Revised Translation
Processos Volume VI
Pages 1615 to 1624
Policia Judiciaria
Witness Statement
Date of Diligence: 2007.05.26
Time: 15.30
Location: DIC Portimão
Responsible Officer: Inspector João Carlos
Name: PETER DANIEL SMITH
Nationality: Irish
Profession: Commercial Manager
The witness states:
That he comes to the process as a witness.
Being of Irish nationality, he does not understand Portuguese in its written or oral form and is accompanied by an interpreter, Lidia Nascimento.
His father owns an apartment in the Luz Villa, Lagos, specifically in the Estrela da Luz complex, corresponding to A1C. His father comes to Portugal at least three times a year. The witness went the first time he travelled to Portugal
With regard to this period he states that he arrived in Portugal on the 26th of April 2007 and had his return passage (which he complied with) booked for the 4th of May of the same year. He arrived at Faro airport having left from Dublin.
Processos Volume VI
Pages 1615 to 1624
Policia Judiciaria
Witness Statement
Date of Diligence: 2007.05.26
Time: 15.30
Location: DIC Portimão
Responsible Officer: Inspector João Carlos
Name: PETER DANIEL SMITH
Nationality: Irish
Profession: Commercial Manager
The witness states:
That he comes to the process as a witness.
Being of Irish nationality, he does not understand Portuguese in its written or oral form and is accompanied by an interpreter, Lidia Nascimento.
His father owns an apartment in the Luz Villa, Lagos, specifically in the Estrela da Luz complex, corresponding to A1C. His father comes to Portugal at least three times a year. The witness went the first time he travelled to Portugal
With regard to this period he states that he arrived in Portugal on the 26th of April 2007 and had his return passage (which he complied with) booked for the 4th of May of the same year. He arrived at Faro airport having left from Dublin.
He arrived a few days before his father, by choice in relation to the days available. He was accompanied by his wife, S***, and his two children TA*** and CO** aged 13 and 6 respectively.
He would like to clarify that on day of the 3rd of May, he and the family went to the Dolphin restaurant, situated in Praia da Luz, where they dined.
He would like to clarify that on day of the 3rd of May, he and the family went to the Dolphin restaurant, situated in Praia da Luz, where they dined.
At around 21H00, they left the restaurant and headed toward Kelly's Bar, which is about one minute away on foot. In Kelly's Bar (he does not remember the name of the street it is on) they had a few drinks and left there around 21H50/22H00.
They left the bar, and went up a set of stairs that give access to a road just above.
They left the bar, and went up a set of stairs that give access to a road just above.
On this road, they walked towards another street (whose name he does not know) and headed for Estrela da Luz.
At the beginning of this road, he saw an individual carrying a child.
This individual was walking normally although with somewhat quick steps as he was walking downwards.
He appeared normal to the witness, as if this were father and daughter.
He adds that this individual was coming down the street, in an opposite direction to that of the witness and his companions. He does not know the destination the individual took as he only saw him while they passed each other.
When asked, he states that when he passed this individual it was around 21H55/22H00 and he had absolutely no knowledge at that time that a child had disappeared.
When asked, he states that when he passed this individual it was around 21H55/22H00 and he had absolutely no knowledge at that time that a child had disappeared.
He only found out about disappearance of the girl the next morning by means of someone he knew, the son of the builder of Estrela da Luz, who was also at the airport.
The witness went to the airport given that, as planned, he intended to return to Ireland on this day.
At this time, he did not associate the individual with the disappearance, however after having thought about the subject and about the coincidence of the time, he inferred that Madeleine could have been the girl who was being carried by the individual he saw.
As regards the description of the individual carrying the girl he says: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 cm in height.
At this time, he did not associate the individual with the disappearance, however after having thought about the subject and about the coincidence of the time, he inferred that Madeleine could have been the girl who was being carried by the individual he saw.
As regards the description of the individual carrying the girl he says: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 cm in height.
He was around 35, or older.
Slightly brown skin as a result of sun exposure.
He had a normal complexion, in good form.
He had short hair, brown in colour.
He does not remember if he wore glasses, or if he had a beard or a moustache.
He did not notice any other relevant details as the lighting was bad.
Neither does he remember the clothing the individual wore or his shoes.
Neither does he remember the clothing the individual wore or his shoes.
He states that he did not look at these details as his pregnant wife was somewhat indisposed and he was constantly looking at her and therefore did not pay attention to observing the individual.
He states the child was female.
He states the child was female.
She was perhaps two or three years old.
She appeared to be a bit smaller than his niece of the same age. It was a girl with a normal complexion. She had blond hair, of medium tone, without being very shiny.
Her skin was white, typically British. He did not see her eyes as she was asleep and her eyelids were closed. He does not remember her clothing very well but believes it was light summer clothing light in colour. He does not remember if she was covered by any blanket or covering. He cannot say whether she was barefoot.
Having now seen various photographs of MADELEINE and television images, he says that the child being carried by the individual might have been her.
Having now seen various photographs of MADELEINE and television images, he says that the child being carried by the individual might have been her.
He cannot state this as fact but is convinced that it could have been MADELEINE. Indeed, this is the opinion shared by his family.
When asked, he states that the individual did not say a word nor did the child as she was sleeping deeply.
When asked, he states that the individual did not say a word nor did the child as she was sleeping deeply.
He adds that the individual did not try to hide his face or lower his gaze. He did not notice anything strange.
He says that it would not be possible to recognise the individual in person or from a photograph.
When asked, he says that when he saw the individual, the witness was accompanied by his wife, S***, his father MARTIN, his mother MARY, his children TA*** and CO** aged 13 and 6 respectively, his sister AOIFE aged 12 and his two nieces AI****** and EI****, aged 10 and 4, the children of his sister B*****, who was in Ireland.
He also says that when he passed the individual, the individual was descending to his right, and walked past the witness in the middle of the street, given that at that time the traffic was minimal or non-existent.
He adds that the group was walking at a distance of some meters so that they were able to see the individual from various different positions.
A sketch is attached showing the route and the location of the sighting.
Adds also that his son TA*** was questioned in Ireland and said that the individual was wearing a long-sleeved coat, black in colour, and that the child was barefoot.
He has no other elements to offer the investigation.
And nothing more was said. Having read the statement and finding it to be in conformity, ratifies and signs together with the interpreter.
He says that it would not be possible to recognise the individual in person or from a photograph.
When asked, he says that when he saw the individual, the witness was accompanied by his wife, S***, his father MARTIN, his mother MARY, his children TA*** and CO** aged 13 and 6 respectively, his sister AOIFE aged 12 and his two nieces AI****** and EI****, aged 10 and 4, the children of his sister B*****, who was in Ireland.
He also says that when he passed the individual, the individual was descending to his right, and walked past the witness in the middle of the street, given that at that time the traffic was minimal or non-existent.
He adds that the group was walking at a distance of some meters so that they were able to see the individual from various different positions.
A sketch is attached showing the route and the location of the sighting.
Adds also that his son TA*** was questioned in Ireland and said that the individual was wearing a long-sleeved coat, black in colour, and that the child was barefoot.
He has no other elements to offer the investigation.
And nothing more was said. Having read the statement and finding it to be in conformity, ratifies and signs together with the interpreter.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/post534.html#p534
