The situation concerning the first suspect, ROBERT MURAT, will now be approached, thus following a line of the succession of the facts, without prejudice of returning to the description of occurrences further ahead.
A few days after the facts took place, suspicions were raised concerning an individual that resides approximately 100/150 metres away from apartment 5A, identified as ROBERT JAMES QUERIOL EVELEIGH MURAT.
suspicions arose initially due to the formulation by a British journalist, who found the special commitment and curiosity of MURAT in this case to be strange, which had reminded her of another [case] that had taken place in the United Kingdom with similar outlines and where the guilty persons had actively participated in searches.
The reasons for said suspicion are duly listed within the information that is contained in the process, on pages 308, 328, 442, 461, 957, 960, 961 and 986 to 1000, being certain that they ended up being reinforced, some time later, by elements of the holiday group that asserted, contrary to what MURAT said, that he had participated in the searches on the evening of the disappearance.
In an initial phase, before the investigation was deepened, this individual gathered the conditions to be pointed out as a suspect. The conditions that are intrinsical to his suspect status, can be analysed, as stated before, on the routine reports that were mentioned above.
In order to confirm or dismiss the suspicions about ROBERT MURAT, searches and telephone surveillance were requested, pages 995 to 1013, both on the suspect and on the individuals with whom he directly or indirectly interacted, namely with who he met almost daily and maintained telephone contacts.
Despite the exhaustive and methodical investigation into MURAT and the persons close to him, no elements whatsoever were collected to relate him to the crime that was under investigation, and it should be noted that contrary to what witnesses within the group stated concerning his hypothetical participation in the searches on the night of the disappearance, other witnesses (like SILVIA BAPTISTA and elements of the GNR) asserted that they had not seen him during those diligences
Beyond the communication interceptions and forensic exams of the computers belonging to them, which pointed to nothing useful, several searches were also performed in the suspect’s home, as mentioned earlier, with cino-technical assistance and exploration of the subsoil, both physically and by technological detection means, which also did not allow for the collection of exact evidence.
Be aware that, in relation to the utilization of very advanced technological means, in the area of the detection of strange bodies in the subsoil or enclosed [walled in], these were performed specifically by technicians from Aveiro University, using equipment that allowed a detailed search of the area.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm
