“Finding Madeleine”; Chapter 1, Part 2

Second of a multi-part series. The full book is available for download at findingmadeleine.com.  Full book now available as direct download for instant (improved) delivery.

Chapter 1, Part 1 is available here.

Finding Madeleine

By:

Centinel

www.findingmadeleine.com

Copyright 2017, All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer

“Finding Madeleine” is a personal narrative. It is the opinion of the author and is based upon publicly available sources. In no event should the reader infer or conclude the author is making any accusations of wrongdoing, guilt or innocence with respect to any person, living, dead, or corporate.

Footnotes and images are available in the full book.

Dedicated to all who are unjustly held and to those who set them free.

“There’s no place like home.”

The character Dorothy Gale from the Wizard of Oz

Visit our home:

FindingMadeleine.com

Preface

In “Finding Madeleine” we resolve the baffling mystery of the disappearance of Madeleine Mccann, the 3-year old British girl who vanished from her family’s vacation apartment in Portugal in 2007.

Madeleine’s plight, and that of her family, came to dominate British and world headlines for much of the remainder of that decade. Although media coverage has diminished along with the public’s memory of her, Madeleine continues to generate the occasional headline.

Oddly, Madeleine re-appeared in the closing weeks of the 2016 U.S. Presidential election when two ghostly images of a man sought in her disappearance became part of the already bizarre PizzaGate story. The images were soon forgotten in the chaos of the election and the cacophony and shock of its aftermath.

The two images are a Rosetta Stone. They offer the first tangible clue to solve Madeleine’s disappearance.

We did not set out to Find Madeleine. Nor did we have any prior interest or preconceptions pertaining to Madeleine Mccann’s mysterious disappearance. We set out to discover why a reference to Madeleine occurred in the closing days of the 2016 U.S. Presidential campaign. In trying to discover the answer to that question we found a crumb-filled path. When we arrived at the end of that path we found out what happened to her.

For those looking for Madeleine, you will follow that same path to discover her likely fate, and by which she might return.

For those who do not wish to know that monsters walk freely among us, you will want to burn this book.

For those in the U.K., much of what you are about to read is banned under one or more standing D-notices, confidentiality rules and orders from the High Court, and the Official Secrets Act. You are not supposed to know. Your media and all of your government officials have been muzzled.

Foreword

“Lady, I do not make up things. That is lies. Lies are not true. But the truth could be made up if you know how. And that’s the truth.” 

Lily Tomlin

Gerry and Kate Mccann (nee’ Healy) took their three young children on holiday to Praia da Luz, Portugal in late April 2007. It did not end well. According to Kate, she went to check on her children around 10:00 pm or so on May 3, 2007 only to discover that Madeleine, her 3-year old daughter, had vanished from her bed. A desperate search ensued, but she was not to be found.

When the Mccann’s finally returned from Portugal they were absent their eldest child. By then, Madeleine had become the most publicized missing child in the 75 years since the Lindbergh’s baby Charles vanished from his crib, also at 10:00 pm. Writing of the Lindbergh kidnapping, H.L. Mencken described it as “the biggest story since the Resurrection”.

The media coverage of Madeleine’s disappearance would come to eclipse that of baby Charles. Unlike the Lindbergh baby, whose tiny body was found two months later with a massive skull fracture, Madeleine Mccann remains missing to this day.

Nearly ten years after Madeleine vanished, a reference to her occurred in the closing weeks of the brutal 2016 U.S. Presidential election in the form of two ghostly images. The images are of a man who was seen carrying a small sleeping girl in the vicinity of the Mccann’s vacation apartment around the time she vanished. The images briefly became part of the bizarre PizzaGate story until they were subsumed in the chaos of the election and vanished in its aftermath.

The ghostly images are a Rosetta Stone. They are the key to solving the near-decade long mystery of Madeleine’s disappearance.

It’s one of the strangest stories you might ever read.

Chapter 1, Part 2:     Losing Madeleine

“Please, if you have Madeleine, let her come back to mummy, daddy and her brother and sister.”

Gerry McCann’s first public appeal for help, May 2007

“There’s absolutely no way Kate and I are involved in this abduction.”

