sister B*****, who was in Ireland.

He also says that when he passed the individual, the individual was descending to his right, and walked past the witness in the middle of the street, given that at that time the traffic was minimal or non-existent.

He adds that the group was walking at a distance of some meters so that they were able to see the individual from various different positions.

A sketch is attached showing the route and the location of the sighting.

Adds also that his son TA*** was questioned in Ireland and said that the individual was wearing a long-sleeved coat, black in colour, and that the child was barefoot.

He has no other elements to offer the investigation.

And nothing more was said. Having read the statement and finding it to be in conformity, ratifies and signs together with the interpreter.


Last edited by Ines on Fri Nov 12, 2010 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Edited to post revised translation

Has anyone got a sketch/plan showing the location of the sighting ?

they have sketch plans on Mccann files lioned but I cant put the link in Im afraid.

Put this in google and the mccann files page will come up



peter daniel smith sketch plan of sighting madeleine mccann

Thanks chez.

Is this the sketch you're after?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html

From The Whistler Blog re part of Peter Smith's statement missing in translation. This was later revised by Pamalam.

The Portuguese poster who translated the police statements for the 3 Arguidos forum appears to have mistranslated/missed out important information.
from Blackwatch:
quote: The orginal translation by xxxx reads: He (Peter) only found out about the child the next morning from someone he knew in his complex who was also leaving to go home. The deponent went to the airport as he had booked a flight to return home on this day.

The full and actual translation reads:
He (Peter) only found out about the disappearance of the child the next morning from someone he knew, the son of the builder of Estrela da Luz, WHO WAS ALSO AT THE AIRPORT. The deponent went to the airport as he had booked a flight to return home on this day.

xxxx leaves two crucial details out:
a) that the Smith family know the son of the person who built the Estrela da Luz complex and
b) that the son was with them at the airport on a flight to return home.

Pamalam (mccannfiles ed.) has since revised the original translation by xxxx.
The original text in Portuguese reads: Só tomou conhecimento do desaparecimento da criança na manhã do dia seguinte, através de um conhecido, filho do construtor da Estrela da Luz, que também se encontrava no aeroporto. end quote.

http://rosaleen-thewhistler.blogspot.com/2010/11/madeleine-mccann-cctv-camera-evidence.html

http://www.thesargeants.net/dblog/articolo.asp?articolo=374.

I cant get the sargents link up, wonder if that has been taken off for some reason

winterbells, I think that is the sketch lioned was referring to

cherry1 wrote:I cant get the sargents link up, wonder if that has been taken off for some reason

The Sargents vanished a few months ago but came up with my post automatically. The concerns re Peter Smith's statement is from The Whistler's Blog which is still there. I'm looking for verification of this and hopefully, as it mentions Pamalam adding the info that was claimed to be missing, she will be able to confirm this.