A huge thank you to Astro from themaddiecasefiles.com for the transcript and translation into English
CMTV “Maddie Special”, May 3rd, 2014
(Gonçalo Amaral is asked for his opinion about the Euclides Monteiro and sexual predator leads)
GA
- It’s been a long time, and a long time during which a story was
built. A story was created from the principle that an abduction took
place while no abduction was proved, nobody has proved that it was an
abduction yet.
So these news come out, these and other news, and this is worth zero.
Is [abduction] a possibility that you are not convinced of?
GA
- It’s been seven years, nobody can prove that there is an abduction,
why there is an abduction. There are important things in the
investigation. When it was reopened, they should have been taken into
account. If what is being done [in the current investigation] is
serious, and I think it is, there are people who – the Portuguese police
at least has many people who are interested in solving the case, or
concerned with it.
They will have to take into account, namely
that group of people, namely – we’re talking about a paedophile here, a
serial predator, all over the Algarve, or from Vilamoura up to that area
[of Luz]. Now they talk about 18 cases, cases that have not been
registered with the police, cases that –
I remember, at that
time, in 2002 there was already great sensitivity towards this kind of
paedophilia situations, even because of the Casa Pia case, in that area
the Joana case, so to state that the police forces seem to have stifled
it and now suddenly these stories appear…
This makes us think, it
makes us think and let’s stop for a moment and let’s look, objectively,
at what is there. And what is there, objectively, is a complaint with
the English police of a British couple that says: there is a gentleman
there, who two years ago committed paedophile acts towards that little
girl that disappeared.
I heard that that gentleman broke into a
few houses and that he lied down besides [the little girls]. And that
this is paedophilia. I ask: those gestures that were made relating to
Madeleine, two years earlier, during the holiday in Mallorca, that are
described in the process and they are, there is a complaint from a
couple of doctors that were friends with this couple, at the British
police, what happened to that?
Deep down, what are we looking for? First, we investigate what is there in the process.
And in fact, that never happened.
Not
even in the first letter rogatory, the only letter rogatory that we
went to England to carry out – no diligences were performed concerning
that situation.
(…)
GA - The conclusions that we reached
did not point to an abduction, they pointed at other things, but not to
an abduction. An accidental death followed by the concealment of a
cadaver. But the investigation was still at a point, it hadn’t reached
the end yet. Therefore only by continuing the investigation, doing a
reconstruction, carrying out more diligences, namely the questioning of
that couple of doctors that complained about that gentleman, doctor
David Payne.
So there’s a series of things that at the moment we
seem to be forgetting, a deal seems to have been made, it gives the idea
that there is a deal out there, we forget about this, now let’s think
about that…
And then it’s all inconsistencies, you’ll notice:
there was the witness statement of a lady, Jane Tanner, who is a friend
of the couple, she was there on holiday, that said “I saw the abductor
carrying the child walking into that direction. He was dressed like
this, and this and that”. And this put at stake – the way she said it
and the location where she said she saw it, where she walked – it put
the very testimony of the child’s father at stake.
What happened?
A
few years later, based on an e-fit that was made upon request from the
couple, by their private detectives, someone is found who says “I still
have the clothes from that time, this is my daughter that I was
carrying, and I even still have – notice this! – I even still have the
little girl’s pyjama, almost four years later. Here’s the little girl’s
pyjama. And I went to pick her up from the Crèche”.
And it’s
said that the crèche was open at half past nine in the evening. It would
just take someone who picks up a phone and calls the crèche and asks at
what time the crèche closed. And why this gentleman appears after all
of this time.
Then it is said: “Now we are going to make a
reconstitution”. The English police makes a reconstitution, with some
actors, and then reaches the conclusion that the important man was the
one that carried at half past nine, who was walking down the street and
was seen by the Smith family. And yes, that one is the important one.
This was said by the Scotland Yard.
But that man doesn’t have a belly. He is not dark, he is not an African.
Why were you removed from the process?
GA
– That is a good question. I know that before I left the investigation,
someone suggested to me that I should let the case go into archiving,
that I shouldn’t worry about the outcome of the investigation.
