|
In an interview staged only a short walk
from the regional PJ police headquarters in Faro over the
weekend, Gonçalo Amaral, the former leading detective in the
case involving the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, has an
open and frank conversation with The Portugal News. Lambasted by
the British media, and ignored by much of the Portuguese written
press since the launch of his controversial book last week
(which the Correia da Manhã newspaper has assisted in
promoting), Gonçalo Amaral explains his reasoning behind certain
methods of investigation, and stresses his actions to date have
not been to accuse anyone, rather, he argues, his focus has been
about the pursuit of truth.
The Portugal News: Did you leak
information about the investigation to the media?
Gonçalo Amaral:
I never had anything to do with leaks. We have to look at from
where these leaks could have originated. A number of entities
worked with us during the investigations and we cannot rule out
the possibility that some of these leaks originated in Britain.
As a matter of fact, when the FSS handed over their report to
Portuguese police, we kept it under wraps, but a British daily
was the first to appear with extracts of the FSS’s findings.
TPN: But how
does that explain that some sections of the Portuguese press
have printed confidential information that later proved to be
accurate?
GA: Perhaps
they had good sources of information, but we cannot conclude
that they were given information by police in the Algarve.
TPN: The
report leaked last week says that Gerry and Kate were made
arguidos on the “merest possibility” that they were involved in
the disappearance of their child. Is that accurate?
GA: They were
made arguidos on suspicion of two crimes: concealing a body and
simulating an abduction and potentially the crime of
abandonment. But saying they were made arguidos on the merest
possibility that they were involved in the disappearance of
their child is not true. The conclusions reached by the team
investigating the crime, including colleagues in Britain, are
the same as the five points I mention at the end of my book.
Perhaps the conclusions reached in this latest report were made
to facilitate the archiving of the case and findings were put
across in a mild manner. Once you gain access to the case files,
you will find that it was not due to a mere possibility.
TPN: What do
we know about Madeleine’s disappearance?
She was here
on holiday. There is obviously no doubt that Madeleine existed.
There is also no doubt that she went missing. The scheme
employed to visit the children does, to a large extent, not
correspond with the truth, it was probably used to safeguard the
view that the children were safe [in the apartments on their own
as their parents dined at the Tapas restaurant].
TPN: How often
were the children checked upon?
GA: One of the
first lines of the investigation was to interview the party that
was on holiday with the McCanns to establish this.
TPN: What did
you find at the apartment?
No signs of
forced entry. There were no signs of glove marks on the window.
We compiled a report of the evidence we collected, but we are
not here to accuse anyone.
TPN: Do you
think more could have been done before archiving or closing the
case?
GA: In my
opinion, a number of things are still lacking: We should have
continued investigating the parents in order to either charge
them or rule them out as suspects. If I represented this couple,
I would have insisted that police investigations continue. Not
everything we do is to incriminate a suspect. Often a phone will
be tapped in order to obtain information that will clear a
suspect.
We worked long
hours discussing a number of potential explanations for
Madeleine’s disappearance; we did not insist solely that she had
been abducted.
TPN: You say
that politics prevented you from doing certain things during the
investigation. What were those actions you would like to have
taken?
GA: I found
the intervention of the [then] British Ambassador strange, as
besides the British Consul in Portimão already being involved in
the case from the first morning of Madeleine’s disappearance,
all diplomatic channels had been opened and were functional.
With the arrival of the Ambassador, my colleagues and I thought
it was odd, and to a certain extent made us feel limited in our
investigations.
TPN: Did you
ever receive orders to investigate in a certain manner?
GA: No we did
not receive any orders. I don’t like talking about orders. But
we felt limited.
TPN: Did the
police offer a plea bargain to Kate McCann?
GA: No.
TPN: But did
you not suggest she consider a plea bargain?
GA: We only
explained the nature of certain crimes. Her lawyer was there,
you can ask him.
TPN: Did Kate
and Gerry McCann answer all the questions that you posed to them
as fully as possible?
GA: Up until
being declared an arguido, Kate, at the request of her lawyer,
co-operated. When questions became of a nature that could
incriminate her, she was made an arguido, her rights and duties
were read out to her in English and thereafter she opted for the
right to remain silent.
TPN: And Gerry
McCann?
GA: He
answered all questions, before and after being made an arguido.
TPN: When did
the police first learn of the intention of the McCanns to leave
Portugal?
GA: With the
arrival of the sniffer dogs, I think back in August, the couple
started showing a keenness to leave the country. As for these
dogs, I have not seen or heard any scepticism in Britain,
contrary to Portugal.
TPN: How can
you explain the theory that Kate and Gerry used their hire car
in the disappearance of their daughter when it was hired 25 days
after she vanished?
GA: I don’t
know. I was not the one who hired the car.
A bodily fluid
was detected in the trunk of the car which was similar to that
of Madeleine McCann in 15 of the 19 indicators of her profile.
TPN: Has this
evidence been investigated further?
GA: No.
TPN: Why not?
GA: You will
have to ask my former colleagues that question.
TPN: What
evidence was there that someone had been watching apartment 5A
prior to Madeleine’s disappearance?
GA: We spoke
to a number of people who came forward.
TPN: Anyone
suspicious mentioned in these statements?
GA: No.
Perhaps just a British musician we later tracked down.
But in a
reconstruction, witness testimonies, such as that of Jane Tanner
and others, including restaurant workers, could be clarified
further.
TPN: At what
stage did you become suspicious of the McCanns and why?
GA: There were
a number of inconsistencies detected during the first
interrogations.
TPN: Such as?
GA: We were
initially told by the parents that when they checked on the
children they would use the front door. But Kate later said they
used the other door. Because had they used the front door, they
would have detected someone had forced their way into the room
[where Madeleine and the twins had been sleeping].
But during
these initial rounds of questioning, my team and I believed
these inconsistencies were due to the McCanns and their friends
trying to cover the fact they had left their children
unattended, along with their possible lack of trust in the
Portuguese police. This had a lot of weight for me in the
beginning, especially as the law in Britain is far tougher
concerning the abandoning of children.
TPN: Did you
look into sex offenders, and what was the outcome?
GA: It is very
difficult that a paedophile pre-selected Madeleine. It had to be
very well planned. But all known sexual predators were
investigated.
TPN: Did you
have any evidence that Robert Murat and the McCanns or their
friends knew each other previous to Madeleine’s disappearance?
GA: We tried
to confirm this, but along with the assistance of the British
police, we were unable to establish any connection. But we
looked into all possibilities. Robert Murat purchased a
last-minute ticket to come to Portugal a couple of days before
Madeleine went missing, perhaps as it was cheaper to do so. But
we had to investigate whether or not his visit coincided with
Madeleine’s disappearance a couple of days later and whether he
had been contacted to come here.
TPN: How do
you see the lawsuit that you might face over your book?
GA: My book is
based on facts. It could be a good occasion to take all the case
files to court and compare what I wrote with that which is
contained in the files.
TPN: What next
lies ahead for you?
GA: I have had
a number of proposals, but in October I am intending on starting
my practical training as a lawyer, as I already have a law
degree, but never practised.
Brendan de
Beer
Edition:
970 |
