Expresso - 06.09. 2008
Scroll down for English translation
Scroll down for English translation
C'est la première
interview accordée par les MC depuis que l'affaire est classée (21 juillet) et
qu'ils ne sont plus témoins assistés. Raquel Moleiro, Tui Gustavo
et Rui Ochoa (photos) sont à Rothley.
Expresso : O que estão a
fazer actualmente para encontrar Madeleine?
Gerald MC : Há vários
meses que temos investigadores privados a trabalhar connosco. Agora
que o caso foi arquivado é mais fácil, porque acedemos ao processo.
Fizemos novas entrevistas a quem já tinha testemunhado. E
entrevistámos outras que vieram ter connosco e que nunca tinham
falado antes.
Kate MC : Como não
sabíamos o que tinha sido feito pela PJ, repetimos tudo o que nos
parecia importante.
GMC : Algumas relatam
avistamentos, mas não é provável que conduzam à nossa filha.
Estamos mais interessados nas pessoas que dão informações
credíveis que podem ser verificadas através de fotografias ou de
outra forma; pessoas que sabem quem possa estar envolvido.
Ils ne croient pas aux signalements sans expliquer pourquoi.
Ils ne croient pas aux signalements sans expliquer pourquoi.
Exp. : Que impressão têm do
processo? Ficaram chocados com o conteúdo
GMC : Fomos
investigados ao mais ínfimo detalhe. Há volumes inteiros sobre nós.
Esses podemos passar à frente. Deve ser informação inquietante,
que não nos vai ajudar a encontrar a Madeleine.
Hélas non !
Exp. : Não acham que foi feito
tudo o que era possível? A investigação chegou à Polónia,
Holanda, Espanha, Marrocos...
GMC : Marrocos é um
bom exemplo do que correu mal. Foi reportado um avistamento e
disse-se que havia câmaras na bomba de gasolina. Quando os
inspectores foram lá concluíram que não havia. A verdade é que
não havia na zona de abastecimento, mas na loja. E quando a PJ
voltou a cassete tinha sido regravada.
KMC : É difícil
descrever como é levarem-nos a nossa filha... Ansiamos por ver acção
em todo o lado. Queríamos holofotes, queríamos helicópteros,
queríamos toda a gente na rua à procura.
Exp. : Se Madeleine tivesse
desaparecido em Inglaterra tinha sido diferente?
GMC : Se tivesse sido
numa cidade britânica, não tenho dúvida. Mas não sei se teria
sido diferente se estivéssemos numa pequena localidade da Escócia.
Claramente, a polícia inglesa tem mais experiência em raptos, está
mais alerta.
“Nada no processo diz
que Madeleine morreu", dizem os McCann
Exp. : Se tiverem uma pista
importante sobre o paradeiro de Madeleine transmitem-na à polícia
portuguesa?
GMC : Se for preciso
fazer algo em Portugal, tem de ser. Não podemos andar a arrombar
portas ou a prender pessoas. Mas só quando sentirmos que sozinhos
não podemos avançar mais.
Exp. : Confiam nas autoridades
portuguesas, depois de serem considerados suspeitos?
GMC : Não nos
importávamos se tivéssemos sido investigados logo no início, se
achassem que isso ajudava. Mas meses depois, quando as provas tinham
sido perdidas? É que uma vez instalada a suspeição, nunca mais
conseguimos provar a inocência.
Exp. : Não acharam estranho que
os cães tenham encontrado vestígios de sangue no vosso quarto e no
carro de aluguer...
GMC : Não foi
encontrado sangue! Os indícios não têm valor sem serem
corroborados por informação forense. E não foram.
Exp. : Foram investigados 40
apartamentos e os cães só sinalizaram o vosso. Dez carros e só
reagiram ao vosso.
GMC : A fragilidade
destes cães foi provada num estudo realizado nos EUA, a propósito
de um homem acusado de homicídio. Tinham dez quartos, e em cada um
colocaram quatro caixas com vegetais, ossos, lixo. Algumas tinham
restos humanos. Ficaram lá dez horas. Oito horas depois de terem
tirado as caixas vieram os cães. E os cães erraram em dois terços
das tentativas. Imaginem a fiabilidade quando estes cães testam um
apartamento três meses depois do desaparecimento de uma criança.
Exp. : Ficaram surpreendidos
quando foram constituídos arguidos?
KMC : Não foi
surpreendente depois de semanas com os "media" a dizerem
que éramos suspeitos. E aí temos de perguntar porque é que a
informação chegou deturpada aos "media". Por que dizem os
jornais que foi encontrado sangue no apartamento quando o relatório
da polícia não o confirma? Por que razão foi dito que o ADN
encontrado no carro tinha uma exactidão de 100% com o de Madeleine?
GMC : De certa forma
gostaríamos de ter sido acusados para nos podermos defender
abertamente. Agora, lendo o processo, não há qualquer prova que
justifique a suspeita, a não ser a acção dos cães. Nunca houve
uma explicação sustentada. E o interrogatório: 'O que é que
aconteceu à Madeleine? Como se livraram dela? Quem vos ajudou? Onde
a puseram?' Só fantasia! Se tivessem encontrado ADN - e depois? E se
a Madeleine se tivesse magoado no apartamento - por que razão tinha
de ser nossa culpa?
Exp. : Investigam informações
que apontem para a morte de Madeleine?
KMC : Queremos
encontrá-la viva, mas se estiver morta queremos saber.
O casal continua a usar as pulseiras amarelas, símbolo da sua busca por Maddie
Exp. : Ainda acreditam que está
viva?
KMC : Há grandes
hipóteses de estar viva, não é? Não há nada no processo que
indicie que algo de mau lhe aconteceu...
Exp. : Mas também não há
indícios de que tenha sido raptada.
GMC : Acreditamos
firmemente que ela foi raptada por um homem, minutos depois de eu a
ter ido ver ao quarto. Há duas testemunhas independentes que viram
uma criança com cerca de quatro anos a ser transportada naquela
noite. A nossa amiga Jane Tanner viu e a família Smith também.
