The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Page 3 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by jeanmonroe on 19.11.14 20:52

Anyone know IF RM was, at anytime, actually IN G5A?

Pity him, if he was!

Sounds to me like a classic 'MET' (BG) 'set up/ fit up/ stitch up'!

UNKNOWN DNA?........................Murat?

UNKNOWN 'HAIRS'.....................Murat?

TV prog yesterday.....M Nightingdale...........Murat.

ITV news today.........M Nightingdale...........Murat.

Shouldn't be too long before a 'source' close to the McCann's says 'Kate has always 'suspected' ...........Murat'

Wonder when, if, we'll hear from Jenny M, 'soon'

re: "WHY are those doctors, FP, R O'B and RO, LYING about Robert?"  JM.


Murat might soon be needing this man - his lawyer, Francisco Pagarete. Murat 'forgot' to tell the PJ , when first questioned, that he'd met with his lawyer on Wednesday 2 May. Pagarete was by his side at that crunch meeting between the Murat Team and the McCann Team at 'Salsalita', the Eveleighs' villa, on 13 November 2007, with Kennedy & Smethurst across the table from Murat and Pagarete.

When news of this meeting leaked out, Kennedy said he'd made the journey to Portugal 'to offer Murat a job looking for Madeleine'    

- Moderator   

 

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5132
Reputation : 885
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by NickE on 19.11.14 21:35

@MissesWillYa wrote:Is RM currently married to MW? Just curious.
According to Portuguese media, yes.

"..............Robert’s wife, Michaela Walczuch, and her former husband, Luís António......................."

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".

NickE

Posts : 916
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 41

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by MissesWillYa on 19.11.14 21:37

@NickE wrote:
@MissesWillYa wrote:Is RM currently married to MW? Just curious.
According to Portuguese media, yes.

"..............Robert’s wife, Michaela Walczuch, and her former husband, Luís António......................."

Thanks, NickE. I must have misread that line.

MissesWillYa

Posts : 180
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2013-04-25
Location : On a mountaintop

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by sharonl on 19.11.14 21:52

The Portuguese seem reluctant to work with British police and who could blame them? But, without the PJ, on what authority could NSY possible interview any Portuguese resident even if he is ex-pat?

IMO this is just spin, unless of course the PJ are questioning Murat and NSY have jumped on bandwagon.

But, if it were the PJ, would it be splattered all over the press? How odd that we only here about bits of the investigation that the McCanns would want us to hear.

____________________
"WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER" - Rebekah Brooks to David Cameron

sharonl


Posts : 3565
Reputation : 419
Join date : 2009-12-29

View user profile http://www.cold2012.org.uk

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by XTC on 19.11.14 22:04

@mysterion wrote:I wonder if a lot more is now known about "activity" in PDL in April/May 2007 and that a complete revisit of all the evidence provided by witnesses is required. Maybe OG have been very busy indeed. I've pencilled in May 2015 for a result.
From what I've read of SY's modus operandi from the start is that they have put a great deal of store in phones and phone records.

That's a good place to start I think. Everyone's ( and I hope they have analysed everyone ) who had a mobile phone and was near PdL that day and night should have been found by now I would hope ( even JT's discredited bundleman - if he had a mobile?).

The positions should be known of these people if these phones were used on the day. Whether the contents and texts etc are known is not
known. Hopefully SY do know these things?

Therefore as an example  if RM and his mobile was moving around PdL that day it should be known. If he went to the Golf course at a certain time and if GM did the same it should be known. Unless - some people didn't have their mobiles with them? The problem in my opinion with phones is that any planning of the cunning kind would not be carried out via mobiles and in the during and after period the same would apply
I think.

If burglarA rang accomplice B on his/her mobile or texted ( even worse ) that the deed had been done etc it's a pretty obvious line of enquiry for the police to follow.

Which brings me to a theory that whomever removed Madeliene from wherever would not announce to the mobile phone provider and the checking police that the dastardly deed had been done.

What the perpetrators might not know though is that just because your mobile is turned off it doesn't mean that there isn't a signal.
From the bit I know about mobiles the signal is always trying to connect to a phone mast. It's only ever truly off when you take the battery out.

Possibly SY ( and the PJ ) may know who was where but not about any calls made or texts sent whilst the act was occurring. If your phones off you aren't going to make a call anyway. The main thing being - I imagine to place phones as near as possible to 5a ( if indeed that was where  Madeleine was taken from?) at ceratin times of the day or night. The night being the most important I assume for SY and the PJ.

The biggest problem for both forces are the people who were walking round PdL without mobiles. Most of them are untraceable. Just like a remover who wasn't carrying a mobile phone that night possibly? If this theory is to hold water then it suggests that the remover was one person without a mobile phone. In other words the remover had no need to tell anyone by phone about anything - just remove.

Only a theory though.

Re: the BBC reports.

Simply put I think the media has assumed that the interviews of the alleged 11 was a done deal.

This is what happens when you rely on unreliable sources.

SY don't do running commentaries but the media does.

My only surprise it that the usually circumspect BBC plonked it on the website and flagged it as semi - breaking news on the Six O'Clock Bulletin.



I wonder if there is a wrestling match going on between the BBC and Sky over who owns Madeleine's story from now on?



All Opinion.

XTC

Posts : 210
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-03-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by NickE on 19.11.14 22:18

There are reasons why the case is not solved after 7.5 years.
I think that one of the reason is that they seem to be locked up at May 3rd
I really hope SY and PJ have rewind the tape and looked at the events earlier that week.
Creche records,phone calls/text.................
IMO.

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".

NickE

Posts : 916
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 41

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by Tony Bennett on 19.11.14 22:43

@XTC wrote:
Therefore as an example if RM and his mobile was moving around PdL that day it should be known. If he went to the Golf course at a certain time and if GM did the same it should be known.
This is all a matter of record so far as Robert Murat is concerned.

The PJ analysed his 'phone records and trapped him by producing them when he was re-interviewed on 10 and 11 July 2007. Murat gulped, asked for 'time out' to take stock of the situation, and then admitted that he'd told the police a pack of lies about what he'd really been doing from 1st to 4th May.

I wrote it all up in detail in Chapters H and I of my article 'Robert Murat: From Arguido to Applause', pp, 66-79.

Here it is for anyone who's not read it yet: winkwink

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


H.  The second set of police interviews with Murat - on 10 and 11 July, two months after he was made ‘arguido’

We’ll take his two interviews separately.