Gerry Mccann, one month later

…continued from Chapter 1, Part 1

England

About ten days after Madeleine vanished, a paralegal working for the London-based International Family Law Group (IFLG) reportedly approached the Mccann’s upon referral of a colleague of Gerry’s. After the initial contact, the para-legal and a barrister met with the Mccann’s. The Mccann’s retained IFLG and quickly moved to establish “Madeleine’s Fund” (dba, “No Stone Left Unturned, Limited”).

Madeleine’s Fund came to handle, coordinate and publicize the Mccann’s search, their related legal affairs, and the generous contributions that poured in from the public. Madeleine’s Fund would go on to raise and spend several million Pounds in a fruitless effort to Find Madeleine.

The Mccann’s were faulted for not establishing Madeleine’s Fund as a charity but rather as a “limited” (non-charitable) company. It seemed an odd decision to some that caused additional suspicion to fall upon the parents. To this day, Madeleine’s Fund remains a limited (private) corporation. According to the Fund’s website, it is ineligible to obtain charity status in Britain because it does not provide a “public” benefit.

As IFLG and the Mccann’s busied themselves with creating Madeleine’s Fund, IFLG also set about making Madeleine a Ward of the High Court, likely filing a petition for Wardship on or shortly after May 17, 2007. We cannot say exactly when because such matters are handled anonymously for the docket and proceedings related to custody and Wardship are confidential and under seal of the Court, consistent with British statutes and procedures at the time.

Nevertheless, by filing their petition to make Madeleine a Ward of the Court the Mccann’s voluntarily and affirmatively sought to forfeit their legal, custodial, and parental rights and responsibilities to their daughter.

“The Telegraph can also disclose that Madeleine was made a ward of court last summer [2007] at the request of the McCann’s, to empower judges to act in her best interests in any legal dispute such as the case which is about to be heard.

Clarence Mitchell, the McCann’s’ spokesman, said: ‘I can state that on the instigation of Gerry and Kate McCann Madeleine is a ward of the High Court of England and Wales. An application has been made on Madeleine’s behalf by her parents for disclosure of certain documents. The hearing is currently scheduled for July 7 [2008] in the High Court in London. It has been the stated intention of Gerry and Kate McCann to leave no stone unturned in doing everything necessary to search for their daughter, as would any parent. This application is just part of their search for Madeleine.’

Madeleine’s status as a ward of court has never been disclosed by her parents, who quietly made a wardship application in the High Court just weeks after she went missing. The couple’s legal team had advised them to ask for Madeleine to be made a ward of court because wardship status gives the courts certain statutory powers to act on her behalf in legal disputes such as the one which has arisen with Leicestershire police.”

Shortly after Madeleine disappeared her parents initiated a legal proceeding that ceded all of their parental rights and responsibilities to a stranger. That stranger was Judge Dame Mary Claire Hogg of the High Court in London, who began to exercise Wardship over Madeleine in the Summer of 2007.

When Madeleine was made a Ward of the High Court all matters related to her fell under the Family Division’s confidentiality rules and any orders the Court might issue pertaining to her. One such rule is the Court’s ability to “restrain publicity” per Section 1.2(a) of the Family Division’s “Practice Direction”.

The hearing in which Madeleine’s Wardship was disclosed concerned an order the High Court had issued shortly after she disappeared concerning investigatory records held by the Leicestershire police. These records and documents were the subject of the only open court hearing in the U.K. that we know of related to Madeleine’s disappearance. The hearing occurred on July 7, 2008 before Madeleine’s Ward, Judge Hogg.

According to the transcript of the open court hearing, Judge Hogg issued a broad order on May 22, 2007 applicable to British law enforcement and other agencies, persons and entities. The broad order was kept under seal of the Court. We learn of its existence and some of its contents through the open court transcript. From the transcript we learn that multiple “orders and directions” were sought shortly after Madeleine disappeared.

“On 17 May 2007 Madeleine’s parents invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under the Inherent Jurisdiction of the Court, and The Child Abduction and Custody Act, and the Hague Convention. They sought various orders and directions aimed at ascertaining the whereabouts and recovery of Madeleine.”

From the open court proceeding we know IFLG was empowered on May 22, 2007 to seek and obtain virtually any and all records they might wish from any person, entity, agency or authority; after which IFLG sought confidential investigatory records and documents from the Leicestershire police. To which the Leicestershire police objected, at least in part.

