EXCLUSIVE: British police identify 'Maddy suspects' and urge Portuguese to act

Ok, so McCanns and friends are in Chaplins, so no regular checks. Child or children wakes up, goes ballistic, crying to the point where two passer-bys are so concerned they try to gain access to another persons apartment. All perfectly possible.

This only deepens the level of neglect the children suffered and, in my opinion, gives more credence to the children being sedated to a dangerous level on the following nights, so that they did not wake again.

No matter what way you spin this, it is not good.

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:I find it absolutely incredible that it took SY 2 yrs to come up with 20 names of people "of interest ". now they have thrown the Ball in the Portugese Court knowing full well that Portugal will not consider these people as a reason for re-opening the case. Leucester Police were allowed to interview people so why couldn't SY do the same and if the interviews bought fresh evidence, THEN approach Portugal.
I am ashamed of the way SY have behaved, they knew all along that the Portugese would not re-open the case unless there was specific new evidence , not "people of interest. " Now everyone knows abiut this thanks to the retiring DCI, so if the Portugese refuse they will be seen as hard hearted.

Hi panda, I agree with what you are saying, but I don't know if it is as simple as that, in so far as SY will say they are not conducting an investigation of the crime, but a review of the original investigation. They have now done their review and in their opinion these 9 (or however many) people need to be looked at, their phone records need further investigation etc. they tell the Portugese this and then this is where the proverbial could hit the fan.

If there is to be no cover up and SY have the balls they claim to have, they are at this very moment talking to the Portugese, giving them their files, opinions etc., and basically telling them the PJ were not too far off the mark in the original investigation. The Portugese are, understandably, reluctant to drag this whole thing back on themselves, not least from a cost point of view. This is where SY come to an arrangement to share costs or some such agreement, and next week the case becomes live again.

Now all of that is in a world where SY is being run by human beings who care about the fact that a Little three year old girl is out there, somewhere, all alone and thus far nobody who knew her cared enough to bring her home.

So I think we will see very soon exactly what this review is about.

Morning mossman, how about the McCanns paying for the Portugese to question these people. They have made their fortune from the Fund , cost the U.K. Taxpayer millions in interviews by Leicester Police , chasing up "sightings of Madeleine etc. Have they come forward and said they would meet the cost of the Portugese interviewing these 20 people. NO!!!!

I think a Police enquiry has to be independent and money from "previous" suspects should not be used.

I can't see any report on the Sky site or The Sun now.

mossman wrote:Ok, so McCanns and friends are in Chaplins, so no regular checks. Child or children wakes up, goes ballistic, crying to the point where two passer-bys are so concerned they try to gain access to another persons apartment. All perfectly possible.

This only deepens the level of neglect the children suffered and, in my opinion, gives more credence to the children being sedated to a dangerous level on the following nights, so that they did not wake again.

No matter what way you spin this, it is not good.

This has blown the Mccanns right off the sofas of the breakfast shows. They will not want questions over people entering the apartment when Maddie was crying alone.

Remember neglect may not have been true as one good theory goes, so if there was no neglect the people entering had a key.

Just a thought. The express has made Jt look a liar along with Gerry MCCann, is it possible the facts of this story are tweaked, did the couple entering the apartment MAKE Maddie cry?

Where was DP at this time?

I can see the PJ reopening the case anyday now, the scene is being set.

All this is BS.
The article is pointing out, asking, WHERE were the McCanns when 'madeleine was crying'.
Chaplins Bar?
A lot lot further away from 5A than tapas restaurant.
1000 metres?
Not the cosy 'we could see the sliding patio door at all times'
That's why Mitchell went apeshit.
If the press found out they were over half a mile away from their kids, left alone, it would look like they were bang to rights on being negligent.
According to the McCanns they were 'checking' every 20 minutes so how come they didn't enter the apartment and find these strangers ,in there, 'soothing' their kids?
Or did the 'soothers' only stay for 19 minutes!
And left before the McCanns did another 'check'
Mrs Fenn 'heard' crying from 22:30 til 23:45pm.
Where is it mentioned about the FOUR 'checks' the McCanns should have done in this time?
It isn't because, they didn't! imo.
At most, Madeleine and Sean would have only be 'crying' for 20 minutes before either K or G would have entered the apartment to 'check' on them!
WHERE were the responsible parents when the kids were crying?
And why did none of their friends, who supposedly were 'checking' their kids go back to the tapas and tell the McCanns 'your kids are crying, i've just checked ours and heard yours crying'
Because THEY were all a 1000 metres away from their kids too?

quickfingers wrote:I think a Police enquiry has to be independent and money from "previous" suspects should not be used.

