The early morning sighting

This early morning sighting has always interested me. Newspapers reported a sighting of a man and woman carrying a child in the very early morning of May 4th. First reports were carrying a child. Then seemed to change to dragging a child in one or two later articles. The couple were caught in a car headlights and then scurried down a lane towards the beach. This never seems to get a mention but it was definitely reported at the time. Is it another lead that wasn't followed up on.

MaryB wrote:This early morning sighting has always interested me.  Newspapers reported a sighting of a man and woman carrying a child in the very early morning of May 4th.  First reports were carrying a child.  Then seemed to change to dragging a child in one or two later articles.  The couple were caught in a car headlights and then scurried down a lane towards the beach.  This never seems to get a mention but it was definitely reported at the time.  Is it another lead that wasn't followed up on.

Was the man who made that statement called George Brooks ? I cannot check now as I have no time, but I think it night be in the files.

That's the one. But sometimes he is George Brooks and sometimes George Burke. Confusion again!

5 - 1 Apensos V, Vol  1 Page 3

apenso5_vol_1_Page3

Leicestershire Constabulary Continuation Witness Statement

Continuation Statement - 4th May

Continuation Statement: Information from the Family

There is a male who owns a pizza hut in the resort called George originally from Liverpool. He states that on Friday morning at 5.55 AM on Friday 4th May 2007 he saw a couple acting suspiciously carrying a child near to the marina.

He can be contacted on the following number: ***

The pizza hut is near to a place called Amy Dukes.

The police have not yet spoken to this male.


(In different handwriting)



Info from family to McCann.

Portuguese resident/business owner

Reporting couple with child

5.55 AM 4/5 near to the marina.
 
04 - Information about George Burke sighting of child near marina
05 - Logo of Lite Bites Sandwich Shoppe, Lagos Marina
06 - Copy of George Brookes - passport
5 -1 Apensos V, Vol  1 Page 4 to 5
apenso5_vol_1_Page4

apenso5_vol_1_Page5

apenso5_vol_1_Page6


Email

To: DIC Portimao
Sent: 8th May 2007, 11.28
Subject: Fwd Madeleine McCann

From: M. Martins (sapo.pt email address)
Date: 8th May 2007, 10.14
To: DIC Portimao
Subject: Madeleine McCann

I have followed the case in the press as I live in the Algarve. However my attention has been drawn by the news that an English citizen (George Burke) who returned to the village in the morning from Lagos and who says that he saw a couple with a child at about 06.00. Would this person not be suspicious due to being from the village and be returning 7 seven hours after the events? Please excuse my boldness and if I am bringing false accusations due to lack of information, I apologise again but feel that I have to share my preoccupation. I hope this does not make you lose time.

Good luck
MM


Apensos V, Vol 1 Page 5
Lite Bites Sandwich Shop Logo, Lagos Marina

Apensos V, Vol 1 Page 6
Copy George Brooks Passport
07 - External diligence re marina de Lagos sighting 2007.12.04
5 - 1 Apensos V, Vol  1 Page 7
apenso5_vol_1_Page7

apenso5_vol_1_Page8
MISSING PAGE
External Inquiry Report

Date: 2007/12/04
Place: Lagos Marina, Lagos.
Responsible Officer: Inspector Joao Carlos

Description and Result of Inquiry:

On this date I went to the abovementioned place with the purpose of gathering elements related to the previously mentioned information about a supposed sighting of Madeleine McCann, by a British individual named George Brooks in the early morning of 4th May 2007.

Once I arrived at the scene, I checked that there was effectively a restaurant establishment on the first floor of the complex, called Pizza Hut. This establishment was closed, because of the opening hours. However, in order to collect information, I went to another establishment called “Lite Bites” which is next door and where there was an employee, who identified herself as GS, of British nationality.

During our conversation, she said that she has worked there since May of this year, the owner of the space being George Brooks, identified by the enclosed photocopy of his passport, which she provided.

She said that the whereabouts of the owner were unknown since the 21st September 2007. On this date he collected....

