Processos Vol III

Pages 582-583

Witness Statement

Luis Miguel da Conceicao Duarte

Date: 2007.05.08

Profession: Reservations Manager

That he comes to the process as a witness.

States that he has worked at the OC since April 1985 and from 1987 onwards, has been employed in the reservations department, first as a clerk and then as manager. He has now served in that role for 12 years.

He carries out his functions at the main reception in the resort. His normal working hours are from 09H30 to 18H00, Monday to Friday, with a lunch break from 13H00 to 14H30.

He states that his specific duties involve everything related to client reservations, the logistics of checking them in, and in assigning apartments.

He adds that when the clients arrive at the resort, the prior processing of their stay is carried out by reception employees.

States that his functions are centred on the physical space (previous references –primary reception) and that he does nor have much personal interaction with the clients/guests.
He notes that the McCann reservation was not handled by him.

As regards the facts being investigated, he mentioned that he has nothing to offer the investigation namely because from the 2nd May to the 6th May, 2007, he was on holidays in Madeira.

But he mentions that prior to the media emitting pictures of the family, he had not seen the McCann family or their children. He only found out about the disappearance of the child afterwards.

He specifies that he can add nothing to the investigation, as he already mentioned, he was not in Praia da Luz when the disappearance happened.

He clarifies that since beginning work at the resort, he has never been made aware of a situation similar to the present nor is he aware of any suspicious movements to this effect.

He has no knowledge of other elements that could help the investigation

And nothing more was said.

Reads, ratifies, signs.

Processos Vol III

Pages 579-581


Witness Statement

Rita Cristina Rose dos Santos Silva

Place of Work: Ocean Club

Profession: Receptionist

She has worked in the OC resort since February 2001 exercising her functions as receptionist.

That for about a year, she has worked with reservations.

That her work location is the 24 hour reception—the main reception of the Ocean Club resort and in the reservation section located on the second floor of the same building.

Her normal hours of work are varied. When she works in reservations, she normally works Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays, between the hours of 09H30 to 13H00 and from 14H30 to 18H00, when the administrative services section close.

When working as a receptionist, her work hours are 08H00 to 16H00, with a lunch break, and sporadically from 16H00 to 24H00.

Her work duties are carried out in the building that houses the main reception of the OC resort.

That she became aware of the situation, (referring to the missing child), at around lunch time (12H00/13H00), from the television. She immediately contacted the OC reception and the situation was confirmed to her by one of her colleagues.

On 03.05.2007, the date the child went missing, she was not working, nor did she work on Friday, and returned to work on 05.05.2007 around 07H30.

That on 03.05.07, she headed towards the main reception, in order to collect her pay. She left the OC around 14H00.

That she does not know the child’s family and only got to know them via the media.

That she does not remember having served the family of the missing child, referring that the family in question did not pass by the Ocean Club reception as they were Mark Warner clients.

After their arrival by bus/minivan, Mark Warner clients go directly to their apartments. In doing so, they are accompanied by Mark Warner employees who complete their check-in.

After the clients are left at their apartments, Mark Warner delivers their identification, including a copy of passports or the passport itself, to the Ocean Club reception, which concludes the registration of the guest(s).

Mark Warner is a British Tour Operator and began working at the OC in 2006.

According to what she understands, this business works exclusively with English tourists.

That the apartment where the family stayed was assigned to the family given the typology and characteristics of the same, without knowledge of whether they have been guests previously.

That in the case of children or babies, special conditions are often requested, namely cots, high chairs, etc., and these conditions are taken care of by the Ocean Club or by Mark Warner, depending to which agency they booked with.

In the [McCann] case, their needs were taken care of by Mark Warner.

Concerning the keys to the apartments of Mark Warner clients, the keys are given by the OC reception to Mark Warner who gives them to the clients.

The same is the case with an access card which allows for access to all the services of the OC. This card too, is treated as is the keys (above) and is handed out one per person. Mark Warner hands these cards to its clients.

These access cards are given to each client (including babies and children), and besides permitting access to services offered by the Ocean Club, is equally used for buying drinks and food.
Later, these charges are added to the respective apartment.

That in the days prior and after the disappearance of the child, she did not detect any suspicious situation, abnormal or different nor were comments made to her regarding any such situation.