Murat’s police interview on 10 July

Murat was asked to attend for questioning by Portuguese police on 10 July and told he had the right to consult a solicitor. He didn’t require either a solicitor or translator to be present with him. He was asked to confirm his previous testimony. He replied, however, that on the day of his earlier interview (14 May) he was very tired and didn’t remember the details of what he said on that occasion.

His previous statement was then read out to him. He confirmed the general thrust of his statement, but said he wanted to amend some of ‘afmações’ [details] as he said he had confused some events, in particular as regards the dates and times of when they happened.

He said that things he said happened on Wednesday 2 May he now more calmly recalled had happened on Thursday 3 May - and vice versa. And he now said there were ‘other facts’, including some that he now remembered having occurred in those two days that he wanted to tell police about. 

The new information that he volunteered included:

·         In Norfolk he had lived with his ex-wife Dawn, his own daughter S____, and his wife’s adopted son David in Hockering, near Norwich.

·         His grandmother lived in Sidford, not Sidmouth [the two places are close to each other].

·         He couldn’t give details of the exact dates he worked for certain companies, but said he worked for ‘Nissan’ and also ‘Inchcape’, including vocational training in sales.

·         When his father died, he returned from England to live with his mother in Portugal.

·         His divorce from Dawn had been finalised on 4 July 2007.

·         When visiting England he usually stayed with his sister Samantha Murat, or in her boyfriend’s home, or in his late grandmother’s house, which he was renovating.

·         Michaela had accompanied him to England on three previous occasions, but Michaela’s daughter had only accompanied on one of those three occasions, at Christmas 2006.

We might just note briefly that Murat’s father died in 1986 when the young Robert Murat was 12. It is not clear what was he doing in England away from his mother. He may have been living with his father or might possibly have been placed in a boarding school. After all, his father, grandfather and uncles had all been schooled at Bradfield College and various preparatory schools. The Murats had several homes in England - in London, Dorset, Kent and Devon.

Murat now began to correct other more important statements he’d previously made about events on 2 and 3 May 2007. He changed his account significantly.

He said that on the morning of Wednesday 2 May he had not in fact left his home by 10.30am, as stated previously, but in fact met with Sergei Malinka that morning at the Batista supermarket, at around 10.00am. That was a major change of story, no doubt prompted by the police having pinpointed, by looking at pings to local mobile ’phone masts from Murat’s mobile ’phone, exactly where he really was that morning.


After that he’d gone to Michaela’s and brought her back to his mother’s home in Praia da Luz where he told police that they discussed the ‘Romigen’ company that apparently Sergei Malinka was also involved in, as he had been designing the website for the proposed company.  He said that after a half-hour meeting, he and Malinka left together, and following  that he returned home to take Michaela back to Lagos.

The Portuguese Police were naturally curious as to why Murat had not remembered, when he was questioned two months earlier, this important meeting, especially as, when first questioned, that meeting would only have taken place a few days beforehand. He justified his lack of memory by stating that he had only had four hours’ sleep the night before. He said he’d been up until about 3.00am the night before his first interview, drinking coffee and talking to an Inspector Reis S____ at the ‘Bom Vivam’ bar. He’d been woken at 7.00am the following morning by officers from the Portuguese Police.

Murat confirmed that he had also that morning [2 May] paid in, in sterling cash, the sum of 287.51 euros to a bank, apparently called the Credit Agricultural Bank. He said the bank was just 200 yards or so from the house of his lawyer, Francisco Pagarete. It was after going to the bank that he’d gone to Pagarete's house.  He said that this sum had come from a Lloyds Bank account in his or his mother’s name, as he’d wanted to transfer it into his Portuguese bank account. This prompted concerns that Murat may have used the debit and credit cards of his mother.
 
Murat confirmed that he’d called at Dr Francisco Pagarate’s home at about 11.00am to 11.30am - but this visit was unannounced, and he wasn’t there. He now added the new details that he called Pagarete on his mobile ’phone and arranged to meet him later that day.


Referring to his meetings later in the day, he now recollected that he had, after all, met Pagarate that afternoon; also, that when he met with Jorge and his son Jason, another of Jorge’s sons had been present. He now said that after meeting with Pagarete they did not, as he’d said in his earlier interview, return to Lagos with Michaela and her daughter, but instead met once again with Jorge and his sons at the café in the Marina area, to carry on talking about their proposed business plans. They left the café when the owner said he was about to close it.   

Murat now remembered that he gave Jorge and one of his sons a lift in his mother’s VW Transporter to the ’bus stop, then drove on to Lagos with Michaela and her daughter. They didn’t arrive back until 8.00pm. Then, Michaela had begun, straightaway, to cook the dinner. He said he was now not sure that Luis Antonia returned to the house that evening. Murat said he left Lagos between 10.30pm and 11.00pm and arrived back home between 10.45pm and 11.15pm. He drove by the usual route and didn’t recollect stopping anywhere. Pressed once more by the police, he now stated ‘with absolute certainty’ that he did not make any stops or calls on the way back home.

The police then put to him that he’d made a telephone call at around 3.42pm to Pagarete. Murat confirmed that he rang to check that he was there.

He confirmed that he was up until around 1.30am that morning, emphasising that his mother would often be up until that time, doing things like ‘feeding the cats and other business’ before retiring to bed.
 
Then there was another detail that Murat ‘remembered’. He said that during the afternoon of 2 or 3 May, he had visited two apartments, both belonging to the same owner, near the ‘rotunda of the Ball’, in Lagos, with Michaela - apparently ‘for issues related to business’. The visits took about 20-30 minutes.


Now Murat comes to various changes of story as to what happened on Thursday 3 May, the day Madeleine was reported missing. He again emphasises how tired and confused he had been when he gave his earlier statement.

Now he told the police quite a different account of that day’s events.

He now said he woke at 8.00am and left the house by 8.45am. In fact, he said, he had a scheduled appointment to keep at a business tourist complex called ‘Gold Bunker’ in the Espiche district near Almádena. Michaela was with him. He was asked about how Michaela happened to be with him as early as 8.45am, but now remembered that she had ‘come over to Praia da Luz’, but didn’t say how, and the police didn’t press him. He said that they both then drove in his mother’s VW Transporter to the meeting, arriving there at 9.30am. He says it was there in Espiche that they had a meeting, although Michaela Walczuk had claimed the meeting had taken place in her apartment.

A possible explanation for Murat ‘remembering’ his visit to Espiche is that by then, he knew that the police records of his mobile ’phone placed him at Espiche that morning. 