Who suggested that to you?
GA - It was suggested to me.
In the Judiciary Police?
GA
- Yes, in the Judiciary Police. Then there were statements from me on
the night of the first of October – I remember that on the 2nd, at the
time, the British prime minister, Gordon brown, was in Portugal, it was
the Lisbon Treaty, therefore I remember that day well, even because it
was my birthday.
And I unburdened with a journalist who called
me asking about a sighting in Morocco, and what I said to her is what I
reiterate now: the British police, at that time, was so worried with us
to know, in fact, what the involvement was, if there was involvement
from the parents at all, what was the parents’ responsibility in the
child’s disappearance.
We are not speaking about homicide, we are not speaking of any of that.
In fact, what had happened there, that night? Specifically with that group, and with the parents as main suspects.
And
then when that news appeared that the little girl had been sighted in
Morocco, because there, it was said, there could not be any blonde
girls, but it turned there could, I think she was the daughter of a
Belgian lady. So the English are not that much smarter than we are, or
the Moroccans (…)
GA – What is happening here is as simple as
this. Removing me from the investigation is the first step towards
archiving of the process. And then the process is archived. And then it
was reopened, with what looks like a deal.
I’ve already seen it
written in the papers: “The parents were cleared”. I don’t know, was
there a trial? Why were they cleared? Were the Gaspars investigated, was
everything that is there [in the process] investigated?
Isn’t
it at least strange that 7 years later these parents, if they had
anything to do with the case, continue to search for their daughter will
all means?
GA - Who says that they are searching for
their daughter? What I have analysed, because I have the right to look
at the situation, is that they have always carried out a campaign to
defend themselves, a campaign to sell an image of themselves.
A campaign to collect donations, a campaign that has already allowed them to pay the house that they live in.
A
campaign in which they destroy the lives of a series of people, a
campaign that put employment at the Ocean Club at risk, it led to
unemployment.
A campaign where they don’t care about others.
Deep down, it’s their image. Only that. This is my analysis of the situation and I am entitled to it.
Do you think that Scotland Yard is accessary to that campaign?
GA
– Until Scotland Yard clarifies the mystery within this mystery that is
Mr David Payne, and that situation of the paedophilia complaint – it’s
not someone who goes to burglarise a home and lies down next to – we are
talking about obscene gestures and saying, with words, asking if
Madeleine did certain things, to the father of that child, Mr Gerald
McCann.
Other people saw it, witnesses, who on the 12th of May
denounced it to the English police, who in turn never informed us about
that situation, only in October did a fax arrive concerning that, but
the story has been told.
So, let’s understand what this is about.
If
it’s only the fear that all of them have, that pact may exist, all of
them having abandoned their children, because they did abandon them,
during that week they always left them alone, at their own risk, nothing
more – or if there is more to it.
That is what needs to be
understood, and how far that can cause, within the British society, hat
damages it may cause. I don’t know.
But what motives could Scotland Yard have to go along with that?
GA
– Let’s find out why. Let Scotland Yard come and say why they don’t
investigate. Let them deny that the complaint existed, or let them
confirm that it did exist and why they don’t investigate it.
It’s
seven years later. Seven years later, it’s said that Scotland Yard is
making an appeal, some big appeals, and that people call SY and a call
centre.
We already did that. The Judiciary Police and the English
police, at that time, seven years ago, launched that questionnaire.
They launched a questionnaire, in England a call centre was installed,
people who spent their holiday at the Ocean Club, who spent their
holiday in the Algarve, had the opportunity, seven years ago, to say all
that they could say, to contribute, and nothing was said about it.
Now seven years later these things start appearing.
So
that is the mystery. First the statement of Mrs Jane Tanner was
cleaned, then they tried to clean the Smith family’s statement. That
backfired because on the internet, everywhere, people started saying,
no, but this gentleman here is Gerald McCann, the one in the e-fit that
had been made by those detectives that had left the MI5.
So this is where we are. When you say to me that they are searching for their daughter, I doubt it.