(following page 8 is missing)
 
From Michael Wright's statement:
As for additional information I would like to add that on Sunday, 6 May I went to the pizzaria in PdL and bought a large quantity of pizzas. I was attended by a girl from Liverpool. I explained to her my relationship to the McCanns and she told me that her father 'George' had seen a man carrying a child in his arms in the early morning of 4 May in the resort. I asked her if her father would speak about this to the Portuguese authorities. I don't know if the information was ever investigated.

There is a male who owns a pizza hut in the resort called George originally from Liverpool. He states that on Friday morning at 5.55 AM on Friday 4th May 2007 he saw a couple acting suspiciously carrying a child near to the marina.
...........................................................................................

ABOUT the same time G&K say they went 'looking/searching' all by themselves, UNSEEN by anyone else!

How 'handy' was that?

And also just 2 hours AFTER KM 'had insisted' that GM AND DP 'go out again' at 4:00am on the 4th May 2007!

Yeah you didn't see them setting their own private investigators on to that guy, did you.

Of course - given the fact that Exton was out there talking to people this might have been done if the same family owns the pizza hut, he might even have run into the same person working in it.

Would it be possible to secret the body somewhere out of sight the night before then, as Pat Brown had surmised maybe under something - rather than buried at the beach - then get up early "to search" and take it somewhere else?

I wonder where they were or how accounted for between 5 AM ish and whenever they were seen by a reliable witness, maybe 830-9? I can't picture thinking they could carry a dead body through the street yet again, and after the alarm was raised in case an early dog walker or something would see them, but maybe it wasn't possible to hide it and that was the only option. I wonder if they could make it to the Rocha Negra carrying her between them or in turns, inside that time and get back for breakfast or by the time the PJ arrived, something like 930AM.

You would not want to leave her in a tennis bag that could be tracked to you, so you'd have to get rid of that (or whatever you had put her in) on the way home or risk it being found and the jig is up. Leaving her open to the elements more or less.

WAS THAT THE UKRAINIAN MAN AND WOMAN?

I think it was a sighting that was never followed up. Or if it was it was brushed aside as being not important. I don't think it was ever followed through properly.

Funny, in that her own cousin brought them the lead. "thanks Michael now go clean out the car boot - we'll take care of this."

And who said anything about transporting a child to the dump....

Weird that wright went to that pizza place which happened to have an owner who saw a man and women carrying a child in the early hours.


Coincidence.


Or did wright go there purposely to find out a few things.....what he saw etc.

kitti wrote:Weird that wright went to that pizza place which happened to have an owner who saw a man and women carrying a child in the early hours.


Coincidence.


Or did wright go there purposely to find out a few things.....what he saw etc.

No, she had given the evidence to the PJ prior, this was the second time she brought it up.

But good thought.

But how did wright know that she had given this to the pj?

He went their on 8th may 2007....who told him about the sighting ?

kitti wrote:But how did wright know that she had given this to the pj?

She told him - or so he says in his interview - that he went to pick up an order of pizza and that the gal working there was also from Liverpool area and had mentioned the sighting and that she had told it to the police or phoned it in.

I recall seeing something about this on 3A's. The Ukranian thing does ring a bell however how would you know what nationality the people were from "seeing them carrying" a little child?

Would have to find this in the process - it's a chance that a friend or friendly person from Liverpool would make up a sighting and/or embellish a sighting with the fact that the people were not K&G - Ukranian, Roma, swarthy etc - they've done it all.

However the cousin states this pizza worker told him this and I think a PJ cop also said that he went to the pizza parlor which was closed as it was morning time, and met someone in the place next door or upstairs who told him that the business was owned by chap from Liverpool. Sorry, I do not remember more or better details.

How does the DNA in the hire car fit in?
 

I believe that Michael Wright didn't pass this information on to the PJ. One might have expected more from such a close friend of the family.

If he did pass it in it wasn't for some time.


From the Madeleine Foundation

The pizza girl

During this time, on 6th May, Michael Wright says he met a girl from Liverpool. He says he bought a large quantity of pizzas from a ‘pizza shack’ on the beach of Praia da Luz; the girl serving the pizzas was from Liverpool. She apparently told him that her father, known as ‘George B’, had seen a man carrying child during the very early hours of 4th May in the resort, the day after Madeleine ‘went missing’. Michael Wright apparently didn’t know if ‘George’ had been spoken to by authorities.