Exp. : A PJ desacredita o testemunho de Jane Tanner. Diz que quando ela viu o dito homem com a criança, o Gerry estava a conversar nas imediações e era impossível que não tivesse visto também...
GMC : Eu não a vi foi
porque estava de costas para o local por onde ela passou. Estava a
falar com um amigo. E há também o casal com as crianças que viu um
homem a levar uma criança com um pijama semelhante ao de Madeleine,
cabelo louro, da mesma idade.
Pas "un couple avec enfants", mais une famille de 9 individus, dont 4 adultes, 2 adolescents et 3 enfants.
Avait-il déjà reçu et caché les portraits-robots ?
Pas "un couple avec enfants", mais une famille de 9 individus, dont 4 adultes, 2 adolescents et 3 enfants.
Avait-il déjà reçu et caché les portraits-robots ?
Exp. : Mais tarde essa família
afirmou que o homem que tinham visto era o Gerry...
GMC : A essa hora eu
estava no restaurante. O facto de nos termos tornado suspeitos terá
influenciado o testemunho dos Smith.
Exp. : Foi uma coincidência
terem sido constituídos arguidos num dia e terem regressado a casa
no seguinte?
GMC : Interrogaram-nos
nesse dia porque a PJ sabia do nosso regresso.
KMC : Obviamente. A
certa altura não sabíamos bem o que podia acontecer.
GMC : Pela informação
nos jornais, é claro que tivemos medo. Foi assustador.
Exp. : Estando em Inglaterra já
não seriam extraditados.
GMC : Nós perguntámos
ao inspector encarregue do caso se tinha alguma objecção: a
resposta foi não. É claro que receámos que as pessoas pudessem
pensar que estávamos a fugir, mas era melhor não estar em Portugal
naquela altura.
Exp. : Porquê?
KMC : Por causa do
ambiente hostil. Nem podíamos sair de casa.
Exp. : Porque é que, durante o
interrogatório, a Kate recusou responder a perguntas que no dia
seguinte Gerry aceitou esclarecer?
KMC : Fui aconselhada
pelo meu advogado português a não responder.
GMC : Eu recebi o mesmo
conselho mas decidi desobedecer. O meu plano era ficar calado, mas a
primeira pergunta foi: está envolvido no desaparecimento da sua
filha? Era um disparate e decidi responder. A partir daí respondi a
todas.
Cette réponse n'a pas de sens. Il a reçu le conseil de se taire, mais a décidé de ne pas obéir. Puis il dit que son plan était de ne pas répondre (son plan ou le conseil ?), mais que la première question étant absurde (êtes-vous impliqué dans la disparition de votre fille), il a décidé de répondre (il n'a donc finalement pas "décidé de désobéir"). Enfin comme il a répondu à la première, il répondra à toutes les questions. Pourquoi ?
Cette réponse n'a pas de sens. Il a reçu le conseil de se taire, mais a décidé de ne pas obéir. Puis il dit que son plan était de ne pas répondre (son plan ou le conseil ?), mais que la première question étant absurde (êtes-vous impliqué dans la disparition de votre fille), il a décidé de répondre (il n'a donc finalement pas "décidé de désobéir"). Enfin comme il a répondu à la première, il répondra à toutes les questions. Pourquoi ?
Exp. : Por que razão não
autorizaram que a polícia visse as mensagens que mandou e recebeu no
telemóvel na véspera do desaparecimento de Maddie.
GMC : Ninguém pediu
para ver as minhas mensagens. Na véspera e no dia do desaparecimento
não recebi nem mandei 16 mensagens. Mal sabia escrever sms. Recebi
umas três ou quatro chamadas e duas foram do trabalho. Depois do
desaparecimento recebi centenas. E quando a polícia me pediu o
registo disse-lhes para pedirem à operadora. O meu telefone só
regista as últimas dez.
Il joue celui qui tout juste sait répondre quand on l'appelle... Mais il a su effacer tous les messages et appels...
Il joue celui qui tout juste sait répondre quand on l'appelle... Mais il a su effacer tous les messages et appels...
Exp. : O inspector-chefe do
caso, Tavares de Almeida, escreve um relatório onde diz que os
vossos amigos mentiram para vos salvar, que a Maddie morreu na sala,
e que vocês esconderam o corpo.
GMC : O que é que
podemos dizer? Terá de perguntar aos responsáveis da polícia
porque é que escreveram isso, porque é que nos viram como
suspeitos.
Exp. : A maioria dos crimes onde
as vítimas são crianças são cometidos pelos pais.
GMC : Não no caso de
crianças raptadas. E este é o caso de uma criança raptada. É um
caso excepcional.
Mais qui a dit que sa fille avait été enlevée ? Lui, bien qu'il n'y ait absolument aucune preuve.
Exp. : Ao arquivar, o procurador
diz que a investigação pode ser reaberta caso apareça uma nova
pista. Acham possível?
KMC : Claro! Pode
acontecer a qualquer momento. Basta que uma pessoa faça o telefonema
que tanto esperamos. Sabemos que ela foi raptada em Portugal e
acreditamos veementemente que alguém saiba ou suspeite de alguma
coisa.
Exp. : O ex-inspector Gonçalo
Amaral continua convicto do vosso envolvimento no desaparecimento de
Madeleine. Leram 'A Verdade da Mentira', o livro que ele escreveu?
Kate e Gerry -: Não.KMC : Porque leria?
GMC : Não vou aprender nada ao lê-lo.
Qu'en sait-il s'il n'en a même pas lu quelques pages ?
Exp. : Em Portugal, foi um
sucesso.
GMC : Foi? Vendeu
quantas cópias?
Exp. : Cerca de 200 mil. Na
próxima semana é editado em Espanha.
GMC : É o que se pode
chamar enriquecimento ilícito.
Exp. : Os vossos advogados
ingleses já têm uma cópia traduzida e estão a analisá-la.
Tencionam processar judicialmente Gonçalo Amaral?