He now told police about the details of this meeting, which he had been entirely unable to remember during his first interview with them. There, he and Michaela had met the female owner’s father-in-law [unnamed in the Portuguese Police files]. He asserted that he didn’t remember his name but said that he was a ‘builder from Lagos’. The owner of the ‘Gold Bunker’ complex [also unnamed] arrived to join the meeting a little later. 

They continued talking and all had lunch together - making it all the more remarkable that Murat had omitted to give details of this meeting at his earlier interview.

After lunch, Murat and Michaela had gone to the Marina in Lagos where they met with Jorge and his son again. But contrary to his previous claims, Michaela’s daughter, C______, did not accompany them that day.

Now Murat said they went to the Palmares Golf Club in the afternoon, where they remained until the time to pick up C______, i.e. around 3.30pm.  Murat said that Jorge and his son Jason were again in the car. He dropped them off near the Post Office on the way to pick up C______. The three of them then drove to Michaela’s house for 3.45pm and stayed there until around 7.30pm. He says he then drove straight home and didn’t stop anywhere en route.

For the rest of the evening, he stuck to his account, but acknowledged that he made two telephone calls that night, one to Sergei Malinka at 11.39pm and another at 11.40pm to Michaela. He couldn’t remember having made these calls, but acknowledged that he did make these calls although he couldn’t remember what they were about. Up until recently,  the Daily Mail was still, bizarrely, carrying on its website a public apology to Sergei Malinka for ever having suggested that the two men spoke with each other that night.

Now Murat went on to change his account of what happened the day after Madeleine was reported missing, Friday 4 May.

He had to admit that he’d ’phoned Michaela at 8.27 am, though he again couldn’t remember what it was about. He admits therefore that he woke well before 9.00am that morning, the time he had previously given the police for when he had woken up.


Murat’s police interview on 11 July

At 10.00am on 11 July, Murat faced further questions from Inspector Paulo Ferreira. Here are the main points from this interview.

- Murat remembered that the ’phone numbers for ‘Roger’, 44780xxxxxxx, and 44770xxxxxxxx, are both mobile ’phone numbers of two partners who buy and sell land and whom he knows professionally.

- He said he’d been in England ‘about a month’ before returning to Portugal on 1 May. He’d been renovating the house that used to belong to his grandmother and is now owned by his mother. He and his mother had struck a deal; he would renovate that house in Devon; she would invest in ‘Romigen’.

- His mother had paid for the trip to England.

- Whilst over in England, he’d been in contact with his sister and brother-in-law, his nephews, and his long-standing friend Mário R____ C____ (‘Czech’) who lived nearby in Exeter.

- Whilst in England he kept in internet contact with his future partners Jorge da Silva and his son Jason, and of course his partner Michaela.

- He cannot be sure if he kept in touch with Sergei Malinka during this period.

- He said that whilst in England, negotiations with his potential future business partners had stalled. This was why he decided to travel to Portugal.

- He wanted to progress this matter, believing that he was the only person who could do so.

- He booked his air ticket with ‘flybe’ by internet on the same day he travelled, namely Tuesday 1 May.

- The night before flying out, he slept in the house of sister and brother-in-law. His sister Samantha took him to the airport. He flew from Exeter to Faro.

- During his stay in England he did not have contact with the McCanns nor any of the ‘Tapas 9’ and he is not aware that any member of his family had had any contact with, or knew any of them beforehand.

Asked again if he was involved on the night that Madeleine disappeared or was in Mark Warner Ocean Club helping in the searches and contacting several people, around 11.30pm to midnight, he replied again:

‘Categorically, No’. He maintained that he hadn’t left his mother’s house after around 7.30pm that evening.

Following this further interview, the police then arranged the ‘confrontation’ between Murat and Rachel Mampilly/Oldfield, Russell O’Brien and Fiona Payne, which we discussed above.

The questioning of Murat recommenced in the afternoon. Murat again said that he arrived at his mother’s house at between 7.00pm and 7.30pm on 3 May, which is not consistent with his mother’s account, as she puts Robert’s arrival at about 8.15pm to 8.30pm, after she returned from the supermarket. He couldn’t remember what clothes he was wearing and he still couldn’t remember whether his mother was there or not when he arrived. Nor could he recall what he did that evening after he got in.

The police put to him his mother’s clear recollection that she came back to her house at around 8.30pm and that she recalls Robert arriving about the same time. Murat said couldn’t explain the discrepancy. He confirmed that he and his mother heard sirens at ‘between 10.00pm and 10.30pm’ but says again that didn’t hear the sounds of dogs barking or raised voices.

Asked about his renting a grey Hyundai Getz on Saturday 12 May from Cma Auto Rent in Praia da Luz, he recalled hiring the car in the afternoon. He said he’d done so because his mother was using the VW over the weekend and the Skoda was being repaired in the garage and he had no other means of transport. His mother returned the car the following Tuesday [15 May]. He said he’d used the car to drive round the Lagos and Portimão areas, and probably drove ‘no more than 60 to 120 miles’. Only he had driven it.

It was put to him that the clock in the car showed that it had been driven over 400 miles. Murat’s response was: ‘That’s not true’. He said it must be an error by the car hire company.

Pausing there, let us look at a contemporaneous account about Murat’s hiring of his car on 12 Saturday, in an article by Ian Herbert. We will immediately notice, on reading the first paragraph, that, according to this article, he apparently gives an entirely different reason for hiring out this car. Here is the article:

QUOTE

Suspect in hunt for missing girl ‘wanted hire car immediately’

By Ian Herbert in Praia da Luz - Friday, 18 May 2007


“Police investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal have been told how their prime suspect, the Briton Robert Murat, was impatient to rent a car two days before he was first questioned by police, because he claimed his own was needed by those involved in the search for the four-year-old.


“Staff at the Autorent 3 dealership here say they asked Mr Murat to wait until after their lunchbreak finished at 3pm last Saturday - Madeleine's fourth birthday. But he said he needed the vehicle immediately.

“Maria Rocco, the member of staff who received Mr Murat's call at the dealership, opposite the church where Madeleine's parents have been praying regularly, called police to report Mr Murat's request after hearing of his arrest. He said: ‘I need a car for myself because the English people who are looking for the little girl need to borrow my car’, Mrs Rocco recalled. ‘You could tell from his voice that he needed it in a hurry. I was puzzled. Why would he need to lend his car to somebody else [in the search]?’ The revelation comes after police questioned Mr Murat's mother, Jennifer, yesterday about her son's alleged involvement in Madeleine's abduction. Yesterday it was reported that police arrived at Mrs Murat's £600,000 villa in Praia da Luz to quiz her about her role concerning her son's alibi on the night of the abduction.


