Re: 'Did you know Robert Murat?' Gerry's answer makes me very uncomfortable

by Gillyspot 25.09.11 14:04

This is one of the things I am working on at the moment as I believe there is a connection between the Healy's and Murat's family. Not sure what yet though.

by Guest 25.09.11 14:43

If ever Gerry decides to give up being a doctor, I see a future career for him as a politician - they know all about refusing to answer questions.

In case anyone has never heard of the infamous interview with Jeremy Paxman and Michael Howard, here's a link:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Gillyspot 25.09.11 14:56

But was Gerry McCann not angling for a position as a politician in the early months?

Mind "no comment" will not wash when you are not the "bereft father of a missing girl" so he is probably not suited. Particularly with his propensity to sneer all the time (it does not engender belief in the populace) - Well not with me anyway laugh

by Guest 25.09.11 15:02

Sadly (but not surprisingly) Jeremy Paxman was not in attack dog mode when he interviewed Gerry.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Smokeandmirrors 25.09.11 15:04

I really hope the review thoroughly examines this and all matters which have led to the mystery and speculation of this case. All the matters which have triggered huge doubts and suspicions should be unravelled once and for all ie was there a broken fridge or not? Was there a blue tennis bag or not? Did Gerry know Murat or not? What was the mobile phone traffic all about? etc etc.

SY, if you read this, it is simply not going to be good enough to gloss over these matters. Many members of the public have been baffled, shocked angered by this case and it is their taxes funding this review so really you have a duty to sort the wheat from the chaff, get to the bottom of contradictions and speculation once and for all. If these matters go uninvestigated it will be a travesty.

If the Mc's were the victims of a heinous crime, with no wrongdoing by them in the eyes of the law, then the law must also help them to restore their reputations backed up with real fact and substance in the form of published investigative report from Scotland Yard.

by Gillyspot 25.09.11 15:06

Please Scotland Yard. Read all the McCann families versions of the shutters being broken (these were given out over the night of the 3rd and the day of the 4th May 2007 when it wasn't proven they weren't jemmied/forced/broken. Even Brian Healy (Kate's Dad) and David Payne (who was there in PDL) said this so to the press although it is not in the Portuguese files it is still evidence!

by puzzled 25.09.11 15:58

Smokeandmirrors wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This snippet has always seemed very uncomfortable - there may be an innocent explanation for things said or unsaid, but still uncomfortable.

I wonder if there could be a different interpretation here. Namely, that Gerry McCann knew of Robert Murat, but Murat didn't know him. I don't know how that would make sense, but it seems there was a deliberate attempt to incriminate him from very early on - whatever the reason for that could be.

by Gillyspot 25.09.11 16:00

I think there is a connection. Not a close one maybe but a connection nevertheless. Remember Gerry answered the questions Kate McCann did not - yet did not answer this question from a journalist (well said "no comment") Why?

by rainbow-fairy 27.09.11 20:04

puzzled wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This snippet has always seemed very uncomfortable - there may be an innocent explanation for things said or unsaid, but still uncomfortable.

I wonder if there could be a different interpretation here. Namely, that Gerry McCann knew of Robert Murat, but Murat didn't know him. I don't know how that would make sense, but it seems there was a deliberate attempt to incriminate him from very early on - whatever the reason for that could be.

puzzled, I will back you up here! I can't remember now the site or the article or even the author, but I read an interesting piece on this online.
Isn't Murat in property somehow?
The hypothesis I read stated their belief was that Murat, without knowing who the recipient was procured keys to an empty Luz property. Hence how Gerry may have heard of him but not vice versa. Remember how many times K + G have stated that 'someone holds the key to unlock where Madeleine is being kept', perhaps literally so not metaphorically?
Now I've written it down, I'm not sure, it could have been Dr Martin Roberts? But I'm really not sure.
It did seem somewhat plausible to me, but having read above about Gerry and Murat's 'matching' phone records, I'm not so sure!

by Guest 27.09.11 20:14

rainbow-fairy wrote:
puzzled wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This snippet has always seemed very uncomfortable - there may be an innocent explanation for things said or unsaid, but still uncomfortable.

I wonder if there could be a different interpretation here. Namely, that Gerry McCann knew of Robert Murat, but Murat didn't know him. I don't know how that would make sense, but it seems there was a deliberate attempt to incriminate him from very early on - whatever the reason for that could be.

puzzled, I will back you up here! I can't remember now the site or the article or even the author, but I read an interesting piece on this online.
Isn't Murat in property somehow?
The hypothesis I read stated their belief was that Murat, without knowing who the recipient was procured keys to an empty Luz property. Hence how Gerry may have heard of him but not vice versa. Remember how many times K + G have stated that 'someone holds the key to unlock where Madeleine is being kept', perhaps literally so not metaphorically?
Now I've written it down, I'm not sure, it could have been Dr Martin Roberts? But I'm really not sure.
It did seem somewhat plausible to me, but having read above about Gerry and Murat's 'matching' phone records, I'm not so sure!

hey rainbow-fairy,

I remember reading that as well it was quite an interesting article by Dr Roberts and the way the mccann's mention keys a lot ... and found it again:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by puzzled 27.09.11 20:23

Yes, that's where I saw the idea, on the McCann files. It's here, dated 24th January 2010:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 27.09.11 20:30

Stewie wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:
puzzled wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This snippet has always seemed very uncomfortable - there may be an innocent explanation for things said or unsaid, but still uncomfortable.