This possible ‘sighting’ of Madeleine was for some reason never mentioned by the McCanns, although they many times referred to the ever-changing and unreliable claimed sighting by Jane Tanner, and to another, at around 10.00pm on the evening of 3rd May, by a man from Ireland, Martin Smith.

A number of questions have been raised about this ‘sighting’ of ‘George B’. For example, did ‘George B’ report this ‘sighting’ to the Portuguese police? If so, it should of course be in the police files. If it wasn’t reported, why not? As Michael Wright was advised by the girl of this ‘sighting’, did he run and tell the McCanns? - and did the McCanns then contact the police?

Let us look at this another way. Suppose you're out there helping your close relations Kate and Gerry after the tragic abduction of their daughter. You go down to the beach on Sunday - just three days later - and go and get some pizzas. The girl there tells you that her father saw someone carrying a young girl on the night of 3rd/4th May. So - what do you do? You might, for example: (a) immediately ’phone Kate and Gerry to and tell them of the lead, or (b) contact the Portuguese police immediately, or (c) contact the UK Police immediately, or (d) ask the girl to make contact with the father so you can speak to him? But - no. Apparently Michael Wright does none of these things. He did nothing and apparently only mentions it to the police months later.

Freja53 wrote:How does the DNA in the hire car fit in?
 

As we progress this one line of investigation (or whoever progresses it, I'm not deluded into thinking we are doing that here, I mean SY, Pj, Amaral, Pat Brown etc) I would say that the place where many got off the trail was that the family was under scrutiny by press, friends and family, and cops after the following morning.

Many said how could they have done this, they were being watched? How could they call someone that night and have that person be involved in the removal/s, so suddenly?

If they moved the body the night of May 3rd they would not necessarily have to have further involvement with it at that time.

They could have moved it the following early morning - 6 AM - to get it away or could have left the apt to have privacy in which to make phone calls to leave instructions.

Fewer "touches" or contact with the body would clearly be best for them all around. You do not want to be seen involved, nor to be involved, very frightening and upsetting etc and a huge chance of detection.

The dogs alert not to bodies but to where they have been.

http://host.madison.com/news/local/attorneys-want-cadaver-dogs-excluded-from-murder-trial-eugene-zapata/article_45f4c3ee-08c7-5c75-b443-fa91e44d91ce.html

Kate references this case in her book.

The dogs alerted to properties Eugene Zapata had owned

The Jeanette Zapata case remained cold for decades until Madison police in December 2004 began to use scent dogs in searches of properties owned or occupied by Zapata, including former homes, land he owned and a rental car he drove during a trip to Wisconsin. The dogs appeared to indicate the scent of human remains at some of the sites, but no remains were found

Zapata was convicted - and confessed - to killing his wife and in fact had had the body in his property where the dogs alerted. not such a smart case to reference, for Kate, who only picks up the info that the dogs evidence was not admitted or found to be admissible, leaving out the fact that the dogs had in fact gotten it right in the storage shed where his wife's body had lain and presumably in the car he used to move her to the dump site.

The dogs do not alert to CADAVERS they alert to the SCENT OF CADAVERS which means that they can spot where the cadaver HAD BEEN.

You do not need asniffer dog to tell you if a body is in the storage shed unless you are an imbecile, you can"detect" a human body for yourself. You use the dogs to scent where they might be (under ground) or where they HAVE BEEN or where items in contact with the body HAVE BEEN.

Nothing says that items that HAD BEEN in contact with MM cadaver were not moved in that car boot. The body itself would not need to have been in the boot.

Only the clothing or suitcase or tennis bag or shoes worn in contact with the cadaver would need to be supported.

hence the "how could we have done it in the car when everyone was watching us" is a huge red herring!

As i recall, the owner of the Pizza Place was driving back from a Business in Lagos that he owned and the headlights of his car shone on a couple carrying something and turning into the nearest lane when caught in the glare., it was roughly 6am , I think he was questioned but because he was driving the sighting was brief

My point being the scent of cadaver in the hire car could have been from the shoes worn to move the body the following morning and other clothing or tools or blanket or tennis bag so used.

They would presumably have been in contact with the ground in and around the body (the shoes)  and human decomposing bodies leak substances from various orifices,  not to put too fine a point on it.

Yesterday's Pat Brown blog includes (Nov 3 blog about why people don't like McCanns) a photo of K*G running up Rocha Negra, the shoes are not the hot pink ones worn by Kate on earlier runs or that she describes as having worn in the days prior to MM's disappearance - remember when the little dog ran out and "bit" her? Leaving blood one would suppose, conveniently on these shoes we can presume, as the dog "did not like" the pink running shoes.

Hm.

The shoes can be moved into the dump via the car - leaving a possible mixture of Kate's blood, MM's blood and/or dna in some form - where they were stuffed under the boot liner.

This would account for the dna evidence as well as the cadaver scent.

kate has another pair of running shoes on in the photo Pat Brown posts, I think. The pink ones were retired?

Why could the shoes not have been the item to which the dog/s alerted?

The stench and dripping blood from nappies and rotten fish would account for the smell in the boot (if you want to believe they abused the car in this fashion ) and McCanns also could have used the hire car to transport said items (crap diapers and decaying sea bass) in order to confound the dogs and/or have an "innocent explanation" for the smell, if any were detected, or the blood, whether Kate wore them on the morning of the 4th or at a later time or both. You get rid of the shoes in case the body is found and with it shoe prints and any dna evidence left on the soles.

You let sea bass, which gives off cadaverine scent apparently, leak into the boot so that you can explain the scent away (helpfully helped by the blog by Gerry, that his son had achieved a taste for sea bass).

Zapata case was in the news in 2007 and the murder committed 30 years prior - the cadaver dogs were used in 2004 and the evidence would have been available far in advance of MM disappearance.

I hope they seized the laptop being used by McCanns during the time after may 3rd and before they fled Portugal. If there are searches for cadaver dogs, cases about cadaver dogs, what produces cadaverine etc and those were done prior to them being asked to come in and be interrogated,  then that to me is highly suspicious.

Anyone would know to get rid of the shoes worn to dispose of a body or commit any crime.

tigger wrote:I believe that Michael Wright didn't pass this information on to the PJ. One might have expected more from such a close friend of the family.

If he did pass it in it wasn't for some time.


From the Madeleine Foundation

The pizza girl

During this time, on 6th May, Michael Wright says he met a girl from Liverpool. He says he bought a large quantity of pizzas from a ‘pizza shack’ on the beach of Praia da Luz; the girl serving the pizzas was from Liverpool. She apparently told him that her father, known as ‘George B’, had seen a man carrying child during the very early hours of 4th May in the resort, the day after Madeleine ‘went missing’. Michael Wright apparently didn’t know if ‘George’ had been spoken to by authorities.

This possible ‘sighting’ of Madeleine was for some reason never mentioned by the McCanns, although they many times referred to the ever-changing and unreliable claimed sighting by Jane Tanner, and to another, at around 10.00pm on the evening of 3rd May, by a man from Ireland, Martin Smith.

A number of questions have been raised about this ‘sighting’ of ‘George B’. For example, did ‘George B’ report this ‘sighting’ to the Portuguese police? If so, it should of course be in the police files. If it wasn’t reported, why not? As Michael Wright was advised by the girl of this ‘sighting’, did he run and tell the McCanns? - and did the McCanns then contact the police?

Let us look at this another way. Suppose you're out there helping your close relations Kate and Gerry after the tragic abduction of their daughter. You go down to the beach on Sunday - just three days later - and go and get some pizzas. The girl there tells you that her father saw someone carrying a young girl on the night of 3rd/4th May. So - what do you do? You might, for example: (a) immediately ’phone Kate and Gerry to and tell them of the lead, or (b) contact the Portuguese police immediately, or (c) contact the UK Police immediately, or (d) ask the girl to make contact with the father so you can speak to him? But - no. Apparently Michael Wright does none of these things. He did nothing and apparently only mentions it to the police months later.

Why is it always someone "carrying a girl?" Did they really think that sightings of this sort would be viable? They could make up that they saw a van with suspicious people in it, but it has to have this "sighting" - as if people wandered the streets of PDL with the child in their arms from 10 pm to 6 AM. Ridiculous.

By 6 Am she'd have been dead and dumped in the ocean or buried locally - or taken off long before then and in a CAR - not unless it was G&K and even then wandering about with a child where anyone could see you is crazy.