Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: icabodcrane on April 27, 2013, 09:08:21 PM
Title: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: icabodcrane on April 27, 2013, 09:08:21 PM
I know that the McCanns were made Arguidos largely because of the dog evidence, but why was Murat held in suspiscion by the police ?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on April 27, 2013, 09:14:10 PM
The Mirror journalist Lori Cambell played a large part.
She felt that much of his behaviour mirrored that of Huntley.
There is a quite brilliant article about Murat by the journalist Matthew Parris.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on April 27, 2013, 09:20:04 PM
Lori she had her suspicions by the Monday 7th May so passed them on
Time travel?
She also reckons the police told her when she asked them, as Murat had told her he worked as a police translator, it was unlikely, which is untrue,he was, as evidenced by him doing a tonne of translations for the PJ
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: icabodcrane on April 27, 2013, 10:02:10 PM
Lori she had her suspicions by the Monday 7th May so passed them on
Time travel?
She also reckons the police told her when she asked them, as Murat had told her he worked as a police translator, it was unlikely, which is untrue,he was, as evidenced by him doing a tonne of translations for the PJ
So she was on the ground in Portugal, yet chose to pass her concerns to Leicester police force rather than the Portuguese police who were investigating ?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on April 27, 2013, 10:13:55 PM
Seems so >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: DCI on April 27, 2013, 10:26:03 PM
Seems Lori Campbell wasn't the only one though, is she?
Don't forget the disgusting things Amaral wrote in his book, about Murat, which he received in 2007, from an old friend of Murats.
And this.
02-Processos Volume II PJ Record 8th May 2007
At about 20.00 the police received a phone call from a number that could not be identified, from a person with a female voice speaking in correct Portuguese, who did not want to be identified for reasons of safety. She refers to an individual who abducted Madeleine, who knows how to keep quiet and is quite close to the police. When asked who she was referring to she said it was an individual who resides in Praia da Luz, who has an English mother, who speaks this language very well, who was near the area since the disappearance of the little girl, supposedly with the intention of helping the investigation. She said this man was called Robert and that he used to consult Internet chats of a pretty heavy sexual nature. He would also use Internet for contacts with different acquaintances he had in other countries, especially in the UK. She said most of the mails he sent were encrypted due to the monitoring of the kind of content they possessed. This is why she wanted to alert the authorities about the characteristics of this man, who, in her opinion, could have sexual motives and opportunity, knowing the area perfectly for committing or collaborating in this type of crime.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on April 27, 2013, 10:45:50 PM
DCI Amaral was writing on the investigation and its details, what other people had reported, not what HE thought, not speculating like Lori Campbell and others did that he was a child killer
About time mods we had a rolly eye smiley on here
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: icabodcrane on April 27, 2013, 10:54:06 PM
Seems Lori Campbell wasn't the only one though, is she?
Don't forget the disgusting things Amaral wrote in his book, about Murat, which he received in 2007, from an old friend of Murats.
And this.
02-Processos Volume II PJ Record 8th May 2007
At about 20.00 the police received a phone call from a number that could not be identified, from a person with a female voice speaking in correct Portuguese, who did not want to be identified for reasons of safety. She refers to an individual who abducted Madeleine, who knows how to keep quiet and is quite close to the police. When asked who she was referring to she said it was an individual who resides in Praia da Luz, who has an English mother, who speaks this language very well, who was near the area since the disappearance of the little girl, supposedly with the intention of helping the investigation. She said this man was called Robert and that he used to consult Internet chats of a pretty heavy sexual nature. He would also use Internet for contacts with different acquaintances he had in other countries, especially in the UK. She said most of the mails he sent were encrypted due to the monitoring of the kind of content they possessed. This is why she wanted to alert the authorities about the characteristics of this man, who, in her opinion, could have sexual motives and opportunity, knowing the area perfectly for committing or collaborating in this type of crime.
That sounds a bit alarming !
I suppose it must have been investigated and dismissed though, given that the Prosecutor found no evidence that he was involved in any crime
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: DCI on April 27, 2013, 10:57:11 PM
DCI Amaral was writing on the investigation and its details, what other people had reported, not what HE thought, not speculating like Lori Campbell and others did that he was a child killer
About time mods we had a rolly eye smiley on here
So the Portuguese womans statement on the 8th May 2007, is not speculating? 8)-)))
Sounds far worse than Lori Campbells speculation. And she didn't speculate that he was a child killer.
You do realise you have just defamed Lori Campbell? .
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on April 27, 2013, 10:58:23 PM
Seems Lori Campbell wasn't the only one though, is she?
Don't forget the disgusting things Amaral wrote in his book, about Murat, which he received in 2007, from an old friend of Murats.
And this.
02-Processos Volume II PJ Record 8th May 2007
At about 20.00 the police received a phone call from a number that could not be identified, from a person with a female voice speaking in correct Portuguese, who did not want to be identified for reasons of safety. She refers to an individual who abducted Madeleine, who knows how to keep quiet and is quite close to the police. When asked who she was referring to she said it was an individual who resides in Praia da Luz, who has an English mother, who speaks this language very well, who was near the area since the disappearance of the little girl, supposedly with the intention of helping the investigation. She said this man was called Robert and that he used to consult Internet chats of a pretty heavy sexual nature. He would also use Internet for contacts with different acquaintances he had in other countries, especially in the UK. She said most of the mails he sent were encrypted due to the monitoring of the kind of content they possessed. This is why she wanted to alert the authorities about the characteristics of this man, who, in her opinion, could have sexual motives and opportunity, knowing the area perfectly for committing or collaborating in this type of crime.
That sounds a bit alarming !
I suppose it must have been investigated and dismissed though, given that the Prosecutor found no evidence that he was involved in any crime
It's background information of no direct relevance to the matter under investigation, similar to the stuff about David Payne ...
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on April 27, 2013, 11:01:49 PM
DCI Amaral was writing on the investigation and its details, what other people had reported, not what HE thought, not speculating like Lori Campbell and others did that he was a child killer
About time mods we had a rolly eye smiley on here
So the Portuguese womans statement on the 8th May 2007, is not speculating? 8)-)))
I said Amaral was REPORTING on things that happened not that he believed them, or was the cause/originator of things sheesh
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: DCI on April 27, 2013, 11:04:23 PM
DCI Amaral was writing on the investigation and its details, what other people had reported, not what HE thought, not speculating like Lori Campbell and others did that he was a child killer
About time mods we had a rolly eye smiley on here
So the Portuguese womans statement on the 8th May 2007, is not speculating? 8)-)))
I said Amaral was REPORTING on things that happened not that he believed them, or was the cause od them,sheesh
He must have believed them, he put both in his book, 12 months later.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on April 27, 2013, 11:06:23 PM
DCI Amaral was writing on the investigation and its details, what other people had reported, not what HE thought, not speculating like Lori Campbell and others did that he was a child killer
About time mods we had a rolly eye smiley on here
So the Portuguese womans statement on the 8th May 2007, is not speculating? 8)-)))
Couple of crucial distinctions, there. I've never had a problem with Lori Cambell reporting her suspicions.
I did (do) have a huge problem with her splashing what she suspected over the pages of her newspaper.
And with Amaral, you only have to look at what a distorted meal he made of the Payne episode in his book to see how he misuses information ...
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on April 27, 2013, 11:09:24 PM
I always thought this was a quite brilliant article about Robert Murat:
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic2465.html
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on April 27, 2013, 11:12:27 PM
He must have believed them, he put both in his book, 12 months later.
Well what can I say DCI, LOL
People who write books talk about all kinds of stuff, doesnt mean they BELIEVE them all, I think you are confused
Think about a documentary maker, does he/she believe that everything in the documentary is true? of course not, they are just relaying facts and stories involved, the fact that someone rang in to the Pj and said x y z about mr murat and Mr Amaral talking about it doea NOT meanMr Amaral believed it was true
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: DCI on April 27, 2013, 11:29:58 PM
He must have believed them, he put both in his book, 12 months later.
Well what can I say DCI, LOL
People who write books talk about all kinds of stuff, doesnt mean they BELIEVE them all, I think you are confused
Think about a documentary maker, does he/she believe that everything in the documentary is true? of course not, they are just relaying facts and stories involved, the fact that someone rang in to the Pj and said x y z about mr murat and Mr Amaral talking about it doea NOT meanMr Amaral believed it was true
Confused @)(++(*
He libelled Murat, in publishing that filth, about him. Don't forget the title of his book 8)-)))
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: icabodcrane on April 27, 2013, 11:33:24 PM
Seems Lori Campbell wasn't the only one though, is she?
Don't forget the disgusting things Amaral wrote in his book, about Murat, which he received in 2007, from an old friend of Murats.
And this.
02-Processos Volume II PJ Record 8th May 2007
At about 20.00 the police received a phone call from a number that could not be identified, from a person with a female voice speaking in correct Portuguese, who did not want to be identified for reasons of safety. She refers to an individual who abducted Madeleine, who knows how to keep quiet and is quite close to the police. When asked who she was referring to she said it was an individual who resides in Praia da Luz, who has an English mother, who speaks this language very well, who was near the area since the disappearance of the little girl, supposedly with the intention of helping the investigation. She said this man was called Robert and that he used to consult Internet chats of a pretty heavy sexual nature. He would also use Internet for contacts with different acquaintances he had in other countries, especially in the UK. She said most of the mails he sent were encrypted due to the monitoring of the kind of content they possessed. This is why she wanted to alert the authorities about the characteristics of this man, who, in her opinion, could have sexual motives and opportunity, knowing the area perfectly for committing or collaborating in this type of crime.
That sounds a bit alarming !
I suppose it must have been investigated and dismissed though, given that the Prosecutor found no evidence that he was involved in any crime
It's background information of no direct relevance to the matter under investigation, similar to the stuff about David Payne ...
The Social worker's anonymous contact with the police you mean ? ... yes, I agree, there is a similarity
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on April 27, 2013, 11:44:55 PM
DCI of course he didnt libel Murat anymore than Murat libelled himself when he spoke of people who had talked rubbish of him
He recounted the history of the investigation with all its warts that is all
I dont have to remember anything about the book title, the appeal court decided the book was fine as a recount of the investigation
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Chinagirl on April 28, 2013, 12:32:17 AM
I know that the McCanns were made Arguidos largely because of the dog evidence, but why was Murat held in suspiscion by the police ?
There was no"dog evidence;" they simply indicated places where evidence might be found.
Yes carry on telling yourself that cg What youre sayng is only *technically* right you know
What evidence is this that *might be found* after a cadaver dog has alerted? tell me,because it certainly wasnt finding remains, please dont say keela dog alerts to blood as you would say well, there was no cadaver scent after all as eddie also alerts to blood, and no human body was in 5a, so what evidence would eddie be pointing to? There is a reason a cadaver dog is used in cases and it is NOT because it can smell blood, if that were the case, the blood dog would be redundant, the dog rubix cube is getting closer to be solved
And there is no scientific testing for cadaver scent thats why dogs are used, the FSS have even said this, that Mr Grimes dogs findings are taken as given
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Chinagirl on April 28, 2013, 04:46:39 AM
I think you should careully read the many threads on this board about the dogs where Debunker and others have been at pains to explain the dog indications - and you should read whatthe handler, Grime himself, had to say.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: John on January 05, 2014, 05:36:04 PM
To be fair to the Press on the ground were only repeating what they were being told by the tapas-7. They were calling Murat a liar and saying he was seen near the apartment that night and why doesn't he come clean etc etc...
You only need to read O'Briens rogatory to get a favour of what was being talked about.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Victoria on January 05, 2014, 05:40:04 PM
To be fair the Press on the ground were only repeating what they were being told by the tapas-7. They were calling Murat a liar and saying he was seen near the apartment that night and why doesn't he come clean etc etc...
You only need to read O'Briens rogatory to get a favour of what was being talked about.
Can you really not see the difference between a statement to police and a story published in a national newspaper?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on January 05, 2014, 05:49:29 PM
To be fair the Press on the ground were only repeating what they were being told by the tapas-7. They were calling Murat a liar and saying he was seen near the apartment that night and why doesn't he come clean etc etc...
You only need to read O'Briens rogatory to get a favour of what was being talked about.
Would Amaral come into this category?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 05, 2014, 05:49:58 PM
To be fair the Press on the ground were only repeating what they were being told by the tapas-7. They were calling Murat a liar and saying he was seen near the apartment that night and why doesn't he come clean etc etc...
You only need to read O'Briens rogatory to get a favour of what was being talked about.
And you only need to read what else was said about Robert Murat, none of which had anything to do with The Tapas Seven.
And Witness Statements are always privileged. Or didn't you know that?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: John on January 05, 2014, 05:50:11 PM
To be fair the Press on the ground were only repeating what they were being told by the tapas-7. They were calling Murat a liar and saying he was seen near the apartment that night and why doesn't he come clean etc etc...
You only need to read O'Briens rogatory to get a favour of what was being talked about.
I don't agree, John. The allegations against Murat were horrendous.
And, in a different situation, such long-term damaging allegations could have been about you, which is why I don't understand your stance.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: jassi on January 05, 2014, 06:03:20 PM
Presumably, if they were libelous, they shouldn't be repeated or discussed.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on January 05, 2014, 06:24:33 PM
Robert Murat was never a suspect until a certain member of the tapas-7 stated they had seem him lurking around the McCann's apartment on the night that Madeleine disappeared. Robert did much to help the McCanns and that was how he got his thanks. Disgraceful!
That is a misrepresentation.
The question that arose was simply whether Murat was out and about on the night; plenty insisted he was (as he was fully and legally entitled to be) but he insisted he spent the evening with his mother.
Complicating that issue is that several dead-ringer look-alikes for Murat were out and about that night, including David Payne.
Mistaken identity? Who knows.
I never did figure the point of this 'confrontation'.
At least before Lora Campbell, no one suggested any link between Murat and Madeleine.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pinkblossoms on January 05, 2014, 06:27:27 PM
Lori's comments came later. It was a member of the tapas-7 who first identified Murat as having been around the apartment. They were the first interviewed by police on 4 May. Lori only added fuel to the fire by making the silly comments she did.
The first hint of any suggestion of a link with Madeleine came from Lori Campbel.
Before that, it was a simple question of whether Murat spent the evening with is mother or whether he didn't.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pinkblossoms on January 05, 2014, 06:37:23 PM
Lori's comments came later. It was a member of the tapas-7 who first identified Murat as having been around the apartment. They were the first interviewed by police on 4 May. Lori only added fuel to the fire by making the silly comments she did.
can you verify that it was a member of the tapas who first identified murat,and not lori Campbell >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 05, 2014, 06:38:55 PM
The question that arose was simply whether Murat was out and about on the night; plenty insisted he was (as he was fully and legally entitled to be) but he insisted he spent the evening with his mother.
Complicating that issue is that several dead-ringer look-alikes for Murat were out and about that night, including David Payne.
Mistaken identity? Who knows.
I never did figure the point of this 'confrontation'.
At least before Lora Campbell, no one suggested any link between Murat and Madeleine.
This is a fact. This accusation did not first come from The Tapas Seven. But it was never important in so far as I could see. So, perhaps he was there. What is that supposed to mean? He knew The PJ better than we ever will.
However, I thought that the abductor was heading for the hills or the beach at the time. So it can't have been him.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Benice on January 05, 2014, 06:56:27 PM
Robert Murat was never a suspect until a certain member of the tapas-7 stated they had seem him lurking around the McCann's apartment on the night that Madeleine disappeared. Robert did much to help the McCanns and that was how he got his thanks. Disgraceful!
Are you sure John? IIRC None of the Tapas 7 had any any prior knowledge that Murat was going to picked up by the police and made an arguido. It was only AFTER he was made an Arguido and they saw his picture on TV that they recognised him as a man they saw on the night of the 3rd and relayed that info to a UK policeman. (And they were not the only ones to make that claim either).
Wasn't it newspaper reporters who first became suspicious of him and contacted the Leicester police - and set the ball rolling?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: stephen25000 on January 05, 2014, 07:09:52 PM
Are you sure John? IIRC None of the Tapas 7 had any any prior knowledge that Murat was going to picked up by the police and made an arguido. It was only AFTER he was made an Arguido and they saw his picture on TV that they recognised him as a man they saw on the night of the 3rd and relayed that info to a UK policeman. (And they were not the only ones to make that claim either).
