[..] it was agreed to reinforce and extend the foot searches and reinforcement from the search and rescue dog team was requested, which arrived at P da L at 23.00 with 3 more sniffer teams for a total of six officers and eight specialized dogs. Unquote
On 4th May he was called at about 01.15, he arrived at the OC at about 1.55, accompanied by the officer Laçao.They presented themselves to Sergeant Duarte from the GNR Lagos post and were informed by him of the disappearance of a small girl from the resort. There were other GNR officers present at the scene, but he does not remember their names. There were also PJ officers present.
After having established exactly where the girl had disappeared from, he was given a piece of her clothing by one of his colleagues, whose name he does not remember. Unquote
Occupation: GNR Officer (Dogs: Rex and Zarus)
- That after the dogs were given this scent from the towel and near apartment 5A of block 5, the first sniffer dog headed to the door of that apartment. Immediately afterward, he turned to block 5, using a circumvented route to block 5, and came to the road between this block and the leisure area of the resort (pools, restaurant, etc), and turned to the left, or around the referred to apartment and headed to the main road.
Having reached there, (the dog) crossed the street (Francisco Gentil Martins) and, next to the wall of block 6, once the street was crossed, turned right and headed towards the area of the contiguous car park. More specifically (the dog) went next to a lamp post, smelling the ground there.]
After searching that zone, he again crossed the road and headed toward the entrance to the pool and restaurant area, and smelled the door which was closed at that hour. He turned again to the parking zone and stopped or lost the scent at this point. - When he effected the same operation with the second dog, in general, this dog took the same route and headed to the light post and showed interest there and ended by losing the scent at this point. It should be stated that the one difference is that this second dog did not head toward the entrance to the restaurant and pool zone. But he does state that the dogs followed a 'scent trail', a signal for the animal who was working. He is certain that they were not conditioned in any direction. None of the dogs used in this search action, after having smelled the towel, went into block 5 but headed to the zone which gives access to the road between the apartment and the leisure area. He states it should be noted that the second dog may have been conditioned by the original path taken by the first sniffer dog as he may have smelled the first dog's path taken.[..]- Yesterday (08/05/07) around 23H45, this search action was repeated but was centred on the dogs inside blocks 5 and 4 of the resort. He adds that in this type of operation, given the time that had lapsed, and with the heat that could already be felt, the results obtained may be highly relative given that the dog will confirm all the scents it comes across. It is certain the dog will react to more active scents, namely because the apartment is occupied. Also, any noise perceived by the dog in the apartment may make the dog loose interest.
- Initiating the diligence, the first sniffer dog, after having smelled the towel used in the previous operation, began searching, it being certain that next to the doors of some apartment he demonstrated major interest whilst he did not even approach others. In none of these actions did the dog give him a signal that he had caught the scent of the missing child. It is certain however, that near apartment 5J, 5H and 4G, that the dog showed major interest in smelling the doors and the immediate areas. He states that next to 5H, there were two bags of rubbish which may condition the dog. Just outside apartment 4G was a tray with plates, cutlery and cloth napkins, apparently used. It is certain that this apartment is the one where the missing child's parents were lodged (at the time). In relation to the dog's interest at doorway 5J, the same may have been conditioned by the presence of people inside the apartment.
- After completing the search in the interior of block 5, verandas and apartment access, and whilst in the exterior, the sniffer dog took the same route he had taken on 04/05/07, being the road between that apartment and the leisure area-pool sand restaurant, and headed toward the same parking area. There he lost the scent of the search.
Date: 2007.05.09 Occupation: 1st Sergeant GNR Location: GNR-Queluz
The deponent states that:
[..]- He remembers that on the 4th of May of the current year, around 23H00, they attempted to tentatively identify and thus reconstruct the path taken by the missing minor. They gave the dogs a Turkish bath towel which was supposedly used by the child in question. This operation was realised by two different dogs.
- That after having given the sniffer dog the towel and next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically, next to apartment block 5A and 5, the first sniffer dog headed toward the door of that apartment. Immediately afterward, he headed in the direction of block 4, returned around block 5, and came down a road that exists between this block and the leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). He turned right; in the direction of the aforementioned apartment and headed toward the main road. There, he crossed the street and next to the wall of block 6, turned right, and headed toward the contiguous parking area. More concretely, he headed next to a light post and sniffed the ground around that post. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the access zone to the restaurants and pool area, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, and at that point, lost the scent.
- When carrying out this operation with the second dog, he followed the same route, took the same direction and headed toward the light post in the parking lot mentioned above. He sniffed the area and at that point appeared to have lost the scent. The only difference was that this dog did not head toward the entrance of the restaurant or the pool area.