That she is unaware of any detail or information regarding the disappearance of the child, nor does she possess any information that could help find the child.

And nothing more was said.

Reads, ratifies, signs.

Processos V1I
Pages 1843-1844

Witness Statement

Svetlana Malinka

Date. 2007.06.20

Profession: Cleaner

Place of work: Ocean Blue – Villa Management & Rental

She comes to the process as a witness.

She does not speak the Portuguese language and is assisted by a Russian language interpreter in this office.

The witness has been in Portugal since 1999, having continually resided in Praia da Luz, Lagos for about 5 or 6 months, she has worked for the firm Ocean Blue. Her work is carried out in the Praia da Luz zone, more specifically in the Ocean Club zone. This firm contracts the cleaning of some apartments close to the one from where the English child went missing. This apartment she cleans is in the same block, but is on the top floor. The witness cannot indicate the exact apartment.

She adds that she does not always clean in this area as there other workers who may do so. Their assignments are rotated.

The witness adds that the majority of persons who work in the zone, know that the apartment block occupied by the McCanns, located near the pool, is often occupied by non-owners.

The witness declares that she became aware of the disappearance of the girl via conversations with her colleagues. She became aware of the location of the disappearance two days after the facts.

She has nothing more to add regarding the disappearance of the minor Madeleine McCann. Having lived in the Praia da Luz zone for eight years, at no time has she been aware of abnormal situations. She characterises the zone as being very calm.

And nothing more was said.

Read, ratifies and signs.

Processos Vol II, Pages 392 to 394

STATEMENT FROM CLEANER OF 5 A

Maria Julia S. da Silva.

Upon being asked, she states that she is a cleaner and has been working as such for around 13 years with the company “THE OCEAN CLUB”. Her two daughters, FM and DI work with her in the same department.

Regarding her job, she points out that she is the person who is responsible for cleaning Block 5, more specifically apartments A, B, C, D, H, I, K, L, M and P, and also states that when the child disappeared only apartments A, B, D, G, H and K were occupied. She declares that she is the only employee who cleans these apartments, and has help when new customers arrive or leave. When preparing apartment A, where the Mc Cann family were to be installed, she says that she carried out the preparations with the help of her colleague DNA, on Saturday the 28th. She remembers that when preparing this apartment, she had just been notified that the apartment was to be occupied by 5 (five) people; she was unaware of children in the group. However, at the exact moment when she and her colleague DTNA were preparing the room, personnel from the company MARK WARNER entered the apartment and proceeded to place two children’s beds. It was at this moment that they learned that children would be sleeping in the apartment.

When questioned, she declares that the fact a third company placed the children’s beds inside the apartment is common. Also, she says that when the reservation of the apartments is in the hands of the MARKWARNER travel agency, it is this company that is responsible for placing the beds. On the other hand, when other travel agencies are involved, placing the children’s beds is carried out by “THE OCEAN CLUB” company itself.

With respect to her activities performed directly in the apartment, she declares that the last time she entered the apartment was on the Wednesday prior to the events, specifically on the 2nd of May, when she cleaned the apartment. When questioned, she declares that as opposed to what is established, on Thursday the 3rd and due to other chores, she did not have time to collect the garbage bags.

She remembers that when she entered Apartment A on the Wednesday, the parents were inside. After being duly authorized, she entered and carried out her work, because they were already on their way out. While she was in the apartment, there were no children there, and she supposed that they were in the creche. While performing her work, she remembers having noticed that the couple was sleeping in the room located opposite the entrance, where she confirmed the presence of a child’s bed (crib). The room gives onto an outdoor garden by means of a terrace, as it is on the ground floor,. In the room next to the entrance to the apartment there was a bed placed next to the wall (where she supposed the missing child slept), and also the second child’s bed (crib). All these beds were untidy at the time, meaning that they had been used. She also declares that in the room next to the entrance was another bed that had not been used.

On the following Friday, the day after the child disappeared, she states that due to police formalities, she did not clean apartment A.

When questioned, she declares that on the days prior to the events, she did not notice any strange element/object in the apartments she entered to clean that could have caught her attention and that could have been directly related to the disappearance.

Likewise, she declares that she did not notice any element/person behaving in a strange manner.

Finally, she declares that her work schedule begins at 1000 hours and ends at 1800 hours, after which time she returns to Lagos where she lives.