Ah but quickfingers......the Fund was set up to search for Madeleine , since they havn't had to do that for two years and know Portugal is in dire straits financially, as a gesture of goodwill and a thankyou for all the work they have done on trying to find Madeleine they could make the offer. cough cough.
I was just wondering , among these 20 people mention is made of someone who has since split from their Partner. Could it be Jane Tanner and Russell? He was not at the Counrt when the Tapas group received £375,000 each.? Amaral and his wife have also split.

[quote="jeanmonroe"]All this is BS.
The article is pointing out, asking, WHERE were the McCanns when 'madeleine was crying'.
Chaplins Bar?
A lot lot further away from 5A than tapas restaurant.
1000 metres?
Not the cosy 'we could see the sliding patio door at all times'
That's why Mitchell went apeshit.
If the press found out they were over half a mile away from their kids, left alone, it would look like they were bang to rights on being negligent.
According to the McCanns they were 'checking' every 20 minutes so how come they didn't enter the apartment and find these strangers ,in there, 'soothing' their kids?
Or did the 'soothers' only stay for 19 minutes!
And left before the McCanns did another 'check'
Mrs Fenn 'heard' crying from 22:30 til 23:45pm.
Where were the FOUR 'checks' the McCanns did in this time?
At most, Madeleine and Sean would have only be 'crying' for 20 minutes before either K or G would have entered the apartment to 'check' on them!
WHERE were the responsible parents when the kids were crying? quote
Apparently, the McCanns could have been charged with negligence which carried a 1 yr Sentence or "neglect causimg harm" which carries a 10 yr sentence. the Portugese allowed the one year to lapse, probably because of the massive interest in the case around the World.

This is all very strange, the tide has been turning for a while now and I hope there will be a conclusion soon. The Express article blows a lot of what the McCanns and friends have said right out of the water and I don't see how they can backpeddle on any of it

Panda wrote:

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:I find it absolutely incredible that it took SY 2 yrs to come up with 20 names of people "of interest ". now they have thrown the Ball in the Portugese Court knowing full well that Portugal will not consider these people as a reason for re-opening the case. Leucester Police were allowed to interview people so why couldn't SY do the same and if the interviews bought fresh evidence, THEN approach Portugal.
I am ashamed of the way SY have behaved, they knew all along that the Portugese would not re-open the case unless there was specific new evidence , not "people of interest. " Now everyone knows abiut this thanks to the retiring DCI, so if the Portugese refuse they will be seen as hard hearted.

Hi panda, I agree with what you are saying, but I don't know if it is as simple as that, in so far as SY will say they are not conducting an investigation of the crime, but a review of the original investigation. They have now done their review and in their opinion these 9 (or however many) people need to be looked at, their phone records need further investigation etc. they tell the Portugese this and then this is where the proverbial could hit the fan.

If there is to be no cover up and SY have the balls they claim to have, they are at this very moment talking to the Portugese, giving them their files, opinions etc., and basically telling them the PJ were not too far off the mark in the original investigation. The Portugese are, understandably, reluctant to drag this whole thing back on themselves, not least from a cost point of view. This is where SY come to an arrangement to share costs or some such agreement, and next week the case becomes live again.

Now all of that is in a world where SY is being run by human beings who care about the fact that a Little three year old girl is out there, somewhere, all alone and thus far nobody who knew her cared enough to bring her home.

So I think we will see very soon exactly what this review is about.

Morning mossman, how about the McCanns paying for the Portugese to question these people. They have made their fortune from the Fund , cost the U.K. Taxpayer millions in interviews by Leicester Police , chasing up "sightings of Madeleine etc. Have they come forward and said they would meet the cost of the Portugese interviewing these 20 people. NO!!!!