“Results of these interviews will join Mrs Rocco's evidence, which was supported by the form Mr Murat signed when he collected a Hyundai Getz at 5.16pm that day. It will certainly have interested Portuguese police, since the ground search for Madeleine was being scaled down last Saturday and Mr Murat's mother's car, a green VW van, seen in the area that weekend, was available. Mr Murat has indicated that he was aware last weekend that police were tailing him. He complained to them about this shortly before the raid on his house.
 

“Police are also focussing their inquiries on telephone calls between Mr Murat and a Russian computer scientist, Sergei Malinka. One of these was reportedly made by Mr Malinka a few minutes after 10pm on 3 May,  the time when Madeleine's parents discovered she was missing from her room at a Mark Warner resort in the Algarve town.

“The Russian left his flat in Praia da Luz on Wednesday night with police, who had removed a laptop and two computer hard drives. Mr Malinka declined to discuss his ’phone calls with Mr Murat yesterday, but insisted that videos seized from his house had no paedophile content. He confirmed his name and number were in Mr Murat’s phone.


“Yesterday, Mr Malinka protested his innocence. He said: ‘I am not a suspect in this case. I am merely a witness questioned like eight or nine others. Everything that has been said about me is lies...There have been claims in the press that I am some kind of sexual maniac or paedophile. It is nonsense. My career is destroyed and my life is ruined’.


“Mr Malinka remains one of the investigation's 100 witnesses, rather than a suspect like Mr Murat, but the policeman leading the inquiry, Oligario Sousa, did not rule out that situation changing. ‘[He is] not a suspect but it could be in the course of the investigation that something could change’, he said. ‘It's a very dynamic investigation’.


“Mr Malinka, who moved to Portugal from Moscow seven years ago, says he spent several weeks helping Mr Murat and his German girlfriend, Michaela Walczuk, set up a property website a year ago. He said Mr Murat was a client, not a friend, despite reports that they had been photographed together several times after Madeleine's disappearance. ‘I had a working relationship with him [Robert]. How friendly can you be with a client?’ he said.


UNQUOTE


It is clear that by the date of that article, many serious rumours were in full swing about Murat and his friend Malinka. We might note that that weekend, Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann were discussing a possible visit to the Roman Catholic shrine at Fatima in Ourém. The 400 miles that Murat had driven would have enabled him to travel to Fatima and back. Or he could have reached Lisbon and back within the 400 miles, or even Huelva in Spain and back. Did someone want to meet him covertly and insist that he travelled in a hired car? Or did Murat need to meet someone?

One additional mystery is that Murat used his ex-wife's Norfolk address in Hockering, Norfolk, when he hired the Hyundai Getz, which he ‘needed in a hurry’ from Auto Rent. Why not give his local address or, if he wanted to give an English address, that of one of his sisters in Devon? The questions about Murat’s actions just seem to pile up.

The police then asked an important question in the interview. They wanted to know why he had apparently not made any calls on his mobile ’phone between 3.00pm on Wednesday 2 May and late on the evening of Thursday 3 May. Murat couldn’t explain it except to say that he was ‘with Michaela most of the time and she was the person he most frequently ’phoned’. The significance of this is that the mobile ’phone records of Dr Gerald McCann showed that he switched off his mobile ’phone within six minutes of Murat doing so and switched it on again some 32 hours later again within six minutes of Murat doing likewise. It is a coincidence of timing that cries out for an explanation. One suggestion made is that they both used Pay-as-you-Go mobiles during this period, discarding them later.

We might note at this juncture the responses the two men gave as to whether they already knew each other. When reporter Sandra Felgueiras asked Dr Gerald McCann whether he already knew Robert Murat, Dr McCann hastily said: “I'm not going to comment on that” whilst his body language clearly showed that he was uneasy with the question. As one observer noted: “The absence of a firm denial makes the positive answer much more likely to be correct”.

Robert Murat's answer to a similar question was: “"I've never met the man before and the idea that I'd met him when he was campaigning for the Labour Party is laughable. I've been a Conservative all my life." (Daily Express, 14 September 2007).

Murat then went on to tell police that he’d never entered the apartment where Madeleine was, neither before nor since she disappeared.

The police now questioned Murat about other matters. The police had his landline and mobile ’phone records. They put to him the numbers held in his mobile ’phone and asked whom he’d been ringing. His answers, for the record and for anyone wanting to analyse his telephone records, are in Appendix 1. We are unsure whether they yield anything of significant interest.

He was asked if he knew someone who owned a boat. He said his uncle had a boat stored at the back of his home. Last year, when he worked for ‘Remax’, he had sold an apartment to a Snr I____ and he knows that he possesses a boat, but doesn’t know where this boat is, and never saw it. He only had a business relationship with Snr I____.

Murat added that he thought that a friend of Michaela’s husband Luis, called Steve, also had a boat, but he’d never seen it and wasn’t sure. Murat also noted that he knew Nelson P____, who was the son of Carlos P____, who had an ‘embarcaçiáo’, but Murat never saw it nor knew where it was kept. Asked if on the day Madeleine disappeared, or subsequently, he had been around the Marina or the port area, he said he had not.  

Murat was then shown a photograph by the police, and identified the man in the photo as a Romanian man that he knew who had done some gardening at his mother’s house. Murat had been seen talking to the Romanian after Madeleine disappeared, and said he’d been asking the Romanian if he could translate into Romanian an appeal for people to look for Madeleine.

I.  A summary of Murat’s 17 changes of story about what he did on 1, 2, 3 and 4 May

You may by now have lost count of the number of changes in Robert Murat’s story about what he was doing between 1 and 4 May, so here’s a convenient summary of his new account of events, and how these contradicted his earlier account of events:

1.   Remembers that on 1 May he tried to contact Jorge da Silva.

2.   Remembers that on 2 May he didn’t leave home at 10.30am but instead had a meeting with Sergei Malinka at the Batista Supermarket.

3.   He had in fact taken Michaela and Malinka back to his mother’s house in Praia da Luz for a further discussion, something he’d omitted to tell the police in the first interview.