Wasn't it newspaper reporters who first became suspicious of him and contacted the Leicester police - and set the ball rolling?
Ah yes, the infamous Lori Campell, who has backed the Mccanns to the hilt.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pinkblossoms on January 05, 2014, 07:33:27 PM
Are you sure John? IIRC None of the Tapas 7 had any any prior knowledge that Murat was going to picked up by the police and made an arguido. It was only AFTER he was made an Arguido and they saw his picture on TV that they recognised him as a man they saw on the night of the 3rd and relayed that info to a UK policeman. (And they were not the only ones to make that claim either).
Wasn't it newspaper reporters who first became suspicious of him and contacted the Leicester police - and set the ball rolling?
yes both lori campbell and ian woods were suspicious of murat,because of his weird behaviour long before any tapas even knew who he was
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: VIXTE on January 06, 2014, 01:03:16 AM
Lori's comments came later. It was a member of the tapas-7 who first identified Murat as having been around the apartment. They were the first interviewed by police on 4 May. Lori only added fuel to the fire by making the silly comments she did.
Well. I remember that day on the SKY News very well.. when the Murat story broke up.. I was next to the TV the whole day..
What I also remember is that when the Murats photo was first time published in the media, it wasn't his photo at all. That was the photo of that journalist from the Portugal News.. the Brit living in PDL..I cannot remember his name.. But the journo was interviewed on SKY news and he confirmed it was his photo that was published in the media, mixed up with Murats and the journo was talking how weird feeling that was..
Now.. I also always thought that it was him, the journalist, who was there that night during the search and he was perhaps being mixed up with Murat..so everyone was right.. they saw the guy that night, but that wasn't Murat but the journalist guy.
That is my six pence ;))
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Benice on January 06, 2014, 02:04:33 AM
Well let's have a look at what Russell O'Brien had to say about Mr Murat's involvement bearing in mind that Lori Campbell's didn't phone Leicestershire Police until 6 May.
Comments- I am troubled by MURAT’S denial of being there on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance and assisting in the translations. This has troubled me he would have an alibi had he have been honest about being there. The statement given in Portugal are true and accurate, other people put MURAT there on the night one of those being Sylvia head of house keeping. I would like to point out that I do not wish to change the statement given to the PJ but have reservations that the time may have been inaccurate and it may have been the following morning when I saw him.
I’ve written about, erm, Robert MURAT and then there’s a whole, my whole third statement is, is solely about our meetings, erm, so there, there is a vast amount of information that, that isn’t there, but obviously in my third statement is, is a sort of testimony for that. I think what I’ve written here really is that, erm, we gave that statement, erm, within a few days of him being made aguido, certainly before, erm, any details of, of his movements, according to his statement, had been, had been leaked or had come out into the open. Erm, we certainly, the three, you know, the three of us, all immediately thought, when we saw him on the television, that we recognised him and that he was there on the night and the statements that were given were given relatively soon after the event and at the time I had absolutely no doubt that that was, that those were accurate. The reason I brought this back up here is because I cannot see what he stood to gain by not, by not being, well by saying he wasn’t there on the night when there was the potential for so many people to have seen him. Erm, and it’s been a bit difficult, kind of, erm, you know, he was trying to knock a square peg into a round hole here, because I certainly had a great deal of faith in what I said at the time, you know, there was no, I didn’t have any doubts, was it the evening, sorry, was it the night, was it the next morning, but with him denying it, with no further evidence coming out, with no questions in here whatsoever that kind of led, that would, that sort of said, you know, ‘What about Robert MURAT’, I can only speculate that there’s, that there is no further evidence, erm, that kind will push, will push the case further on him. Erm, and then I also got the information from the likes of Charlotte PENNINGTON and, and, erm, at least earlier on, Sylvia, erm, well sort of the Housekeeper, and Press reports saying that other people also placed him there on the night, that kind of made me think, well this is, that I, you know, that I am correct”.
www.mccannfiles.com/id221.html
In red above - is where he says it was AFTER RM was made an arguido and they saw his piccie on TV that they contacted the police to say they remembered seeing him on the 3rd May and later made statements to that effect.
It's seems pretty clear to me that until then they had no idea he was being investigated and that they played no part at all in his initial 'arrest' - which IIRC was a couple of weeks after Madeleine disappeared.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: John on January 06, 2014, 04:42:02 AM
In red above - is where he says it was AFTER RM was made an arguido and they saw his piccie on TV that they contacted the police to say they remembered seeing him on the 3rd May and later made statements to that effect.
It's seems pretty clear to me that until then they had no idea he was being investigated and that they played no part at all in his initial 'arrest' - which IIRC was a couple of weeks after Madeleine disappeared.
Robert Murat was made an arguido on 15 May 2007 which was the very day Rachael made her statement about him. Russell and Fiona both made similar statements the following day.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: colombosstogey on January 06, 2014, 06:04:24 AM
Well. I remember that day on the SKY News very well.. when the Murat story broke up.. I was next to the TV the whole day..
What I also remember is that when the Murats photo was first time published in the media, it wasn't his photo at all. That was the photo of that journalist from the Portugal News.. the Brit living in PDL..I cannot remember his name.. But the journo was interviewed on SKY news and he confirmed it was his photo that was published in the media, mixed up with Murats and the journo was talking how weird feeling that was..
Now.. I also always thought that it was him, the journalist, who was there that night during the search and he was perhaps being mixed up with Murat..so everyone was right.. they saw the guy that night, but that wasn't Murat but the journalist guy.
Robert Murat was made an arguido on 15 May 2007 which was the very day Rachael made her statement about him. Russell and Fiona both made similar statements the following day.
I would query whether the date of Rachael's statement is correct.
However - do you now agree that from all their statements it's clear that it was not until AFTER they saw RM on TV that they recognised him as someone they'd seen on the night of the 3rd and were subsequently interviewed about that -and therefore they were not responsible for his being made an Arguido - which is what you originally claimed?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: stephen25000 on January 06, 2014, 08:48:25 AM
Which makes it even worse. If she didn't confound them she clearly pinned an innocent man just to feed the police with a suspect.
Murat was one of the many innocent victims the McCann case concocted over the time.
There's one for davel.
How many people, and I don't mean the mccanns or associates, have become 'victims' in this case by being accused of taking Madeleine without any foundation whatsoever ?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pinkblossoms on January 06, 2014, 10:12:08 AM
How many other people identified murat as being there that night not including mccanns or friends ?????
nanny Charlotte Pennington, who said she saw Mr Murat hanging around outside the Ocean Club's reception at about 10pm, and British holiday-maker Jayne Jensen, an unnamed British barrister and two unidentified British tourists who all claim to have seen him around the complex that night. >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pinkblossoms on January 06, 2014, 10:37:18 AM
Mr Murat's uncle Ralph Eveleigh was shown Mr Symington's photograph and exclaimed: "Bloody hell, it's Robert! They're very similar." But Mr Murat's hopes that the likeness could help him clear his name were dealt a blow last night when Mr Symington said he left Praia da Luz at 6pm on May 3 and was seven miles away at the time of the witness sightings, between 10pm and midnight.
He said: "I categorically wasn't around on the night she vanished. I was at home with my family. "I left Praia da Luz at 6pm on May 3 to go home. I live 10km away from here, so I was not in or around Luz that night. It couldn't have been me."
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Benice on January 06, 2014, 10:42:41 AM
Which makes it even worse. If she didn't confound them she clearly pinned an innocent man just to feed the police with a suspect.
Murat was one of the many innocent victims the McCann case concocted over the time.
Absolute tosh imo. The PJ gave the McCanns the impression that Murat was involved - and that it was just a matter of time before they arrested him. It was only when KM read the files she realised there was never any evidence against him.
IMO they also led RM to believe that JT had identified him as the abductor (in the same way they lied to GM about the 100% DNA match). I have no doubt that he later discovered that wasn't true and that JT had never claimed to have seen him on the 3rd.
RM was made an arguido by the PJ - from various information they received - none of which had come from the McCanns or their friends - and it turned out they were wrong (again).
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Benice on January 06, 2014, 10:45:51 AM
How many other people identified murat as being there that night not including mccanns or friends ?????
nanny Charlotte Pennington, who said she saw Mr Murat hanging around outside the Ocean Club's reception at about 10pm, and British holiday-maker Jayne Jensen, an unnamed British barrister and two unidentified British tourists who all claim to have seen him around the complex that night. >@@(*&)
Also Sylvia Batista (sp) a Mark Warner employee.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Luz on January 06, 2014, 10:47:30 AM
Mr Murat's uncle Ralph Eveleigh was shown Mr Symington's photograph and exclaimed: "Bloody hell, it's Robert! They're very similar." But Mr Murat's hopes that the likeness could help him clear his name were dealt a blow last night when Mr Symington said he left Praia da Luz at 6pm on May 3 and was seven miles away at the time of the witness sightings, between 10pm and midnight.
He said: "I categorically wasn't around on the night she vanished. I was at home with my family. "I left Praia da Luz at 6pm on May 3 to go home. I live 10km away from here, so I was not in or around Luz that night. It couldn't have been me."
Mr. David must be delighted after he patronized the mccann and invited them for dinner.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: stephen25000 on January 06, 2014, 10:53:25 AM
How many other people identified murat as being there that night not including mccanns or friends ?????
nanny Charlotte Pennington, who said she saw Mr Murat hanging around outside the Ocean Club's reception at about 10pm, and British holiday-maker Jayne Jensen, an unnamed British barrister and two unidentified British tourists who all claim to have seen him around the complex that night. >@@(*&)
They should have been shown Payne's photos,side by side with Murat's.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Luz on January 06, 2014, 10:56:39 AM
Absolute tosh imo. The PJ gave the McCanns the impression that Murat was involved - and that it was just a matter of time before they arrested him. It was only when KM read the files she realised there was never any evidence against him.
IMO they also led RM to believe that JT had identified him as the abductor (in the same way they lied to GM about the 100% DNA match). I have no doubt that he later discovered that wasn't true and that JT had never claimed to have seen him on the 3rd.
RM was made an arguido by the PJ - from various information they received - none of which had come from the McCanns or their friends - and it turned out they were wrong (again).
Go on blame the police. And as you are at it, blame them for the death of the child and the disappearance of her body.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on January 06, 2014, 11:22:43 AM
Nothing ever came of anyone alledgedly saying they saw Murat on the night....most of it seems paper / metodo3 tittle tattle 7 months after the events...nothing in the police files except for people who were around that night who knew him saying they didnt see him......and sylvia baptista did not say she saw him personally....she didnt even know him.....just a case of mistaken identity imo at best....wouldnt want to speculate on the worst!
Eta
Thats as far as that lot go.....as to fiona payne, she reckons he introduced himself by name that night.....
>@@(*&) Dont believe her..I too think the tapas three were entirely mistaken...at best......I mean in their rogatories they never knew which day was which....not reliable witnesses imo but at least OBrien had the nous to say it was possible he was wrong As for Rachel Oldfield how can anyne trust what she says, when she comes out with gormless comments like the had to lift the patio door shutters to go in and check on their kids......
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on January 06, 2014, 11:37:09 AM
How many people, and I don't mean the mccanns or associates, have become 'victims' in this case by being accused of taking Madeleine without any foundation whatsoever ?
Too many to count......and pretty disgusting at best
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: colombosstogey on January 06, 2014, 01:46:17 PM
Mr Murat's uncle Ralph Eveleigh was shown Mr Symington's photograph and exclaimed: "Bloody hell, it's Robert! They're very similar." But Mr Murat's hopes that the likeness could help him clear his name were dealt a blow last night when Mr Symington said he left Praia da Luz at 6pm on May 3 and was seven miles away at the time of the witness sightings, between 10pm and midnight.
He said: "I categorically wasn't around on the night she vanished. I was at home with my family. "I left Praia da Luz at 6pm on May 3 to go home. I live 10km away from here, so I was not in or around Luz that night. It couldn't have been me."
It seems that Mr Murat has a popular face, as there was another person who looked identical to him who was actually OUT SEARCHING that night and could have been mistaken for him.
Adriaan Jacobus Van Marais, who worked there and was searching until about 2am....
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Mr Gray on January 06, 2014, 01:54:44 PM
I would query whether the date of Rachael's statement is correct.
However - do you now agree that from all their statements it's clear that it was not until AFTER they saw RM on TV that they recognised him as someone they'd seen on the night of the 3rd and were subsequently interviewed about that -and therefore they were not responsible for his being made an Arguido - which is what you originally claimed?
Why would you query the date of the statement Benice?
Having read their statements again I would say that some members of the tapas-7 contributed to him being made an arguido.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: John on January 06, 2014, 02:46:40 PM
RM was made an arguido by the PJ - from various information they received - none of which had come from the McCanns or their friends - and it turned out they were wrong (again).
Why are you claiming this when it is untrue Benice?
The tapas-7 were interviewed immediately after Madeleine was found missing and one of the questions was did you see anyone acting suspiciously around the OCG that night/morning. At least three of them saw a man they later identified as RM.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: VIXTE on January 06, 2014, 08:22:10 PM
Why are you claiming this when it is untrue Benice?
The tapas-7 were interviewed immediately after Madeleine was found missing and one of the questions was did you see anyone acting suspiciously around the OCG that night/morning. At least three of them saw a man they later identified as RM.
I am sorry but this seems illogical to me.. As if they knew who he was.. wouldn't they tell the British press when he was firstly suspected?
The press knew there was someone, it was all over the news.. but it wasn't the RM photo they showed. It was that guy, the british journalist living in PDL, Paul L.. something they showed..
Now, my question is: was name of RM ever mentioned in any early questioning of the tapas group?
I am too lazy to check for this.. and not so interested!
But if it did then it would be similar to case of Jonna Yeates, when her murderer wrongly accused the landlord..
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Benice on January 07, 2014, 07:45:01 AM
Why would you query the date of the statement Benice?
Having read their statements again I would say that some members of the tapas-7 contributed to him being made an arguido.
I queried the date because of the quote below from Rachael's statement dated the 15th, which as you say was the date on which RM was made an Arguido. She refers to 'the day before when it was on TV that RM had been made an Arguido'.. So either RM was made an arguido on the 14th or the date of her statement is incorrect. But whenever it was - her statement was made AFTER RM had been made an Arguido - not on the same day or before.
Quote She did not see him again, except for yesterday, when he was shown on various television channels as a suspect in the abduction of Madeleine. She then felt her suspicions about this individual would be confirmed, feeling bad for not having expressed them earlier to others and to the police. Unquote
Once again - she confirms that she had not spoken to the police about RM prior to his being made an arguido- so could not have contributed to that decision by the PJ to make him one.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Benice on January 07, 2014, 08:14:51 AM
Why are you claiming this when it is untrue Benice?
The tapas-7 were interviewed immediately after Madeleine was found missing and one of the questions was did you see anyone acting suspiciously around the OCG that night/morning. At least three of them saw a man they later identified as RM.
Yes but they identified him as the man they saw on 3rd May to the police AFTER he had been made an arguido. It would have to be BEFORE he was made an arguido for them to have influenced that decision by the PJ. They do not mention RM at all in any statements given to the PJ BEFORE he was made an arguido.
RM was made an Arguido on the 15th May It was then announced on TV. As a result of seeing that - they contacted the police and were subsequently interviewed - and that is when they identified him as the man they saw on 3rd May.
Therefore it isn't physically possible for any of them to have contributed to RM being made an arguido as you claim - because he'd already been made one before they were interviewed.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Angelo222 on January 07, 2014, 09:28:57 AM
You are forgetting that Robert Murat was seem on TV the week before he was made an arguido.
Sorry Angelo - I don't understand the point you're making - could you elucidate plz?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 07, 2014, 11:45:48 AM
Why were The McCanns made Arguidos?
There was never any reason to sensibly accuse either them or Robert Murat. Just some idiot going off half cocked in the process of trying to make a name for himself. And of course, none of them were actually Portuguese.
Robert Murat can thank his lucky stars that The Media were all over this from day one. Although I do believe that Robert Murat was threatened by Goncalo Amaral, despite the fact that according to some, he was only The Coordinator. Heaven help Robert Murat and those Police Station Stairs otherwise.