Hi panda, of course the "fund" should pay, as it should have already for the review. It didn't and it will not though. I would just hate to see money being used as an excuse for this yet again being shelved. I would not blame the Portugese, their country is broke, they have already spent millions and had no thanks, why should they bother. That would suit the McCanns, happy days for them. I don't agree with the UK tax Payer funding it either but that is happening anyway so if it means spending some more on top of what has already been spent and Madeleine found, overall it will be worth it.

It should at this stage be a joint venture between the two countries in terms of funding. The funding will never ever come from the limited company though.

margaret wrote:

This has blown the Mccanns right off the sofas of the breakfast shows. They will not want questions over people entering the apartment when Maddie was crying alone.

Remember neglect may not have been true as one good theory goes, so if there was no neglect the people entering had a key.

Just a thought. The express has made Jt look a liar along with Gerry MCCann, is it possible the facts of this story are tweaked, did the couple entering the apartment MAKE Maddie cry?

Where was DP at this time?

I can see the PJ reopening the case anyday now, the scene is being set.

The thing about Payne is that there is a big assumption made or it is implied that he never moved from his seat at any time on any night because he had his super duper listener.

He uses this as an excuse to say he was not involved in checking because his kids did not need to be checked. Not the same thing as not being missing from the table. Did he not even need to use the toilet at any point during the meals ? I don't remember this ever being addressed.

I am furious with SY mossman if all they can come up with after 2 years and £4.25 million is 20 possible people who should be intervieed. SY is clocking up more expenditure on the rounding up of possible sex offenders 40 odd years ago. This is Taxpayers money, yet not one Politician has asked questions.

Panda wrote:I am furious with SY mossman if all they can come up with after 2 years and £4.25 million is 20 possible people who should be intervieed. SY is clocking up more expenditure on the rounding up of possible sex offenders 40 odd years ago. This is Taxpayers money, yet not one Politician has asked questions.

My feeling is if anything is going to happen it will be soon.

I have to believe that no news is good news and that in general there is more good than evil within the human race. I have to believe that SY are doing their job and as such that is why they have said little. It is how they operate, they cannot accuse people without 100%proof and if they have 100%proof then they should charge them.

Basically i am hoping they know what they are doing and operating to a system that makes no sense to us but one which is what is required in order to convict.

I may well have to eat those words some day but until we know for certain, I have to remain hopeful. Yes, it s a ridiculous amount of money with half the world starving and indeed many in the UK suffering. If there are convictions as a result of their work it will justify the spend to a small degree. So lets wait and see, not long to go now I hope.

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:I am furious with SY mossman if all they can come up with after 2 years and £4.25 million is 20 possible people who should be intervieed. SY is clocking up more expenditure on the rounding up of possible sex offenders 40 odd years ago. This is Taxpayers money, yet not one Politician has asked questions.

My feeling is if anything is going to happen it will be soon.

I have to believe that no news is good news and that in general there is more good than evil within the human race. I have to believe that SY are doing their job and as such that is why they have said little. It is how they operate, they cannot accuse people without 100%proof and if they have 100%proof then they should charge them.

Basically i am hoping they know what they are doing and operating to a system that makes no sense to us but one which is what is required in order to convict.

I may well have to eat those words some day but until we know for certain, I have to remain hopeful. Yes, it s a ridiculous amount of money with half the world starving and indeed many in the UK suffering. If there are convictions as a result of their work it will justify the spend to a small degree. So lets wait and see, not long to go now I hope.

What surprises me is who tipped off the Press with this SY "possible interest " story, We know the retiring DCI made a speech , but SY must have had these "persons of interest" for a while, so why not approach the Portugese Police then??????

..ad why is Brunty reporting from an empty apartment saying nothing, when he could say the same from the studio??

Sky News is not mentioning it at all today and it was never off yesterday?????

Did anyone see this low key interview on Sky News early yesterday evening? I was getting the supper ready, but I was half listening and half looking. The voice off interviewer was talking to a cheerful looking but quietly spoken fat man who had a very short haircut. He must have been, I should say, in his fifties, wearing a nondescript grey shirt open at the neck and no tie. He was I believe an ex-policeman, and he sounded authoritative. No John Connor he! I had never seen him before. The voice off was talking about the McCann case and started up with the usual mantra about 'Well... after all this time...' The fat man cut in swiftly with (sorry cannot possibly remember the correct words but the gist of it was as follows). NOT VERBATIM : 'Sometimes the passage of time is helpful when looking at a cold case again. People who know quite a bit about what happened may have had misguided loyalties. After the passage of time these may have faded and they may think again'.
(!) I'll swear I didn't dream that!