4.   He now remembered visiting his bank and paying in 287.51 euros.

5.   He now remembered he’d called at the home of Francisco Pagarete, his lawyer, that morning.

6.   He now remembers that he had met Francisco Pagarete that afternoon.

7.   He now remembers that another of Jorge’s sons was present at their meeting in the café in the afternoon.

8.   The meeting in the café went on much longer than he had said previously.

9.   He thinks that Michaela Walczuk’s husband Luis Antonio may not have been present at Michaela’s house that evening, contrary to what he had previously said.

10.                On 3 May, he had not woken at 9.00am as previously stated, but at 8.00am.

11.                He had not driven to Michaela’s house that morning after 10.00am as previously stated; instead he had left home at 8.45am for a 9.30am meeting with the owner of the business tourist complex called ‘Gold Bunker’ in the Espiche district and her father-in-law.

12.                He now remembered that he and Michaela had visited two apartments for about 30 minutes, probably on the afternoon of 3 May.

13.                He and Michaela had lunch with the owner of the ‘Gold Bunker’ complex and her father-in-law, a fact he had not disclosed to police before.

14.                Michaela’s daughter C______ was not with them that day, contrary to his previous story.

15.                They went to the Palmares Golf Club in the afternoon, another fact Murat had failed to disclose.

16.                He now admitted to making two telephone calls, to Sergei Malinka and Michaela, at 11.39pm and 11.40pm that night.

17.                He previously said he had woken at 9.00am on Friday 4 May. He now admitted he had telephoned Michaela at 8.27am and must have got up earlier.

 
A possible interpretation of these changes of story could be along these lines; namely that during his first statement, Murat did not want to admit to:

·         meeting with Sergei Malinka at the Batista supermarket on 2 May at around 10.00am

·         he and Michaela being in the Espiche/Almádena area at around 9.30am on 3 May

·         his meeting with the owner of the ‘Gold Bunker’ complex

·         he, Michaela and the da Silvas being at the Palmares Golf Club on the afternoon of 3 May

·         that he had visited two apartments on the afternoon of 3 May.

We make no other comment on the large number of changes of story but leave the reader to form his or her own judgment as to why there were so many changes. We will however add this discussion by a poster on the ‘maddiecasefiles’ internet forum, who analysed these discrepancies in Murat’s account of those few days:

“Jorge Miguel Rocha da Silva tells us that even on the day Murat returned from Exeter (1 May), he tried to get in touch da Silva at the children’s clothing shop that he runs with his wife. He couldn’t, as it was a public holiday. On the following two days (2 & 3 May) he insisted that that da Silva meet him at short notice. A few days later, three days before Murat was made an arguido, Michaela Walczuk was still inviting him to get-togethers at her apartment.

“The official line from Murat is that he was talking to da Silva to persuade him to invest in his and Michaela’s venture: ‘Romigen’. Yet to this day, Romigen appears to be no more than a ‘shell’ company, just a paper idea for selling property via the internet. It doesn’t seem as though the company required any significant cash injection. And if we look at da Silva’s statements, if Murat had any intention of buying land to make money out of it, this was never made apparent to da Silva even after several hours of apparently unprofitable conversation - or rather, so it's been said, of long and puzzling silences.


“On his first full day back in Praia da Luz (2 May), Murat did manage to get in touch with da Silva at the shop. He took da Silva and his two sons to a café bar for the first round of talking. We know that Murat rang his lawyer no less than four times that day. In addition, in da Silva’s first statement to the PJ, he said that: “They did some talking in Mrs Murat’s VW Transporter”. He says rather vaguely that the discussion was ‘to develop some details of the intended business’.


“The following day (3 May), Murat, Michaela, Jorge da Silva and his sons met again for a long session on 3 May, at the Palmares Golf Club. 

It is hard to understand from Jorge da Silva’s account what all these meetings were really about”.

So what could they have been about? Was the true content of these discussions being concealed?

We know that Murat came back to Portugal in apparent haste on 1 May.

His own account says that he booked his ticket on that very day. He seems to have booked his flight ticket at between midnight and 2.00am. His sister Samantha took him to the airport to catch the 7.00am flight. Murat must have been up and about at not long after 4.00am that morning to get up, travel by car to the airport and check in etc.

There seems to be, without doubt, a significant degree of urgency about Murat’s movements on 1 May. In his statement he said that he met only his mother (who fetched him from Faro airport) and Michaela that day, but since then we’ve learnt that he called at Jorge da Silva’s shop. Why did da Silva have these long discussions with Murat? Was it really just about Romigen?

Was his sudden early morning flight from Exeter to Praia da Luz just in order to get ‘Romigen’ moving, or to finalise his divorce as he claimed on another occasion? Did he really need to meet urgently with a top local lawyer for that reason?  Two years later, Romigen appears to be still only a ‘shell’ company, or at most a ‘front’ for something else.

So we pose this question: did something significant happen on Monday 30 April which required him to jet out to Portugal immediately and confer with a number of powerful and well-connected people in Praia da Luz?

J.  Other problems with Murat’s account of events

SNIPPED

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13964
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by Okeydokey on 20.11.14 1:27

Tony raises a number of v. interesting and legitimate questions. I guess the crux is this:

"The police then asked an important question in the interview. They wanted to know why he had apparently not made any calls on his mobile ’phone between 3.00pm on Wednesday 2 May and late on the evening of Thursday 3 May. Murat couldn’t explain it except to say that he was ‘with Michaela most of the time and she was the person he most frequently ’phoned’. The significance of this is that the mobile ’phone records of Dr Gerald McCann showed that he switched off his mobile ’phone within six minutes of Murat doing so and switched it on again some 32 hours later again within six minutes of Murat doing likewise. It is a coincidence of timing that cries out for an explanation. One suggestion made is that they both used Pay-as-you-Go mobiles during this period, discarding them later."


Okeydokey

Posts : 919
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2013-10-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Moving in the right direction!

Post by violet6000 on 20.11.14 2:49

I am so excited to hear of this news. I have read a lot about this case over the years, although I have only made one previous post--fairly recently on this board. It related to Murat. I do think that he orchestrated much of the week's activities and likely links all the various players together. I believe there were (nefarious?) connections between him & G. I am guessing folks either helped bc they thought it was all due to an accident and/or for personal financial gain. However, I still wonder if something more sinister was afoot. Either way, I think this is a very good sign of justice to come.

violet6000

Posts : 11
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-11-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by NickE on 20.11.14 9:20

Does anyone knows if it's possible to become an arguido twice in the same crime investigation in Portugal?