Ultimately, the matter between the Leicestershire police and the Mccann’s boiled down to 81 “pieces of information”. Let’s hear the story behind these pieces of information from IFLG’s Tim Scott.

“Although the Leicestershire Constabulary were quick to set up a major incident room and to provide a telephone number which anyone with information could call, there was a period of time before this became widely known. During that time Gerry and Kate’s solicitor, Ms. Ann Thomas of The International Family Law Group, who sits in front of me, had already been retained. Her firm’s number was publicized and a large number of people called in. All of these callers were given the number which the Leicestershire Constabulary had set up for the purpose. The solicitors thought it right that the police should be receiving it. In fact with few exceptions the solicitors did not even retain any notes on what the callers were saying or even their contact details.”

IFLG’s phone number was publicized, presumably by IFLG, after which a “large number” of calls and tips from the public were received. With but a “few exceptions”, IFLG referred the callers to the Leicestershire police without bothering to record the name, contact information or relevant information of callers who might have immediate, direct, relevant and consequential knowledge related to Madeleine.

As a result of the open court hearing in July 2008, Judge Hogg ordered the release of the 81 stray bits of information to the Mccann’s. What’s most significant about the Judge’s order, however, is her remarkable plea to the person or persons who knows what happened to Madeleine:

“There is of course at least one person who knows what has happened to Madeleine, and where she may be found.

I ponder about that person: whether that person has a heart and can understand what it must be like for Madeleine to have been torn and secreted from her parents and siblings whom she loves and felt secure and whom no doubt misses and grieves for. Whether that person has a conscience or any feeling of guilt, remorse or even cares about the hurt which has been caused to an innocent little girl whether that person has a faith and belief, and what explanation or justification that person will give to God. I entreat that person whoever and wherever you may be to show mercy and compassion, and come forward now to tell us where Madeleine is to be found.

I hope and pray that Madeleine will be found very soon alive and well.

I confirm the Wardship and Madeleine will remain a Ward of Court until further Order of the Court. The case will be reserved to myself subject to my availability.”

Judge Hogg’s plea suggests Madeleine was taken alive and hidden by her captors. How might Judge Hogg have known Madeleine wasn’t dead? How did she know Madeleine was taken, and hadn’t just wandered off?

In the weeks following her disappearance it seemed as if everything possible was being done to Find Madeleine. Everything, that is, but for following up on relevant statements made by three eyewitnesses who voluntarily came forward to offer their statements. Two of the eyewitnesses each gave a statement to the Leicestershire police. Another eyewitness gave two statements to the Portuguese and made an anonymous attempt to contact British authorities.

The statements of these three eyewitnesses contained relevant and damning information, yet their statements were suppressed, ignored, or dismissed without cause.

On May 16, 2007, thirteen days after Madeleine disappeared, a couple contacted the Leicestershire police. The couple, long-time friends of the Mccann’s, are also M.D.’s. They wanted to inform the Leicestershire police, who were working with the Portuguese, of an event they witnessed when they accompanied the Mccann’s on another group trip to Mallorca in 2005

The day after the couple gave their statements to the Leicestershire police, IFLG rushed to the High Court to obtain various secret orders and directions from the Court, one of which was to allow them to rifle through the Leicestershire police investigatory files.

The couple’s statements, and the fact of their existence, were withheld for nearly six months. Yet the statements were material, relevant and damning of Gerry Mccann and one of the Mccann’s holiday friends. The suppression of the two eyewitness statements given to the Leicestershire police prevented the Portuguese from considering another theory of the case and from pursuing more productive inquiries. Rather, the Portuguese focused initially on abduction by a stranger, and later, negligence, homicide or murder by one or both parents covered up by a staged abduction and later disposal of Madeleine’s body.

Katherina and Arul’s (Savio) statements were withheld from the Portuguese until after the Portuguese named the Mccann’s as arguidos in early September 2007. Soon thereafter, one of the lead Portuguese investigators, Goncalo Amaral, was removed from the case.

Here’s Inspector Amaral’s take on Arul and Katherina’s statements upon discovering their existence after he had been dismissed:

“This witness statement from the couple, S.G. and K.G., is taken by the English police on May 16th, thirteen days after Madeleine’s disappearance. That information, very important for the progress of the investigation, was never sent to the Portuguese police. When the Portuguese investigators learn about similar events that allegedly took place during a holiday in Greece – without, however, obtaining reliable witness statements -, they tell the English police, who, even at this point, refrain from revealing what they know on the subject. 

It will only be after my removal from the investigation, in October 2007, that this statement will finally be sent to the Portuguese police. Why did the British keep it secret for more than six months? It is all the more surprising that David Payne, who had planned the trip to Majorca – of whom it was known that his behaviour towards the children was, to say the least, questionable -, is the same person who organised the holiday to Portugal, that he is one of those closest to Madeleine and that he is the first friend of the family to have been seen with Kate McCann just after the disappearance (we will talk further about this). He was still present in Vila da Luz when the English police received that witness statement: why wasn’t he interviewed immediately? Without doubt, the Portuguese police could have made progress with the investigation thanks to that lead: such behaviour would merit close attention. Were we looking in the right direction? Might we have established a link with the events of May 3rd? It is difficult to seriously doubt these witnesses.” Source: Goncalo Amaral, “The Truth of the Lie” (“Maddie: Averdade Da Mentira”), Chapter 9. Translation by Anna Andress.

We further discuss the three damning statements as “The Payne Incidents” because they all involve Dr. David Payne.

The Payne Incidents

The Mccann’s took an earlier group holiday to Mallorca with a group of friends (alternate sp., Majorca) in 2005. Arul and Katherina joined the Mccann’s group on that trip. Arul and Katherina have a daughter a few months younger than Madeleine. Arul (aka, “Savio”) knew Kate from when they both attended Dundee Medical School. Arul’s wife, Katherina, knew Kate for 11 years through Arul.

A third statement was given to the Portuguese by a woman named Yvonne concerning her interaction with the Mccann’s and David Payne the morning after Madeleine disappeared.

Yvonne is credentialed in Britain to work with endangered and abducted children. She had worked in this capacity for 25 years. She previously worked in the capacity as Social Services Manager for Child Protection in the following locales: Gateshead, Tyne & Wear; Southshields, Tyne & Wear; Newcastle, Tyne & Wear; York, North Yorkshire; Hull, Kingston Upon Hull; North Tyneside, Tyne & Wear; Plymouth, Devon.

Payne Suspected of Paedophilia

Twelve days after Maddie disappeared, a couple revealed the strange behaviour of one of the group’s members. Testimonies only reached the Judiciária in January [2008] this year [authors note, the month and year are incorrect, the Judiciaria logs reflect they received these statements in late October 2007]. David Payne, one of the McCann’s friends that were on holidays in the Algarve on the 3rd of May last year, when Madeleine disappeared, was suspected of paedophile behaviours.

The accusations were brought by a couple of friends that spent their holidays with part of the group in the summer of 2005 – themselves also English doctors. Twelve days after the British girl disappeared, Katherina and Arul could no longer keep the secret that had bothered them for two years and went to the police to make a statement. They revealed two conversations between Dave and Gerry, during which both revealed suspicious behaviour and indicated sex with minors.

According to what CM was able to establish, the depositions were given on the 16th of May. But they only entered the process in January 2008 [author: date given is in error, the statements were logged by the Judiciaria in late October 2007] and are included in the 13th volume of the process files. At that point in time, Kate and Gerry were already arguidos, the rogatory letters had already been issued and the English, including Dave, showed their reluctance in returning to Portugal.

Touching the nipple

Katherina made a statement that was eight pages long. She reported holidays in Mallorca with several English [people], including the McCanns and the Paynes. Two incidents left her with serious doubts about the friends’ behaviour and lead [author: sp., “led”] her to create suspicions that were never confirmed.

The first one happened on a night when Gerry and Dave were talking about Maddie. Katherina does not know what they were saying but she remembers that Dave sucked on his fingers, pushing them into the mouth and pulling them out again, while his other hand traced a circle around the nipple, with a circular movement over the clothes. “That was done in a provocative manner”, recalls Katherina, who says that it stuck to her memory.