- None of the dogs used in this search, after having been given the towel supposedly used by the child, entered into block 5 but went immediately to the street between the apartment and the leisure area. It should be taken into account that the second sniffer dog may have been conditioned by the first sniffer dog. That is to say that in the case of doubt, the second dog may have followed the second of the first.
[..]- The initial diligence carried out with first sniffer dog, after having sniffed the towel used in the previous operation, began searching and showing interest in some doors leading to other apartments. He did not show any interest or even approach other apartments. In none of these actions did the dog give the signal to his trainer, Soldado Fernandes. It is certain however, that the dog signalled next to apartments 5J, 5H, and 4G. He showed great interest in sniffing these doors and the immediate areas. Next to door 5H there were two bags of rubbish and the odour may have distracted the dog. Outside 4G was a tray of plates, cutlery and cloth napkins that had apparently been used. This apartment is where the parents of the missing child were staying (at the time). Concerning apartment 5J, the same may have been conditioned by the presence of people in the interior or he could have sniffed an odour that needed to be confirmed.
- He states that after the search inside block 5, and whilst in the exterior, the sniffer dog took the same route on 04.05.07, being the existent road of that apartment and the leisure area (pools and restaurant) and then went to the same parking area. At that point, the scent was lost. This situation may be related to the fact that the biggest concentration of odours are in that area and due to the fact that odours are better preserved near walls and away from major winds. It is certain that upon reaching the main road and turning right is where the biggest concentration of odours exist. This is where the dog lost interest.
- The second dog was taken through the same operation and also showed interest at the door of apartment 5J. This same dog jumped on his hind paws to the parapet of the veranda and raised his head as though in search of an odour. As related above, this interest could have been the result of various factors but it is certain that in this area the scent was intense. In the exterior, the sniffer dog immediately headed to the parking area next to block 6 and there apparently lost the scent.
13- Processos Vol XIIIa page 3517. Annex B. Report on the Sniffer Dog search and Rescue Team.
'At about nine o’clock we all went out on to Rua Dr. Agostinho da Silva to find out what was going on and to look out for the PJ. [..] According to the PJ files, to which we did not have access until August 2008, two patrol dogs were brought to Praia da Luz at 2 am on 4 May and four search-and-rescue dogs at 8am. I don’t remember seeing any police dogs until the morning and if there were any specific police searches overnight, they were not apparent. The only searches I was aware of were those carried out by ourselves, fellow guests and the Mark Warner staff.
Officers Lacäo and Morais with dogs Numi and Kit. Patrol dogs.
[.] a witness following the events on the morning or early afternoon of 2nd or 3rd May [..] on the late morning or early afternoon of either 2nd or 3rd May, not being certain which, the deponent and his partner were out walking in the vicinity of their home. [..] they went up the from their home to Rua Dr. Agostinho da Silva then down Rua Dr. Francisco Gentil Martins where the ‘Ocean Club Gardens’is situated.
- At that time as he passed the residential block he noticed a light commercial vehicle (in all respects the same as an Opel Corsa Van) white in colour [..]
- When going down the (Rua Martins) he passed an individual standing on his left at the beginning of a path and at the entrance of a small car park opposite the reception of the resort.
- At the point they passed the individual the deponent had seen him face-on because he (the man) was facing the opposite direction to which he was walking and appearing to be watching attentively movements (occurring) adjacent to the parked vehicle.
- - Asked, the deponent said that he noticed the above because he had a high instinct for vigilance due to his participation where he lived in England in a neighbourhood-watch in which suspicious persons or movements were watched for [..]
- The deponent wished to clarify that he was convinced that the man was not one of the many tourists who frequented that area, considering his features and physical appearance.
- Asked to elaborate further he said that the van was situated close to the gateway on the side of the building (which gateway led to the veranda of the apartment in question (5A).
- For the rest, he adds that after having reflected specifically on the incidents he concluded that it was the man’s deliberate focus (fixation) on the area in which the events that gave rise to the investigation occurred.
- Urged to reveal details about the area around the van, the deponent could not be certain itf the vehicle was directly next to, slightly above or slightly below the gateway.
|Sketch plan of the locations where Derek Flack saw the van and the man watching 5A.|
Joao Carvalho, who reported this sighting to Dr. Goncalo |Amaral on the 5th of May, notes in his report: ‘he adds that near to where the individual was watching, on the other side of the road, was a parked vehicle, van type, white, with a person (he does not remember whether the person was inside or outside the vehicle). He cannot describe that person. ‘