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".

NickE

Posts : 916
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 41

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by Guest on 20.11.14 9:37

[quote="Okeydokey"]Tony raises a number of v. interesting and legitimate questions. I guess the crux is this:

"The police then asked an important question in the interview. They wanted to know why he had apparently not made any calls on his mobile ’phone between 3.00pm on Wednesday 2 May and late on the evening of Thursday 3 May. Murat couldn’t explain it except to say that he was ‘with Michaela most of the time and she was the person he most frequently ’phoned’. The significance of this is that the mobile ’phone records of Dr Gerald McCann showed that he switched off his mobile ’phone within six minutes of Murat doing so and switched it on again some 32 hours later again within six minutes of Murat doing likewise. It is a coincidence of timing that cries out for an explanation. One suggestion made is that they both used Pay-as-you-Go mobiles during this period, discarding them later."

[/quote]

Lets see if I get me old arithmetics right:

Switch-off at 3.00 pm on Wednesday 2nd 2007
stayed off for 32 hrs;
Switch on therefore at 3.00 pm + 8 hrs => 23.00 hrs (11 pm) on Thursday 3rd 2007?

How odd:

What could RM have been doing in complete radio silence from wednesday till Maddies disappearance first came to light?

An who with?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by BlueBag on 20.11.14 9:39

Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachel?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?

BlueBag

Posts : 3422
Reputation : 1272
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by aiyoyo on 20.11.14 9:46

@margaret wrote:

Either certain people have leaked it, or the police leaked it to put pressure on certain people....

Well.......he must be (cleared I mean), else why is he going to be re-interviewed only as a witness, when if the status wasn't cleared but only suspended then shouldn't the status automatically resume by default upon further/future re-interview or re-interrogation ?

Since PJ and SY have often stated they don't do running commentary, I wonder where the leak came from ?  Particularly BBC known for stringent, restricted and selective reportings where did they get this info from?  Even RM himself claimed he's not been informed about it?

If Police leaked it, it won't be about putting pressure IMO, as that would be counter-productive. Pre-warning affords the person/s chance to destroy evidence if they hadn't done so or allow them time to be more thorough in the destroying of evidence.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by Tony Bennett on 20.11.14 10:07

@BlueBag wrote:Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachel?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?
The facts are these.

Robert Murat was indeed 'stitched up' by:

1. Jane Tanner on 13 May (she ID'd Murat who walked by a police van she was sitting in)

2. Rachael Oldfield
3. Fiona Payne
4. Russell O'Brien - all on (if memory serves) 15 & 16 May

Arguably he was also 'stitched up' by:

5. MI5/British police profilers, who told Goncalo Amaral that Murat 'fitted the profile of the abductor 90%' (all set out in Amaral's book, 'The Truth About A Lie')

6. Control Risks Group and
7. Detective Superintendent Bob Small - both of whom advised and spoke to Jane Tanner in the hours before she ID'd Murat (who looked nothing like her initial description of the abductor on 4 May and nothing like Melissa Little's later drawing of 'Tannerman')

8. Lori Campbell of the Mirror and the Independent and
9. Clarence Mitchell, then the Head of the government's Media Monitoring Unit - both of whom pointed the finger at Murat in the early days

10.)
11.)
12.) At least five other people who in the months to come were to claim that they had also seen Murat 'hanging around the Ocean Club' late on
13.) 3 May
14.)   

That's one heck of a lot of people who 'stitched up' Murat.

Now look back for a moment at Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 above - NINE people.

All of these, one way or another, sooner or later, retracted their identifications of Murat.

These retractions cam over a period of months after the 'high summit' meeting between the Murat Team and the McCann Team at Salsalitas, the Burgau villa of Ralph & Sally Eveleigh, Murat's uncle and aunt, when Robert Murat and his mother squared up to Brian Kennedy, each flanked by their respective lawyers, Francisco Pagarete and high-ranking Freemason Edward Smethurst.

That was on 13 November 2007.

Look at the press reports from 1 January 2008 onwards, and you'll see how Nos. 1 to 4 and Nos. 10 to 14 all came out, sometimes via sources or spokesmen, to say things like 'I think I mistook Angus Symington/David Payne (take your pick) for Robert Murat'. The British press were helpfully provided by sources with photos of Symington and Payne looking as alike as possible to Robert Murat.

Who were those sources? 

Within the story of the 'stitching-up' of Murat, and then the sudden change of tack after the 'high noon' summit in the Eveleighs' villa, lies one of the keys to this mystery.

@ BlueBag    You asked:  "Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachael?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?@

REPLY: I don't yet know.

But I believe what I described above suggests a deliberate plan to get him named as a suspect, orchestrated by the British security services 

____________________

                            "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?" - Amelie, May 2007 -  "Maddie's Jammies. Where is Maddie?"


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 13964
Reputation : 2141
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by jozi on 20.11.14 10:56

@BlueBag wrote:Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachel?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?
IMO its a wild goose chase and what better way to get the world and his dog cencentrating on dodgy Murat instead of the Mcs....is there any other way ?

jozi

Posts : 710
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2012-05-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by MRNOODLES on 20.11.14 11:32

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachel?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?
The facts are these.

Robert Murat was indeed 'stitched up' by:

1. Jane Tanner on 13 May (she ID'd Murat who walked by a police van she was sitting in)

2. Rachael Oldfield
3. Fiona Payne
4. Russell O'Brien - all on (if memory serves) 15 & 16 May

Arguably he was also 'stitched up' by:

5. MI5/British police profilers, who told Goncalo Amaral that Murat 'fitted the profile of the abductor 90%' (all set out in Amaral's book, 'The Truth About A Lie')

6. Control Risks Group and
7. Detective Superintendent Bob Small - both of whom advised and spoke to Jane Tanner in the hours before she ID'd Murat (who looked nothing like her initial description of the abductor on 4 May and nothing like Melissa Little's later drawing of 'Tannerman')

8. Lori Campbell of the Mirror and the Independent and
9. Clarence Mitchell, then the Head of the government's Media Monitoring Unit - both of whom pointed the finger at Murat in the early days

10.)
11.)
12.) At least five other people who in the months to come were to claim that they had also seen Murat 'hanging around the Ocean Club' late on
13.) 3 May
14.)   

That's one heck of a lot of people who 'stitched up' Murat.

Now look back for a moment at Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 above - NINE people.

All of these, one way or another, sooner or later, retracted their identifications of Murat.