She has nothing further to say. After reading the document and finding it to be satisfactory, she signs it.

Cleaner 5a....

Maria Julia S da Silva

Processos Vol VI
Pages 1409 – 1412

Witness Statement

Marina Paulo Raposo Batista Castela


Date: 2007 – 05 – 16


Place of Work: Ocean Club

Occupation: General Manager



She comes to the process as a witness. She heard about the disappearance on 4th May when she arrived at work at about 09.30.

She saw the suspect, Robert Murat, for the first time on that day at about 12.30 when the witness went to meet GNR officers whom she cannot identify, to open the doors for them and speak to guests staying in apartments in block 6. The objective was for the police to talk to these guests and show them the photo of the girl and establish whether they had any information that could lead to discovering her whereabouts.

When she was beginning this task together with GNR officers, this individual appeared, she does not know from where, he immediately saw what operations were going on, speaking ostensibly to the guests from the first two apartments, explaining to them what they were doing there, showing much will and anxiety in the transmission of this information.

Given his behaviour, for a few minutes the witness thought that he belonged to one of the security forces, namely the PJ.


The GNR officer who was with them did not speak and English nor say anything.


After the second apartment, the witness says that Robert’s attitude was not the most correct, as he spoke to the guests in a very dry and affirmative way and she took the initiative to introduce herself to the clients, not letting him speak.

She thanks that is the reason why he immediately disappeared and did not accompany them to the rest of the apartments.

During the time he was with them that afternoon, several times he said how sorry he was about Madeleine’s disappearance, that he had a daughter of the same age and that we had to do everything possible to find the girl.

She had not seen this individual before this incident and knows nothing about him or his lifestyle.

She only saw him again on the morning of 7th May when she came to make statements to the PJ officers in apartment 6 of block 6. She was in the building between 11.00 and 13.30 and remembers that the individual entered and left the building at free will. They said hello to each other and did not speak any further that day.


On the following day 8th May, when she took some cleaning staff to the PJ station for questioning, Robert went to her and greeted her with two kisses. He asked her name. She did not see him again that day and thinks he was with the PJ officers.


She saw him again the following day 9th May at about 10.30 at the PJ station. At that moment he approached her and said the witness was known by a friend of his, Michaela. The witness confirmed this fact.

After this day she saw him no further. Apart from the contacts she had with him she had seen him on other occasions from a distance, in the company of journalists.

When questioned, she said that she knows Michaela (she has a German surname which the witness cannot pronounce) who lives behind the Del Rei restaurant in Lagos for the past 10 years.

They got to know each other through both being Jehovah’s witnesses and frequenting the same church, opposite the financial building in Lagos.

That she would attend the meetings with her boyfriend at that time, called Luis Antonio. Afterwards they got married and went to live in the apartment where they still both reside. She does not know whether they are still married today.


She knows that about 3 years ago, Michaela left home and went to live with another man near Faro, the witness does not know whom this individual was. She does know that Michaela was away for a little while, returning home.

Since that time (about 3 years ago) she has not had any further contact with Michaela because she was disassociated from the Jehovah’s witnesses of her own will and due to the reasons mentioned above.

That about 2 or 3 months ago she was readmitted to the JW . last Sunday, on 13th May they were together at a meeting where she was with her daughter. They greeted each other and the witness told her that she had met her partner, Robert. She confirmed that they had a business together on the Internet and that he had come to live in Portugal to expand his business, having arrived recently.

The witness says that he went to help the police in P da L with the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. She (MW) said that this was typical of him, to want to help. She added that he had even delayed medical tests in the UK in order to be in Portugal and accompany the investigation. Michaela appeared a bit displeased, due to the fact that their Internet business had experienced delays.

She does not know whether Michaela had a relationship with Robert as he was never referred to on this level and she never saw them together.

When asked about Michaela’s personality, the witness said she was a very cold person namely in the interpersonal relationships with her mother in law, daughter and with friends. At the time she was married to Luis Antonio (whom she still lives with) she did not work and liked to take care of her appearance. Given the coldness of her personality, they never had a close relationship.

The she speaks, Portuguese, German and English well. She says she had good computer skills. She has not seen her in the OC area for almost 7 years, which is when she came to live with Luis Antonio, who cleaned the resort pool.

