Processos Vol X
Pages 2667 – 2668



Letter to the Public Prosecutor, Portimao Public Ministry

Date 18th September 2007



In terms of the recent alteration to the Penal Process Code (29th August 2007), namely that referred to by article 86, numeral 1 – “the penal process is, under penalty of nullity, public, apart from the exceptions foreseen in the law” and that, according to alinea b) of nº 6 of the same article, publicity about the case implies “the narration of processional acts or the reproduction of their terms by the press”, I, João Paolo da Conceição Tiago, carrier of ID card nº **** and of press card nº *** present my request to consult the process commonly known as the “Madeleine Case”.

I am a freelance journalist and in this capacity am collaborating with the British news channel ITN, the producer of information for ITV and Channel 4 in the UK and CNN and CBS in the US.

As stated in nº 1 of article 5ª, I understand that that the changes made to the Penal Process Code are immediately applicable, by which, except for exceptions foreseen in the law, the investigation process is now public. Also because the exceptions foreseen in nº 2 of the same article nº5 do not seem to me to be applicable in this case.

Given that the case was already the subject of judicial secrecy and taking into account the speculation that has marked this case, I request, as established in nº 13 of article 86, the following clarifications, which I understand would be necessary to re-establish the truth and not prejudice the investigation:

1. What incriminatory evidence exists at the moment that would indicate the involvement of Kate and Gerry McCann in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine McCann?

2. According to the press, the Public Ministry and the Policia Judiciaria do not have sufficient elements of proof in order to enable them to formulate an accusation against the couple. Is that true?

3. If these elements of proof do not exist, is it normal for a suspicion to take so long to arrive at Justice?

4. The Policia Judiciaria has been the target of many criticisms, on the part of the British media. Are these criticisms justified?

5. How can it be possible, in the case that you co-manage, that so much information about the investigation has been printed in the Portuguese press, when the investigation is or was under judicial secrecy?

6. When will a decision be made about the formalisation of accusations against the McCann couple or the archiving of the case be made?

7. The direction of the investigation no longer considers the possibility of abduction? Have the authorities stopped looking for Madeleine, dead or alive?

8. Are there other lines of inquiry, apart from those that implicate the McCanns?

Given the unprecedented public interest in this case, in my understanding it is pertinent to make this request, especially as what I am proposing – and what the television channels propose – is a serious, objective and non-speculative work.

With compliments,

João Paolo da Conceição Tiago



(Doc linked in TOC)

Processos Vol X
Page 2661

To: The Public Prosecutor
Portimão Judicial Circuit


Date: 17 September 2007


Nicholas Springate, of British nationality, bearer of passport number Nº*******, BBC journalist, press card nº******* and Steven Kingston, of British nationality, bearer of passport nº *******, BBC journalist, press card n******* both with the professional address of ********, Lagoa, Portugal, given the entry into force on the 15th September 2007 of the changes introduced by the Law 48/2007 of 29th August, introduced into the Penal Process Code, article 86 of this code being modified in nº 1 to “the penal process and under penalty of nullity, public” considering the terms laid down in nº 1 of article 5 of the Penal Process code “the processional law is of immediate application”, consequently applicable to processes that were initiated previously and their duration, namely the so-called "Madeleine Case", which due to the above mentioned legal norms is no longer under judicial secrecy and is now public under penalty of nullity, come to request, under the dispositions of articles 86, nº 1, 88 nº1 and 90, nº 1 of the Penal Process Code, authorisation to consult the process files of the “Maddie Case” (denomination adopted in a note for the media dated 11-09-2007 by his Excellency the Public Prosecutor in order to identify the process in question for effects of the divulgation of information, with particular attention to public repercussions of the case.


Portimão, 17th September, 2007

We request and await deferral.

Nicholas Springate Steven Kingston


(Doc linked in TOC).

Processos Vol X
Page 2662


Portimão Public Ministry


CONCLUSION – 17-09-2007 (15 and 16 weekend)


The nature of the facts shared whose knowledge and divulgation have already reached a cross border dimension, demands that the interests of the investigation be protected from the most varied speculations/comments about the elements that are contained in the process files and of those other elements that could come to be contained in them, as a result of the development of the investigation, which is only possible if they are – as until now – the subject of judicial secrecy.

Please remit the files to the Mmo JIC for validation of this determination of terms and for the effects laid down in article 86 of the PPC and of the wording introduced by Law 48/2007 of 29th August.

Signed

The Public Prosecutor

Dr José Magalhães e Menezes



(Doc linked in TOC)

Processos Vol X
Page 2669

Communication

In reply to the questions received from the journalists, the following is made known:

1. The process known as the “Madeleine Case” has still not completed the investigation phase, it therefore corresponds to the entity that leads or directs this (Public Ministry) to provide the information or clarifications about its development, if the understanding is that the law is permitting;


2. During this phase, the intervention of the Instruction Judge is necessary and should be destined to safeguard the rights, liberties and guarantees, by authorising or not the carrying out of diligences that could offend these rights, liberties and guarantees, such as, for example, forensic tests, searches, apprehensions (as was the case of jurisdictional intervention that has taken place until now);


3. Satisfying the requirement of the Portimão Court Instruction Judge and given the communicational difficulties that still persist within our courts, this Council assumes, in collaboration with the aforementioned Judge, the provision of clarifications and information which, within the strict limits of the law, come to be justified, whether in the jurisdictional phase that may eventually come to take place, or in the specific interventions of the Instruction Judge, which may also come to occur in the future;

4. The intervention of the Instruction Judge that has occurred up until now does not justify – further than that which has been explained – any information or clarification on the part of this Council.

Lisbon, 18th September 2007

Vice President

António Nunes Ferreira Girão


(Doc linked in TOC)

Processos Vol XVI
Page 4296




Portimão Public Services Ministry


To: Steven Bruce Kingston
Lagoa


Process 201.070GALGS

Date: 19-05-2008


Subject: Despatch


You are notified that by means of despatch proffered on the case files mentioned above, your consultation has been deferred as required in virtue of the fact that the investigation is under judicial secrecy.



María Luisa Nascimento Duarte


(Doc linked in TOC)

Processos Vol XVI
Page 4286


To: The Public Prosecutor
Portimão Judicial Circuit




Steven Kingston, of British nationality, bearer of passport nº *******, BBC journalist, press card n******* both with the professional address of ********, Lagoa, Portugal, under the dispositions contained in article 86nº1, 88 nº1, 89 nº6, 90 nº1 and 276 nºs and 3 of the Penal Process code, with the text of Law nº 48/2007 of 29th August, subsequently corrected by the Rectification Statement nº 100-A/2007 of 26th October, request the authorisation to consult the process files mentioned above for effects of the divulgation of information and clarification of the truth, with particular attention to public repercussions of the case.


Lagos 15th May 2008

Awaiting deferral.

Signed.

Steven Kingston


(Doc linked in TOC)