So for more than six months nothing else was looked at beyond those three. What a mess.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 07, 2014, 11:50:46 AM
There was never any reason to sensibly accuse either them or Robert Murat. Just some idiot going off half cocked in the process of trying to make a name for himself. And of course, none of them were actually Portuguese.
Robert Murat can thank his lucky stars that The Media were all over this from day one. Although I do believe that Robert Murat was threatened by Goncalo Amaral, despite the fact that according to some, he was only The Coordinator. Heaven help Robert Murat and those Police Station Stairs otherwise.
So for more than six months nothing else was looked at beyond those three. What a mess.
That's a lie but let's assume it's true for the sake of discussion. If it were true why was legal action not taken against the police? Why, instead, was it taken against a book writer?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on January 07, 2014, 12:03:44 PM
There was never any reason to sensibly accuse either them or Robert Murat. Just some idiot going off half cocked in the process of trying to make a name for himself. And of course, none of them were actually Portuguese.
Robert Murat can thank his lucky stars that The Media were all over this from day one. Although I do believe that Robert Murat was threatened by Goncalo Amaral, despite the fact that according to some, he was only The Coordinator. Heaven help Robert Murat and those Police Station Stairs otherwise.
So for more than six months nothing else was looked at beyond those three. What a mess.
So the PJ spent so many man hours and resources on all the sightngs just for fun?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 07, 2014, 12:23:18 PM
..... deleted quote removed ...
Portugal has a different judicial system. You keep talking about the police. Police, police, Amaral, police... Amaral etc.
You never mention the judges and prosecutors.
Quoting the Met on October 24th: "The Portuguese Judicial Authorities have today, 24 October, announced that they have reopened their investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann."
It is they who direct investigations, not policemen like Mr Amaral. It's a different system.
Yet you never mention this in your analysis of 2007 >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: jassi on January 07, 2014, 12:31:24 PM
Portugal has a different judicial system. You keep talking about the police. Police, police, Amaral, police... Amaral etc.
You never mention the judges and prosecutors.
Quoting the Met on October 24th: "The Portuguese Judicial Authorities have today, 24 October, announced that they have reopened their investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann."
It is they who direct investigations, not policemen like Mr Amaral. It's a different system.
Yet you never mention this in your analysis of 2007 >@@(*&)
I believe a number of European countries have similar systems, so it is not a quirk of Portugal.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 07, 2014, 12:38:32 PM
But that doesn't fit Eleanor's (and the McCanns) narrative does it. They describe it like a Hollywood movie.
What has this got to do with anything? Three people were made Arguidos on nil evidence. All subsequentially cleared of any involvement in a crime. Mayhap Robert Murat will sue The PJ, but I somewhat doubt it.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 07, 2014, 01:07:08 PM
What has this got to do with anything? Three people were made Arguidos on nil evidence. All subsequentially cleared of any involvement in a crime. Mayhap Robert Murat will sue The PJ, but I somewhat doubt it.
I rather think the authorities were thinking of the child who disappeared without trace, any trace, rather than worrying about upsetting the family's feelings.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 07, 2014, 01:09:15 PM
And it would be the same in any country in the world, Eleanor.
I dread to think what US police would have done in this case.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 07, 2014, 01:43:29 PM
And it would be the same in any country in the world, Eleanor.
I dread to think what US police would have done in this case.
Me too, Lyall. But I truly cannot see the UK Police making such a cock up on this one. Believe me, I would have been among the first to kick in if they had.
But just look at what the US Police had to with The Lisa Irwin disappearance. Strange people running about all over the place, and still they tried to nail the parents.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 07, 2014, 01:50:24 PM
There are absolutely no grounds for the McCanns or Murat to sue the Portuguese authorities (including the PJ). During the investigation, they were declared "arguidos" which gives certain rights under Portuguese law - representation, right to refuse to answer questions etc.
It is a fairly routine procedure - (although of course in some of the more intellectually challenged quarters, the McCanns being made "arguidos" was equated with "convicted").
Making these three people Arguidos on nothing much at all was a bad move. Hasty, I do believe, was said, by another PJ Officer. After that, it was a complete waste of time even questioning any of them as they all had a Right to Silence.
No one in their right mind risks giving any information that can later be twisted.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 07, 2014, 01:52:27 PM
Me too, Lyall. But I truly cannot see the UK Police making such a cock up on this one. Believe me, I would have been among the first to kick in if they had.
But just look at what the US Police had to with The Lisa Irwin disappearance. Strange people running about all over the place, and still they tried to nail the parents.
I don't know that case. But have you read the book by Kevin Wells? The police considered the family to be suspects. As police do in all countries of course, only in Portugal it was three months before they did anything about it.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 07, 2014, 02:32:04 PM
I don't know that case. But have you read the book by Kevin Wells? The police considered the family to be suspects. As police do in all countries of course, only in Portugal it was three months before they did anything about it.
Not according to Amaral's Book.. He had The McCanns in the frame from Day One, he said.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 07, 2014, 02:45:15 PM
Not according to Amaral's Book.. He had The McCanns in the frame from Day One, he said.
Yes - because their behaviour was suspicious. He was using his powers of deduction from day one. That's what detectives do. The behaviour of their friends was suspicious too.
As to Murat, a journalist from the Sunday Mirror contacted Leicestershire police suggesting that Murat's behaviour was suspicious (a bit like Huntley's behaviour after the disappearance of the two girls in Soham). This was on the 6th May - two days after Madeleine's alleged abduction.
Jane Tanner, on the evening of the alleged abduction, claimed that she saw a man carrying a child going in the direction of Murat's house. Tanner's suggestion was that she had seen Madeleine's abductor carrying Madeleine. Did Tanner and others directly identify Murat as the man who she thought had abducted Madeleine?
This was all supposed evidence for the abduction theory. See how many people are sowing the seeds for that theory from the very beginning, despite (allegedly) not being there to witness the abduction, therefore not theoretically having any knowledge as to what had happened to Madeleine?
Did Jane Tanner positively identify Murat as the man she saw carrying a child (the inference being that the child was Madeleine)? In any event, it is on record that the Portugese police did not believe the sighting was important and did not find Tanner a reliable witness.
Aren't doctors supposed to keep an open mind when faced with the challenge of making a diagnosis? Statistically speaking, abduction of a child by a random unknown person is rare. The McCanns themselves openly acknowledged this and in fact cited it as a justification for leaving the children alone in the apartment - they simply did not believe that abduction by a stranger was a possibility.
Statistically speaking, when a child disappears, it often has something to do with parents/carers/someone who knows the child.
While I can understand why, if you were wishing to cover up a crime, you might want to frame someone, what is less easy to understand is Gerry's answer when asked if he knew Murat. 'No comment'.
In actual fact, Murat offered to help the McCanns, by translating for instance.
I wonder what Murat has to say about the McCanns and their friends?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 17, 2014, 01:36:27 PM
Okay, apparently Kate McCann claims that she had suspicions about Murat all along.
Who is claiming that a body is buried in Murat's driveway? Stephen Birch, the South African. He does not claim or suggest that Murat has anything to do with this. I have absolutely no idea as to the veracity of this claim.
I simply mention it as, hypothetically speaking, if someone had committed a crime they might want to cover it up and frame someone else. It is possible.
Even if there are human remains in Murat's driveway, on what basis would Stephen Birch claim that they were those of Madeleine?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Victoria on January 17, 2014, 01:43:07 PM
Okay, apparently Kate McCann claims that she had suspicions about Murat all along.
Who is claiming that a body is buried in Murat's driveway? Stephen Birch, the South African. He does not claim or suggest that Murat has anything to do with this. I have absolutely no idea as to the veracity of this claim.
I simply mention it as, hypothetically speaking, if someone had committed a crime they might want to cover it up and frame someone else. It is possible.
Even if there are human remains in Murat's driveway, on what basis would Stephen Birch claim that they were those of Madeleine?
Where?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on January 17, 2014, 01:57:20 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-505443/Kate-McCann-My-suspicions-Murats-alibi-night-Madeleine-vanished.html Pity shes never offered him any apology but forgives the abductor! Might wierd woman
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Victoria on January 17, 2014, 02:01:54 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-505443/Kate-McCann-My-suspicions-Murats-alibi-night-Madeleine-vanished.html Pity shes never offered him any apology but forgives the abductor! Might wierd woman
So no direct quote from Kate then. Just as I thought.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on January 17, 2014, 02:12:46 PM
Do you know of precedents in a child's disappearance case of parents using a spokesman ? A spokesman implies media. If you close your door to them (which doesn't mean the media will stop informing on the case), no spokesman is needed. Celebs who are clumsy in PR matter use spokesmen to be sure that the news will be appropriate and have an impact at least minimizing a negative image.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 17, 2014, 04:28:23 PM
Do you know of precedents in a child's disappearance case of parents using a spokesman ? A spokesman implies media. If you close your door to them (which doesn't mean the media will stop informing on the case), no spokesman is needed. Celebs who are clumsy in PR matter use spokesmen to be sure that the news will be appropriate and have an impact at least minimizing a negative image.
No I don't know of any precedents Anne, but there really never was a case like this one before.
Mohamed Al-Fayed had/has one - it's not entirely analogous but may have set a precedent. >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 17, 2014, 04:32:23 PM
Page 84 of Kate's book: "There was little doubt in my mind then, nor is there now, that what Jane saw was Madeleine's abductor taking her away."
Page 79 of Kate's book: "....Jane had seen a man....carrying a child.........having passed Gerry and Jes talking.....she had seen this man crossing the junction.....As soon as she heard about Madeleine's disappearance, everything fell into place and she felt sick."
Kate mentions Murat on page 88. On page 98 she mentions the family of 9 who saw a man carrying a child who gave a similar description to Jane's,
On page 133 she writes about hearing that Robert Murat had been taking in for questioning.
In her book, Kate claims that Jane never identified Murat as the man she had seen on 3rd May.
However on page 134 Kate records that Fiona told us she'd seen Robert Murat outside apartment 5A on the night of Madeleine's disappearance. "Then I began to feel panicky."
However, by page 157, Kate is writing that "when I read through the PJ files .......I found nothing to implicate Murat."
Nevertheless: she does not entirely exonerate him, writing: "Several witnesses, including Fiona, Russ and Rachael, reported seeing Murat near our apartment on the night Madeleine vanished. He has always categorically denied being there and his mother confirmed that he was at home all evening."
So much for the Jane Tanner sighting. Still, the Portugese police always thought it was a turkey.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 17, 2014, 04:41:27 PM
Still, this article in the Daily Mail does not exactly paint Murat in a good light. There is also quite a bit of discussion about his mobile phone call that evening. At least he didn't delete it like certain other people that evening.
Do you know of precedents in a child's disappearance case of parents using a spokesman ? A spokesman implies media. If you close your door to them (which doesn't mean the media will stop informing on the case), no spokesman is needed. Celebs who are clumsy in PR matter use spokesmen to be sure that the news will be appropriate and have an impact at least minimizing a negative image.
In the USA attorneys will have done a similar job, I'm sure there will have been many instances of that.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 17, 2014, 04:44:03 PM
Don't forget that we still have this man coming from the wrong direction who appeared to be heading away from 5A. It really isn't surprising if everyone, including me, thought he was the abductor. And certainly, Jane Tanner saw someone.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on January 17, 2014, 04:48:07 PM
Yes - because their behaviour was suspicious. He was using his powers of deduction from day one. That's what detectives do. The behaviour of their friends was suspicious too.
As to Murat, a journalist from the Sunday Mirror contacted Leicestershire police suggesting that Murat's behaviour was suspicious (a bit like Huntley's behaviour after the disappearance of the two girls in Soham). This was on the 6th May - two days after Madeleine's alleged abduction.
Jane Tanner, on the evening of the alleged abduction, claimed that she saw a man carrying a child going in the direction of Murat's house. Tanner's suggestion was that she had seen Madeleine's abductor carrying Madeleine. Did Tanner and others directly identify Murat as the man who she thought had abducted Madeleine?
This was all supposed evidence for the abduction theory. See how many people are sowing the seeds for that theory from the very beginning, despite (allegedly) not being there to witness the abduction, therefore not theoretically having any knowledge as to what had happened to Madeleine?
Did Jane Tanner positively identify Murat as the man she saw carrying a child (the inference being that the child was Madeleine)? In any event, it is on record that the Portugese police did not believe the sighting was important and did not find Tanner a reliable witness.
Aren't doctors supposed to keep an open mind when faced with the challenge of making a diagnosis? Statistically speaking, abduction of a child by a random unknown person is rare. The McCanns themselves openly acknowledged this and in fact cited it as a justification for leaving the children alone in the apartment - they simply did not believe that abduction by a stranger was a possibility.
Statistically speaking, when a child disappears, it often has something to do with parents/carers/someone who knows the child.
While I can understand why, if you were wishing to cover up a crime, you might want to frame someone, what is less easy to understand is Gerry's answer when asked if he knew Murat. 'No comment'.
In actual fact, Murat offered to help the McCanns, by translating for instance.
I wonder what Murat has to say about the McCanns and their friends?
See, the trouble with Amaral is that he didn't even seem to understand the basic procedures and protocols of his own police force, as revealed in his comment about the Gaspar statements.
If Amaral is to be believed (he isn't!) the Gaspars made a joint statement.
The distinction is vital, because Mr Gaspar's statement could scarcely have been more different from his wife's.
That aside, basic procedure and protocol of police forces around the world (including the PJ) is to take individual witness statements.
Why didn't Amaral know/say that?
Incompetence?
Or attempt to mislead?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 17, 2014, 04:48:21 PM
Don't forget that we still have this man coming from the wrong direction who appeared to be heading away from 5A. It really isn't surprising if everyone, including me, thought he was the abductor. And certainly, Jane Tanner saw someone.
There's still the issue of the time and location of this sighting though. Redwood didn't say anything about that aspect.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: AnneGuedes on January 17, 2014, 05:06:33 PM
See, the trouble with Amaral is that he didn't even seem to understand the basic procedures and protocols of his own police force, as revealed in his comment about the Gaspar statements.
If Amaral is to be believed (he isn't!) the Gaspars made a joint statement.
The distinction is vital, because Mr Gaspar's statement could scarcely have been more different from his wife's.
That aside, basic procedure and protocol of police forces around the world (including the PJ) is to take individual witness statements.
Why didn't Amaral know/say that?
Incompetence?
Or attempt to mislead?
I'd bet attempt to mislead all (except for more clever than the AG, i.e you). But he will soon be punished ! Prepare the champagne...
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 17, 2014, 05:07:05 PM
See, the trouble with Amaral is that he didn't even seem to understand the basic procedures and protocols of his own police force, as revealed in his comment about the Gaspar statements.
If Amaral is to be believed (he isn't!) the Gaspars made a joint statement.
The distinction is vital, because Mr Gaspar's statement could scarcely have been more different from his wife's.
That aside, basic procedure and protocol of police forces around the world (including the PJ) is to take individual witness statements.
Why didn't Amaral know/say that?
Incompetence?
Or attempt to mislead?
interesting that you mention the Gasper statements although I am curious as to what they have to do with Robert Murat being made a suspect. Is there a link that we don't know about?
As for Amaral who the McCanns are suing, I am afraid I find him far more convincing than the McCanns and their friends. He also strikes me as considerably more, how should I put it, 'considered' is probably one way of putting it.
For instance, this observation of his strikes me as intelligent: "Everything should be about what happened to Madeleine. The case's core has shifted and it's now about money, celebrities and politics. It has become an industry - absurd."
I would not disagree with that. There are plenty of vultures feeding at the Madeleine trough.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: AnneGuedes on January 17, 2014, 05:13:47 PM
There's still the issue of the time and location of this sighting though. Redwood didn't say anything about that aspect.
DCI Redwood found that Tannerman was in excess, so he suppressed him in order to see better. It seems that what he says, though, doesn't count, Tannerman's believers continue to believe (McCanns included). How is that coherent with the respect due to the old SY institution is beyond me.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 17, 2014, 05:17:53 PM
However I can see how the McCann's are clinging onto discrediting Amaral as if to a life-raft. It's strange how the British press are not covering the McCann's on going case against Amaral, though, isn't it? I would have thought it would be in the public interest.