Panda wrote:

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:I am furious with SY mossman if all they can come up with after 2 years and £4.25 million is 20 possible people who should be intervieed. SY is clocking up more expenditure on the rounding up of possible sex offenders 40 odd years ago. This is Taxpayers money, yet not one Politician has asked questions.

My feeling is if anything is going to happen it will be soon.

I have to believe that no news is good news and that in general there is more good than evil within the human race. I have to believe that SY are doing their job and as such that is why they have said little. It is how they operate, they cannot accuse people without 100%proof and if they have 100%proof then they should charge them.

Basically i am hoping they know what they are doing and operating to a system that makes no sense to us but one which is what is required in order to convict.

I may well have to eat those words some day but until we know for certain, I have to remain hopeful. Yes, it s a ridiculous amount of money with half the world starving and indeed many in the UK suffering. If there are convictions as a result of their work it will justify the spend to a small degree. So lets wait and see, not long to go now I hope.

What surprises me is who tipped off the Press with this SY "possible interest " story, We know the retiring DCI made a speech , but SY must have had these "persons of interest" for a while, so why not approach the Portugese Police then??????

That's the point though, we do not know what happened, when. We only know what we are reading and we know how pink articles in the press can be. Best read with an open mind.

Those cleaners could well be real persons of interest, not necessarily suspects though, if they exist. Worth noting that apartment 5a was very well cleaned as we all know. Perhaps outside cleaners were hired by somebody to do some cleaning ............ That would make them very interesting people indeed.

So read between the lines and believe nothing until we hear from Mr Brunt live in PDL

Seen ,on the MCF, the interview of perhaps the 2 witnesses, but nothing about a couple entering the flat the 2nd ( from TMCF .The transcript is a third the way down the page http://www.mccannfiles.com/id52.html)

......................................................................................................................................................................
We were woken up at half past eleven at night by one of the friends of the McCanns to say 'a little girl' had 'been abducted'; those... those were the words used", 14 August 2007

Search for Maddie BBC - Stoke and Staffordshire

14 August 2007 - Susan Moyes owns an apartment two floors above the one the McCanns stayed in.

Transcript

By Nigel Moore

Question: This is a story you've followed incredibly closely because you were involved on the night; you helped the police and the family in looking for Madeleine, didn't you?

Susan Moyes: Yes, we did and, yes, very, very concerned... concerned for the family and followed it, every day... every day.

Q: Can you take us back to that night and... and what you were doing and when you first heard there was a problem?

SM: Sure. We went out for a meal about 7 o'clock, down in the town, we walked back about 9 o'clock, round past, errm... the... the church, round past the supermarket, back to the apartment, went out on the balcony about quarter past nine - everywhere was peaceful, everywhere was lovely - we then went to bed.

We were woken up at half past eleven at night by one of the friends of the McCanns to say 'a little girl' had 'been abducted'; those... those were the words used. So, we got dressed and joined in the search, we were out until about four in the morning with, oooh… about, I don't know, thirty people... thirty other people, maybe. The Mark Warner team were out, errm... and other guests at the Ocean Club.

Q: Now, to... to put it into perspective, we've all seen the pictures of the apartment where the McCanns were staying. How close is yours to theirs?

SM: Directly above, errm... we are but one above. Mrs Fenn, that lives there, was in the apartment below us and then below that was the McCanns, so directly above.




The Moyes were sat on their balcony at 9:15 PM but report nothing suspicious


Q: And, errr... you were out there for a considerable... a considerable period of time?

SM: Yeah, we went out on the Wednesday; the day before sh..., errr... Madeleine went missing and we were out for the month of May.

Q: Tell me about the affect all of this has had on the... the local community there.

SM: It was, errr... unbelievable really. Apart from the disruption from the mass media, the helicopter - constantly circling round - and sheer disbelief really, everybody was completely, errm... well, amazed by it. Gobsmacked, really.

