Re: The Mystery of Robert Murat: The 17 changes in his story

by exempt 06.01.10 23:10

Tony Bennett wrote:But let us look at the mystery of Madeleine McCann's disappearance as a vast jigsaw, as yet very much uncompleted.

Any fact relating to one of the main 'participants' that week could be (I don't say is) a part of that jigsaw.

The more pieces we can accumulate, the clearer the picture becomes.

Somehow, I don't think you are some super web sleuth who can fit all the pieces together.

by Abbey 07.01.10 1:25

"
Somehow, I don't think you are some super web sleuth who can fit all the pieces together."

Why the constant need to attack the poster rather than the content of the post?
I thought that was now considered (and understood) to be the basic rule of debate on these new internet-provided forums?
Maybe it’s just down to old-fashioned manners and debating skills – or the lack of!

by Jophiel 07.01.10 1:39

I agree Abbey.

by Guest 07.01.10 3:16

Abbey wrote:"
Somehow, I don't think you are some super web sleuth who can fit all the pieces together."

Why the constant need to attack the poster rather than the content of the post?
I thought that was now considered (and understood) to be the basic rule of debate on these new internet-provided forums?
Maybe it’s just down to old-fashioned manners and debating skills – or the lack of!

I agree Abbey, well said.

by aiyoyo 07.01.10 4:40

At the end of the day, RM is not white as snow. He might have helped them (mccanns) with some favours without not realising the purpose behind. Now that he was arguidoed and de-arguidoed, I suspect the secret seven meeting might have gone somethine like that - BK said to RM, whether you realised it then or not, and whether you like it or not, what you did then can be construed as assessories by the Police, why not leave things at that and in the interim the Press will pay out. The suddeness he dropped Max Clifford is an indication that things are not as meet the eyes. I suspect the reason for dropping MC might be twofold 1) to save MF seeing through his agreement with BK and/or on advice by BK; and 2) to avoid dragging MC into unnecessary implications in the future should this go to Court because can people see MC forgiven him for that eventuality?

I suspect, he might have agreed to accept payout from Press because that might not compromise his future position, but might not have taken anything from BK (just my guess because he would be stupid to do so).

If this case ever make it to Court and his role exposed, he could always claim he wasnt aware then that the favour he did had anything to do with the missing child. The favour might have been to provide info or advice of some kind. Time will tell when this case goes to Court. No case remains unsolved, in fact very rarely.

Judging by GM's reaction to the question about RM, its not rocket science to deduce his reply was neither straight nor candid. Dont forget KM at one point even went the length of condemning RM. Dont ask me what she said - people must look that up because I read and do not save.

Expect to hear more of RM, whether as witness or accessory is the pertinent question imho.

by Guest 07.01.10 10:32

aiyoyo wrote:At the end of the day, RM is not white as snow. He might have helped them (mccanns) with some favours without not realising the purpose behind. Now that he was arguidoed and de-arguidoed, I suspect the secret seven meeting might have gone somethine like that - BK said to RM, whether you realised it then or not, and whether you like it or not, what you did then can be construed as assessories by the Police, why not leave things at that and in the interim the Press will pay out. The suddeness he dropped Max Clifford is an indication that things are not as meet the eyes. I suspect the reason for dropping MC might be twofold 1) to save MF seeing through his agreement with BK and/or on advice by BK; and 2) to avoid dragging MC into unnecessary implications in the future should this go to Court because can people see MC forgiven him for that eventuality?

I suspect, he might have agreed to accept payout from Press because that might not compromise his future position, but might not have taken anything from BK (just my guess because he would be stupid to do so).

If this case ever make it to Court and his role exposed, he could always claim he wasnt aware then that the favour he did had anything to do with the missing child. The favour might have been to provide info or advice of some kind. Time will tell when this case goes to Court. No case remains unsolved, in fact very rarely.

Judging by GM's reaction to the question about RM, its not rocket science to deduce his reply was neither straight nor candid. Dont forget KM at one point even went the length of condemning RM. Dont ask me what she said - people must look that up because I read and do not save.

Expect to hear more of RM, whether as witness or accessory is the pertinent question imho.

