Carlos Anjos no Pros e Contras
Carlos Anjos, head of the PJ investigators Federation (ASFIC) in Prós e Contras, Sept 10 2007:
CA: We started this investigation… it was what we call “a blank case”.
We had a holiday apartment… we were informed after everyone else was informed, including the media … mainly the media… that’s when we were informed that, from a holiday apartment had disappeared — I’m trying to be as clear as possible without infringing the so called secret of justice — in a holiday apartment… most people know what a holiday apartment is like, it’s something impersonal, where there are no goods from people, with very few belongings, and where there were three or four suitcases of clothing of the persons who were holidaying there.
In that apartment which had nothing in it, at a precise time that is known to be at approximately at 6:00 PM, there were three children and two adults. At 10 PM, 10:41 when the police was alerted, but it’s known that at 10 PM in that apartment something was missing — a child. It could have been a piece of furnishing, but no, unfortunately a child was missing.
And the picture that the police found is a scene — a location, not of a crime, we didn’t know if a crime had happened there, it could have been a disappearance, in which the parents couldn’t tell us whether the window was open or closed, how they’d left the door’s lock — what was explained to us is that from that location had disappeared… where nine people had already entered (all the British group that was holidaying), GNR had already been there (it was the first police force to be called to the spot) — and there is not a single clue, not a single vestige of what happened there. That is, it was with this work basis…
JS: So it was bound to be very difficult…
CA:… that the PJ started on this job. That is, there was absolutely nothing, and what might have been had already been messed by nine people (I’m putting aside my GNR colleagues). So, it was this that my Algarve colleagues found in that place — it was this work basis that was handed over to the PJ, and it was demanded, internally and externally, that starting from zero, four months later…
JS: …you’d complete the puzzle…
CA: No, that four months later we’d have the result.
JS: Of course.
CA: The sense of proportion was a bit lost in all this situation... starting with the McCann couple. Because the day the child disappeared, the first call the McCanns makes is to Sky News. And the PJ arrived at the location one hour and a half before Sky, so that day we had...
Hostess: That's because Sky News was located in the UK, otherwise the [PJ] might have arrived later... (laughs)... run the risk of arriving later!
CA: No because they have in Algarve always, in the Summer, a news team.
JS: You might have arrived later, that was...
CA: I don't know. I know that we arrived one hour and a half before. And this that day gave us exactly the idea... we understood perfectly the rules of the game we were going to play. We were going to play a game that is... a case that was going to be discussed in the media and not in the calm and discreet environment of the criminal investigation, as it should be.
C.A. :(...) Allow me to just say one thing.
This case had a distinctive feature, that when it was endorsed into the media, this was made in an erroneously approach in our point of view; and the McCann couple launched their daughter's advertising campaign. At the time we were embarked upon the abduction issue.
Maddie had a perceptible, extremely visible sign in one of her eyes.
If this had been a kidnap issue it would had been terrible for the child.
If that child was hypothetically put up for sale or for whatever thing else, she would be absolutely… It was her death sentence.
That issue, in that day, of the exposure of that photograph was the downright condemnation of death for that child.
F.L.: And the parents didn’t take regard that as being crucial?!
C.A.: Nobody took that into account.