Q: What... I mean, what were the local community saying to you because obviously being out there such a time, you must have spoken to a lot of people about it? It must have been, if you like, the talk of the town.

SM: Mmm... There was a lot of criticism of the police, which... which we felt was unfounded, errm... at that time. And... really, a lot of... unsure about exactly what happened. How did somebody get in? Was it the front? Was it the back? Was it left open? Was it forced? A lot of different stories...

Q: Speculation, if you like...

SM: Absolutely, absolutely. Yeah, yeah.

Q: And... we've got a copy of the newspaper here - in fact it's one of today's newspapers - The Express and... and it's still front page news, of course. Back in the news, there...

SM: Big... big style, yeah, yeah.

Q: How do you feel when you see the pictures here in the newspapers? I mean, have you... have you collected newspapers over the period?

SM: Oh yeah, I get the paper every day anyway but obviously followed it very closely and I just… disbelief, no way... no way do I feel they were any way involved in it. Not at all, no.

Q: How do you feel they… they've been treated?

SM: I think, errm... initially it was very supportive. Personally, I think probably if they'd left the Algarve maybe a month ago, errm... it... it would have been treated more favourably, I think.

Q: It's difficult to know how... how to handle that kind of situation, from their point of view though, I suppose, isn't it?

SM: Beggar's belief... it beggar's belief, yeah, you just don't want to be in that situation, errm... but, yeah, I can't understand this, errr... the turn of... of people's attitudes towards them, some being really quite nasty, unfounded and... and wrong, I think.

Q: Have the newspapers got it right in terms of... of where they were that evening, I mean, the distance from the... the restaurant to the apartment and what have you?

SM: Well, yeah, as the crow flies, errm... they're probably about right with the 50 yards but, in actual fact, you do have to... it's walled off, in a walled area - about six foot of wall - so you have to actually have to go through a little, errm... entrance building, out onto the road and then round to their apartment.

Q: And line of sight, is there any?

SM: Difficult... they wouldn't have had vision of the whole of their, errm... errr... balcony, they would only have had the top of it from... from where they were sitting, because of the wall and because of the flowers on top of the wall.

Q: How do you feel about the... the criticism of the McCann family for leaving the children?

SM: Harsh... very, very harsh. Hand on heart, we've all done something like that, I think, and errm... no, it's... it's just unfortunate. Just a sad, unfortunate accident.

Q: And how do you feel having been, if you like, errm... being swept along with all of this, having been part of this story from the start, being there, at that time when it all happened, I mean, I suspect as a family you must have talked about this over the dinner table for... for weeks and weeks and weeks?

SM: Yes... yes, we have, we have, errm... and I just can't get my head round it at all. I can't... I can't understand it and I don't... I don't know if it'll ever be resolved, really.

Q: You're off back to... to Portugal soon, I gather, and errm... how do you think Praia da Luz will be when you get back?

SM: Yeah, we go back in a couple of weeks, errm... and my husband has actually said for the first time he's going to feel very differently about it, errm... I... I... no, I'm fine about, I'm fine about it, errm... but, yeah, it’s a shame, it's kind of tainted what is a lovely... lovely spot.


Holidaymakers tell of late-night search for Madeleine, 05 May 2007
Holidaymakers tell of late-night search for Madeleine Breaking News

05/05/2007 - 15:05:45

A British couple on holiday in the Algarve resort where Madeleine McCann was abducted told today how frantic staff knocked on the doors of holidaymakers to get them involved in a search for the missing girl.

Paul Moyes, 58, who is on holiday with his wife, Susan, said: "At 11.30pm there was a knock on the door. I went out in my dressing gown and there was a distressed gentleman there saying that a child had been abducted and could we help with the search. Everybody got involved."

The couple said the drama unfolded after what they described as "a fabulous day" in the Praia Da Luz resort.

It was as the couple were sleeping that three-year-old Madeleine was snatched from her parents' holiday apartment below.

Mrs Moyes, 58, from Middlewich, Cheshire, told how they had returned to their apartment at around 9.15pm after an evening out.

"We went into the apartment, I went out on the balcony, looking over at the tapas bar, and remarked to Paul that there were so many people in there eating and drinking – 'what a fabulous day'."