These retractions cam over a period of months after the 'high summit' meeting between the Murat Team and the McCann Team at Salsalitas, the Burgau villa of Ralph & Sally Eveleigh, Murat's uncle and aunt, when Robert Murat and his mother squared up to Brian Kennedy, each flanked by their respective lawyers, Francisco Pagarete and high-ranking Freemason Edward Smethurst.

That was on 13 November 2007.

Look at the press reports from 1 January 2008 onwards, and you'll see how Nos. 1 to 4 and Nos. 10 to 14 all came out, sometimes via sources or spokesmen, to say things like 'I think I mistook Angus Symington/David Payne (take your pick) for Robert Murat'. The British press were helpfully provided by sources with photos of Symington and Payne looking as alike as possible to Robert Murat.

Who were those sources? 

Within the story of the 'stitching-up' of Murat, and then the sudden change of tack after the 'high noon' summit in the Eveleighs' villa, lies one of the keys to this mystery.

@ BlueBag    You asked:  "Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachael?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?@

REPLY: I don't yet know.

But I believe what I described above suggests a deliberate plan to get him named as a suspect, orchestrated by the British security services 

It's seems all very 70s cop show with a dose of Barry George.

Somebody up high playing God in saying, 'he deserves to get locked up so he can take the fall for this one'.

Just my opinion of course.

MRNOODLES

Posts : 637
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2013-07-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by Guest on 20.11.14 12:22

The Burgau meeting on 13th November 2007, ties in nicely with the tapas class 9 old school reunion allegedly held at a Rothley hotel, a little later that same month. More than just a coincidence I think.

 

The Telegraph published an article early December 2007, although perhaps intended to be favourable for the groups public image, nevertheless quite revealing:



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1572127/Madeleine-McCann-Tapas-9s-secret-meeting.html


The ever present 'source' (either close to the family or the investigation) can always be relied on to dribble bits of information to the press when necessary, as can be exemplified by quotes like:

 

"Of course it was emotional and deeply sad for all involved," the source said and also admitted that it was an opportunity to discuss events amid reports that the group are to be re-interviewed by police.

 

"It was an opportunity for the group to discuss the events of the summer and to talk about what may happen next," the source continued.

"They wanted to talk about possibly being interviewed by police again and what that may entail."

 

The willingness of the friends to meet dispels claims that some of them had fallen out with the couple and wanted to change their witness statements given to Portuguese police.



"It was a show of solidarity under police claims that one or two had wanted to change their stories," said the source.

 

"That is just not the case and the meeting showed that. It was a meeting to express support by the friends and just to see each other again. They hadn't seen each other properly."

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by Daryl Dixon on 20.11.14 12:43

@BlueBag wrote:Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachel?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?

Maybe JT and the others didn't know 'he was in on it' and just told the PJ what they saw?


Edited to add: my thinking is that the Tapas group were unaware of what was happening.

Daryl Dixon

Posts : 69
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-06-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by MRNOODLES on 20.11.14 12:51

Thinking out loud. Does this suggest that the attempt to stitch Murat up and failing. Is autually holding up the fragile house of cards as it were?

I mean, the tapas 7 and the twosomes are bound together to keep schtum because they all have the possible threat of perverting the course of justice hanging over their heads.
Murat knows it, Gerry knows he knows it. But there's a lack of proof unless somebody talks.

My opinion.

MRNOODLES

Posts : 637
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2013-07-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by noddy100 on 20.11.14 12:54

Maybe they are going to interview all former arguidos as witnesses this time
It would send the message out to the McCanns that they may be next

noddy100

Posts : 696
Reputation : 37
Join date : 2013-05-17

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by stillsloppingout on 20.11.14 12:55

@Daryl Dixon wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachel?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?

Maybe JT and the others didn't know 'he was in on it' and just told the PJ what they saw?


Edited to add: my thinking is that the Tapas group were unaware of what was happening.

Probably true i would add were not fully up to speed on what was happening , RM would have been a useful patsy [ why do you think they used the Maddie pic with the football [ Everton ] shirt on ? . It was to mirror Holly and Jessica's [ soham ] Man Utd kit pictures , and further 'LIKEN " Murat with Huntley .
There is an awful lot of subtle sh** that is going on . including there shaping of the media by reading these fora , and planting stuff to counter . or confuse .

RM should come clean , hold a press conference , Lawyered up and speak . as i have said if not why not ?.

stillsloppingout

Posts : 489
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2013-02-06
Location : N WEST ENGLAND

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by NickE on 20.11.14 15:02

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachel?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?
The facts are these.

Robert Murat was indeed 'stitched up' by:

1. Jane Tanner on 13 May (she ID'd Murat who walked by a police van she was sitting in)

2. Rachael Oldfield
3. Fiona Payne
4. Russell O'Brien - all on (if memory serves) 15 & 16 May

Arguably he was also 'stitched up' by:

5. MI5/British police profilers, who told Goncalo Amaral that Murat 'fitted the profile of the abductor 90%' (all set out in Amaral's book, 'The Truth About A Lie')

6. Control Risks Group and
7. Detective Superintendent Bob Small - both of whom advised and spoke to Jane Tanner in the hours before she ID'd Murat (who looked nothing like her initial description of the abductor on 4 May and nothing like Melissa Little's later drawing of 'Tannerman')

8. Lori Campbell of the Mirror and the Independent and
9. Clarence Mitchell, then the Head of the government's Media Monitoring Unit - both of whom pointed the finger at Murat in the early days

10.)
11.)
12.) At least five other people who in the months to come were to claim that they had also seen Murat 'hanging around the Ocean Club' late on
13.) 3 May
14.)   

That's one heck of a lot of people who 'stitched up' Murat.

Now look back for a moment at Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 above - NINE people.

All of these, one way or another, sooner or later, retracted their identifications of Murat.

These retractions cam over a period of months after the 'high summit' meeting between the Murat Team and the McCann Team at Salsalitas, the Burgau villa of Ralph & Sally Eveleigh, Murat's uncle and aunt, when Robert Murat and his mother squared up to Brian Kennedy, each flanked by their respective lawyers, Francisco Pagarete and high-ranking Freemason Edward Smethurst.

That was on 13 November 2007.

Look at the press reports from 1 January 2008 onwards, and you'll see how Nos. 1 to 4 and Nos. 10 to 14 all came out, sometimes via sources or spokesmen, to say things like 'I think I mistook Angus Symington/David Payne (take your pick) for Robert Murat'. The British press were helpfully provided by sources with photos of Symington and Payne looking as alike as possible to Robert Murat.