Recently Michaela has been working in real estate companies. At this moment, as far as the witness knows, she has a home selling business with Robert on Internet and that they are in the process of expansion, to include other services.

She recognises Robert as the man presented as a suspect in the abduction of Madeleine on the television during the last days and as resident of Casa Liliana situated close to where the events occurred.

According to what Michaela told her, he spends a lot of time in England. Due to the witness’s profession she passed by the house every day (the OC has various lost nearby, called Palm Bay) and she has never seen that man there, which makes her think that he spent a lot of time abroad or in another place.

As far as she knows, Michaela was also in the UK with her daughter during the carnival holiday in 2007.


No more is said. Reads, ratifies, signs.

Statements linked in TOC

Translated by Astro:

Vol VIII

Pages 1975 - 1977

Witness Statement

Silvia Batista

2007 - 07 - 26

“Concerning the matter of the process, the witness said:

That she has given statements for several times within the process, and remembers the contents of what she stated before, therefore reproducing the contents of the previous statements into this statement.

The deponent offers another statement because with the passage of time, since Madeleine’s disappearance, she has remembered some details of the facts that she witnessed, which she considers of some interest to the investigation.

Like she said before, she was alerted to Madeleine’s disappearance between 10.30 and 11 p.m. She was at home and was informed about the event through a telephone call. She immediately went to the Ocean Club, where she arrived only minutes before the GNR officers. When she arrived at the resort, she went immediately to apartment 5A, where she met several persons both on the inside and on the outside of the apartment. She went into the apartment but left it right away without speaking to anyone, because she was informed that the GNR officers were at the main reception, so she went to meet them.

When she arrived near the GNR officers, she verified that Gerry, Madeleine’s father, was behind her, in the company of another individual whose identity she doesn’t remember. At that moment, Gerry placed both knees on the floor, hit the floor with both hands, too, placing himself like a praying arab, and shouted out twice in rage, and it was not possible to understand what he said. Then Gerry got back on his feet and accompanied the deponent and the other individual who was in the GNR car, to apartment 5A.

Already on location, the deponent entered the apartment and asked those who were present both for the passports of all family members and photographs of the missing person. The deponent walked Gerry to the GNR car, so he could deliver the requested documents. She states that she carried out these diligences, and other diligences, at the request of the GNR Commander as they used the deponent’s knowledge of the English language to translate the questions that were asked from the missing person’s family members, and the answers that were given. She remembers that Gerry gave the GNR Commander several photographs of the missing person. These were postcard-type photographs, taking their size and shape into account. They were actually photographs of the size and shape of a postcard, and they seemed to be all similar to her.

She also realised that from the very first moment on, both Gerry and the rest of the group members insisted in stating that Madeleine had been abducted, all of them using the word “abducted” instead of missing, and they all showed great interest in informing the press about the situation.

The deponent further recalls that she entered the room where Madeleine had been sleeping. She now remembers that the door was closed. The inside of the room was dark. The shutters were down, and light entered only through its holes. The windows were closed and the curtains slightly open. Gerry, who accompanied the deponent during this visit, with the GNR officers also present, said that it had been him who had closed the window because the babies were still sleeping inside, which the deponent could verify as true. Gerry mentioned that when he noticed that Madeleine was missing, he had found the window and shutters open, and the curtains fluttering.

The deponent recalls that the cots that were used by the babies were placed in the middle of the room and aligned, and therefore she found it strange that someone could have taken Madeleine from the bed where she was sleeping up to the window, because there was no space to get through. The deponent opened the bedroom’s wardrobe to check if eventually Madeleine was hiding inside. Then they all left the room, and someone closed its door again. The deponent remained in the living room for a while, with the GNR officers, Gerry and the other group members that were there in a frenzy, going in and out and speaking on their mobile phones. She noticed that none of the group members, including the child’s mother and father, were busy looking for her. The mother was sitting on the master bedroom’s bed, the father accompanied the deponent and the GNR officers and the other group members walked in and out and spoke on the phone, apparently concerned about informing the press about the event.

She thought that the child’s mother was downbeat with the situation, the father showed his concern and also asked both for the press to be alerted and for dogs to be brought in for the search. Concerning the others, she can only recall that Fiona and her husband, Payne, were hysterical about the situation. At a given moment, right after the PJ’s elements arrived, the child’s parents removed the twins from the cots where they still slept, and took them into the apartment on the first floor. At Kate’s request, the deponent removed the soft toys and a blanket from the cots, and also took them to the first floor. The babies’ cots were left only with the mattresses.

The deponent also wishes to mention that at around 3 a.m. Madeleine’s parents asked for the presence of a priest on location. They didn’t explain the reason why they wanted a priest, but the deponent found the fact strange as there were no indications that the little girl was dead, and that’s the circumstance under which usually the presence of a priest is requested.

At a given moment, the deponent translated the deposition from one of the ladies that belonged to the group of English people, namely one that she indicates as being a brunette. This lady told the GNR officers, and the deponent translated, that she had seen a man crossing the road, possibly carrying a child. The deponent found that situation strange because she was convinced that when she saw this man, the lady was positioned in a spot that has no viewing angle to the location where she had seen the man. She doesn’t know exactly where the lady was positioned when she saw the man passing by, but she knows that she indicated that she saw him passing on the street that lies in front of the window to the bedroom where Madeleine was, walking into the direction of the street that leads to the Baptista supermarket.

When questioned about the clothes that the English group members wore that night, she mentions that she only remembers that Fiona wore a green blouse, Gerry wore a dark coloured shirt, and Fiona’s husband wore light-coloured trousers, she thinks cream-coloured.

And she stated nothing further.”

Statements linked in toc.

Processos Volume III

Pages 789-791

Witness Statement

Elisa Angela Dias Romao

Date: 2007.05.09
Time: 11H55
Professions: Reception Worker, Luz Ocean Club

That she comes to the process as a witness.

The witness works at the Luz Ocean Club, on contract. Her functions include attending to the reception area of the Garden Club (where the Millenium restaurant is found).

This is the second period in which she has worked for the LOC, always in the same role.

Her days off are Sundays and Mondays.

Regarding the investigation, the witness states that she became aware of the same, on Friday. That morning, when she showed up for work, she heard talk that a British child had disappeared the night prior and that since then no one knows of her whereabouts.

With relation to the other elements gathered afterwards, the witness confirms that she became aware of them via the media and other talk between the guests and colleagues.

She firmly believes that no one knows precisely how everything happened.

Regarding the group linked to the couple and the missing child and her two siblings, she only became aware afterwards that Madeleine’s siblings were twins. The witness remembers seeing them in the Garden Club, near the pool and the Tapas restaurant.

They appeared a normal family, as did the entire group. She did not notice any strange or suspicious details.

When questioned, the witness clarifies that she worked at the Garden Club reception on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, at a time covering the lunch hour. She remembers seeing the couple with their children as they had to pass the reception to leave the area. She next saw them head in the direction of the apartment where the witness believes they had lunch.

She believes that they left always between 12H30 and 13H00.

Around 14H00 the couple would return around 14H00, in fact, most of the couples would return their children to the crèche around this time. She does not know if the three McCann children were together given their different ages.

When questioned, the witness states that the parents would spend the majority of the time inside the Garden Club, in activities such as playing tennis, as they were a group of four couples (the reservation was always made for 9 adults). They would only all meet together for dinner.

The couple would only leave the Garden Club after the children’s tea, which was served by the nannies in that area around 17H00/18H00.

It was only after this period that they would leave with the children in the direction of their respective apartments.

Questioned, states that she was left with the notion that the four couples always took their children when they went out or that they (the children) never left the area without their parents.

Her normal working day was from 09.00 – 17.00 and therefore she was never present when the group was dining.

Her working day was normal that day and she did not see anything of interest to the investigation.

On this same day at around 17H30, she remembers that she left the reception to collect her earnings and she does not remember having seen Madeleine or her parents enter or in the interior of the TAPAS.

She returned to the reception around 19H00 and finished work shortly afterwards. She became aware of the disappearance the next day (Friday) via a colleague.

Questioned, she does not remember if this year someone entered the reception or frequented the pool or restaurant without having the authorisation to do so. In past years, namely the past year, various children and adults have entered without authorisation, intending to use the pool.

She has never noticed any individuals or vehicles in the immediate areas of the resort that appeared suspicious or abnormal.

Likewise, she does not remember anyone questioning her regarding the functioning of the resort or in particular about the functioning of the children’s services.

And nothing more was said.

Document linked in toc.