Among those dining in the tapas bar opposite their apartment were Madeleine's parents, Gerry and Kate, who were making regular trips back to their own rooms to check on their children.

Mr Moyes said: "I felt quite shattered, to be quite frank. The people were themselves extremely sad and it was quite sad for everybody.

"We were quite emotionally shattered, seeing the family that distressed."

He said that among those who joined the search were many off-duty police in plain clothes who had been called in to help.

Mrs Moyes said: "Walking around you would see individual men, they were police but you wouldn't know because they were in casual clothes."

The couple said they remained on the search until 4am on Friday morning.

Mr Moyes described the resort as idyllic and safe. His wife added: "It is paradise."

comperedna wrote:Did anyone see this low key interview on Sky News early yesterday evening? I was getting the supper ready, but I was half listening and half looking. The voice off interviewer was talking to a cheerful looking but quietly spoken fat man who had a very short haircut. He must have been, I should say, in his fifties, wearing a nondescript grey shirt open at the neck and no tie. He was I believe an ex-policeman, and he sounded authoritative. No John Connor he! I had never seen him before. The voice off was talking about the McCann case and started up with the usual mantra about 'Well... after all this time...' The fat man cut in swiftly with (sorry cannot possibly remember the correct words but the gist of it was as follows). NOT VERBATIM : 'Sometimes the passage of time is helpful when looking at a cold case again. People who know quite a bit about what happened may have had misguided loyalties. After the passage of time these may have faded and they may think again'.
(!) I'll swear I didn't dream that!

I saw this.
He said relationships change and people regret alibis Couldn't believe my ears! Ex met officer Seemed lovely normal non showbizzy policeman

Do Maddie McCann's parents know so called mystery couple?
Chelsea Hoffman


http://www.examiner.com/article/do-maddie-mccann-s-parents-know-so-called-mystery-couple

Totally agree Mummy45, esp the last bit. Cheers me somewhat. I veer between hope and the other thing quite regularly!

see also:

https://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t15458-paul-and-susan-moyes?highlight=susan+moyes

mummy45 wrote:

comperedna wrote:Did anyone see this low key interview on Sky News early yesterday evening? I was getting the supper ready, but I was half listening and half looking. The voice off interviewer was talking to a cheerful looking but quietly spoken fat man who had a very short haircut. He must have been, I should say, in his fifties, wearing a nondescript grey shirt open at the neck and no tie. He was I believe an ex-policeman, and he sounded authoritative. No John Connor he! I had never seen him before. The voice off was talking about the McCann case and started up with the usual mantra about 'Well... after all this time...' The fat man cut in swiftly with (sorry cannot possibly remember the correct words but the gist of it was as follows). NOT VERBATIM : 'Sometimes the passage of time is helpful when looking at a cold case again. People who know quite a bit about what happened may have had misguided loyalties. After the passage of time these may have faded and they may think again'.
(!) I'll swear I didn't dream that!

I saw this.
He said relationships change and people regret alibis Couldn't believe my ears! Ex met officer Seemed lovely normal non showbizzy policeman

No you didn't dream it, it was mentioned on Jill's site!

mummy45 wrote:

comperedna wrote:Did anyone see this low key interview on Sky News early yesterday evening? I was getting the supper ready, but I was half listening and half looking. The voice off interviewer was talking to a cheerful looking but quietly spoken fat man who had a very short haircut. He must have been, I should say, in his fifties, wearing a nondescript grey shirt open at the neck and no tie. He was I believe an ex-policeman, and he sounded authoritative. No John Connor he! I had never seen him before. The voice off was talking about the McCann case and started up with the usual mantra about 'Well... after all this time...' The fat man cut in swiftly with (sorry cannot possibly remember the correct words but the gist of it was as follows). NOT VERBATIM : 'Sometimes the passage of time is helpful when looking at a cold case again. People who know quite a bit about what happened may have had misguided loyalties. After the passage of time these may have faded and they may think again'.
(!) I'll swear I didn't dream that!

I saw this.
He said relationships change and people regret alibis Couldn't believe my ears! Ex met officer Seemed lovely normal non showbizzy policeman

That jumped out at me too. Friends who once backed up a "badly told story" may regret what they did. So, which one will go first? I hope one of them does the decent thing!