And what is it Kate has said: she can forgive the (paedophile) abductors of Madeleine but not Amaral. What an extraordinary thing to say. And why would she say it?
All about 'reputation management' I suppose - a subject quite close to their hearts from the very beginning.
What exactly is the Madeleine Fund being used for? I think the public have a right to know given that the Fund aims to be transparent.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 17, 2014, 05:22:34 PM
Not sure I have much confidence in DC Redwood - he worked on the Jill Dando case, didn't he, and look what came of that? Still, we can but hope that our police force do not come out of this appalling mess with even more egg on their faces.
We must be the laughing stock of the rest of the world.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 17, 2014, 05:26:55 PM
The Libel Action was brought nearly five years ago, and there is no doubt that if The McCanns hadn't done this then Amaral would just have gone on and one and on.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 17, 2014, 05:30:03 PM
What, you mean he might have solved the case, is that what you mean?
I believe the McCann's are attempting to recover legal costs against Amaral.
That's what I call chutpah.
Still, we can hope that, eventually, a judge will put an end to the McCanns going on and on and on and on.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 17, 2014, 05:33:21 PM
What, you mean he might have solved the case, is that what you mean?
I believe the McCann's are attempting to recover legal costs against Amaral.
That's what I call chutpah.
Still, we can hope that, eventually, a judge will put an end to the McCanns going on and on and on and on.
It is Amaral who has held up the case.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 17, 2014, 06:01:28 PM
Its a shame that he was taken off the case under pressure. A great shame. Still, hopefully justice will eventually be done for Madeleine. But what has this got to do with Robert Murat? I suppose Amaral knew that Murat was a patsy but had to play along with it, at least for a bit. Seems like there was a lot of bad press about Murat but once the PJ files were released, it became clear they had to drop that particular one.
Did the McCann's ever apologize to him?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 17, 2014, 06:04:18 PM
Its a shame that he was taken off the case under pressure. A great shame. Still, hopefully justice will eventually be done for Madeleine. But what has this got to do with Robert Murat? I suppose Amaral knew that Murat was a patsy but had to play along with it, at least for a bit. Seems like there was a lot of bad press about Murat but once the PJ files were released, it became clear they had to drop that particular one.
Did the McCann's ever apologize to him?
Did Amaral ever apologise for the hideous things he said about Robert Murat in his book?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on January 17, 2014, 06:13:28 PM
interesting that you mention the Gasper statements although I am curious as to what they have to do with Robert Murat being made a suspect. Is there a link that we don't know about?
As for Amaral who the McCanns are suing, I am afraid I find him far more convincing than the McCanns and their friends. He also strikes me as considerably more, how should I put it, 'considered' is probably one way of putting it.
For instance, this observation of his strikes me as intelligent: "Everything should be about what happened to Madeleine. The case's core has shifted and it's now about money, celebrities and politics. It has become an industry - absurd."
I would not disagree with that. There are plenty of vultures feeding at the Madeleine trough.
The reference to the Gaspar statements was in response to the comment on Amaral's powers of deduction. Unlike the poster I was responding to, I have no faith in Amaral's powers of deduction.
And the comment you cite should be placed in context.
How were Madeleine's best interests served by leaking a lie as vicious as "Gerry not Madeleine's father" (for example)?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: AnneGuedes on January 17, 2014, 06:16:54 PM
In the USA attorneys will have done a similar job, I'm sure there will have been many instances of that.
But in Europe ? In German Roman System, this isn't thinkable, it would be counterproductive. Even lawyers are very careful with what they say. The would never pinkyclaim "ludicrous".
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: AnneGuedes on January 17, 2014, 06:18:18 PM
The reference to the Gaspar statements was in response to the comment on Amaral's powers of deduction. Unlike the poster I was responding to, I have no faith in Amaral's powers of deduction.
And the comment you cite should be placed in context.
How were Madeleine's best interests served by leaking a lie as vicious as "Gerry not Madeleine's father" (for example)?
Have you the money for the champagne, or should we contribute ?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: AnneGuedes on January 17, 2014, 06:20:42 PM
However I can see how the McCann's are clinging onto discrediting Amaral as if to a life-raft. It's strange how the British press are not covering the McCann's on going case against Amaral, though, isn't it? I would have thought it would be in the public interest.
And what is it Kate has said: she can forgive the (paedophile) abductors of Madeleine but not Amaral. What an extraordinary thing to say. And why would she say it?
All about 'reputation management' I suppose - a subject quite close to their hearts from the very beginning.
What exactly is the Madeleine Fund being used for? I think the public have a right to know given that the Fund aims to be transparent.
The public has the right to pay, even if it's only half a pound. The Fund is no charity and discretion has to be respected. Are you complaining ?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on January 17, 2014, 06:28:01 PM
The reference to the Gaspar statements was in response to the comment on Amaral's powers of deduction. Unlike the poster I was responding to, I have no faith in Amaral's powers of deduction.
And the comment you cite should be placed in context.
How were Madeleine's best interests served by leaking a lie as vicious as "Gerry not Madeleine's father" (for example)?
Oh right. They are quite interesting, though, aren't they, the Gaspar statements? I still don't see why you brought that up on a thread about Murat. The obvious linking theme here would be references to paedophilia as the Gaspers suggested that David Payne made lewd gestures that could be interpreted as having an interest in paedophilia.
Given that Murat was made a suspect not long after the McCanns claimed that their daughter had been abducted by a paedophile, I presume that there was some suspicion that he might have an interest in paedophilia. And I do believe it was suggested that there was some evidence that he might have looked at child porn on his computer. I know there were comments made of this nature at the time. As to their veracity, I have no idea.
However, the Gasper statements can be read. It must have been a difficult decision for the Gaspers but I understand that when they learned that David Payne had been with the McCanns on holiday when Madeleine disappeared, they felt concerned enough to contact the police and express their concerns.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Benice on January 17, 2014, 06:40:15 PM
Its a shame that he was taken off the case under pressure. A great shame. Still, hopefully justice will eventually be done for Madeleine. But what has this got to do with Robert Murat? I suppose Amaral knew that Murat was a patsy but had to play along with it, at least for a bit. Seems like there was a lot of bad press about Murat but once the PJ files were released, it became clear they had to drop that particular one.
Did the McCann's ever apologize to him?
Why would they apologise? It wasn't anything to do with them that Murat came to the PJ's attention. All they knew was that he was being investigated and the PJ led them to believe it would only be a matter of time before they had the evidence to arrest him. It was only after KM read the files that she realised that was not the case and that there was no evidence against him.
Strange how Amaral found JT to be a perfectly credible witness when he was arranging for her to take part in the identify parade with RM . Why would he do that if he didn't believe her? It was only when his case against RM failed and he turned his attention to the McCanns that he realised that JT's testimony had now become 'inconvenient' to him.
His answer to that little problem was to set out to discredit her by lying about her - even claiming that she had formally identified RM - when the truth is that she had NOT identified him at all - at any time.
You think it was a great shame he was taken off the case? Good grief! I think it was a tragedy for Madeleine that the lead investigator and his 2nd in command in charge of her case both turned out to be crooked policemen - whose abuse of their positions as policemen resulted in criminal convictions for the pair of them. There can be no greater 'shame' than that IMO.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 17, 2014, 06:47:17 PM
As to Gerry not being Madeleine's biological father, I have absolutely no idea whether he is or isn't although the newspaper which made the claim stands by the veracity of the claim and to my knowledge has not been sued by the McCanns.
So I really cannot comment on whether it was a 'vicious lie' or not. Why don't you contact the newspaper and check out their sources?
In cases where children have been conceived by IVF, there is always the possibility, I presume, of sperm/egg donation. Not an area I know a lot about.
If you were to advance a hypothesis that either of both of the the McCanns had a lack of attachment to Madeleine then that might provide some explanation for that.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 17, 2014, 07:10:06 PM
As to Gerry not being Madeleine's biological father, I have absolutely no idea whether he is or isn't although the newspaper which made the claim stands by the veracity of the claim and to my knowledge has not been sued by the McCanns.
So I really cannot comment on whether it was a 'vicious lie' or not. Why don't you contact the newspaper and check out their sources?
In cases where children have been conceived by IVF, there is always the possibility, I presume, of sperm/egg donation. Not an area I know a lot about.
If you were to advance a hypothesis that either of both of the the McCanns had a lack of attachment to Madeleine then that might provide some explanation for that.
You are twisting things. The Gaspars did not agree in their statements. And Gerry was confirmed as Madeleine's father.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on January 17, 2014, 07:57:30 PM
From the files, reasons that led to suspicions against Robert Murat.
Jane gets a mention (just) right at the end.
B - Detailed Analysis
[this section to be completed soon]
C - The suspicions about Robert Murat and his constitution as an arguido
Apart from the suspect being seen on the location of the occurrence and speaking about the event with the persons that were around there, namely journalists, his name was on the list of interpreters, and he made a commitment as such (Commitment Act on page 1577).
On the 6th of May 2007 the PJ received a fax from the Leicestershire Constabulary (page 307) in which this police transmits that a reporter from the Sunday Mirror, Lori Campbell, had communicated that certain behaviours of the suspect compromised him, namely by giving his name without any information about himself, by having conflicting relationships with several people and being worried when a photograph of him was taken for that newspaper, which led the English Police to request that he was relieved of interpreter duties.
The files further contain:
- On page 328 a report of an external diligence tells that, on the 4th of May 2007, the suspect offered his assistance to the GNR to help with anything that was needed, namely as an interpreter;
- That on the 6th of May 2007 the signatory of said report was approached by several journalists indicating the arguido with suspicious behaviours, in the sense of what was already explained concerning the fax;
- On page 461 an anonymous information, where a telephone call from a woman who tries to incriminate the suspect is reported, although no facts were presented;
- On page 957 there is a report about an external diligence that resulted from a trip to the location where, according to witness Jane Tanner, she saw, a short time before she knew that Madeleine had disappeared, a man carrying a child walking into the direction of the suspect's house, Casa Liliana;
- On page 960 the service information according to which the curiosity that the arguido showed in the investigation was found strange.
In order to be able to be heard about the suspicions that befell him, Robert Murat was made an arguido on the 14th of May 2007 [9], having declared that he has already served as an interpreter during process actions, that he has a daughter that was born in 2002 and lives in England where he visits her several times, having returned to Portugal on the 1st of May 2007 and that he rented a vehicle because his mother uses the VW at the stand that was put up in Luz to support Madeleine's family.
That on the 3rd of May 2007 he didn't leave home in the evening, having heard a siren at around 10.30 p.m. or shortly afterwards, a fact that he commented with his Mother, but didn't come outside to investigate.
On Friday the 4th of May 2007 he was alerted by his Mother to the disappearance of a child in Praia da Luz, according to news on "Sky News", having then walked to the location of the disappearance, where he was introduced to the child's parents, offering his assistance.
That afterwards, with a GNR officer and a member of the resort staff, they entered several apartments, with the purpose of locating the child. That before this occasion, he didn't know the inside of the "Ocean Club".
He further clarified, because he was asked, that he was the main suspect among the journalists, therefore from that moment onwards he refused speaking to them, including in that refusal the mention of his full name, or allowing to be photographed.
He further clarified that he has nothing to do with the child's disappearance, and knows nothing about this case, explaining that he asked an English policeman about the manner in which the British police was able to trace a person in a given location and at a given time and if the police could trace him at home through his mobile phone, but he did this to prove his innocence.
On the other hand, rather unpleasant references were made to his personality, as was the case of a witness that has known him for many years [10].
It should be further referred that witnesses Rachel Mampilly, Russell James O'Brien and Fiona Elaine Payne mentioned that they saw arguido Robert Murat at the "Ocean Club" resort on the night that Madeleine disappeared.
During the confrontation that took place on the 11th of July 2007 [11], these witnesses, just like the arguido, maintained their previous positions.
Nevertheless, the positions are different regarding the witnesses that were heard, because while Sílvia Baptista [12] admits it is very possible that a person with the arguido's characteristics was helping to search for Madeleine on the night of the disappearance, other witnesses, Paul Wright, June Wright, Barend Weijdon and GNR officer José Baptista Roque [13], among other officers, mentioned that they didn't see the arguido on location that night.
Facing the suspicions that befell the arguido, considering what he seemed to transmit and the type of occurrence that was under investigation, whose real scope was not, like now, delimitated, and in order to confirm them or to set them aside, taking into account that they were indispensable for the continuation of the investigation, searches were made at the arguido's house as well as at his mother's and telephone interceptions were carried out, both on the arguido and on those with whom he directly or indirectly interacted, namely with whom he met on an almost daily basis and with whom he kept telephone contact.
Searches were also performed at the location where he started to spend the night at, the Quinta Salsalito, which is a vast place of difficult control, therefore the search on this location might permit the collection of elements that are reputed to be of high interest for the investigation, but those searches had no effect whatsoever.
During the searches at Casa Liliana, two rain water cisterns near the pool were checked, the missing minor's trail was searched by the GNR's sniffer dog team, both inside and outside the residence, searches were equally performed inside three vehicles that were parked there, and the matching photographic report was carried out by members of the CSS (Crime Scene Sector), experts from the Criminal Police Lab, but nothing positive was attained.
From the forensics exams to Serghei Malinka's, Robert Murat's and Jenny Murat's computers [14], it could be concluded that the contents of the examined drives produced nothing that could compromise them as participants in any illicit activity, namely the one that was being investigated in the process.
From the interception of communications, the telephone contact record of arguido Robert Murat, his mother Jennifer Murat, witnesses Michaela Walazuch, Luís António and Sergey Malinka; records and maps of the telephone calls that were made from public telephone booths in Praia da Luz nothing flows that could have any indicative use.
From the analysis that was performed on every contact, from the 1st of November 2006 until the 19th of July 2007, by Robert, Michaela, Sergey, Jennifer and Luís António, results that Robert and Malinka, only contacted each other eight times [15], that there were no relations between Sergey and Luís António, nor between him and Robert, nor between either of them and the Murat residence, between the 30th of April and the 4th of May 2007 [16].
Searches were performed at the residence, and the subsoil was explored with a Geo-radar (GPR), - which consists of a radar antenna that transmits electromagnetic energy in the shape of an impulse within frequencies between 25 MHz and 1 GHz. Those impulses are partially reflected through sub-superficial geological structures, captured with a receiving antenna and marked as a time record of continuous bi-directional path which is presented as a pseudo-geological record section - e these technical searches neither found nor marked anything of interest to the files [17].
Searches were equally performed with the use of sniffer dog support, with the dog Eddie that detects cadaver odour, and it was verified that the dog signalled nothing [18]. The examination of the targets' vehicles (arguido and people who interacted with him), nothing was found.
Therefore, despite the suspicions that befell the arguido, - partly because they were induced, albeit involuntarily, by himself, namely the protagonism that he assumed both with the group of friends, which the McCann couple was part of, and with the journalists, showing his great curiosity in finding out what diligences had been performed and which were to be performed, and by objective elements and the fact that his residence is located in the direction which, according to Jane, was taken by the stranger who carried the child in his arms - and which therefore demanded his constitution as an arguido. It is nevertheless certain that through the collected evidence, said suspicions gradually emptied themselves, until the point where any connection of the arguido to the child's disappearance was set aside, which is why, at the end, the archiving of the process will be determined.
Jane played no part in Murat being made an arguido, and certainly never identified him as the man she saw.
But in Europe ? In German Roman System, this isn't thinkable, it would be counterproductive. Even lawyers are very careful with what they say. The would never pinkyclaim "ludicrous".
These are new times, Anne. Post-Blair and Iraq, if nobody with a voice feels either motivated or brave enough to comment anything is possible.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: AnneGuedes on January 17, 2014, 09:08:26 PM
You think it was a great shame he was taken off the case? Good grief! I think it was a tragedy for Madeleine that the lead investigator and his 2nd in command in charge of her case both turned out to be crooked policemen - whose abuse of their positions as policemen resulted in criminal convictions for the pair of them. There can be no greater 'shame' than that IMO.