GMC : Neste momento
estamos focados naquilo que podemos fazer para encontrar Madeleine e
não em processar seja quem for.
KMC : Tudo o que vou
dizer sobre isto - porque não vou perder tempo com o sr. Amaral - é
que como profissional e como pessoa o seu comportamento tem sido uma
vergonha.
Exp. : Não têm curiosidade em
saber o que diz o livro?
KMC : Para quê? Deve
ser só um monte de disparates. É tão secundário... Não vai,
certamente, ajudar a encontrar a nossa filha. Serve-me de consolo que
na capa chama-lhe Maddie, o nome que a comunicação social inventou.
Nós nunca lhe chamámos tal coisa.
Exp. : Mas conhecem a teoria que
Gonçalo Amaral defende: Maddie morreu, acidentalmente, no
apartamento do The Ocean Club e vocês ocultaram o corpo.
GMC : É mesmo uma
perda de tempo. E nós precisamos de todo o tempo possível para
analisar os documentos da investigação, que têm imensa informação
que desconhecíamos.
KMC : Basta cruzar, por
alto, a teoria dele com o processo para perceber que os factos que
relata estão incorrectos.
C'est absolument faux et a été déclaré tel par la juge de première instance. Il n'y a rien dans le livre de GA qui ne soit dans les PJFiles.
C'est absolument faux et a été déclaré tel par la juge de première instance. Il n'y a rien dans le livre de GA qui ne soit dans les PJFiles.
Exp. : Há uma tese que defende
que o coordenador foi afastado da investigação por pressões
políticas britânicas.
GMC : Quem é que o demitiu?
GMC : Quem é que o demitiu?
Exp. : O director nacional da
PJ.
GMC : Então, tem de
lhe perguntar se foi pressionado. Ou se o Gordon Brown discutiu o
caso com ele. De certeza que não.
Exp. : Também se demitiu. E muito por acção deste processo.
GMC : Não foi o que me
constou. Aparentemente tinha uma visão diferente do ministro da
Justiça sobre a própria polícia.
Exp. : Em última análise ambos
saíram da PJ porque a investigação falhou.
GMC : Não é culpa
nossa. Eu não critico as autoridades por não terem tentado
encontrar a Madeleine. Já não interessa. Agora só nos importa
fazermos tudo para a tentar encontrar, pelos nossos meios.
Quel culot !
Quel culot !
Exp. : Chegaram a conhecer
Gonçalo Amaral?
KMC : A pergunta é ao contrário: ele chegou a conhecer-nos?
KMC : A pergunta é ao contrário: ele chegou a conhecer-nos?
Exp. : Como mudou a vossa vida com o desaparecimento da Madeleine?
GMC : Independentemente
do que venha a acontecer, nunca mais será a mesma. Se falarem com
outros pais de crianças raptadas, eles também referem esta vida
paralela em que entrámos. O Sean e a Amelie, por serem tão
pequenos, obrigam-nos a incutir uma certa normalidade na nossa vida,
a fazê-la normal por eles. E são eles que, por instantes, a tornam
normal para nós. Mas para nós nunca será normal. Eles têm três
anos e meio e são muito, muito felizes.
Exp. : Explicaram aos gémeos o que aconteceu à irmã?
KMC : Eles apercebem-se
perfeitamente da ausência de Madeleine. Não tenho qualquer dúvida.
Mas não sabem pormenores. Sabem que desapareceu e que estamos à
procura dela.
GMC : Fomos
aconselhados sobre o que devíamos dizer-lhes, como e quando. Maiores
explicações estão guardadas para mais tarde. Percebemos que sentem
a falta da irmã mais velha. Sabem que não é uma coisa boa ela não
estar connosco, e têm esperança de que volte.
Exp. : Como é que mantêm a
Madeleine presente nas vossas vidas?
KMC : Há fotografias
dela por toda a casa. E todos os dias falamos com os gémeos sobre
ela - é uma parte importante da vida deles. O Sean e a Amelie falam
dela e ainda a incluem nas suas brincadeiras... Se recebem doces,
dizem "Vamos guardar um para a Madeleine". Ou "Quando
ela chegar a casa vou dar-lhe isto ou aquilo". É ternurento e
torna os nossos dias menos difíceis.
Exp. : Temeram ficar sem a custódia do Sean e da Amelie por terem tido um comportamento apontado como negligente?
GMC : Não fomos
negligentes, fizemos o que qualquer pai razoável faria. Mas
lamentamos profundamente o que aconteceu, porque alguém viu na nossa
actuação uma oportunidade para levar Madeleine. Eu sou uma pessoa
optimista. Nunca pensaria que uma coisa destas pudesse acontecer.
Exp. : Mudaram a maneira de
lidar com o Sean e a Amelie?
GMC : Somos mais
protectores e menos confiantes. Não voltámos a deixar os nossos
filhos sozinhos e muitas famílias não mais o farão por causa de
nós.
Sous-entendu "grâce à eux".
Sous-entendu "grâce à eux".
KMC : Agora pensamos em
tudo o que pode acontecer, em predadores, raptores. No "shopping"
nem os largamos.
Detalhes de duas horas de
conversa
Kate e Gerry estão
diferentes. Mais descontraídos, ou conformados. É difícil
perceber. "Os gémeos obrigam-nos a uma certa normalidade",
explica a mãe. Passaram 16 meses e o mistério do desaparecimento de
Madeleine McCann continua por esclarecer.
Os pais já foram vítimas
de uma tragédia e suspeitos de um crime terrível. O processo foi
arquivado, mas são julgados todos os dias. Gerry concorda: "A
partir do momento em que se instala a suspeição, nunca mais
conseguimos provar a inocência".
Mais ils n'ont pas essayé ! Cf. l'esquive de la reconstitution.
Mais ils n'ont pas essayé ! Cf. l'esquive de la reconstitution.
Exp. : Quanto gastaram, até
agora, na investigação privada?