Wow were you there then?

by Guest 07.01.10 11:16

Abbey wrote:
Maybe it’s just down to old-fashioned manners and debating skills – or the lack of!

Works both ways me dear, works both ways.

by preciousramotswe 07.01.10 12:05

aiyoyo wrote:At the end of the day, RM is not white as snow. He might have helped them (mccanns) with some favours without not realising the purpose behind.

Of course, he 'might' have done anything. The moon 'might' be made of cheese. But the likelihood that he did anything to help people he didnt know and had no real opportunity to meet is very low indeed. We are dealing in fantasy here aiyoyo, not any species of fact or even likelihood.
Judging by GM's reaction to the question about RM, its not rocket science to deduce his reply was neither straight nor candid. Of course it wasn't candid. GM had been told not to discuss anything about the man who had just been arrested - what is it about that inocuous statement that people profess to find so hard to understand? None of you are stupid, please stop pretending to be! Dont forget KM at one point even went the length of condemning RM. Dont ask me what she said - people must look that up because I read and do not save. No, I don't suppose you do. the more important question is do you read and understand? Judging by what you have just said above, I don't think so.

Expect to hear more of RM, whether as witness or accessory is the pertinent question imho.
You may well hear more from RM, the 'Madeleine Foundation' just might hear from him sooner than most.

by vaguely 07.01.10 12:13

Tony Bennett wrote:But let us look at the mystery of Madeleine McCann's disappearance as a vast jigsaw, as yet very much uncompleted.

Any fact relating to one of the main 'participants' that week could be (I don't say is) a part of that jigsaw.

The more pieces we can accumulate, the clearer the picture becomes.

[/quote]

This is true, except that in this case the pieces that came in the box don't appear to satisfy. People seem determined to scribble their own images over them. They still fit, but when put together they completely alter the original picture.

by Guest 07.01.10 13:15

vaguely wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:But let us look at the mystery of Madeleine McCann's disappearance as a vast jigsaw, as yet very much uncompleted.

Any fact relating to one of the main 'participants' that week could be (I don't say is) a part of that jigsaw.

The more pieces we can accumulate, the clearer the picture becomes.

This is true, except that in this case the pieces that came in the box don't appear to satisfy. People seem determined to scribble their own images over them. They still fit, but when put together they completely alter the original picture.[/quote]

Nice one.

by Autumn 07.01.10 19:53

exempt wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:But let us look at the mystery of Madeleine McCann's disappearance as a vast jigsaw, as yet very much uncompleted.

Any fact relating to one of the main 'participants' that week could be (I don't say is) a part of that jigsaw.

The more pieces we can accumulate, the clearer the picture becomes.

Somehow, I don't think you are some super web sleuth who can fit all the pieces together.

Exempt, note the use of the words 'us' and 'we' in the post - Mr Bennett is suggesting that we all work together on this, he has never claimed to have all the answers has he?

by Autumn 07.01.10 19:54

exempt wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:But let us look at the mystery of Madeleine McCann's disappearance as a vast jigsaw, as yet very much uncompleted.

Any fact relating to one of the main 'participants' that week could be (I don't say is) a part of that jigsaw.

The more pieces we can accumulate, the clearer the picture becomes.

Somehow, I don't think you are some super web sleuth who can fit all the pieces together.

Exempt, note the use of the words 'us' and 'we' in the post - Mr Bennett is suggesting that we all work together on this, he has never claimed to have all the answers has he?

by Cassiel 07.01.10 19:55

How can we do this Autumn?

by vaguely 07.01.10 19:57

by spending two years insulting each other in small boxes on a screen. We're all so much nearer the truth now than we were two and a half years ago.

I can smell it.

by Autumn 07.01.10 20:11

Cassiel wrote:How can we do this Autumn?

By raising public awareness about the many disturbing issues surrounding this case. Books, leaflets and media discussion are the way forward - the McCanns, of course are fully of aware of this which is why they have done all in their power to silence those who done most to inform the public, namely Mr Bennett and Dr Amaral.

by Guest 07.01.10 20:16

Oh yes, leaflets. Big success, wasn't it?

by Autumn 07.01.10 20:22

Molly wrote:Oh yes, leaflets. Big success, wasn't it?