Good grief, Benice ! How can you know and say that ? What evidence have you that those inspectors were a tragedy for Madeleine ? The lack of finding her ? Let's please wait until SY suggests so. Don't you think that Madeleine's undetermined tragedy occurred in the evening of the 3rd of May ? Neither of these inspectors had heard of her then and if they weren't alerted earlier, whose fault was it, since the cellphones functioned perfectly and Mrs Fenn offered her landline ?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 18, 2014, 10:53:15 AM
Perhaps the McCanns and their friends were the ones that told the lies, rather than Amaral.
" It should be further referred that witnesses Rachel Mampilly, Russell James O'Brien and Fiona Elaine Payne mentioned that they saw arguido Robert Murat at the "Ocean Club" resort on the night that Madeleine disappeared."
Three members of the group told the police that they saw Robert Murat. That, put alongside Jane Tanners 'sighting' of a man carrying a child, who appeared to fit the description of Murat, put Murat under suspicion.
Or are you saying that those witnesses lied to the police and in fact didn't see Murat that night? And maybe you are suggesting that Jane Tanner's 'sighting' which the police never believed was reliable was also a lie?
So, if the McCanns and their friends lied about what happened that night, given that they are the most important witnesses, it is not that surprising that Robert Murat came under suspicion.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 18, 2014, 10:56:46 AM
It should be further referred that witnesses Rachel Mampilly, Russell James O'Brien and Fiona Elaine Payne mentioned that they saw arguido Robert Murat at the "Ocean Club" resort on the night that Madeleine disappeared.
During the confrontation that took place on the 11th of July 2007 [11], these witnesses, just like the arguido, maintained their previous positions.
Nevertheless, the positions are different regarding the witnesses that were heard, because while Sílvia Baptista [12] admits it is very possible that a person with the arguido's characteristics was helping to search for Madeleine on the night of the disappearance, other witnesses, Paul Wright, June Wright, Barend Weijdon and GNR officer José Baptista Roque [13], among other officers, mentioned that they didn't see the arguido on location that night.
Perhaps the McCanns friends lied to the police about seeing Murat that night. Other people didn't see him that night. And of course if we do not chose to believe the McCann abduction theory (and there is no reason to believe it) then we can see why the McCanns and their friends might want to implicate other people in the disappearance of Madeleine.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 18, 2014, 11:18:02 AM
Page 157 of Kate's book: 'Several witnesses including Fiona, Russ and Rachael reported seeing Murat near our apartment on the night Madeleine vanished.'
But other witnesses - Paul Wright, June Wright, Barend Weijdon and GNR officer José Baptista Roque [13], among other officers, mentioned that they didn't see the arguido on location that night.
Murat was not there. He was at home with his mother.
Personally, I believe the four other witnesses, and the other officers, as well as Murat and his mother.
If all those people are correct, we have to ask whether Fiona, Russ and Rachael lied or whether they just have bad memories and bad eye-sight.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 18, 2014, 11:36:46 AM
Why would they apologise? It wasn't anything to do with them that Murat came to the PJ's attention. All they knew was that he was being investigated and the PJ led them to believe it would only be a matter of time before they had the evidence to arrest him. It was only after KM read the files that she realised that was not the case and that there was no evidence against him.
Strange how Amaral found JT to be a perfectly credible witness when he was arranging for her to take part in the identify parade with RM . Why would he do that if he didn't believe her? It was only when his case against RM failed and he turned his attention to the McCanns that he realised that JT's testimony had now become 'inconvenient' to him.
Well, you may describe the police as crooked. Personally I think there are other people who are crooked.
Nothing is ever anything to do with the McCanns, is it? They are just poor innocent victims of nasty people who go around stealing their children and making up stories.
Four of the McCanns friends told the police they saw Murat outside the apartment on the night Madeleine vanished.
No-one else saw him there. And he wasn't there.
Amaral never found Jane Tanner to be a reliable witness for the simple reason that she wasn't a reliable witness. Anyone with half a brain can work that out.
The fact that Jane Tanner claims she saw a man carrying a child near the resort means only one thing. That is what Jane Tanner claims she saw. It doesn't mean there WAS a man there Nor does it mean that even if there was a man carrying a child that it was Madeleine's abductor.
Jane Tanner, the McCanns and their friends have given a remarkable amount of weight to what Jane Tanner claims she saw.
Page 154 of Kate's book: 'To our huge relief, the next day the PJ finally released Jane's description of the man who in all probability carried Madeleine away.'
How could Kate possibly make that claim. 'In all probability' is an interesting phrase. It is used by doctors quite a bit. It is reassuringly woolly as it leaves for the possibility of doubt but yet still firmly plants an idea.
Amaral presumably had to pay lip-service to her absurd 'sighting' but, as a detective with a brain in his head, he no doubt was keeping a very open mind.
His answer to that little problem was to set out to discredit her by lying about her - even claiming that she had formally identified RM - when the truth is that she had NOT identified him at all - at any time.
You think it was a great shame he was taken off the case? Good grief! I think it was a tragedy for Madeleine that the lead investigator and his 2nd in command in charge of her case both turned out to be crooked policemen - whose abuse of their positions as policemen resulted in criminal convictions for the pair of them. There can be no greater 'shame' than that IMO.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: j.rob on January 18, 2014, 01:13:42 PM
Don't know what happened in the above post. It should not all be in a quote. The gist of what I was trying to say is that I do not believe Amaral ever found the McCanns or their friends reliable witnesses. He probably paid lip-service to the identity parade while keeping his mind open and smelling a very large rat. As for Amaral being crooked, are you suggesting that the McCann abduction theory was plausible? The McCann's friends were the only people to claim that Murat was outside the McCann's apartment that night. No-one else agrees with them. Were they lying or do they just have collective bad eyesight? Jane Tanner claims she saw a man carrying a child. The McCanns inexplicably assume that this is Madeleine's abductor. There is no evidence for Jane Tanner's claim. The Portugese police didn't believe her.
I think the pot should stop calling the kettle black.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on January 18, 2014, 02:05:25 PM
Don't know what happened in the above post. It should not all be in a quote. The gist of what I was trying to say is that I do not believe Amaral ever found the McCanns or their friends reliable witnesses. He probably paid lip-service to the identity parade while keeping his mind open and smelling a very large rat. As for Amaral being crooked, are you suggesting that the McCann abduction theory was plausible? The McCann's friends were the only people to claim that Murat was outside the McCann's apartment that night. No-one else agrees with them. Were they lying or do they just have collective bad eyesight? Jane Tanner claims she saw a man carrying a child. The McCanns inexplicably assume that this is Madeleine's abductor. There is no evidence for Jane Tanner's claim. The Portugese police didn't believe her.
I think the pot should stop calling the kettle black.
The McCann's friends were not the only people who thought they saw Robert Murat outside 5A that night. Stop making things up.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Lyall on January 18, 2014, 02:18:41 PM
The McCann's friends were not the only people who thought they saw Robert Murat outside 5A that night. Stop making things up.
But were they the first?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on January 18, 2014, 02:21:03 PM
The gist of what I was trying to say is that I do not believe Amaral ever found the McCanns or their friends reliable witnesses. He probably paid lip-service to the identity parade while keeping his mind open and smelling a very large rat.
Perish the very suggestion that an [...moderated out as unproven ....] liar like Goncalo Amaral should find the McCanns and their friends 'reliable witnesses', especially after Jane Tanner was vindicated by proper detective-work by the Scotland Yard team.
Did Amaral ever find that fridge he insisted he was on the brink of finding at the point he was removed from the investigation the McCanns are supposed to have stored the body of Madeleine in?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: John on January 18, 2014, 09:08:43 PM
We never did get to the bottom as to how Russell was so adamant that he had seen Murat near the Ocean Club Garden hours after Madeleine disappeared and later that morning even spoke with him. Surely a young professional medical doctor couldn't have being so wrong?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on January 18, 2014, 09:15:12 PM
We never did get to the bottom as to how Russell was so adamant that he had seen Murat near the Ocean Club Garden hours after Madeleine disappeared and later that morning even spoke with him. Surely a young professional medical doctor couldn't have being so wrong?
Thing about him is he was adamant he was right but also said he could have been wrong! One of the more obnoxious of the t9
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: John on January 19, 2014, 12:53:20 AM
A credible witness then? ...NOT
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Redblossom on January 19, 2014, 04:45:26 PM
Lets not forget he said he checked the Oldfields kids on Sundy night...well Oldfield was in that night off sick....he also said he checked on the Mccanns kids the Sunday through the open patio door though neither Gerry or Kate ever mention hm checking their kids and also Gerry said their patio door was locked that night...so no, its entirely possible that he gets dates mixed up! At best....
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 23, 2014, 12:07:00 AM
I am spotting some unusual detail in the statements of British sister which they try to deliver and that is "Murat constant urge to change cloths the day GNR dog was searching for Madeleine" and Murat accompanying GNR officer as translator" why he changed his cloths so many times feeling uncomfortable, is it maybe the GNR dog?
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Sisters.jpg)
ANN WILTSHIRE & JANE JENSEN ANNIE WILTSHIRE AND JAYNE JENSEN (58 and 53) Year 2007 (Holiday friends) Annie Wiltshire and Jayne Jensen, both from Aylesford in Kent, were on a fortnight’s holiday in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz. They stayed in an apartment opposite the tapas bar and became friends with the McCanns through tennis. Annie Wiltshire and Jayne Jensen told police they saw Mr Murat smoking a cigarette outside the Ocean Club’s entrance, 20 metres from the McCanns’ apartment, between 10.30 and 11pm on May 3. The sisters joined in the search for Madeleine that night. They recognised Murat the next day as he acted as an interpreter for cops. The sisters said his behaviour was "strange" and described how he changed his clothes at least once during the day of May 4, but then insisted to them that he had been wearingthe same outfit all day.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/playground.jpg
Murat in navy blue and jeans exactly as described on 4th of May
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 12:29:43 AM
@bros the evidence shows that RM tells the truth - he was wearing those same blue jeans and t-shirt in the morning of the 4th - there is a photo which proves this.
The two witnesses you mention saw two different men and accidentally confused them to be one. The man they saw evening 3rd, and (in a striped top) on morning 4th was not RM. The man they saw later on 4th (in blue jeans and tshirt) was RM.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Benice on November 23, 2014, 12:43:30 AM
@bros the evidence shows that RM tells the truth - he was wearing those same blue jeans and t-shirt in the morning of the 4th - there is a photo which proves this.
[Name removed] saw two different men and accidentally confuses them to be one. The man [Name removed] saw evening 3rd, and (in a striped top) on morning 4th was not RM. The man [Name removed] saw later on 4th (in blue jeans and tshirt) was RM.
How do you know that he didn't change his clothes some time after that photograph was taken?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 01:09:31 AM
How do you know that he didn't change his clothes some time after that photograph was taken?
Because the photo I time at 10.30am showing RM in blue jeans and blue tshirt is at the same time that [Name removed]/AW saw their man wearing striped shirt and trousers. Two different men.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 23, 2014, 01:26:23 AM
Because the photo I time at 10.30am showing RM in blue jeans and blue tshirt is at the same time that [Name removed]/AW saw their man wearing striped shirt and trousers. Two different men.
Yet we don't have a description of the clothes worn by the man they saw the previous evening....I wonder why not?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 01:39:25 AM
Yet we don't have a description of the clothes worn by the man they saw the previous evening....I wonder why not?
One of these two lady witnesses (not both) saw that man evening 3rd and I haven't found a description by her of his clothing then, but there is a little information in another source.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 23, 2014, 01:50:09 AM
One of these two lady witnesses (not both) saw that man evening 3rd and I haven't found a description by her of his clothing then, but there is a little information in another source.
Well, come on then...or do I have to spend hours googling again? P.S. I reckon you've got inside knowledge of who owns all those private apartments in block 5 to have identified the owner of the grey car.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 23, 2014, 08:10:01 AM
Well, come on then...or do I have to spend hours googling again? P.S. I reckon you've got inside knowledge of who owns all those private apartments in block 5 to have identified the owner of the grey car.
?{)(**
Pagasus please point to the evidence that sister witnesses have changed statements, as I recall it is not only them but six witnesses in total cast doubt over Murat alibi.
The key witnesses are:
• Holidaymaker Jayne Jensen, a 54-year-old businesswoman. In a statement to police she said she saw Mr Murat smoking a cigarette on the street corner opposite the apartment half an hour after Madeleine disappeared.
•The barrister, who has not been named but was on holiday and was pictured in Praia da Luz at the time Madeleine vanished. He has given a witness statement that corroborates what Ms Jensen said.
The next evening he and Ms Jensen were talking about the disappearance on an apartment balcony when Mr Murat joined them for a drink. The barrister has described Mr Murat's behaviour that evening as "odd", saying Mr Murat insisted on going to change his clothes because it had been a long day - when they were certain he had already changed earlier. -Second witness about his constant clothes change.
Three friends of the McCanns. It is understood they have given statements to police insisting Mr Murat introduced himself to them on the night Madeleine vanished. It is claimed he said: "I am Robert. Can I help in the search?" Mr Murat subsequently acted as a translator between the police and the McCanns up until he was made a suspect.
• Charlotte Pennington, a nanny working at the Ocean Club resort. She claims to have seen Mr Murat in the hours after Madeleine vanished.
A source close to Mrs McCann told the Standard: "Kate has always felt there are questions concerning Murat that need to be answered.
@bros the evidence shows that RM tells the truth - he was wearing those same blue jeans and t-shirt in the morning of the 4th - there is a photo which proves this.
The two witnesses you mention saw two different men and accidentally confused them to be one. The man they saw evening 3rd, and (in a striped top) on morning 4th was not RM. The man they saw later on 4th (in blue jeans and tshirt) was RM.
Some may have RM confused with DP.
(Yvonne Martin also described DP as wearing a dark polo top, when he was the one with the stripey one and RM wore the dark blue T-shirt. "Speaking with a Southern English accent Wearing light trousers, cream or beige coloured, and a dark polo shirt.")
And I still find it plausible that translatorman might have been John Hill.
The resemblance isn't that close, but in the chaos of that night, anyone of roughly the same height/build with glasses. (http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/john-hill.jpg)
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Mr Gray on November 23, 2014, 11:23:00 AM
DP doesn't smoke and the witnesses clearly said they saw Murat smoking
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 23, 2014, 01:21:02 PM
DP doesn't smoke and the witnesses clearly said they saw Murat smoking
It is very obvious what your saying people were drinking with Murat the day and day after. I am just getting curios why Murat had to change cloths so many times. On couple of pictures we can see Murat escorting dog handler trying to pick a scent.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Benice on November 23, 2014, 01:25:00 PM
So does that automatically make her a liar in your opinion Faith?
FP (or the others) had no reason to lie. They had no idea that Murat had been made an Arguido until after he was made one - and his face appeared on TV. It would have been mighty strange IMO if they had decided not to let the police know they had seen him on the 3rd. What they did in contacting the police was what I would expect any normal person to do in those circumstances IMO.
Do you class Silvia Batista as an independent witness? She claimed to have seen Murat on that night too. I'm not aware that she ever changed her mind about that, (but that's from memory so am happy to be corrected if necessary).
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on November 23, 2014, 03:40:37 PM
I find Silvia Batista's various interviews to be a bit confusing.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 03:56:57 PM
Well, come on then...or do I have to spend hours googling again? P.S. I reckon you've got inside knowledge of who owns all those private apartments in block 5 to have identified the owner of the grey car.
Four of the T9 saw translatorman that night: DP FP ROB RO. IIRC one of them in a statement had a tentative recollection of clothing. PS I have only the same files and press and photos and videos as you do.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 04:01:10 PM
Pagasus please point to the evidence that sister witnesses have changed statements, as I recall it is not only them but six witnesses in total cast doubt over Murat alibi.
The key witnesses are:
• Holidaymaker Jayne Jensen, a 54-year-old businesswoman. In a statement to police she said she saw Mr Murat smoking a cigarette on the street corner opposite the apartment half an hour after Madeleine disappeared.
•The barrister, who has not been named but was on holiday and was pictured in Praia da Luz at the time Madeleine vanished. He has given a witness statement that corroborates what Ms Jensen said.