GMC : Cerca de um
milhão de libras, nos últimos dez meses, pagos com dinheiro do
fundo FindMadeleine. Na nossa defesa também foi gasta uma soma
substancial, mas dois benfeitores asseguraram a despesa, o que
significa que o fundo só foi usado na procura da nossa filha.
Exp. : Mantêm a oferta de 2,5 milhões de libras a quem encontrar Madeleine?
GMC : Não controlamos
essa recompensa, mas tudo me leva a crer que se mantém. E que haverá
também dinheiro disponível para quem forneça informações
credíveis
KMC : É muito dinheiro,
mas não podemos estabelecer limites, uma criança não tem preço.
Pagamos o que tiver que ser.
Exp. : Ainda há dinheiro no
fundo?
GMC : Ainda resta algum
dinheiro. Recentemente, os jornais britânicos ('Express newspapers')
pagaram-nos uma indemnização de 550 mil libras, que alimentou o
fundo. Isso teve um impacto importante. E continua a haver doações,
pessoas que enviam dinheiro directamente.
Exp. : Mas menos do que no
início, antes de serem constituídos arguidos.
GMC : Claro! Quem ficou
com dúvidas deixou de contribuir. Muitos escrevem-nos a pedir
desculpa por terem acreditado na nossa culpa. Sabemos que temos que
nos esforçar para que as pessoas saibam que não há provas de que
Madeleine está morta e que nós não estivemos envolvidos no
desaparecimento.
Artigo publicado na
edição impressa do Expresso de 6 de Setembro de 2008, 1º Caderno,
páginas 24, 25 e 26.
English Translation
Maddie case: In their first interview since they quit being suspects in the disappearance of their daughter, Kate and Gerry McCann spoke about the re-launch of the investigation, the fear that they felt in Portugal and the unshakable certainty that Madeleine was abducted
“Nothing in the process says that Madeleine has died”
Q – What are you presently doing to find Madeleine?
Gerry – We have had private investigators working with us for several months. Now that the case has been archived, it’s easier because we accessed the process. We carried out new interviews with those that had already testified. And we interviewed others who approached us and had never spoken before.
Kate – As we didn’t know what the PJ had done, we repeated everything that seemed important to us.
Q – Do the new witnesses offer clues about the disappearance?
Gerry – Some report sightings, but it’s not likely that they lead to our daughter. We are more interested in persons that offer credible information that can be verified through photographs or in another form; persons who know who may be involved.
Q – What impression did you get from the process? Were you shocked over its contents?
Gerry – We were investigated into the smallest detail. There are entire volumes about us. We can jump those. It must be disquieting information that will not help us to find Madeleine.
Q – Don’t you think that everything that was possible to do, was done? The investigation reached Poland, the Netherlands, Spain, Morocco…
Gerry – Morocco is a good example of what went wrong. A sighting was reported and it was said that there were cameras at the petrol station. When the inspectors went there, they concluded that there were none. The truth is that there were none in the pump area, but in the shop. And when the PJ returned, the tape had been recorded over.
Kate – It’s difficult to describe how it feels to have our daughter taken away… We want to see action everywhere. We wanted spotlights, we wanted helicopters, we wanted everyone on the street, searching.
Q – If Madeleine had disappeared in England, would things have been different?
Gerry – If it had happened in a British city, I have no doubts. But I don’t know if it would have been different if we had been in a small village in Scotland. Clearly, the English police are more experienced in abductions, they are more alert.
Q – If you have an important clue concerning Madeleine’s whereabouts, will you transmit it to the Portuguese police?
Gerry – If something needs to be done in Portugal, we’ll have to. We cannot go around breaking doors down or arresting people. But only when we feel that we cannot advance any further on our own.
Q – Do you trust the Portuguese authorities, after having been considered suspects?
Gerry – We wouldn’t mind if we had been investigated at the beginning, if they thought that could help. But months later, when the evidence had been lost? It’s that once the suspicion is installed, we can never prove our innocence again.
Q – Didn’t you find it strange that the dogs found traces of blood in your room and in your rental car…
Gerry – There was no blood found! The indicia are worthless if they are not corroborated by forensic information. And they were not.
Q – 40 apartments were investigated and the dogs only marked yours. Ten cars and they only reacted to yours.
Gerry – These dogs’ frailty was proved by a study that was carried out in the USA, in the case of a man that had been accused of murder. They had ten rooms, and in each room four boxes were placed, containing vegetables, bones, trash. Some contained human remains. They stayed there for ten hours. Eight hours after the boxes were removed, the dogs came in. And the dogs failed two thirds of the attempts. Imagine the reliability when these dogs test an apartment three months after the disappearance of a child.
Q – Were you surprised when you were made arguidos?
Kate – It was not surprising after weeks with the media saying that we were suspects. And there we have to ask why the information that reached the media was disfigured. Why do the newspapers say that blood was found in the apartment when the police report does not confirm it? Why was it said that the DNA that was found in the car was a 100% match with Madeleine’s?
Gerry – In a way, we would like to have been accused so we could defend ourselves openly. Now, reading the process, there is no evidence that justifies the suspicion, apart from the dogs’ action. There was never a sustained explanation. And the questioning: ‘What happened to Madeleine? How did you get rid of her? Who helped you? Where did you put her? All fantasy! If they had found DNA – so what? And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment – why would that be our fault?
Q – Do you investigate information that point towards Madeleine’s death?
Kate – We want to find her alive, but if she is dead we want to know.
Q – Do you still believe that she’s alive?
Kate – There are great possibilities that she is alive, isn’t it? There is nothing in the process to indicate that something bad has happened to her…
Q – But there are no indicia that she has been abducted, either.
Gerry – We firmly believe that she was abducted by a man, minutes after I went to see her in the bedroom. There are two independent witnesses that saw a child of around four years of age being carried that evening. Our friend Jane Tanner and also the Smith family.
Q – The PJ discredits Jane Tanner’s testimony. They say that when she saw said man with the child, you [Gerry] were chatting nearby and it was impossible that you hadn’t seen him as well…
Gerry – I didn’t see her because my back was turned to the location where she passed. I was talking to a friend. And there is also the couple with children that saw a man carrying a child with a pyjama that was similar to Madeleine’s, blond hair, the same age.