Yes, my printer nearly went into meltdown due to public demand for leaflets. I remain fully supportive of leafleting and would be interested in another leafleting campaign - everyone I met was very friendly and keen to learn more about the information in the police files. :)

by vaguely 07.01.10 20:25

Autumn wrote:
Molly wrote:Oh yes, leaflets. Big success, wasn't it?

Yes, my printer nearly went into meltdown due to public demand for leaflets. I remain fully supportive of leafleting and would be interested in another leafleting campaign - everyone I met was very friendly and keen to learn more about the information in the police files. :)

The trouble was that the wording of the leaflet had a bias, and wasn't actually word for word what was in the files. Maybe distributing the actual files would have been a better way of informing the public who were interested.

ETA - didnt the foundation use a printers for these leaflets?

by Guest 07.01.10 20:28

Ah, yes most people are polite, especially the British.
So did you post any of those leaflets with the information in the police files in here?

ETA Vaguely they way I've read her post is that she's made her own leaflet(s).
Perhaps Autumn will explain?

by Autumn 07.01.10 20:29

vaguely wrote:
Autumn wrote:
Molly wrote:Oh yes, leaflets. Big success, wasn't it?

Yes, my printer nearly went into meltdown due to public demand for leaflets. I remain fully supportive of leafleting and would be interested in another leafleting campaign - everyone I met was very friendly and keen to learn more about the information in the police files. :)

The trouble was that the wording of the leaflet had a bias, and wasn't actually word for word what was in the files. Maybe distributing the actual files would have been a better way of informing the public who were interested.

ETA - didnt the foundation use a printers for these leaflets?

I think if we could compile a list of important facts, word for word from the police files, for public distribution,that would be a great idea thumbsup

by Autumn 07.01.10 20:31

Molly wrote:Ah, yes most people are polite, especially the British.
So did you post any of those leaflets with the information in the police files in here?

ETA Vaguely they way I've read her post is that she's made her own leaflet(s).
Perhaps Autumn will explain?

No, I didnt and nothng to explain.

by Guest 07.01.10 20:33

Autumn wrote:
vaguely wrote:
Autumn wrote:
Molly wrote:Oh yes, leaflets. Big success, wasn't it?

Yes, my printer nearly went into meltdown due to public demand for leaflets. I remain fully supportive of leafleting and would be interested in another leafleting campaign - everyone I met was very friendly and keen to learn more about the information in the police files. :)

The trouble was that the wording of the leaflet had a bias, and wasn't actually word for word what was in the files. Maybe distributing the actual files would have been a better way of informing the public who were interested.

ETA - didnt the foundation use a printers for these leaflets?

I think if we could compile a list of important facts, word for word from the police files, for public distribution,that would be a great idea

Oh, you didn't write your own leaflet, you were distributing TB's 10 reasons?

by vaguely 07.01.10 20:33

Autumn wrote:
vaguely wrote:
Autumn wrote:
Molly wrote:Oh yes, leaflets. Big success, wasn't it?

Yes, my printer nearly went into meltdown due to public demand for leaflets. I remain fully supportive of leafleting and would be interested in another leafleting campaign - everyone I met was very friendly and keen to learn more about the information in the police files. :)

The trouble was that the wording of the leaflet had a bias, and wasn't actually word for word what was in the files. Maybe distributing the actual files would have been a better way of informing the public who were interested.

ETA - didnt the foundation use a printers for these leaflets?

I think if we could compile a list of important facts, word for word from the police files, for public distribution,that would be a great idea

And also meet with Mr Grime, who was misquoted/misrepresented in the last leaflet.

have fun!

by Cassiel 07.01.10 22:33

Autumn wrote:
Cassiel wrote:How can we do this Autumn?

By raising public awareness about the many disturbing issues surrounding this case. Books, leaflets and media discussion are the way forward - the McCanns, of course are fully of aware of this which is why they have done all in their power to silence those who done most to inform the public, namely Mr Bennett and Dr Amaral.

Impartially hough? Nopt from the perspective of guilt on the part of the Mccanns? With a clear and open acknowledgement that there may well be an abductor?

by aiyoyo 08.01.10 1:47

Could people not be left to make up their mind of the files?

Log in for more topics