Madeleine – José da Silva, furto

Another part of the reason that José da Silva was made an arguido may be that he appears in the PJ files on a printed list of employees of the Ocean Club, with the hand-written word ‘Furto’ beside his entry.

The word ‘furto’ is best translated as theft, linked to furtar, to steal. It is possible to translate it as burglary, but there are three words in Portuguese that mean burglary more directly.

The printed list of employees appears to have been used to check that statements were taken systematically from each one, so no-one was missed. The notes were jotted on top.

These hand-written notes that were added to the printed list cover several things, and appear in several different types of hand-writing.

Presumably, these notes were added by the PJ, but precisely who in the PJ added what, and when the notes were added, is not clear.

However, eight employees have notes added which implicates them in what looks like low-level criminal activity, of varying types. There is no previous record of a serious crime noted. There is nothing that approaches kidnapping. There is nothing of a sexual nature. And the nearest the notes get to burglary is furto, a word that fits better with theft, while three better words for burglary do not appear on the list.

The offences appear to cover driving without a licence, theft, drug trafficking, fraud, forgery, and trafficking (presumably in stolen or illegal goods). There is nothing to indicate precisely how serious these offences were. Take the drug trafficking for example. There is nothing to clarify whether this was significant or a very minor role in selling or moving drugs.

None of the 8 employees was questioned about these criminal records. Therefore, I must presume that the offences were considered minor, or alternatively that information about this was added after the witness interviews and no-one thought it worthwhile following up.

Of the 8, three have furto in their entry, and some curious coincidences exist. The only one of the 8 made an arguido was José da Silva, so why did Scotland Yard focus on him?

Two of those labelled furto appear to be boyfriend and girlfriend. One did a menial job in the Tapas kitchen. The other did a menial job in the Millennium restaurant. These do not seem to be likely suspects, despite the furto tag.

From the 8, a different two people were working in the Millennium on 3rd May when a searcher broke the news that a girl had gone missing. Both remembered seeing the McCanns in the restaurant on Saturday, 28 April 2007, when the Tapas 9 all trudged to the Millennium, because the Tapas restaurant was closed.

This would give these two suspects a head start in seeing the Tapas 9 together. However, the only other time the McCanns ate in the Millennium was Sunday morning, when the two suspects were not working. So this coincidence can be chalked off as just a coincidence.

A fifth person from the 8 was in apartment 5A on Tuesday, 1st May, to help out with maintenance. He was with a colleague from maintenance, and his statement is that he was in the kitchen and the parents’ bedroom only. The three children were not present. If we are talking burglary here, this was an ideal opportunity to go into the children’s bedroom to unlock the window, knowing that the shutter could be opened from the outside. Kate McCann, in her book ‘Madeleine’, states that the men helped her with the washing machine first, then she went out leaving them to fix the jammed shutter.

There is a 6th person on the list, one whom I would rate as a person of interest above José da Silva. I would like to set this persona aside to another post. However, the person has not been made an arguido, and as far as I know, has not been questioned in the SY investigation.

Of the 8 people on the list, there is just one person, a gardener, who seems to be of near zero interest whatsoever. He says he went home at his usual time on the day Madeleine disappeared, and saw the news of her disappearance on the media. That is a minor blip that cannot be true, as the news broke the following day.

This leaves us with the final person of the 8, José da Silva, and returns us to the question of why he was made an arguido.

He was a driver within the Ocean Club. He lived nearby in Luztur. He made 3 calls and a text to Ricardo Rodrigues on the evening 3rd May. He has an entry of ‘furto’ beside his name in the PJ files.

I am still scratching about for a reasonable explanation, until you look at the other people made arguidos, and the those appearing as witnesses.

Before that I want to do one last post to look at José da Silva, as there is one final piece in his puzzle.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Madeleine – José da Silva, furto

  1. This is excellent stuff. Really interesting. I wonder if you could link me to that list, please? I’d love to have a gander… I think I recall seeing the document in question, but not sure where it is.

    Now, my background is Italian… ‘furto’ would be theft, whereas ‘furto con scasso’ would be burglary. I wonder is it similar in Portuguese?… could it be short for burglary? Does it really matter, though? A thief is a thief… a thief presented with a bunch of keys swiftly becomes a burglar, no actual literal breaking necessary.

    Big moral step away from that, I would think, is a burglar becoming a child trafficker.

    If this is the culprit, it must be traceable. So, if he was a paedophile, he would almost certainly have previous and other offences committed afterwards. If that’s the case for him or the other two, it’s been successfully hushed.

    If he’s a child trafficker, he’s either (hopefully) working for a nice childless couple (hard to trace) or for a criminal gang. Either way, he’d have been paid a significant sum of money. Are we still waiting for the red tape on searching his accounts and/or premises?

    Let’s face it, though… a list of employees with an accompanying rap sheet is not the image that Mark Warner, Luz or Portugal really want to give off.

    Missing bunches of keys and a long string of minor burglaries leading up to the date, ditto…

    That all fits in with a picture of petty crime that is likely common in any tourist resort. How you get from that to the abduction of a child is the question… if indeed they are related.

    You, of course, then have the paedophile attacks, and the list of paedophiles now on the register who might or might not have been in the area. Again, not great press for a tourist spot… And then reports of gangs with that motive, be they northern European or Rom… Very quickly you can see why the locals want this horribleness to go away.

    But looking at the case, and trying to solve it, you have to look at the various kinds of criminality being practised… but, that said, just because there were many people there trying to scam tourists or pilfer their belongings… linking that to anything more serious is a logical problem.

    For example, you could have had, by sheer coincidence, one gang of thieves eying up the massively exposed and vulnerable G5A for a theft concurrently with a kidnapper, trafficker or paedophile in that week or on that very night. I’m not suggesting that, but rather pointing out snaring someone for wanting to break into G5A in itself isn’t necessarily the end of the case. Maybe the thieves were planning a burglary, and crossed paths with a person or people carrying out an abduction. Mad theory… but possible.

    So, say JdS was a simple thief, and even broke into G5A that night… it would make him at least an excellent witness, at most the chief suspect, but it not in itself prove he was the abductor. Make sense?

    • Starting at the top. Volume 4, pages 850 and 851. mccannpjfiles.

      The shortest of the 3 words for burglary is roubo, which is exactly the same length as furto. There may be an equivalent of furto con scasso, but the other 2 Portuguese words are a single word, not a phrase.

      The paedophile angle is the hardest to make progress on, as the PJ files were cleansed, and we are reliant on media speculation.

      I doubt that Mark Warner was aware of convictions for petty offences. There is nothing to indicate anyone in the hierarchy was asked about employees’ criminal records. I very much doubt that the ability existed in 2007 for companies to look up criminal records of potential employees.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s