Who were those sources? 

Within the story of the 'stitching-up' of Murat, and then the sudden change of tack after the 'high noon' summit in the Eveleighs' villa, lies one of the keys to this mystery.

@ BlueBag    You asked:  "Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachael?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?@

REPLY: I don't yet know.

But I believe what I described above suggests a deliberate plan to get him named as a suspect, orchestrated by the British security services 
Is there anything that indicates that R.M could be a Mason Bro. ?

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".

NickE

Posts : 916
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 41

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by ShuBob on 20.11.14 18:47

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@BlueBag wrote:Why did Jane Tanner and others (Rachel?) try and stitch him up if he was in on it?
The facts are these.

Robert Murat was indeed 'stitched up' by:

1. Jane Tanner on 13 May (she ID'd Murat who walked by a police van she was sitting in)

2. Rachael Oldfield
3. Fiona Payne
4. Russell O'Brien - all on (if memory serves) 15 & 16 May

Arguably he was also 'stitched up' by:

5. MI5/British police profilers, who told Goncalo Amaral that Murat 'fitted the profile of the abductor 90%' (all set out in Amaral's book, 'The Truth About A Lie')

[...]]

Let's try and stick to facts. The 'profilers' were sent to PdL by CEOP headed by Jim Gamble.

ShuBob

Posts : 1893
Reputation : 57
Join date : 2012-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by Vicky87 on 20.11.14 19:08

BBC site thinks Murat is being spoken to as a witness, not a suspect

Portuguese police investigating the disappearance of British girl Madeleine McCann are to question former suspect Robert Murat, the BBC has learned.

A source close to the case has told the BBC that Mr Murat, one of 11 people being interviewed by officers in Portugal, will be treated as a witness.

He has always denied any involvement in the disappearance and said that his conscience "is clear".

Madeleine was three when she went missing in Praia da Luz in May 2007.

Mr Murat was the first person to be declared a suspect or 'arguido' in the investigation and was later cleared by police in Portugal.

He won substantial damages from various media organisations and has always denied any involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.

'Conscience clear'

Speaking to the BBC from the Algarve, Mr Murat said neither he nor his lawyer had received a formal request to appear, but said he "would do so freely".

He said: "My conscience is clear and I have no problem speaking to the police again."

Mr Murat's wife has also been listed as one of the four witnesses the Metropolitan Police wish to have questioned regarding Madeleine's disappearance.

Four of the 11 speaking to police are being interviewed as witnesses and seven as 'arguidos' - a status in the Portuguese judicial system referring to individuals whom police may reasonably suspect are linked to a crime.

Robert Murat Mr Murat and his wife are understood to be due to speak to police
British detectives had been scheduled to fly out to observe the questioning next week, but this was postponed on Tuesday night, believed to be due to legal technicalities.

British police can sit in on the interviews but are not allowed to ask direct questions.

In June, Portuguese and British police searched three sites in the Algarve resort but found no evidence relating to the case.

The following month, four suspects, all Portuguese citizens, were questioned by Portuguese detectives in Faro but this led to no new developments.

The interviews were observed by officers from the Met Police, which is conducting its own investigation.

The McCann family were staying in an apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz when Madeleine went missing. Her parents had been at a restaurant near their apartment that evening.

The Met launched a fresh investigation into Madeleine's disappearance, codenamed Operation Grange, in July 2013.

The request to interview the 11 people of interest comes from Letters of International Request submitted to Portugal's Attorney General by British detectives from the operation.

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said: "Scotland Yard is not prepared to provide a running commentary."

Vicky87

Posts : 13
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2013-10-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

solved Re: Scotland Yard to investigate Robert Murat again.

Post by NickE on 20.11.14 19:54

Daily Express


Expat Robert Murat: Maddy police wanting to interview me is ‘fantasy land’
BUSINESSMAN Robert Murat yesterday dismissed claims he is set to be interviewed again about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann as “fantasyland.”


By: Gerard Couzens, Tracey Kandohla and John Twomey
Published: Thu, November 20, 2014


Robert Murat today in Praia de Luz
The British-born property developer insisted he has had no advanced warning of a proposed witness interview next week.
Mr Murat spoke after a leading Portuguese newspaper alleged Scotland Yard detectives have requested for him to be re-interviewed.
Detectives first questioned him after three-year-old Madeleine vanished from the family apartment in a holiday resort in Praia da Luz on the Algarve in 2007.
At the time, Portuguese police officials described him as an arguido or “suspect”. But he was never arrested or charged with any offence.
After months of protesting his innocence, his arguido status was removed in 2008.
Yesterday he said: “At the moment, the situation is I haven’t been informed about anything. I really can’t say anything about it.
“All I know is I haven’t had anything official. No comment. It’s all just fantasy land.”
Francisco Pagarete, Mr Murat’s lawyer, said he was aware of the Portuguese newspaper report.
He added: “My client has not received anything from the authorities.”

Robert Murat was quizzed after 2007 disappearance of Madeleine
"All I know is I haven’t had anything official it’s all just fantasy land."

The Jornal de Noticias claimed Mr Murat is named on a list of witnesses whom Scotland Yard has asked the Portuguese police to interview again.
Yard detectives have sat in on interviews as part of Operation Grange – the Metropolitan Police’s multi-million pound investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance.
After Yard officers supervised the digging up of areas around the holiday resort, Mr Murat said: “Unfortunately, I’ll always be linked to it.
“It’s always going to have an effect on me because peoples’s opinions of what happened are so varied. I was cleared of everything right back in 2008 but the fact is that in some people’s mind there’s still going to be a link.
“So finding out the truth of what happened will conclusively take me out of that.
“It’s really important that something does happen and they do find out what happened.”
Mr Murat, 40, who grew up in Devon, lives in Lagos, a 10-minute drive from Praia da Luz. He has previously said that he should be re-quizzed by police.
He said: “They need to speak to everybody, including myself. I have no problem with that whatsoever. And they need to get the Portuguese involved in a much more constructive way.
“To get somewhere now, they need to have a joint team working here together in Praia da Luz.”
Yesterday, a Scotland Yard spokesman declined to comment on the article in the Jornal de Noticias.
He said: “We refuse to give a running commentary.”


http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/537588/Robert-Murat-Madeleine-McCann-police-interview


Why does he want to be questioned by police if he was "cleared" and have no information to tell?

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".

NickE

Posts : 916
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 41

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum