Outros Apensos II (File 08)


Report from the Brigade for Information Analysis

Analysis Report

Disappearance of Madeleine McCann



ANALYSIS REPORT


1) Introduction

On the 28th April 2007, four English couple and the mother of one of the female members of the group from the UK arrived at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz . All the couples were accompanied by their children, with a maximum age of 4 years.

The Group was comprised of the following members:
- Gerald McCann + Kate Healy = Madeleine (4) and Sean and Amelie (twins) (2).
- Russel O'Brien + Jane Tanner = Ella (3) and Evie (1)
- Matthew Oldfield + Rachael Manpilly = Gracee (?)
- David Payne + Fiona Payne + (Diane Webster) = Scarlett (1) and Lilly (3)

The journey and holiday were booked and organised in the UK through Mark Warner, a company with which they already had prior contacts, namely a trip to Greece the year before.

The return from Algarve to UK should have taken place on 5th May 2007.

In general terms, the days spent at the Ocean Club followed a certain routine.

The children would have breakfast with the parents being taken to mini clubs at the resort afterwards, where they took part in recreation activities organised according to their respective ages. They would join their parents at lunchtime and returned to kid club for part of the afternoon. At about 18h00 the parents would collect the children and return to the apartments. They bathed them, gave them dinner and put them to bed at about 19h30/20h00.

Whilst the children were in the mini clubs, the parents took part in various leisure activities, such as tennis, jogging, reading, etc.

Apart from the first day, the group of adults dined in the Tapas restaurant (situated next to the Ocean Club swimming pool) where a table for nine persons was reserved. These dinners would begin at about 20h30/21h00, continuing until about 24h00.

Given the fact that there was no monitoring system for the children (or two parents had not been informed of this) during the dinner time, the parents decided to carry out checks of their children by going to the apartments approximately every half hour.

This check on the children was made by their own parents, or, some times, by parents of other children who, when going to look at their own children, would also check on the others. However, in some cases, these checks were limited to passing by outside the bedroom windows to listen for any crying.

***

The McCann’s apartment is situated on the ground floor, at the eastern end of the building. It can be accessible in two ways: - either through the main door leading to the same side as the bedroom window of Madeleine and the twins (see photos on page 12); - or on the opposite side by means of two (sliding) glass doors, one leading into the lounge and the other into the couple's bedroom. These give access to the balcony from which stairs, followed by a small gate, lead to the side street.

Given that the latter access option was the most convenient, as it was closest to the restaurant entrance, the living room door would be closed but not locked, so that it could be opened from the outside, leaving an opening that a hand could be slid into.

2) THE EVENTS

On the night of 3rd May, at about 20h30, the McCanns were the first to arrive at the Tapas restaurant. The others were gradually arriving up to about 21h00.

At 21h00 Matthew went to see his daughter. He said that he listened next to the bedrooms of the other children and that everything was quiet.

At 21h05/21h10 Gerald went to see his children. He entered by means of the sliding door. He found it strange that the door from the lounge into the bedroom was a little more open than they had left it when they went out. But, he thought that Madeleine could have got up and returned to bed. He saw that Madeleine and the twins were in their respective beds and were peaceful. He went to the WC and left the apartment by the sliding door. In the street, near the gate, he met Jez, whom he knew from tennis, whom he spoke to for 3 to 5 minutes.

At this moment (21h15), Jane Tanner, who was coming from the restaurant and going to see her children, passed by them. She says that at that moment on the road perpendicular to where she was, at a distance of about 10 metres away, she saw a man carrying a child in his arms (see sketch and photo on pages 50/51). The child was barefoot and wearing pyjamas, but the only thing she found strange was that the child was not covered. She did not notice whether the external blinds of Madeleine's bedroom were down or raised up.

Neither Gerald nor Jez noticed Jane pass by nor did they see the man carrying the child.

At 21h30 Matthew left the Tapas restaurant to go to see his children. He told Kate that he would check her children. He entered the 5A living room by means of the sliding door. He thought that the bedroom of Madeleine and the twins was lighter than usual, it appeared to him that the external blinds could have been raised.. However, he paid no attention to it and limited himself to looking into the bedroom through the door that was quite open. He says that he saw that the twins were in the cots and that all was calm. As Madeleine's bed was against the nearest wall he did not see if she was in her bed.

At 22h00 Kate went to her apartment. She entered by means of the sliding door and then noticed that the bedroom door was fully open, the window was open, the external blinds were raised and the curtains were drawn open. The twins were sleeping in the cots but Madeleine had disappeared.

Only later, after knowing the colour of the pyjamas, did Jane come to the conclusion that the child she says she had being carried by the man could have been Madeleine.

2.1 TIME LINE, of the Group (Annex 2)

A Time Line was prepared, based on the statements of the Group members, with the aim of determining the time at which Madeleine disappeared.

2.1.1) CONCLUSION

From what was stated, and if the child carried by the man referred to by Jane Tanner was Madeleine, then the abductor (given the very limited time between Gerald leaving and the moment Jane says she saw him) would already have been inside the apartment when Gerald went there at 21h05/21h10, having left immediately afterwards.

If it were not Madeleine, and Jane, later, although unintentionally, had created that conviction, the disappearance could have occurred later. Either between Gerald's exit and Matthew's entrance (21h30), or between his exit and Kate's arrival (22h00).

In any case, everything leads one to believe that the person responsible would have exercised control over the Group of 9.

3 DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVESTIGATION

(The equation of two hypotheses, however remote, was not discarded: - one, Madeleine leaving by herself, getting lost, and to be in an unknown place, the other, an attempted robbery (the individual, being interrupted by Gerald's entrance, and Madeleine having seen him, or something having gone wrong, decided to take her with him.)

However, according to all the inquiries made and all the indications gathered, everything points to Madeleine having been the target of an abduction.

As no ransom demand has been received, we believe the following motivations remain:
- of a sexual nature – “predator” and/or a paedophile network;
- human trafficking;
- childless person/couple or substitution of a missing child;
- revenge against Madeleine's parents, for professional, passionate motives, etc.

During the investigation certain indications were found that, collectively, pointed to a suspect - Robert Murat. Because of their close relations with him, the investigation also focused its attention on his friend/girlfriend - Michaela Walczuch and a Russian individual, a computer expert Sergey Malinka.

3.1) TIME LINE, of the suspects (Annex 3)

A Time Line was prepared, based on the statements of the arguido and close witnesses referred to above, with geographic locations and timings.

3.1.1) TIME LINE The start of Robert Murat's participation as "translator" (Annex 4)

Based on contradictory statements, a time line was prepared from the moment Robert Murat began his activity as “translator”.
It was found that only three members of the Group of 9, and only after him having been considered as a suspect, came forward to state that he was seen in the area of the apartment on the night of 3 - 4 May, a short time after the disappearance of Madeleine. The remaining witnesses questioned about his participation, namely GNR officers, stated they did not see him, or that they only saw him on May 4.

But, generally, they described his behaviour as not being that of someone who was interested solely in translations, but as having an attitude that exceeded that role, wanting to acquaint himself with the things elements that had been found and to “direct” some of the activities of the investigation.

4) OBJECTIVE
Backed up by the phone call listings, comparing the statements made and trying to clarify the kind of relationship between the participants and/or others.

4.1) CHRONOGRAM OF COMMUNICATIONS (Annexes 5, 6 and 7)Flow charts of phone calls (Annexes 8, 9 , 10 and 11)

The following list of mobile and fixed telephones were identified, described as follows:

Robert Murat:
Mobile 91918844141

Fixed line: 282788816

Michaela Walczuch
Mobile 919881959
Mobile 96014755959
Fixed line 282760189


Sergey Malinka
Mobile 914168557
Fixed line 282788807

Lists of calls made and received were requested from the telephone operators, along with SMS messages to mobiles showing the destination and originating phones, and the records from the cell masts activated.

Based on these lists, as well as reading the mobile phone call lists, and by consulting calendars, the respective communication timing diagrams were prepared.

In the Chronograms (Annexes 5, 6 and 7) calls on days 2, 3 and 4 May were reviewed and analysed.
All phones were identified where possible, whether Portuguese, English or other nationality. Telephone lists from PT, TMN, VODAPHONE and OPTIMUS were used. Collaboration from UK police officers was relied on to identify some telephone numbers of that country. Similarly, they correlated all the phone numbers in the inquiry and the calendars under review.
Comparison and correlation were made, whether by means of the call flow charts, or by means of the cell masts activated by the mobile phones, by place/time, the statements made by each one of those questioned.

No discrepancies were found between the time line (statements of RM, MW and SM) and the chronogram, either in terms of the time that calls were made or received, or in terms of masts activated. But there were omissions, due to forgetfulness or intention.

In this way, this information, on its own, does not prove the location of Robert Murat, specifically during the period in which Madeleine disappeared.

Mobile Number 919188441
Day - 02-05-07
09.02 call made to 960147559 (MW) Luz Centre Mast
10.51 call received from 282780580 (Delopredial) North Lagos Mast
11.36 call received from 918224078 (Dr Pagarete) Lagos Centre Mast
11.38 call made to 918224078 (Dr Pagarete) Marginal Lagos Mast
13.25 call made to 918224078 (Dr Pagarete) Marginal Lagos Mast
15.44 call made to 918224078 (Dr Pagarete) Lagos Centre Mast

(Between 15.44 on 02 and 23.20 on 03 there are no mobile calls)

Day 30-05-2007
23.20 call received (09.00 min) from 960147559 (MW) Luz Centre Mast
23.35 call received (02.10 min) from 960147559 (MW) Luz Centre Mast
23.39 call made (00.30 min) to 914168557 (SM) Luz Centre Mast
23.40 call made (07.48 min) to 960147559 (MW) Luz Centre Mast


Fixed Line 282788816 (RM or mother)

Day 03-05-2007
Between 17.47 and 19.48 receives 5 calls from 282761804 (M** L** P** C** in Lagos (important to find out who this is) to RM or mother?
Between 18.15 and 18.21 receives two calls from 34616610776 (Spain) (important to find out who this is) to RM or mother?
20.15 call made (10.11 min) to 960147559 (MW)
23.53 call made (08.03 min) to 960147559 (MW)

(In these last two calls, because of their duration it would appear that it was RM phoning and not his mother).

Observation:
New inquiries should made of Robert and Michaela in order to clarify the calls between them on 3 May from 20h15 to 20h25 (fixed), from 23h20 to 23h29 (mobile), from 23h55 to 23h37 (mobile), 23h40 to 23h47 (mobile) and from 23h53 to 24h01 (fixed).
And of the call of 30 seconds from Robert to Sergey at 23h39 - the only such call on those days.

In the flow charts (Annexes 8, 9, and 10) connections on days 1, 2, 3 and 4 May 2007, relating to each telephone were analysed and taken into consideration.

In the flow chart (Annex 11 - combination of calls in Annexes 8, 9 and 10) connections on the days 1, 2, 3 and 4 May 2007, together with the target numbers were analysed and considered.

- In the period in question, calls by phone and SMS between RM and MW are shown, either from mobile or fixed service phones.
- No calls are recorded between MW and SM. Between RM and SM only one call is recorded.
- No common numbers are shared between SM and RM, nor between SM and MW.
- Only one common number was found between RM and MW 707960000 UZO (Call Centre?)

5) CONCLUSION

The flux of calls analysed, from fixed and mobile phones, and the respective comparison with witness statements, does not enable us to point out significant discrepancies.

A close, ongoing relationship between RM and MW was noted

There is a relationship between RM and SM, but in the period examined there was only a single call.

There were no telephone contacts common to the three people.

For the reasons presented, it is not possible, by this means, to clarify the eventual participation of any of them in the events being investigated.

Lisboa, 28 May 2007