Q – Later on, that family stated that the man they saw was Gerry…
Gerry – At that time I was at the restaurant. The fact that we became suspects has probably influenced the Smiths’ testimony.
Q – Was it a coincidence that you were made arguidos on one day and returned home the next day?
Gerry – They questioned us on that day because the PJ knew about our return.
Q – Were you afraid of being arrested?
Kate – Obviously. At a certain point we didn’t know very well what could happen.
Gerry – From the information in the newspapers, of course we were afraid. It was scary.
Q – Being in England, you would not be extradited anymore.
Gerry – We asked the inspector that was in charge of the case of he had any objection: the answer was no. It’s obvious that we were afraid that people might think we were escaping, but it was better not to be in Portugal at that point in time.
Q – Why?
Kate – Because of the hostile environment. We couldn’t even leave the house.
Q – Why did Kate refuse to answer questions during your interrogation, that Gerry accepted to clarify the next day?
Kate – I was advised by my Portuguese lawyer not to reply.
Gerry – I received the same advice but decided to disobey. My plan was to remain silent, but the first question was: are you involved in your daughter’s disappearance? It was nonsense and I decided to answer. From there onwards, I replied to all of them.
Q – Why didn’t you authorize the police to see the messages that you sent and received on your mobile phone on the eve of Maddie’s disappearance.
Gerry – Nobody asked to see my messages. On the day before and on the day of the disappearance I did not receive or send 16 messages. I could hardly write a text message. I received three or four phone calls and two were from work. After the disappearance I received hundreds. And when the police asked me for the registry, I told them to ask the service provider. My phone only registers the last ten.
Q – The chief inspector in the case, Tavares de Almeida, writes a report where he says that your friends lied to save you, that Maddie died in the living room, and that you hid the body.
Gerry – What can we say? You will have to ask the police chiefs why they wrote that, why they saw us as suspects.
Q – The majority of crimes where the victims are children are committed by the parents.
Gerry – Not in the case of abducted children. And this is a case of an abducted child. It’s an exceptional case.
Q – When he archived the case, the prosecutor said that the investigation can be reopened if a new clue appears. Do you think that is possible?
Kate – Of course! It could happen at any moment. All that it takes is for one person to make the phone call that we wait for so much. We know that she was abducted in Portugal and we vehemently believe that someone knows or suspects something.
“Mr Amaral’s behaviour is a disgrace”
They have not read the book that is a best-seller in Portugal. And they don’t spare the author and former PJ inspector
Q – Former inspector Gonçalo Amaral remains convinced of your involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance. Did you read ‘The Truth of the Lie’, the book that he wrote?
Kate and Gerry – No.
Kate – Why would I?
Gerry – I won’t learn anything from reading it.
Q – It was a success in Portugal.
Gerry – Was it? How many copies did it sell?
Q – Approximately 200 thousand. Next week, it is edited in Spain.
Gerry – That is what can be called illicit enrichment.
Q – Your English lawyers already have a translated copy and they are analyzing it. Do you intend to sue Gonçalo Amaral?
Gerry – At this moment we are focused on what we can do to find Madeleine and not in suing anyone.
Kate – All that I am going to say about this – because I’m not going to waste any time on Mr Amaral – is that as a professional and as a person his behaviour has been a disgrace.
Q – Aren’t you curious to know what the book says?
Kate – What for? It must be nothing but a load of rubbish. It is so secondary… It certainly won’t help to find our daughter. My consolation is that on the cover he calls her Maddie, the name that the media have invented. We never called her anything like that.
Q – But you do know the theory that Gonçalo Amaral defends: Madeleine accidentally died in the Ocean Club apartment and you concealed the body.
Gerry – It really is a waste of time. And we need all the time that we can get to analyze the investigation’s documents, which contain a lot of information that we didn’t know about.
Kate – You just have to cross, loosely, his theory with the process in order to understand that the facts that he reports are not correct.
Q – There is a theory that defends that the coordinator was removed from the investigation due to British political pressure.
Gerry – Who dismissed him?
Q – The PJ’s national director.
Gerry – Then you have to ask him if he was pressured. Or if Gordon Brown discussed the case with him. He surely didn’t.
Q – He also resigned. And largely due to this process.
Gerry – That was not what I was told. Apparently he had a vision of the police itself that was different from the one held by the Justice Minister.
Q – In a final analysis, they both left the PJ because the investigation failed.
Gerry – That’s not our fault. I do not criticize the authorities over not trying to find Madeleine. It doesn’t matter anymore. Now all that matters is that we do everything to try to find her, through our own methods.
Q – Did you ever get to know Gonçalo Amaral?
Kate – The question is the other way around: did he get to know us?
There are photographs of her all over the house
Gerry has returned to his work as a cardiologist. Kate did not exercise medicine again. Twins Sean and Amelie fill up her days as a mother.
Q – How has your life changed with the disappearance of Madeleine?
Gerry – Independently of what happens, it will never be the same again. If you talk to the parents of other abducted children, they also mention this parallel life which we entered. Sean and Amelie, being so young, force us to introduce a certain normalcy in our lives, to make it normal for them. And it’s them who, for moments, make it normal for us. But it will never be normal for us. They are aged three and a half, and they are very, very happy.
Q – Did you explain to the twins what happened to their sister?
Kate – They perceive Madeleine’s absence perfectly. I have no doubt whatsoever. But they don’t know the details. They know that she disappeared and that we’re looking for her.
Gerry – We were advised concerning what we should tell them, how and when. Larger explanations are kept for later. We realize that they miss their older sister. They know that her not being with us is not a good thing, and they hope that she returns.
Q – How do you keep Madeleine present in your lives?
Kate – There are photographs of her all over the house. And we speak about her with the twins every day – it’s an important part of their lives. Sean and Amelie talk about her and still include her in their playing… If they receive sweets, they say “Let’s keep one for Madeleine”. Or “When she comes home I’ll give her this or that”. It’s endearing and it makes our days less difficult.