Days later, the scene repeated itself. The doctor saw Dave making the same gestures again, while he talked about his own daughter. Scared, Katherina said nothing about the incident. But she took special caution, asking her husband never to let the doctor come close to the bathroom when her daughter was having a bath.

Arul went to the police to tell the same story. Katherina’s companion confirmed the gestures that were made by Dave during the conversation with Gerry but asserted that he wasn’t aware that they were talking about Maddie. He did find the behaviour in extremely bad taste, but didn’t see it being repeated.

The incident ended up forgotten in his memory and it was only the disappearance of Madeleine, who had also been with them on the Mallorca vacation, that revived it.

During the deposition [statement], Katherina went even further and said she had associated the gestures to someone who likes to watch child pornography. “I remember thinking whether he looked at the girls in a different manner”, she concluded.

Friends from school days

Arul and Kate were friends from their school days. They have known each other for approximately 20 years and that was the motive that led the couple to accompany the McCanns on their holidays to Mallorca.

Arul and Katherina did not know Fiona and Dave and they only met again once, during a dinner that gathered several couples. When Maddie disappeared from the Ocean Club, Katherina remembered the incident in Mallorca. And she immediately tried to verify whether Dave had again been accompanying the McCann couple, as the suspicions about his behaviour still stood. In the deposition that was made to the English police, Katherina says she decided to give a statement when she saw the TV images. Dave was among the same holiday group…”

Kate accused of conditioning the case

An intercalary report from the Polícia Judiciária, which was produced immediately before Kate and Gerry were made arguidos, accuses Madeleine’s parents of having conditioned the investigation. The document is signed by an inspector and was directed to Gonçalo Amaral, who was then coordinating the process.

The investigator then stated that the information that had been collected initially, was worked by the group in order to sustain the abduction theory. He guarantees that they all lied to protect themselves and even suggests that some could have been covering the crime up. The testimony from Janne Turner, who guarantees that she saw a man crossing the street with a child in his arms, is also questioned. The policeman said that Janne was only two or three metres away from Gerry but he failed to see the man. And that, by stating that the man was headed towards Murat’s house, she ended up orienting the investigation into a false direction, which led to an unnecessary waste of time.

The same report exposes other contradictions in the English’s depositions. Kate and Gerry say that they picked up their children from the crèche at 5.30 p.m., but while the former guarantees that they went for a half-hour run on the beach and only then returned to the apartment, her husband states that they went to play tennis during that period.

After that, at around 8 p.m., one of the elements [sic, “members”; this would be David Payne] of the group reportedly went to the apartment that had been rented by the couple. Kate says that he was there only for 30 seconds and then left. Gerry speaks about half an hour. The policeman remembers that the time difference is what is needed between asking whether everything is well, or advancing in case a crime has to be concealed…

Parents refused technical help

[Yvonne] works with endangered children and approached the McCanns in the Algarve. Found the behaviour strange. Yvone, who earned credentials from the English government to work in situations that involve endangered children, was in the Algarve when Maddie disappeared but the McCanns refused her help. The specialist told the PJ, during two depositions that were made one month apart from each other, that she approached the couple after the first few hours and that the behaviour from both left her with suspicions about their involvement in the disappearance.

The behaviour of David Payne, who was accused by a couple of doctors that spent holidays with him in 2005, of having attitudes that indiciated paedophile practices, also left Yvone intrigued. The McCanns’ friend had called them aside and advised them not to speak to the technician.

Yvone found another detail strange. David’s face was not unfamiliar to her, and the technician believes he might have been inquired before, within some case of sexual abuse. She tried to remember when but failed to locate moment and the circumstances under which she had met him.

The days went by and Yvone continued to think about the issue. She then sent a letter to the English police, where she pointed out the details that she had perceived. Namely, that the bedroom window had not been forced open, that it was not normal for a couple of doctors to leave their children alone and that Kate had reacted in an aggressive manner when she had approached her. She also alerted to the official statistics, that point towards the majority of these cases to involve a cover-up from the families. Source: Correio da Manhã 19.07.2008, paper edition. Translation by Kazlux and Astro; reposted by http://truthformadeleine.com/2008/07/payne-suspected-of-paedophilia/

According to the Correio da Manha’s report of July 19, 2008, excerpted here, Katherina and Arul were present during one or more conversations between David Payne and Gerry Mccann when they were all on a group vacation in Mallorca in 2005. Both Katherina and Arul considered the conversation and gestures to be highly inappropriate; so inappropriate they made sure to keep Gerry and David away from their own toddler daughter during bath time. The conversation they witnessed involved sexualized remarks and gestures exchanged between David Payne and Gerry Mccann concerning their respective daughters who were also toddlers at the time.

