Witness statement of Tiago Rochas Barreiros 2007.05.08
Work Location: Ocean Club
That he comes to the process as a witness. He has worked at the Ocean Club (OC) resort for about two months exercising his function as Tapas Supervisor (restaurant, bar and pool) in the Ocean Club Garden.
That prior to this, he worked at the Hotel Suites Alba Resort and Spa in Albandeira beach, Carvoeiro, in the restaurant area for about one year.
As a supervisor, his functions include all the operational workings of the space known as the Tapas. His normal hours are defined by need although he does have a set work schedule.
That his work location is comprised of the restaurant, pool and bar of the Ocean Club Garden, dominated by the Tapas.
That he became aware of the situation that occurred at the OC with respect to the disappearance of a child when he arrived at the Tapas around 22H00/22H30. He was immediately informed at arriving by work colleagues.
That after finding out what happened he immediately proceeded to join some searches next to the pool and the apartment zone around the resort. He stayed in the OC until around 01H30 when he left with his girlfriend.
That he knows the family of the missing child as they were clients of the Tapas restaurant which they began frequenting the 2nd day of their arrival to the OC.
From the very beginning, a request was made to the restaurant workers to reserve a table for 20H30 until the end of the week. The request was made for a specific table given the number in the group – nine people. This group would dine daily and always arrive around 20H30. They would leave the restaurant around 00H30.
That the table they occupied is next to the Tapas bar since that table was the biggest.
This group (who would dine at the time previously mentioned) was always made up of nine adults, constituted by eight couples [I think this is an error in the document, it says “oito casais” or eight couples and should probably read four couples (quarto casais) or eight people (oito pessoas)] and an older woman. He believed that this older woman was the grandmother of the missing child. He never saw any children accompanying the nine people.
When the table was reserved, nothing was mentioned about checking on the children and the only concern was in accommodating the entire group.
That the table this group occupied was always reserved for 20H30, and where the family of the missing child, in regards to dinner, has their routine defined.
That effectively he did know the missing child’s family due to the circumstances previously mentioned, but had not entered their [prior] residence. He goes daily to the family’s apartment in order to bring them lunch.
That every day around 13H00, he heads to no. 4-G (where the family of the missing child is staying) and to no. 4-1 (where 10 people are lodged) to deliver lunch. He repeats this routine at 20H00 to take them dinner.
That the payment for alcohol, not included in the vacation package, was paid by credit card. This payment was made by random members of the group of nine.
According to what he remembers, the missing child’s family frequented the Tapas pool where they would take their children. They would stay in the children’s play area in the period between 16H45 and 17H30, at the time when babysitters would take care of the children. The babysitters are employees of Mark Warner.
That he never noticed any walkie talkies or other sound devices on top of the table occupied by the group. He only noticed that occasionally one of the nine present would get up from the table and leave for a few minutes. He did not know where they went.
The nine individuals, including the family of the missing child, were included in the half pension regime. They had the right to dinner (a menu that included starter, main course, desert and drinks as listed). All aperitifs, and after dinner drinks were paid separately using the credit card.
That generally, it was always the same people that dined in the Tapas and who were registered for dinner. A list of all the people who dined at the Tapas from the arrival of the missing child’s family to 2007.05.04 has been handed over to the investigation.
That on 2007.05.03 he began work around 09H30 and finished around 17H30, when he left the resort and returned again at 22H30, as already described previously.
That on the 3rd of May, 2007, he did not notice any abnormal situation or anything out of the ordinary, nor has any comment been made to him to this effect.
That for days prior to the disappearance of the child he did not detect any suspicious situation or details that he could now offer the investigation.
And nothing more was said.