The next evening he and Ms Jensen were talking about the disappearance on an apartment balcony when Mr Murat joined them for a drink. The barrister has described Mr Murat's behaviour that evening as "odd", saying Mr Murat insisted on going to change his clothes because it had been a long day - when they were certain he had already changed earlier. -Second witness about his constant clothes change.
Three friends of the McCanns. It is understood they have given statements to police insisting Mr Murat introduced himself to them on the night Madeleine vanished. It is claimed he said: "I am Robert. Can I help in the search?" Mr Murat subsequently acted as a translator between the police and the McCanns up until he was made a suspect.
• Charlotte Pennington, a nanny working at the Ocean Club resort. She claims to have seen Mr Murat in the hours after Madeleine vanished.
A source close to Mrs McCann told the Standard: "Kate has always felt there are questions concerning Murat that need to be answered.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 04:12:47 PM
@Bros Never did I say anyone changed their statements. To start lets at these two events only: 1. Witness J sees a man at about 10.30am 4th wearing striped shirt and trousers. 2. Witness J sees a man much later on the 4th wearing blue jeans and tshirt who says he has been wearing these same clothes all day. For now forget all other witnesses, and forget the night of the 3rd, to concentrate only on the 2 events above, ok? ....tbc
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: faithlilly on November 23, 2014, 04:22:23 PM
I find Silvia Batista's various interviews to be a bit confusing.
Yes. Initially she said she thought RM was present that night. She suggested to PJ to ask 3 other witnesses present who she was sure would confirm this. All 3 witnesses (who BTW unlike SB did actually know what RM looked like) said RM was definitely not there. I find the 3 people who did actually know what he looks like are correct, and one who did not know what he looks like (except retrospectively) to be honest but mistaken.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 23, 2014, 04:40:52 PM
Do you believe that DP would be in a doorway smoking a cigarette (if he was a smoker) whilst the rest of the group were running around searching for the missing child of his close friend?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Alice Purjorick on November 23, 2014, 04:46:51 PM
If in doubt answer a question with a couple more! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPqwUITSUT8
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: jassi on November 23, 2014, 04:48:00 PM
Do you believe that DP would be in a doorway smoking a cigarette (if he was a smoker) whilst the rest of the group were running around searching for the missing child of his close friend?
Who can tell what people will do in times of stress.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on November 23, 2014, 04:51:00 PM
@ Pegasus
There are numerous points regarding her various statements that don't seem clear to me. She may have been exhausted and the GNR/ PJ officers may not have accurately reported what she'd said.
No idea.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: faithlilly on November 23, 2014, 05:05:31 PM
is there any statement by murat in the released files
We thought you had read all the available evidence? You keep telling us that.
WITNESS STATEMENT OF ARGUIDO: ROBERT MURAT
Processo, Volume V, pages 1170-1178
WITNESS STATEMENT OF ARGUIDO: ROBERT MURAT
Date: 2007/05/14; Time: 10:00; Location: DIC Portimao Officer: Joao C. and Luis P., Inspectors
I'll leave you to find it 8(0(*
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 06:44:45 PM
Was DP the translatorman people saw talking with police that night? No. Here's a big clue why not. Because DP was one of the people who saw translatorman talking with police that night. Which sort of rules out he was translatorman.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Alfred R Jones on November 23, 2014, 06:54:21 PM
Who can tell what people will do in times of stress.
Does DP mention in his statement that he was so stressed out he had to bum a fag off someone and stand and smoke it whilst everyone else ran about looking for Madeleine?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 23, 2014, 07:07:06 PM
It would have been better for Murat if he had been Translatorman. He wouldn't have needed to go to all that bother contacting Special Branch agents regarding his phone pings.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 07:09:15 PM
Witness J certainly saw a man wearing some sort of striped top at about 10.30am. (Location stated is a bit ambiguous but IMO it was exactly outside entrance of 5 carpark). She thought retrospectively (didn't even know what RM looked like at the time) it was RM. But there is a photo at about 10.30am of RM outside tapas reception wearing guess what blue jeans and tshirt exactly like he said.
Even my landlady Mrs H solved this easily: The man J saw at about 10.30am in a striped top was not RM, it was a different man.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 23, 2014, 07:13:48 PM
Witness J certainly saw a man wearing some sort of striped top at about 10.30am. (Location stated is a bit ambiguous but IMO it was exactly outside entrance of 5 carpark). She thought retrospectively (didn't even know what RM looked like at the time) it was RM. But there is a photo at about 10.30am of RM outside tapas reception wearing guess what blue jeans and tshirt exactly like he said.
Even my landlady Mrs H solved this easily: The man J saw at about 10.30am in a striped top was not RM, it was a different man.
But what about Smokingman she saw the night before - who was that & what was he dressed in?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 07:18:48 PM
Does DP mention in his statement that he was so stressed out he had to bum a fag off someone and stand and smoke it whilst everyone else ran about looking for Madeleine?
No, but he does describe seeing translatorman that night talking to police, and the point to note is he is not sure it was RM, and this is why you don't see him joining the other 3 testifying in July2007, because he is not sure it was RM.
Also if you read ROB statement he says it is possible that the identification of translatorman that night as RM may have been subconscious memory transfer of speaking to RM next morning. Phone forensics (examining the order in which the number of RM and the anglican priest number were added to the mobile's contact list) proved that it was indeed memory transfer.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 07:31:42 PM
But what about Smokingman she saw the night before - who was that & what was he dressed in?
IMO she saw man A on night of 3rd, then saw man A again morning 4th, and then later on 4th spoke with man B (RM) on her friend's balcony. If you have read the statements of everyone who saw man A on night of 3rd translating and talking with GNR, and see no tentative clothing description let me know I will try to dig it out. Man A and man B are both just innocent peeps who happened to be bilingual and genuinely offered their help. It is a miscarraige of justice that peeps still entertain the idea that RM was there night of 3rd when the evidence he was not is so clear.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 23, 2014, 07:49:10 PM
IMO she saw man A on night of 3rd, then saw man A again morning 4th, and then later on 4th spoke with man B (RM) on her friend's balcony. If you have read the statements of everyone who saw man A on night of 3rd translating and talking with GNR, and see no tentative clothing description let me know I will try to dig it out. Man A and man B are both just innocent peeps who happened to be bilingual and genuinely offered their help. It is a miscarraige of justice that peeps still entertain the idea that RM was there night of 3rd when the evidence he was not is so clear.
I believe RM did not participate in the searches on the night of the 3rd or carry out any translations. I am not convinced he was not Smokingman.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 07:51:22 PM
I believe RM did not participate in the searches on the night of the 3rd or carry out any translations. I am not convinced he was not Smokingman.
Re morning 4th - even if I posted photos of RM at 10.30am in blue tshirt, and simultaneously of the different man at 10.30am in a striped top as seen by witness, peeps would still not believe me.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 08:52:05 PM
Silvia María Correio Ramos Batista Date: 2007 – 05 – 15 ... she thinks it should be possible to confirm whether Murat was there on the date that Madeleine disappeared as well as other details, with Paul and June from the Duke of Holland bar and Mr Byron from the property administration company ...
Have you read those three statements of PW and JW and BW? They are all by people who (unlike SB) actually knew what RM looked like, and they were there when SB saw this man. Their statements are conclusive - it certainly was not RM.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 23, 2014, 09:21:07 PM
This photo which I timed at about 10.30am on morning of the 4th proves that RM was wearing blue jeans and tshirt. It makes nonsense of the allegation that he was wearing a striped shirt at 10.30am, then changed his clothes, then denied it. The man witness J saw at about 10.30am in striped shirt was a different man standing at a different place.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 23, 2014, 10:43:57 PM
This photo which I timed at about 10.30am on morning of the 4th proves that RM was wearing blue jeans and tshirt. It makes nonsense of the allegation that he was wearing a striped shirt at 10.30am, then changed his clothes, then denied it. The man witness J saw at about 10.30am in striped shirt was a different man standing at a different place.
Pegasus 10:30 is not correct take a look at the screen clock left corner it is 14:01pm
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Eleanor on November 23, 2014, 10:49:39 PM
Pegasus 10:30 is not correct take a look at the screen clock left corner it is 14:01pm
It was broadcast at 14.00 on the 4th. But the footage was actually filmed at about 10.30am on the 4th. Without a shadow of a doubt. 8(0(* Timing confirmed further by phone ping times related exactly to other bits of the same footage.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 24, 2014, 12:25:29 AM
Someone asked what the man who was translating on the night of the 3rd was wearing. Here is IMO possibly the only description of that in the files
"the witness says he is not certain but thinks he was wearing dark coloured trousers, he can't remember the colour, and a T-shirt, perhaps dark grey in colour and perhaps a jacket, the characteristics of which he cannot describe"
Source: rob statement 16 May 2007
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 26, 2014, 08:12:33 AM
Let try to refresh everything in connection with RM and MW.
I am amazed with the speed RM left UK on 1st of May. He decided to travel and he traveled the same day. He book the ticket at 02:00am and he traveled at 7:00 am same day.
Up to now I can count more than 10 deviation in his statements between interrogation in May and July. As he found that police are using pings from his mobile phone to check if his statements in May are true where he was prior to the night of May 3.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Victoria on November 26, 2014, 09:46:53 AM
Let try to refresh everything in connection with RM and MW.
I am amazed with the speed RM left UK on 1st of May. He decided to travel and he traveled the same day. He book the ticket at 02:00am and he traveled at 7:00 am same day.
Up to now I can count more than 10 deviation in his statements between interrogation in May and July. As he found that police are using pings from his mobile phone to check if his statements in May are true where he was prior to the night of May 3.
Why do you find it amazing that he booked and travelled on the same day? He wasn't booking a package holiday or something that requires a lot of planning. Just a plane ticket to take him between two homes. People with two homes, or people who work in different countries travel between them at the drop of a hat all the time. Really not at all unusual.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 26, 2014, 11:04:31 AM
Why do you find it amazing that he booked and travelled on the same day? He wasn't booking a package holiday or something that requires a lot of planning. Just a plane ticket to take him between two homes. People with two homes, or people who work in different countries travel between them at the drop of a hat all the time. Really not at all unusual.
1. Murat departing UK was defined urgent by him not by me. He stated that he need to save some business deal as I remember.....
2. He slept no more than 3 hours if you try to count.
3.His dear lady MW in her first police interview never mentioned this RM need for urgency since she was there aware fully with his arrival and what proceeded after. We will come to this in the next issues which I plan refreshing here.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Victoria on November 26, 2014, 11:11:17 AM
1. Murat departing UK was defined urgent by him not by me. He stated that he need to save some business deal as I remember.....
2. He slept no more than 3 hours if you try to count.
3.His dear lady MW in her first police interview never mentioned this RM need for urgency since she was there aware fully with his arrival and what proceeded after. We will come to this in the next issues which I plan refreshing here.
Before moving onto any other issues, you would be better off clarifying the one you have already raised. Why are you 'amazed' at the speed with which a person can travel between the uk and Portugal?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on November 26, 2014, 11:14:20 AM
Let try to refresh everything in connection with RM and MW. I am amazed with the speed RM left UK on 1st of May. He decided to travel and he traveled the same day. He book the ticket at 02:00am and he traveled at 7:00 am same day.
Up to now I can count more than 10 deviation in his statements between interrogation in May and July. As he found that police are using pings from his mobile phone to check if his statements in May are true where he was prior to the night of May 3.
Where does that information come from?
He booked his ticket on 30 April according to the files. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1468.jpg
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 26, 2014, 11:31:28 AM
Do you have time when it was booked info might be off for few hours time I read at other forum suggested between 23-02. Since he went to sleep at his sister place Stephanie who took him to airport.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on November 26, 2014, 11:52:27 AM
Do you have time when it was booked info might be off for few hours time I read at other forum suggested between 23-02. Since he went to sleep at his sister place Stephanie who took him to airport.
No the sheet just says "create date" 30/4.
As I haven't found anything else in the files, I'm inclined to think that the 2am "booking" is a myth, or possibly a half-myth if it turns out to be just an online check-in, if Flybe offered that possibility in those days.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on November 26, 2014, 12:54:31 PM
Do you have time when it was booked info might be off for few hours time I read at other forum suggested between 23-02. Since he went to sleep at his sister place Stephanie who took him to airport.
I think I've guessed where you read that. As usual, it's a muddled interpretation, and there's a bit of a muddle in the English translation as well.
According to his answer to a previous question, he had things he felt required his personal presence related to his business to sort out and decided to go back over.
His reply to what the PJ presumably asked him (i.e., if he'd changed the date of his booking, to either earlier or later) was that he hadn't, he'd booked the flight for 1 May. From the Flybe sheet, he'd booked it on 30 April.
That got garbled, from what I suspect is your source, into he'd booked it on the day of departure (i.e. at some point past midnight on 1 May).
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 26, 2014, 01:19:03 PM
Every witness in the files who saw translatorman that night said he was with / taliking to / translating for GNR. So all the investigation now needs to do is ask the GNR officers:
"As well as the lady employee was there a man helping GNR translate that night?" Answer will be yes (as we already know from statements of DP FP ROB RO SB) "Was it RM?" Answer will be no (see GNR officers' existing statements). "Was it someone else?" Answer will be yes IMO
It's not rocket science.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on November 26, 2014, 01:37:57 PM
Every witness in the files who saw translatorman that night said he was with / taliking to / translating for GNR. So all the investigation now needs to do is ask the GNR officers:
"As well as the lady employee was there a man helping GNR translate that night?" Answer will be yes (as we already know from statements of DP FP ROB RO SB) "Was it RM?" Answer will be no (see GNR officers' existing statements). "Was it someone else?" Answer will be yes IMO
It's not rocket science.
It wouldn't have been rocket science to ask the GNR officers if they knew who this person was or could describe him. All they were asked was if it was RM.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 26, 2014, 01:51:08 PM
It wouldn't have been rocket science to ask the GNR officers if they knew who this person was or could describe him. All they were asked was if it was RM.
Agreed, should have been asked back then, therefore the GNR officers present that night should be asked now. I think they will say yes there was a man translating that night and it was not RM it was someone else. Should then be easy enough to find who - but it is important to realise this will simply be another innocent resident trying to help.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 26, 2014, 02:07:08 PM
Agreed, should have been asked back then, therefore the GNR officers present that night should be asked now. I think they will say yes there was a man translating that night and it was not RM it was someone else. Should then be easy enough to find who - but it is important to realise this will simply be another innocent resident trying to help.
Translatorman was not Murat. The real question is - who was Smokingman? It is clear from the files that everyman & his dog who was there that night was asked if they saw RM - except the OC receptionist. No-one, however, was asked if they saw anyone walking around with a child - and there must have been people doing that as we know children were collected from the night crèche. No-one was asked if they saw Gerry walking around prior to 10pm. Why was it sooo important to clear Murat? I can only speculate that it was because Tannerman was heading towards Murat's house.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Brietta on November 26, 2014, 10:37:53 PM
Translatorman was not Murat. The real question is - who was Smokingman? It is clear from the files that everyman & his dog who was there that night was asked if they saw RM - except the OC receptionist. No-one, however, was asked if they saw anyone walking around with a child - and there must have been people doing that as we know children were collected from the night crèche. No-one was asked if they saw Gerry walking around prior to 10pm. Why was it sooo important to clear Murat? I can only speculate that it was because Tannerman was heading towards Murat's house.
Surely it would have been a better alibi to have been seen in the vicinity at the relevant time. Who would have questioned the presence of a neighbour, disturbed by the noise turning to in the search for a missing child?
I think Jane Tanner's sighting did indeed throw a spanner into the works and pointed the investigation in a direction it might not have otherwise taken.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 26, 2014, 11:08:56 PM
I realised a long time ago that RM is innocent, because it would be absurdly stupid (if he had been there that night and been seen by dozens of searchers and numerous GNR officers) to then claim he wasn't there. How anyone can still imagine he was there that night defies understanding.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 26, 2014, 11:46:46 PM
I realised a long time ago that RM is innocent, because it would be absurdly stupid (if he had been there that night and been seen by dozens of searchers and numerous GNR officers) to then claim he wasn't there. How anyone can still imagine he was there that night defies understanding.
What time did the first GNR officers venture out onto the streets? What time did nanny CP reportedly see him?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Brietta on November 26, 2014, 11:55:41 PM
I realised a long time ago that RM is innocent, because it would be absurdly stupid (if he had been there that night and been seen by dozens of searchers and numerous GNR officers) to then claim he wasn't there. How anyone can still imagine he was there that night defies understanding.
It all depends on which alibi of his actual whereabouts was decided to be the correct one.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 26, 2014, 11:59:11 PM
What time did the first GNR officers venture out onto the streets? What time did nanny CP reportedly see him?
The first GNR arrived at 5A area a little after 11pm IMO.
CP saw the man (who I have pointed out is not RM) at about 10.30pm according to one report, or at about midnight according to another report. Best to look for a video interview - that would be more reliable than tabloid articles.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 27, 2014, 12:25:54 AM
I think you know that particular statement never reached the files, possibly due to that pre-interview tipple he enjoyed with a certain PJ Inspector.
He does however make reference to it during his interview on the 14th
05-Processo, Volume V, pages 1170-1178 (9 pages)
He ate a sandwich of cheese and ham sitting in the kitchen with his mother, until 22:00 or 23:00. Contrary to what he said originally, he was not with MICHAELA when she went to a Jehovah witnesses' meeting between 20:00 and 22:00, which is why he didn't phone her, because she turns her phone off. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBERT-MURAT.htm
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 27, 2014, 02:10:07 AM
He does however make reference to it during his interview on the 14th
05-Processo, Volume V, pages 1170-1178 (9 pages)
He ate a sandwich of cheese and ham sitting in the kitchen with his mother, until 22:00 or 23:00. Contrary to what he said originally, he was not with MICHAELA when she went to a Jehovah witnesses' meeting between 20:00 and 22:00, which is why he didn't phone her, because she turns her phone off. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBERT-MURAT.htm
Thanks, Brietta. 8((()*/
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 27, 2014, 02:12:49 AM
I think you know that particular statement never reached the files, possibly due to that pre-interview tipple he enjoyed with a certain PJ Inspector.
So you are claiming that someone is guilty of lying, and your source is a statement which you have never seen, and which you say is not in the files because the interviewer and interviewee had a tipple before the interview?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on November 27, 2014, 02:16:54 AM
So you are claiming that someone is guilty of lying, and your source is a statement which you have never seen, and which you say is not in the files because the interviewer and interviewee had a tipple before the interview?
Sorry - it was in news reports & I'm too tired right now to find the links. Brietta has just provided you with the reference to it in the files. I will find you the link to telephone recording proving the little tipple he had with RS tomorrow. Night, all.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on November 27, 2014, 02:35:14 AM
"Contrary to what he said originally, he was not with MICHAELA when she went to a Jehovah witnesses' meeting" Similar to the alleged changing of story from doing check by front door with key, to doing check by patio doors. In both cases (RM, and GM/KM) the earlier interview was mis-transcribed IMO. IMO they did not change their story, he did not change his story. It seems unfair to accuse either them or him on these alleged changes of story when in neither case do we have the full transcription of the earlier statement.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Brietta on November 27, 2014, 08:23:32 AM
"Contrary to what he said originally, he was not with MICHAELA when she went to a Jehovah witnesses' meeting" Similar to the alleged changing of story from doing check by front door with key, to doing check by patio doors. In both cases (RM, and GM/KM) the earlier interview was mis-transcribed IMO. IMO they did not change their story, he did not change his story. It seems unfair to accuse either them or him on these alleged changes of story when in neither case do we have the full transcription of the earlier statement.
There is no doubt that Mr Murat did change his story, unless "contrary to what he said originally" means different things to different people. All that is open for discussion is why.
The circumstances in which statements were made is entirely different. Initial statements made in the immediate aftermath of the discovery that your child is missing using volunteer interpreters because you do not speak Portuguese are almost bound to contain errors.
A person making a statement who is not emotionally involved some time after the event when the initial panic has subsided ... who is fluent and making the statement in Portuguese ... retracting the glaring error of providing information falsely naming a person as an alibi, must surely have set the antennae of the investigating officers twitching.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 27, 2014, 09:21:01 AM
There is no doubt that Mr Murat did change his story, unless "contrary to what he said originally" means different things to different people. All that is open for discussion is why.
The circumstances in which statements were made is entirely different. Initial statements made in the immediate aftermath of the discovery that your child is missing using volunteer interpreters because you do not speak Portuguese are almost bound to contain errors.
A person making a statement who is not emotionally involved some time after the event when the initial panic has subsided ... who is fluent and making the statement in Portuguese ... retracting the glaring error of providing information falsely naming a person as an alibi, must surely have set the antennae of the investigating officers twitching.
How many times did the mccanns and the rest of the group change their stories/accounts of events ?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: lizzibif on November 27, 2014, 09:43:52 AM
He does however make reference to it during his interview on the 14th
05-Processo, Volume V, pages 1170-1178 (9 pages)
He ate a sandwich of cheese and ham sitting in the kitchen with his mother, until 22:00 or 23:00. Contrary to what he said originally, he was not with MICHAELA when she went to a Jehovah witnesses' meeting between 20:00 and 22:00, which is why he didn't phone her, because she turns her phone off. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBERT-MURAT.htm
Didn't the Jehovah's report that Michaela wasn't at the meeting that night....?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Victoria on November 27, 2014, 10:05:41 AM
To be fair, any grown man who has to rely on his mother for an alibi is going to raise the odd eyebrow. It's not exactly rock solid, is it?
Still, we have to remember that, as with the McCanns, there wasn't any evidence to prosecute Murat, despite him being, apparently, under significant scrutiny.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: lizzibif on November 27, 2014, 10:10:43 AM
To be fair, any grown man who has to rely on his mother for an alibi is going to raise the odd eyebrow. It's not exactly rock solid, is it?
Still, we have to remember that, as with the McCanns, there wasn't any evidence to prosecute Murat, despite him being, apparently, under significant scrutiny.
no evidence doesn't mean he couldn't of been involved in some way...the McCann anti's say that about them so why not murat...?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Victoria on November 27, 2014, 10:12:11 AM
Without any doubt he is an extremely complex character.
One thing which I did notice while reading the account in the files, was that his behaviour while he was acting as a translator was thought to be questionable by the attendant PJ officers and resulted in him being put under surveillance.
This was long, long before any British journalist expressed concern for precisely the same behaviour which had attracted the suspicion of the investigating officer. In effect the journalist did not start the hue and cry as we have been led to believe ... the PJ were there before her.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: lizzibif on November 27, 2014, 11:11:51 AM
Without any doubt he is an extremely complex character.
One thing which I did notice while reading the account in the files, was that his behaviour while he was acting as a translator was thought to be questionable by the attendant PJ officers and resulted in him being put under surveillance.
This was long, long before any British journalist expressed concern for precisely the same behaviour which had attracted the suspicion of the investigating officer. In effect the journalist did not start the hue and cry as we have been led to believe ... the PJ were there before her.
yes that's right he was under surveillance for about week by the pj ...before the journalist had suspicions about his behaviour....
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: faithlilly on November 27, 2014, 12:49:11 PM
There is no doubt that Mr Murat did change his story, unless "contrary to what he said originally" means different things to different people. All that is open for discussion is why.
The circumstances in which statements were made is entirely different. Initial statements made in the immediate aftermath of the discovery that your child is missing using volunteer interpreters because you do not speak Portuguese are almost bound to contain errors.
A person making a statement who is not emotionally involved some time after the event when the initial panic has subsided ... who is fluent and making the statement in Portuguese ... retracting the glaring error of providing information falsely naming a person as an alibi, must surely have set the antennae of the investigating officers twitching.
My but you are slippery Brietta.
For the confused the esteemed poster has just attempted to nullify Gerry's change of statement with regard to his entrance to 5a on the night of the 3rd while using Murat's as a stick with which to beat him.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 27, 2014, 04:38:31 PM
ONE MILLION $ QUESTION
Murat where was your Volkswagen Transporter? Decide which of your statement is correct.
1. He stated in the police report that his mom was driving it. 2. He stated during the lunch at home vith MW former husband that he left at town near PDL with posters of missing girl. 3. He stated to the rent a car Agent that he needs to rent Hunday Gets urgently because his Volkswagen transporter was given to Brits to look for missing girls. (Here he panicked extremely).
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: jassi on November 27, 2014, 04:42:42 PM
I'm sure the police will ask all the question that they feel are necessary.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on November 27, 2014, 06:16:56 PM
There is no doubt that Mr Murat did change his story, unless "contrary to what he said originally" means different things to different people. All that is open for discussion is why.
The circumstances in which statements were made is entirely different. Initial statements made in the immediate aftermath of the discovery that your child is missing using volunteer interpreters because you do not speak Portuguese are almost bound to contain errors.
A person making a statement who is not emotionally involved some time after the event when the initial panic has subsided ... who is fluent and making the statement in Portuguese ... retracting the glaring error of providing information falsely naming a person as an alibi, must surely have set the antennae of the investigating officers twitching.
The original Amaral team just didn't seem to have a coherent system in operation.
There are lots of unanswered questions concerning details about lots of people... and quite a few instances of notes taken by various PJ officers that don't make much sense.
Whose fault?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on November 27, 2014, 06:25:07 PM
Murat where was your Volkswagen Transporter? Decide which of your statement is correct.
1. He stated in the police report that his mom was driving it. 2. He stated during the lunch at home vith MW former husband that he left at town near PDL with posters of missing girl. 3. He stated to the rent a car Agent that he needs to rent Hunday Gets urgently because his Volkswagen transporter was given to Brits to look for missing girls. (Here he panicked extremely).
Hmm. Have you checked the files yourself on the issues concerning the cars?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 27, 2014, 06:30:57 PM
Contamination & confusion is good. What police force in the world would covertly trail a suspect for the day and follow him to a police station where he was acted as a translator for another suspect (the gardener in this case)?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 27, 2014, 06:53:49 PM
Contamination & confusion is good. What police force in the world would covertly trail a suspect for the day and follow him to a police station where he was acted as a translator for another suspect (the gardener in this case)?
PDL Police did a good job. I wonder wat the forum here will look like when the case is closed.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Alfred R Jones on November 27, 2014, 07:24:14 PM
PDL Police did a good job. I wonder wat the forum here will look like when the case is closed.
Much the same as it looks now - a dozen or so saddos ripping lumps out of each other about the fate of a child none of them ever knew. @)(++(*
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 27, 2014, 07:51:53 PM
It can always be done better of course . But if you have minimal knowledge of how law works you would not be laughing maybe crying. The majority evidence were collected by Judicial Police not regular one, thats why they can solve this case even working from Tokyo.8(0(* .
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Alfred R Jones on November 27, 2014, 08:11:48 PM
It can always be done better of course . But if you have minimal knowledge of how law works you would not be laughing maybe crying. The majority evidence were collected by Judicial Police not regular one, thats why they can solve this case even working from Tokyo.8(0(* .
&%+((£ clear as mud, sorry. Too many people talk in riddles on this forum for my liking.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: ferryman on November 27, 2014, 08:36:43 PM
Much the same as it looks now - a dozen or so saddos ripping lumps out of each other about the fate of a child none of them ever knew. @)(++(*
Some of them did.
Dias was sound.
Joao Carlos wrote a good final PJ report ...
Sorry, that was intended to be a response to Bros:
PDL Police did a good job. I wonder wat the forum here will look like when the case is closed.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: bros on November 29, 2014, 10:55:59 PM
Inspector Pedro Varanda relating to an informal conversation with Robert Murat:
This Police officer was astonished by the knowledge Murat had of McCains everyday routine. Finally, and in the sense of reiterating the suspicious attitude shown by Robert Murat, I venture still to state that, beyond having manifested an enormous knowledge about the dynamics inherent in the functioning of the "Ocean Club Garden" (in which the events under investigation had taken place) and of the routines followed by the McCann family and their companions during their respective stays in in Praia da Luz,[/b] he has tried persistently to influence the conduct of the present investigation, suggesting various analyses the agreement with which [i.e. had they agreed to follow those suggested lines of inquiry] could be intended to impute the consummation of the present illegal act [the missing child] to foreign third parties [i.e. to put the blame on, or to attribute the blame to, outside foreigners].
It can always be done better of course . But if you have minimal knowledge of how law works you would not be laughing maybe crying. The majority evidence were collected by Judicial Police not regular one, thats why they can solve this case even working from Tokyo.8(0(* .
Are you suggesting a Japanese angle of manga & anime - I seem to recall a report of some cartoon-like porn being found on a computer?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on November 30, 2014, 09:41:49 PM
Inspector Pedro Varanda relating to an informal conversation with Robert Murat:
This Police officer was astonished by the knowledge Murat had of McCains everyday routine. Finally, and in the sense of reiterating the suspicious attitude shown by Robert Murat, I venture still to state that, beyond having manifested an enormous knowledge about the dynamics inherent in the functioning of the "Ocean Club Garden" (in which the events under investigation had taken place) and of the routines followed by the McCann family and their companions during their respective stays in in Praia da Luz,[/b] he has tried persistently to influence the conduct of the present investigation, suggesting various analyses the agreement with which [i.e. had they agreed to follow those suggested lines of inquiry] could be intended to impute the consummation of the present illegal act [the missing child] to foreign third parties [i.e. to put the blame on, or to attribute the blame to, outside foreigners].
Are you suggesting a Japanese angle of manga & anime - I seem to recall a report of some cartoon-like porn being found on a computer?
No Misty I didnt have that information, good that you brought it . I was simply referring that his statements were taken by Judiciary Police which is same as speaking to Investigative Judge, if you change the statements after couple of month they can book you to the local county jail. Although many contradictions in his statements they decided not to. Maybe they have something else in mind. The other thing is that Murat is still liable for those statements this wont be a case if was interview with regular police. Now if he is cornered during Judaical police and SY interview he have to be extremely careful what he saying.
Well he would have obviously have learned something of the group's routine as he'd interpreted for various people, including Dianne Webster.
There's nothing in the files to suggest that he knew anything about them prior to Madeleine's disappearance.
Aside from the McCanns, he was the one person that the PJ did investigate thoroughly.
The witness in this statement is Detective who probably knows very well what is he talking about. Plus he was involved since the beginning and is aware of the things you wrote. Lets not water down wat he is talking here he is not only talking here...
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on December 01, 2014, 01:48:24 PM
To be fair, any grown man who has to rely on his mother for an alibi is going to raise the odd eyebrow. It's not exactly rock solid, is it?
Still, we have to remember that, as with the McCanns, there wasn't any evidence to prosecute Murat, despite him being, apparently, under significant scrutiny.
Chris Jefferies' alibi was hardly rock-solid, either.
No Misty I didnt have that information, good that you brought it . I was simply referring that his statements were taken by Judiciary Police which is same as speaking to Investigative Judge, if you change the statements after couple of month they can book you to the local county jail. Although many contradictions in his statements they decided not to. Maybe they have something else in mind. The other thing is that Murat is still liable for those statements this wont be a case if was interview with regular police. Now if he is cornered during Judaical police and SY interview he have to be extremely careful what he saying.
The witness in this statement is Detective who probably knows very well what is he talking about. Plus he was involved since the beginning and is aware of the things you wrote. Lets not water down wat he is talking here he is not only talking here...
Sorry, I don't follow.
Murat was thoroughly investigated at the time (possibly the only person, aside from the McCanns, to have been subject to such intensive scrutiny). There is currently nothing to substantiate that Murat is in any way connected to Madeleine's disappearance, aside from having volunteered to help.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pegasus on December 04, 2014, 01:17:20 AM
... Murat was thoroughly investigated at the time (possibly the only person, aside from the McCanns, to have been subject to such intensive scrutiny). There is currently nothing to substantiate that Murat is in any way connected to Madeleine's disappearance, aside from having volunteered to help.
Agreed. Good post.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on December 04, 2014, 02:37:29 AM
Murat was thoroughly investigated at the time (possibly the only person, aside from the McCanns, to have been subject to such intensive scrutiny). There is currently nothing to substantiate that Murat is in any way connected to Madeleine's disappearance, aside from having volunteered to help.
Why do you suppose SY want to re-interview people who were not there on the night in question and who all had rock-solid alibis? (TIC)
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: sadie on December 04, 2014, 08:06:13 AM
Why do you suppose SY want to re-interview people who were not there on the night in question and who all had rock-solid alibis? (TIC)
Perhaps he has been "fingured" by one of the men already questioned?. SY dont have to tell us everything. or Perhaps he knows the background to one of the people they are suspicious about
I had always wanted to think that Robert was not involved in any way.... so hopefully it is the later.
Anyone with any other ideas?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: lizzibif on December 04, 2014, 06:29:32 PM
Perhaps he has been "fingured" by one of the men already questioned?. SY dont have to tell us everything. or Perhaps he knows the background to one of the people they are suspicious about
I had always wanted to think that Robert was not involved in any way.... so hopefully it is the later.
Anyone with any other ideas?
Evening Sadie ..do you think Robert Murat could be involved in some way ? or could he know more than hes letting on ...just a thought &%+((£
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on December 04, 2014, 06:33:01 PM
You can tell by the way that pig farmer got angry.
No. You can tell by the fact how your PIG FARMER was confronted few days before Madeleine McCain arrived in Portugal just next to 5a.
Honestly we are all lucky that this PDL Kidnap crew were so dumb as a drum.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pathfinder73 on February 01, 2015, 12:39:42 PM
I know Robert Murat would never take Madeleine, says his ex-wife By HELEN WEATHERS Last updated at 23:05 23 November 2007
As for Dawn Murat, 42, she has never once doubted her former husband's innocence. "I have known Robert for 13 years and was married to him for six and he would never, ever hurt a child," says Dawn, who lives in Norfolk. "He's the parent of a daughter, almost the same age as Madeleine, and he would never put anyone through the misery the McCanns are going through because he couldn't bear to think of something like that happening to Sofia. She is the most important person in Robert's life. "No one has ever produced a shred of evidence linking him with Madeleine's disappearance. This has totally ruined his life and he does not deserve that." Indeed, Dawn reveals that last month Murat secretly travelled to Britain to see Sofia during half-term and she allowed their daughter to stay with him overnight at the Devon home of Murat's sister Sam. "If I had thought for just one second that Robert was involved in Madeleine's disappearance I wouldn't let Sofia near him, but I trust him with her 100 per cent," says Dawn. What makes Dawn's unswerving support for her former husband all the more remarkable is the fact that he doesn't really deserve it. She has every reason to hate him for the way he callously ended their marriage two years ago and for the upheaval his arguido status has caused them since May: this summer Dawn had to stay with relatives in Devon after Murat received hate mail making threats against his own daughter.
When Robert first became a suspect he was in a terrible state. I was really worried he might kill himself," says Dawn. "But his thoughts quickly turned to Sofia when he got hate mail. He called me, and though he never told me exactly what was in the letters, he was obviously very frightened for her. I thought it safest to go and stay with my family." The story Dawn tells gives an intimate and fascinating insight into the character of the man at the centre of the Madeleine mystery. Dawn was 27 when she first met Robert Murat, eight years her junior, through her sister who lives in Devon near Murat's family. Dawn was the unhappily married mother of a six-year-old son, David, and Murat - the son of a British mother and a Portuguese entrepreneur - had moved to Britain from Portugal aged 16 to care for his frail grandmother. They were friends first, and when Dawn separated from her husband they started a romance. "At first, my family were against the relationship because they thought he was too young for me," says Dawn. "But Robert seemed so much older than his years. He was wise, gentle, loving and caring. Soon, my family thought he was fantastic, and he was wonderful with my son. David adored him. "He never called Robert 'Dad', but when he introduced him to his friends, he'd say: 'This is my father.' David loved him so much he formally applied to take his surname, Murat, at 17. "Robert was the kind of person who could walk into a room of strangers and start talking to anyone. He was incredibly sociable and everyone liked him. "He was very family-orientated from the start and never liked going out to pubs and clubs. He was virtually tee-total." Murat moved from Devon to live with Dawn in Norfolk and they started talking about having a baby together. He found work initially at the Bernard Matthews turkey processing plant and then as a car salesman, which suited his outgoing personality. They married on May 16, 2001, at Gretna Green and were thrilled when Dawn became pregnant with Sofia the following year. "I remember the night I did the pregnancy test. Rob was out with his friends so I phoned him. He rushed home immediately and came bounding through the door with a huge smile on his face. "He was by my side when our daughter was born and he was a doting father. The minute he came through the door from work, he'd say 'Where's my baby?' and go straight to her cot and give her a cuddle, even if she was asleep. "If ever we went to family parties, Robert wouldn't be the one standing there looking at the children, he would be down on the floor playing with them. Everyone was totally enamoured of him." Murat's father, John, had died when he was 12. It had always been Murat's dream to follow in his late father's footsteps and run his own business, and it was he who suggested they move to Portugal to turn this dream into reality.
So when Sofia was two, Dawn and Robert moved into his mother's villa in Praia Da Luz with their daughter, leaving David - who was by now almost 18 and wanted to stay in Britain - at the Norfolk house. "At first it was fantastic living in Portugal in a lovely villa with its own pool, and Robert's mother was like a second mum to me, but it soon wore off,"says Dawn, a former office worker. "Robert got a job selling properties and was putting in so many hours that we hardly ever saw him. Sofia would keep asking me 'Why can't Daddy take me to the beach?' or 'Why isn't Daddy home?' and we started arguing about the time he was spending away from us. I was also incredibly isolated. I couldn't speak the language and couldn't get a job." The rows became so fierce and Dawn's unhappiness so apparent that Murat suggested she go back to Britain for a break. He said he would join her there in a few weeks; they'd spend some time together before returning to Portugal to start afresh. "As soon as I got home, Robert phoned me and said he wasn't coming over and didn't want me to come back," she says. "He said: 'I'm not sure if I still love you or if I want to be with you any more.' It was a complete bolt out of the blue." Devastated, Dawn was convinced that Murat was simply going through some kind of premature mid-life crisis until she heard her daughter Sofia talking to her mother Margaret. "They were watching TV and a presenter called Michaela came on. Sofia started telling my mum about her Dad's friend Michaela and how they'd bumped into her when he took her out for an ice cream. Then Sofia said: 'Why were Daddy and Michaela holding hands?' "I had never met Michaela, but I knew she worked with Robert. I immediately phoned him and demanded to know if he was having an affair. He denied it and said: 'I just need to sort myself out for a bit.'" Does she think Murat was telling the truth? "Probably not," she says sadly, "but it doesn't matter now." Yet for six months Dawn held out hope that Murat would come to his senses. But on New Year's Eve 2005 Murat phoned Dawn and said he wanted a divorce. "I pleaded with him not to leave us," says Dawn. "I had never cheated on him, never lied and had been 100 per cent committed to the marriage. "He was the love of my life and I felt he had destroyed me. I had a nervous breakdown as a result and was on anti-depressants. I couldn't function." At the beginning of January 2006, Dawn tried to commit suicide by taking an overdose of prescription drugs. Her son David saved her life when her found her and called for an ambulance. "I was in despair," says Dawn. "For six months from the time he asked for a divorce, Sofia and I never heard from Robert. "He has since told me that he wanted to give me time, that he was being cruel to be kind and that it was the hardest six months of his life. I think he regrets it now and he has apologised." Murat renewed contact only in the summer of 2006 when he heard on the grapevine - falsely, as it turned out - that Dawn was seeing someone new. "He said: 'I don't want Sofia to have a new Daddy. I will always be Sofia's Daddy.' "Even though he hadn't spoken to Sofia for six months, the thought of somebody else becoming her father had jolted him back to reality," says Dawn. That August Sofia and her mother saw Murat when he returned to Britain for the funeral of his grandmother. All the bitterness over the way Murat had treated her dissipated when she saw how happy Sofia was to see her father again.
In December last year Dawn even met Michaela when she visited Britain with Murat and charitably says now: "She is a very nice woman. Both Robert and I have realised that Sofia is our main priority so we have to get along. I still love him, but I'm not in love with him any more, and I think he still loves me." Murat visited Sofia in Britain in April this year, staying for a few weeks, and returned to Portugal just two days before Madeleine disappeared - hardly time, he has argued, to plan and execute a kidnapping. "I remember Rob then phoned me up on May 4 and said 'a little girl's gone missing from Praia da Luz, switch on the news'," says Dawn. "I switched on and there were these pictures of Madeleine McCann and I said: 'Oh my God, she looks just like Sofia.'" "Robert said 'Where is Sofia, is she OK?' and I told him not to worry, that she was at playgroup." Dawn believes that the nightmare which followed was all down to Robert's over-eagerness to help the police find a child so strikingly similar to his own. In Britain he'd occasionally worked for the police as an interpreter - being fluent in both languages - so she says it would have been natural for him to offer to do the same there. To outsiders, however, Robert Murat's constant presence at the very heart of the investigation appeared to border on the suspicious. He came across as a bit of an "oddball", and the close proximity of his mother's villa to the McCanns' apartment appeared rather suspect, too. A journalist, reminded of killer Ian Huntley's eagerness to help the media during the Soham murder hunt, related her suspicions to police. Murat was subsequently hauled in for questioning, despite his mother Jenny's alibi that he'd spent all evening with her. Their villa was searched, his computer was seized, his mobile phone records examined. He seemed to fit the description of a man seen hanging around the McCanns' apartment. Claims were made that police had found porn on his computer - fiercely denied by Murat and never officially confirmed - and details emerged of his relationship with Michaela and her curious domestic set-up. Yet there remains not a single piece of evidence linking him to Madeleine's disappearance, and although he is prevented from speaking out under Portuguese law, his family vehemently insist he is innocent. Dawn says: "When Robert was first whisked in for questioning by police my reaction was one of total disbelief. "The Robert Murat you read about is not the person I know. I have yet to meet anyone who has ever known Robert who thinks he was involved in Madeleine's disappearance. "My family will never forgive Robert for the way he treated me, but not a single one of them thinks he did this. "When Robert was with me he never watched porn, but what he does have on his computer are hundreds of pictures of his daughter and nieces. "Yes, some may include them playing naked on the beach, but they are totally innocent. Both Robert and I were brought up never to judge people without knowing all the facts, but people are so swift to judge him. "My heart goes out to the McCanns and what they've been put through is absolutely horrendous. Personally, I would never leave my children on their own, but I would never condemn them for leaving Madeleine and their twins alone in the apartment. "I know Praia da Luz, I lived there, and it is quiet and sleepy. When you are on holiday it's very easy to be lulled into a false sense of security and what parent hasn't at some time done something which in hindsight they regret? "I don't know what happened to Madeleine. I do think she was abducted - predators are everywhere - but I know it wasn't Robert. He doesn't deserve this, and neither does Sofia." • Additional reporting TOM HENDRY
THE FIRST SUSPECT Robert Murat is placed under investigation and interviewed at the offices of the police in Portimão from 10am. He does not wish for the presence of a lawyer. He is the first suspect who will be declared arguido. As such, he benefits from certain rights, one of them being to remain silent. But he does not assert that right and responds to all questions put to him. Despite obvious nervousness, his statements are clear and precise. (TOTL)
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on February 01, 2015, 01:04:08 PM
Strange Jenny Murat, when interviewed by the PJ, was unable to recall the exact name of her son's only daughter.
--- Asked, she says the is not certain on which date Robert was married but she knows that his wife in English and 10/12 years older than him and she knows only that her name is Dawn. --- From this marriage came a daughter, Sophie or Sofia (she is not certain), who was currently four years old and who was born in October 2002, living with her mother in Norfolk [full address given].
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pathfinder73 on February 01, 2015, 02:06:04 PM
--- Asked, she says the is not certain on which date Robert was married but she knows that his wife in English and 10/12 years older than him and she knows only that her name is Dawn. --- From this marriage came a daughter, Sophie or Sofia (she is not certain), who was currently four years old and who was born in October 2002, living with her mother in Norfolk [full address given].
What isn't strange is he fully cooperated with the police after being made suspect and answered all questions. They should've asked that weasel CM that one.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on February 01, 2015, 02:22:08 PM
What isn't strange is he fully cooperated with the police after being made suspect and answered all questions. They should've asked that weasel CM that one.
What is strange is that he went drinking a member of the PJ the night before his interview. Gave him chance to learn his lines 8(0(*
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pathfinder73 on February 01, 2015, 02:26:48 PM
What is strange is that he went drinking a member of the PJ the night before his interview. Gave him chance to learn his lines 8(0(*
No dogs alerted at his home or his cars. He was properly investigated because he answered all questions. If suspects refuse to answer question they can't be properly investigated which means they can't be cleared as possible suspects.
He got suspected because of Ian Huntley and Tannerman going in that direction.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on February 01, 2015, 02:30:21 PM
No dogs alerted at his home or his cars. He was properly investigated because he answered all questions. If suspects refuse to answer question they can't be properly investigated which means they can't be cleared as possible suspects.
He got suspected because of Ian Huntley and Tannerman going in that direction.
The McCanns answered all the questions as witnesses.
Why didn't RM's dogs bark in the night?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: pathfinder73 on February 01, 2015, 02:44:31 PM
--- Asked, she says the is not certain on which date Robert was married but she knows that his wife in English and 10/12 years older than him and she knows only that her name is Dawn. --- From this marriage came a daughter, Sophie or Sofia (she is not certain), who was currently four years old and who was born in October 2002, living with her mother in Norfolk [full address given].
Didn't know much about her son, did she? Didn't know when he was divorced or if it was actually finalised Didn't know if her son maintained a relationship with Michaela.
Oh and look where the information she gathered went!
--- Relative to the facts concerning the disappearance of the English child, the deponent states that because she has been in Portugal for a long time and knows many people, she decided to mount a "post" to collect information in order to be able to determine things about the subject and thus could channel them to the competent authorities. For three days (Friday 11/05, Saturday 12/05 and Sunday 13/05) she was at the "post" mounted near to the cinema having obtained some information that she gave to Robert who, in turn, gave it to the Police. --- Her idea was to try to sensitise people not to feel intimidated by the presence of police and lead them to give all the information that they knew.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on February 01, 2015, 03:34:54 PM
Didn't know much about her son, did she? Didn't know when he was divorced or if it was actually finalised Didn't know if her son maintained a relationship with Michaela.
Oh and look where the information she gathered went!
--- Relative to the facts concerning the disappearance of the English child, the deponent states that because she has been in Portugal for a long time and knows many people, she decided to mount a "post" to collect information in order to be able to determine things about the subject and thus could channel them to the competent authorities. For three days (Friday 11/05, Saturday 12/05 and Sunday 13/05) she was at the "post" mounted near to the cinema having obtained some information that she gave to Robert who, in turn, gave it to the Police. --- Her idea was to try to sensitise people not to feel intimidated by the presence of police and lead them to give all the information that they knew.
She knew rather more about her son's "girlfriend without benefits" though, which seems odd as Dawn & Sofia lived with Jenny for a few months.
"snip*
--- The witness knows Michaela, knows she has a daughter who she knows only as "Titinha", who is about 8 or 9 years old, is a Portuguese national, and lives in Lagos. She knows that Michaela is still married to an individual named Louis and she is a Jehovah's Witness. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- DCI - do you find it odd Martin Smith said when he first met RM in the bars that he wasn't wearing glasses yet other sources state RM was as blind as a bat without them?
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: DCI on February 01, 2015, 03:49:42 PM
She knew rather more about her son's "girlfriend without benefits" though, which seems odd as Dawn & Sofia lived with Jenny for a few months.
"snip*
--- The witness knows Michaela, knows she has a daughter who she knows only as "Titinha", who is about 8 or 9 years old, is a Portuguese national, and lives in Lagos. She knows that Michaela is still married to an individual named Louis and she is a Jehovah's Witness. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- DCI - do you find it odd Martin Smith said when he first met RM in the bars that he wasn't wearing glasses yet other sources state RM was as blind as a bat without them?
Yes I do. He had a dislocation of the retina, which made him blind it the right eye. Seems only Martin thought he didn't wear glasses.
His mother spoke to a journalist and gave contradictions of what her statement says.
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: Carana on February 01, 2015, 04:20:41 PM
Hmmm. Many people who have eyesight problems also wear contact lenses (either occasionally or regularly).
Title: Re: Why Robert Murat became a suspect and then an arguido.
Post by: misty on February 01, 2015, 04:36:27 PM