With his statement Arul likely severed forever a 20-year friendship.

When Madeleine disappeared, Yvonne, a British national, was in Portugal not far from Praia da Luz. Upon waking at 7:00 am on May 4, Yvonne heard a broadcast appeal for help on either BBC or Sky News. She thought she might be of assistance. Yvonne was just the person needed in this type of situation. Yvonne departed for Praia da Luz and arrived on scene at about 9:30 am where she located and introduced herself to the Mccann’s and a third person who did not identify himself, but whom she later identified as David Payne.

Yvonne began making inquiries a person with her credentials would make. At one point Kate told Yvonne that a “couple” had taken Madeleine. Yvonne reports that David, Gerry, and Kate became increasingly suspicious and aggressive toward her as she inquired as to the circumstances of Madeleine’s disappearance. Yvonne then offered the Mccann’s her official documents and certifications.

After viewing Yvonne’s documents, the person Yvonne later identified as David Payne separated her from the Mccann’s and informed her they no longer wished to speak with her. Yvonne made a few more inquiries of the Ocean Club resort staff after which she left the scene. Yvonne later offered her statement to the Portuguese Judicial Police.

Recalling this encounter nearly a year later in his April 2008 statement to the Leicestershire police, David Payne said it was the wrong time to have a conversation with someone like Yvonne. And from his perspective, that may have been correct. David may have recognized Yvonne, just as Yvonne seemed to recognize him. According to her statement to the Portuguese, Yvonne

“…thinks that she may have come across him in the course of her work, as a suspect or witness.” (Source: Processos Volume XIII Pages 3425 – 3428, Witness Statement. Date: 2007.06.13, Time: 12H00. Name: YVONE WARREN MARTIN

Yvonne re-contacted the Portuguese police in November 2007. She had followed events in the press, and at one point anonymously contacted British authorities to suggest they search their offenders and abusers database for David Payne’s name.

According to Yvonne’s November 2007 statement to the Portuguese investigators:

“She says that about two weeks after Madeleine’s disappearance, when the police made an appeal for information about a man, carrying a child, who had been seen in the Luz zone, and whose clothing was described, she wrote an anonymous letter to the British police, telling them the following: regarding the various details she observed during her contact with the McCann’s it is her opinion that they could be in some way involved in the disappearance of Madeleine…

She first found them aggressive and their reaction after she showed Madeleine’s parents her credentials, also seemed strange to her. Afterwards she was informed that there were no signs of a break-in in the apartment. Knowing that they are doctors she found it absolutely abnormal that they left their children alone at home. Associating all of this with her professional experience, which tells her that in 99.99 % of missing children cases, the parents or other family members are involved, she felt it was her duty to inform the police of this.

She did this anonymously because she did not want to be bothered by the media… [T]he witness think that the parents and their friends could possibly be involved in the disappearance of the child.

She declares that one of her main aims when she wrote the anonymous letter was for the British police to check the paedophile or child abusers registers and whether David Payne was on that list.” Source:  Witness Statement Date: 2007/11/14, Time: 10H30, Place: DIC Portimao, Name: YVONNE WARREN MARTIN

By then, the Portuguese seemed uninterested. The inspector who took Yvonne’s second statement recommended no follow-up. Yet the Portuguese had logged Arul and Katherina’s damning statements just two weeks earlier. Yvonne’s, statements and those of Arul and Katherina corroborated each other. The lack of follow-through in November 2007 by the Portuguese is stunning and stands in sharp contrast to their posture before Inspector Amaral was sacked.

There is another incident that occurred in the hours before Madeleine vanished involving David Payne and Madeleine’s parents. We know of this incident from statements made by Gerry and Kate to the Portuguese in the weeks after Madeleine vanished, and from David in a statement he gave to the Leicestershire police nearly a year later. We refer to this incident as “The Visit”.