Q – Did you fear that you might lose custody over Sean and Amelie because your behaviour was considered to be negligent?
Gerry – We were not negligent, we did what any reasonable parent would do. But we deeply lament what happened, because in our action, someone saw an opportunity to take Madeleine. I’m an optimist person. I never thought that something like this could happen.
Q – Did you change the manner in which you deal with Sean and Amelie?
Gerry – We are more protective and less trusting. We never left our children alone again and many families will never do so again because of us.
Kate – Now we think about everything that can happen, about predators, abductors. We don’t even let go of them in the shopping centre.
€1.200.000
The McCanns say that the fund has spent €1.2 million with the private investigation. But the reward of €3 million still stands
Q – How much have you spent on the private investigation so far?
Gerry – Approximately one million pounds, over the past ten months, paid with money from the FindMadeleine fund. A substantial sum was also spent on our defence, but two benefactors have covered that expense, which means that the fund was solely used in the search for our daughter.
Q – Do you maintain the offer of 2.5 million ponds to whoever finds Madeleine?
Gerry – We do not control that reward, but everything leads me to believe that it still stands. And that there will also be money available for whoever supplies credible information.
Kate – It’s a lot of money, but we cannot set limits, a child is priceless. We’ll pay whatever is necessary.
Q – Is there still money left in the fund?
Gerry – There is still some money left. Recently, British newspapers (‘Express newspapers’) paid us a compensation of 550 thousand pounds, which fed the fund. That had an important impact. And there are still donations, people who send money directly.
Q – But less than in the beginning, before you were made arguidos.
Gerry – Of course! Those who were in doubt stopped contributing. Many write to us asking for forgiveness because they believed in our guilt. We know that we have to make an effort for people to know that there is no evidence that Madeleine is dead and that we were not involved in the disappearance.
Other issues
Dogs – “We read everything that we found about these dogs that detect cadavers. It was due to them that we became suspects”
Clues – “The sightings continue. Since May we received one thousand phone calls and an equal number of emails, some containing relevant data”
Media exposure – “Appearing in the media was never good. We did it to publicize Madeleine’s face and to find her. We failed”
Background
Details of two hours of conversation
Kate and Gerry are different. More relaxed, or conformed. It is difficult to tell. “The twins force us to a certain normalcy”, the mother explains. It’s been 16 months and the mystery of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann remains unsolved.
The parents have already been victims of a tragedy and suspects of a terrible crime. The process was archived, but they are judged every day. Gerry agrees: “From the moment when the suspicion is installed, we can never prove our innocence”.
This is the first interview since the process was archived, on the 21st of July. It is scheduled in Rothley, a small village in the British Midlands where nobody suspects the McCanns’ guilt. Even less the owner of the Court House Hotel, which is installed in a medieval building and where the interview is held, in the late afternoon last Monday. There is tea with milk and biscuits. There is no guide and there are no forbidden questions.
In almost two hours of interview, Kate and Gerry, both 40, clearly state the intention that supports their availability for the conversation. “We believe that in Portugal someone knows about Madeleine, that it is where the solution for our daughter’s disappearance lies”. And they want that person, whether singular or collective, to know that they search for him, that they ensure his anonymity and that they even give him 2.5 million pounds if he tells them where Madeleine is.
Every day, in their very British house of little bricks, they study a little more of the process of the Polícia Judiciária’s investigation, which they personally consult as it is being translated. They understand “nothing” of Portuguese. From a first reading they reinforced their hope of finding Maddie alive. Nothing tells them that she is dead. The volumes about themselves, from the time when they were made arguidos, have been put aside. “We do not intend to read them”.
They remind them of the days when they were afraid of being arrested in Portugal, accused of Madeleine’s death.
Maddie case: In their first interview since they quit being suspects in the disappearance of their daughter, Kate and Gerry McCann spoke about the re-launch of the investigation, the fear that they felt in Portugal and the unshakable certainty that Madeleine was abducted
“Nothing in the process says that Madeleine has died”
Q – What are you presently doing to find Madeleine?
Gerry – We have had private investigators working with us for several months. Now that the case has been archived, it’s easier because we accessed the process. We carried out new interviews with those that had already testified. And we interviewed others who approached us and had never spoken before.
Kate – As we didn’t know what the PJ had done, we repeated everything that seemed important to us.
Q – Do the new witnesses offer clues about the disappearance?
Gerry – Some report sightings, but it’s not likely that they lead to our daughter. We are more interested in persons that offer credible information that can be verified through photographs or in another form; persons who know who may be involved.
Q – What impression did you get from the process? Were you shocked over its contents?
Gerry – We were investigated into the smallest detail. There are entire volumes about us. We can jump those. It must be disquieting information that will not help us to find Madeleine.
Q – Don’t you think that everything that was possible to do, was done? The investigation reached Poland, the Netherlands, Spain, Morocco…
Gerry – Morocco is a good example of what went wrong. A sighting was reported and it was said that there were cameras at the petrol station. When the inspectors went there, they concluded that there were none. The truth is that there were none in the pump area, but in the shop. And when the PJ returned, the tape had been recorded over.
Kate – It’s difficult to describe how it feels to have our daughter taken away… We want to see action everywhere. We wanted spotlights, we wanted helicopters, we wanted everyone on the street, searching.
Q – If Madeleine had disappeared in England, would things have been different?
Gerry – If it had happened in a British city, I have no doubts. But I don’t know if it would have been different if we had been in a small village in Scotland. Clearly, the English police are more experienced in abductions, they are more alert.
Q – If you have an important clue concerning Madeleine’s whereabouts, will you transmit it to the Portuguese police?
Gerry – If something needs to be done in Portugal, we’ll have to. We cannot go around breaking doors down or arresting people. But only when we feel that we cannot advance any further on our own.
Q – Do you trust the Portuguese authorities, after having been considered suspects?
Gerry – We wouldn’t mind if we had been investigated at the beginning, if they thought that could help. But months later, when the evidence had been lost? It’s that once the suspicion is installed, we can never prove our innocence again.