You were removed from the case just as you were about to collect the testimony of this man [Martin Smith].
GA
– It’s true. We had already asked the Police’s National Directory for
permission to bring him to Portugal, so we were taking care of the
traveling, the accommodation. When I return to Faro [after being removed
from the case], my colleague that came afterwards considers that
deposition not to be relevant.
But he still made diligences, I
think there is contact with an Irish liaison officer in Madrid, he is
the one who then brings his statement from England, therefore…
But
after the deposition that this man gave to the English authorities, he
contradicts himself, he is no longer absolutely sure that this man was
Gerry.
GA – That is no contradiction. When he speaks to
us, he says it is that person. When the statements to the British police
appear, 85 or 90% is mentioned, so it’s a probability percentage. The
way that he identifies him is not due to the physiognomy, it’s the way
he walks, the way he holds the child. So in terms of evidence, let’s put
it this way, it would never have great value as evidence.
But in terms of the police work, in the investigation, it’s an argument that is important to understand and to clarify.
Until
someone appears – maybe someday someone appears, someone who says that
he was also fetching his child at that time from the crèche that hands
out the little girls at half past nine or ten in the evening, someone
who also kept the clothes and the similar pyjamas. Maybe there were
children of that age, all wearing the same pyjamas.
Even we had one of those pyjamas, it was bought from the same store, in England, for future comparison.
Is this one of the key moments in the investigation, for you?
GA
– It is important. It’s one of those points that until it is clarified,
we can’t move forward with the abduction theory, because the
description matches the description of Gerald McCann and it matches the
description that Jane Tanner made of the other individual, the one who
allegedly appeared in the meantime.
Nothing was confirmed in Portugal.
Here
in Portugal something interesting is happening, here in Portugal and in
England. Scotland Yard has information from the Portuguese police and
breaks the judicial secrecy, and says a few things there. And everyone
takes it for granted. They take it for granted, it’s the police saying
it, therefore it’s an almost absolute truth. But the question is why.
I’m a policeman.
And I know that some journalists investigate.
And
sometimes I ask myself why nobody asks, why there isn’t one journalist
that says “But is this even possible?”. Why don’t I go and knock on the
crèche’s door, for example, and find out if it is possible, at that
time.
Why don’t I go to the GNR and the PSP and say, my friends,
in 2002 child abuse was already under the jurisdiction of the Judiciary
Police. There had already been the Casa Pia case, you were alert to the
situation, so there was a serial predator on the loose and only SY
knows about it?
And so on.
There are questions that we have to find out why. And why, for example, Mr David Payne, why it doesn’t move forward.
Were mistakes made in the investigation?
GA
- Certainly so. There are mistakes made in all investigations. The
first mistake that was made in this one, and I tell you this easily, was
that we didn’t place this couple under surveillance from the first
moment onward, under phone tapping and so on. The McCann couple.
Because
in such a situation, with children of this age in their care – it was
their duty to guard them, to care for them – they are the first
suspects. This happens anywhere in the world, doesn’t it?
Is this a never ending story?
GA
– It will have an end. I don’t know. Madeleine disappeared, in the
meantime some witnesses are already deceased, others will be deceased in
the future, I don’t know my future, either. This will have an end. We
shall see what happens.
But before the end, and before this
program ends, I want to alert to a situation that is important. The
English like this very much, it’s important. It’s not only indications,
it’s not only the inconsistencies, it’s what they call the scientific
part of the question.
And the scientific part is the hair that
was found in that car. Hair without roots, that the English laboratory
says that from its coloration, it belongs to Madeleine McCann. And that
nothing except for transference between objects could justify [hair]
inside that car trunk where cadaver odour was found.
The
Judiciary Police that has them, they should send them to a laboratory to
be analysed for a DNA profile without the need for hair roots. People
say that there are labs of that kind, so do that now.
We have
been at this for such a long time. Maybe they can spare some money and
we can move forward in the investigation, surely. To the Netherlands or
to Germany, I think there are laboratories there.
CMTV invited the McCann family’s legal representatives and its spokesman to make a statement. The invitations were not accepted.
.png)