The Visit

David Payne visited the Mccann’s apartment on May 3, 2007 about an hour and a half before the friends began assembling at the tapas bar for the evening. Curiously, the first mention of David’s visit did not occur until May 10, 2007, a week after Madeleine vanished, when Gerry made mention of it. Here’s what Gerry told the Portuguese police:

“David went to visit Kate and the children and returned [to the tennis courts] close to 19H00 [7:00 pm] trying to convince the deponent [Gerry] to continue to play tennis, which he refused.”

Kate gave her version of David’s visit in a statement to the Portuguese on June 6, 2007. It was not until April 2008, nearly a year after Madeleine vanished, that David Payne gave a statement to the Leicestershire police in which he described his visit to the Mccann’s apartment on May 3, 2007. Much of David’s statement to the police was nearly incoherent; he was hesitant, blubbering, stammering and qualifying throughout.

David’s visit to the Mccann’s apartment occurred after he had been observing Gerry in a late-day tennis match. Gerry said he asked David to look in on Kate to see if she needed help with Gerry’s children while he continued to play tennis. David Payne was the last non-family member to see Madeleine before she vanished.

Here’s a composite summary of Gerry, Kate and David’s sworn descriptions of that visit.

• David said he was going back to his room to change into tennis clothes and retrieve his tennis gear.
• Gerry said David was absent for 30 minutes before he returned to the tennis court.
• Gerry said David went to visit Kate and the three Mccann children.
• David wasn’t sure why Gerry asked him to “pop in” on Kate.
• David wasn’t sure if he popped in on Kate before or after going to his own apartment.
• David wasn’t sure if he went to the front door or the patio door of the Mccann’s apartment.
• David said the door to the Mccann’s apartment was open.
• Kate said the door to her apartment was closed but not locked when David arrived.
• David said he “definitely” went two or three steps into the Mccann’s apartment.
• Kate said David did not enter her apartment, remaining on the patio throughout.
• David said he was at the Mccann’s apartment at about 6:30 pm.
• Kate says David was at her apartment at 6:40 pm.
• David said he observed the three Mccann children as immaculate, happy and content.
• David said he was at the Mccann’s apartment for three to five minutes.
• Kate says he was at the apartment for 30 seconds.
• David said that upon leaving the Mccann’s apartment he went to his own apartment to change and retrieve his tennis gear.
• Gerry said David returned to the tennis courts at 7:00 pm.
• David said that upon returning to the tennis courts he joined Gerry in a tennis match with two others.
• Gerry said he left upon David’s return and did not play tennis with David.
• Gerry said he left the tennis court at a bit past 7:30 pm to return to his apartment where he observed Kate and the children playing on the sofa.
• Kate said Gerry returned to their apartment at 7:00 pm.
• Kate said she was “definite” her children were put to bed at 7:15 pm
• Kate said while David was at her apartment she was wrapped in a bath towel, having just stepped out of the shower.
• David says he couldn’t remember what Kate was wearing.

We need only those last two items to conclude that someone is not being fully forthcoming about David’s visit to the Mccann’s apartment in the hours before Madeleine vanished. Kate is not unattractive and David was presumably wearing his glasses.

Despite commenting a dozen or so times about how angelic, happy and content Kate and her children looked, David could not recall Kate was wearing nothing but a bath towel, while (according to him) he spent three to five minutes speaking with her.

There is another problem with David, Gerry and Kate’s relation of The Visit. Let’s hear it from Inspector Amaral:

“There is an entirely different version of that late afternoon, that of Fiona Payne. According to her, Gerry was not playing tennis but was in the apartment with Kate and the children. Apparently, she accompanied her husband when he went to the McCanns’ apartment. Who is telling the truth? The photos taken on the terrace of the Paraiso prove that Fiona, her friends and their children left the restaurant 15 minutes after the men’s departure – one of them David.” Source: Goncalo Amaral, “The Truth of the Lie” (“Maddie: Averdade Da Mentira”), Chapter 109. Translation by Anna Andress.

To Be Continued……

Click here to buy the full eBook book now.

Author: Centinel

Just a guy from the neighborhood. View all posts by Centinel