Q – Didn’t you find it strange that the dogs found traces of blood in your room and in your rental car…
Gerry – There was no blood found! The indicia are worthless if they are not corroborated by forensic information. And they were not.
Q – 40 apartments were investigated and the dogs only marked yours. Ten cars and they only reacted to yours.
Gerry – These dogs’ frailty was proved by a study that was carried out in the USA, in the case of a man that had been accused of murder. They had ten rooms, and in each room four boxes were placed, containing vegetables, bones, trash. Some contained human remains. They stayed there for ten hours. Eight hours after the boxes were removed, the dogs came in. And the dogs failed two thirds of the attempts. Imagine the reliability when these dogs test an apartment three months after the disappearance of a child.
Q – Were you surprised when you were made arguidos?
Kate – It was not surprising after weeks with the media saying that we were suspects. And there we have to ask why the information that reached the media was disfigured. Why do the newspapers say that blood was found in the apartment when the police report does not confirm it? Why was it said that the DNA that was found in the car was a 100% match with Madeleine’s?
Gerry – In a way, we would like to have been accused so we could defend ourselves openly. Now, reading the process, there is no evidence that justifies the suspicion, apart from the dogs’ action. There was never a sustained explanation. And the questioning: ‘What happened to Madeleine? How did you get rid of her? Who helped you? Where did you put her? All fantasy! If they had found DNA – so what? And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment – why would that be our fault?
Q – Do you investigate information that point towards Madeleine’s death?
Kate – We want to find her alive, but if she is dead we want to know.
Q – Do you still believe that she’s alive?
Kate – There are great possibilities that she is alive, isn’t it? There is nothing in the process to indicate that something bad has happened to her…
Q – But there are no indicia that she has been abducted, either.
Gerry – We firmly believe that she was abducted by a man, minutes after I went to see her in the bedroom. There are two independent witnesses that saw a child of around four years of age being carried that evening. Our friend Jane Tanner and also the Smith family.
Q – The PJ discredits Jane Tanner’s testimony. They say that when she saw said man with the child, you [Gerry] were chatting nearby and it was impossible that you hadn’t seen him as well…
Gerry – I didn’t see her because my back was turned to the location where she passed. I was talking to a friend. And there is also the couple with children that saw a man carrying a child with a pyjama that was similar to Madeleine’s, blond hair, the same age.
Q – Later on, that family stated that the man they saw was Gerry…
Gerry – At that time I was at the restaurant. The fact that we became suspects has probably influenced the Smiths’ testimony.
Q – Was it a coincidence that you were made arguidos on one day and returned home the next day?
Gerry – They questioned us on that day because the PJ knew about our return.
Q – Were you afraid of being arrested?
Kate – Obviously. At a certain point we didn’t know very well what could happen.
Gerry – From the information in the newspapers, of course we were afraid. It was scary.
Q – Being in England, you would not be extradited anymore.
Gerry – We asked the inspector that was in charge of the case of he had any objection: the answer was no. It’s obvious that we were afraid that people might think we were escaping, but it was better not to be in Portugal at that point in time.
Q – Why?
Kate – Because of the hostile environment. We couldn’t even leave the house.
Q – Why did Kate refuse to answer questions during your interrogation, that Gerry accepted to clarify the next day?
Kate – I was advised by my Portuguese lawyer not to reply.
Gerry – I received the same advice but decided to disobey. My plan was to remain silent, but the first question was: are you involved in your daughter’s disappearance? It was nonsense and I decided to answer. From there onwards, I replied to all of them.
Q – Why didn’t you authorize the police to see the messages that you sent and received on your mobile phone on the eve of Maddie’s disappearance.
Gerry – Nobody asked to see my messages. On the day before and on the day of the disappearance I did not receive or send 16 messages. I could hardly write a text message. I received three or four phone calls and two were from work. After the disappearance I received hundreds. And when the police asked me for the registry, I told them to ask the service provider. My phone only registers the last ten.
Q – The chief inspector in the case, Tavares de Almeida, writes a report where he says that your friends lied to save you, that Maddie died in the living room, and that you hid the body.
Gerry – What can we say? You will have to ask the police chiefs why they wrote that, why they saw us as suspects.
Q – The majority of crimes where the victims are children are committed by the parents.
Gerry – Not in the case of abducted children. And this is a case of an abducted child. It’s an exceptional case.
Q – When he archived the case, the prosecutor said that the investigation can be reopened if a new clue appears. Do you think that is possible?
Kate – Of course! It could happen at any moment. All that it takes is for one person to make the phone call that we wait for so much. We know that she was abducted in Portugal and we vehemently believe that someone knows or suspects something.
“Mr Amaral’s behaviour is a disgrace”
They have not read the book that is a best-seller in Portugal. And they don’t spare the author and former PJ inspector
Q – Former inspector Gonçalo Amaral remains convinced of your involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance. Did you read ‘The Truth of the Lie’, the book that he wrote?
Kate and Gerry – No.
Kate – Why would I?
Gerry – I won’t learn anything from reading it.
Q – It was a success in Portugal.
Gerry – Was it? How many copies did it sell?
Q – Approximately 200 thousand. Next week, it is edited in Spain.
Gerry – That is what can be called illicit enrichment.
Q – Your English lawyers already have a translated copy and they are analyzing it. Do you intend to sue Gonçalo Amaral?
Gerry – At this moment we are focused on what we can do to find Madeleine and not in suing anyone.
Kate – All that I am going to say about this – because I’m not going to waste any time on Mr Amaral – is that as a professional and as a person his behaviour has been a disgrace.
Q – Aren’t you curious to know what the book says?
Kate – What for? It must be nothing but a load of rubbish. It is so secondary… It certainly won’t help to find our daughter. My consolation is that on the cover he calls her Maddie, the name that the media have invented. We never called her anything like that.
Q – But you do know the theory that Gonçalo Amaral defends: Madeleine accidentally died in the Ocean Club apartment and you concealed the body.
Gerry – It really is a waste of time. And we need all the time that we can get to analyze the investigation’s documents, which contain a lot of information that we didn’t know about.
Kate – You just have to cross, loosely, his theory with the process in order to understand that the facts that he reports are not correct.
Q – There is a theory that defends that the coordinator was removed from the investigation due to British political pressure.
Gerry – Who dismissed him?
Q – The PJ’s national director.
Gerry – Then you have to ask him if he was pressured. Or if Gordon Brown discussed the case with him. He surely didn’t.
Q – He also resigned. And largely due to this process.
Gerry – That was not what I was told. Apparently he had a vision of the police itself that was different from the one held by the Justice Minister.
Q – In a final analysis, they both left the PJ because the investigation failed.
Gerry – That’s not our fault. I do not criticize the authorities over not trying to find Madeleine. It doesn’t matter anymore. Now all that matters is that we do everything to try to find her, through our own methods.
Q – Did you ever get to know Gonçalo Amaral?
Kate – The question is the other way around: did he get to know us?
There are photographs of her all over the house
Gerry has returned to his work as a cardiologist. Kate did not exercise medicine again. Twins Sean and Amelie fill up her days as a mother.
Q – How has your life changed with the disappearance of Madeleine?
Gerry – Independently of what happens, it will never be the same again. If you talk to the parents of other abducted children, they also mention this parallel life which we entered. Sean and Amelie, being so young, force us to introduce a certain normalcy in our lives, to make it normal for them. And it’s them who, for moments, make it normal for us. But it will never be normal for us. They are aged three and a half, and they are very, very happy.
Q – Did you explain to the twins what happened to their sister?
Kate – They perceive Madeleine’s absence perfectly. I have no doubt whatsoever. But they don’t know the details. They know that she disappeared and that we’re looking for her.
Gerry – We were advised concerning what we should tell them, how and when. Larger explanations are kept for later. We realize that they miss their older sister. They know that her not being with us is not a good thing, and they hope that she returns.
Q – How do you keep Madeleine present in your lives?
Kate – There are photographs of her all over the house. And we speak about her with the twins every day – it’s an important part of their lives. Sean and Amelie talk about her and still include her in their playing… If they receive sweets, they say “Let’s keep one for Madeleine”. Or “When she comes home I’ll give her this or that”. It’s endearing and it makes our days less difficult.
Q – Did you fear that you might lose custody over Sean and Amelie because your behaviour was considered to be negligent?
Gerry – We were not negligent, we did what any reasonable parent would do. But we deeply lament what happened, because in our action, someone saw an opportunity to take Madeleine. I’m an optimist person. I never thought that something like this could happen.
Q – Did you change the manner in which you deal with Sean and Amelie?
Gerry – We are more protective and less trusting. We never left our children alone again and many families will never do so again because of us.
Kate – Now we think about everything that can happen, about predators, abductors. We don’t even let go of them in the shopping centre.
€1.200.000
The McCanns say that the fund has spent €1.2 million with the private investigation. But the reward of €3 million still stands
Q – How much have you spent on the private investigation so far?
Gerry – Approximately one million pounds, over the past ten months, paid with money from the FindMadeleine fund. A substantial sum was also spent on our defence, but two benefactors have covered that expense, which means that the fund was solely used in the search for our daughter.
Q – Do you maintain the offer of 2.5 million ponds to whoever finds Madeleine?
Gerry – We do not control that reward, but everything leads me to believe that it still stands. And that there will also be money available for whoever supplies credible information.
Kate – It’s a lot of money, but we cannot set limits, a child is priceless. We’ll pay whatever is necessary.
Q – Is there still money left in the fund?
Gerry – There is still some money left. Recently, British newspapers (‘Express newspapers’) paid us a compensation of 550 thousand pounds, which fed the fund. That had an important impact. And there are still donations, people who send money directly.
Q – But less than in the beginning, before you were made arguidos.
Gerry – Of course! Those who were in doubt stopped contributing. Many write to us asking for forgiveness because they believed in our guilt. We know that we have to make an effort for people to know that there is no evidence that Madeleine is dead and that we were not involved in the disappearance.
Other issues
Dogs – “We read everything that we found about these dogs that detect cadavers. It was due to them that we became suspects”
Clues – “The sightings continue. Since May we received one thousand phone calls and an equal number of emails, some containing relevant data”
Media exposure – “Appearing in the media was never good. We did it to publicize Madeleine’s face and to find her. We failed”
Background
Details of two hours of conversation
Kate and Gerry are different. More relaxed, or conformed. It is difficult to tell. “The twins force us to a certain normalcy”, the mother explains. It’s been 16 months and the mystery of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann remains unsolved.
The parents have already been victims of a tragedy and suspects of a terrible crime. The process was archived, but they are judged every day. Gerry agrees: “From the moment when the suspicion is installed, we can never prove our innocence”.
This is the first interview since the process was archived, on the 21st of July. It is scheduled in Rothley, a small village in the British Midlands where nobody suspects the McCanns’ guilt. Even less the owner of the Court House Hotel, which is installed in a medieval building and where the interview is held, in the late afternoon last Monday. There is tea with milk and biscuits. There is no guide and there are no forbidden questions.
In almost two hours of interview, Kate and Gerry, both 40, clearly state the intention that supports their availability for the conversation. “We believe that in Portugal someone knows about Madeleine, that it is where the solution for our daughter’s disappearance lies”. And they want that person, whether singular or collective, to know that they search for him, that they ensure his anonymity and that they even give him 2.5 million pounds if he tells them where Madeleine is.
Every day, in their very British house of little bricks, they study a little more of the process of the Polícia Judiciária’s investigation, which they personally consult as it is being translated. They understand “nothing” of Portuguese. From a first reading they reinforced their hope of finding Maddie alive. Nothing tells them that she is dead. The volumes about themselves, from the time when they were made arguidos, have been put aside. “We do not intend to read them”.
They remind them of the days when they were afraid of being arrested in Portugal, accused of Madeleine’s death.