I wonder if there could be a different interpretation here. Namely, that Gerry McCann knew of Robert Murat, but Murat didn't know him. I don't know how that would make sense, but it seems there was a deliberate attempt to incriminate him from very early on - whatever the reason for that could be.

puzzled, I will back you up here! I can't remember now the site or the article or even the author, but I read an interesting piece on this online.
Isn't Murat in property somehow?
The hypothesis I read stated their belief was that Murat, without knowing who the recipient was procured keys to an empty Luz property. Hence how Gerry may have heard of him but not vice versa. Remember how many times K + G have stated that 'someone holds the key to unlock where Madeleine is being kept', perhaps literally so not metaphorically?
Now I've written it down, I'm not sure, it could have been Dr Martin Roberts? But I'm really not sure.
It did seem somewhat plausible to me, but having read above about Gerry and Murat's 'matching' phone records, I'm not so sure!

hey rainbow-fairy,

I remember reading that as well it was quite an interesting article by Dr Roberts and the way the mccann's mention keys a lot ... and found it again:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

And not forget the well used frace " window of opportunity"

by rainbow-fairy 27.09.11 20:50

Stewie wrote:
rainbow-fairy wrote:
puzzled wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This snippet has always seemed very uncomfortable - there may be an innocent explanation for things said or unsaid, but still uncomfortable.

I wonder if there could be a different interpretation here. Namely, that Gerry McCann knew of Robert Murat, but Murat didn't know him. I don't know how that would make sense, but it seems there was a deliberate attempt to incriminate him from very early on - whatever the reason for that could be.

puzzled, I will back you up here! I can't remember now the site or the article or even the author, but I read an interesting piece on this online.
Isn't Murat in property somehow?
The hypothesis I read stated their belief was that Murat, without knowing who the recipient was procured keys to an empty Luz property. Hence how Gerry may have heard of him but not vice versa. Remember how many times K + G have stated that 'someone holds the key to unlock where Madeleine is being kept', perhaps literally so not metaphorically?
Now I've written it down, I'm not sure, it could have been Dr Martin Roberts? But I'm really not sure.
It did seem somewhat plausible to me, but having read above about Gerry and Murat's 'matching' phone records, I'm not so sure!

hey rainbow-fairy,

I remember reading that as well it was quite an interesting article by Dr Roberts and the way the mccann's mention keys a lot ... and found it again:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Hi Stewie, thanks loads for that! I've read so much over the last four years, on so many sites I forget where I've read them, but some really stick in the head and that was one. In fact, think I'll re-read it. I know at the time I read it it seemed quite plausible ;-)

by listener 27.09.11 23:14

IMHO - It has always been about an appartment. If you believe the dogs, she was stored and therefore must have been 'chilled'.

Edit to add - So was RM doing a bit of appartment letting? There are hundreds there, at that time of year, sitting unoccupied. Luz is a 'timeshare' resort (and was in 2007).

Was Murats payout (BK) a wee bit of 'hush' money? Doesn't really matter, in the big picture, which side offered, or asked. It is about the appartment!

by rainbow-fairy 28.09.11 8:18

listener wrote:IMHO - It has always been about an appartment. If you believe the dogs, she was stored and therefore must have been 'chilled'.

Edit to add - So was RM doing a bit of appartment letting? There are hundreds there, at that time of year, sitting unoccupied. Luz is a 'timeshare' resort (and was in 2007).

Was Murats payout (BK) a wee bit of 'hush' money? Doesn't really matter, in the big picture, which side offered, or asked. It is about the appartment!

listener, you are right it's about the apartment.

Yes, IIRC, in the article mentioned above, it stated that Murat was some kind of lettings agent?
I think the PJ had a firm idea of all this and what went on - it's no accident all were made arguido's. I don't believe PJ would make RM arguido on the say-so of a jumped-up journo Lori Campbell. Or was she doing a similar thing to Jane Tanner? Muddying water while confirming official stories?

Yep. Despite what K + G will have us believe, the Portuguese police ARE NOT STUPID (leastways no more so than our own - LP anyone?)

by Spaniel 06.02.12 17:45

Smokeandmirrors wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This snippet has always seemed very uncomfortable - there may be an innocent explanation for things said or unsaid, but still uncomfortable.

The reaction has to me, always been that of a business meeting, rather than social. Maybe tie it to the "I'm not here to enjoy myself."

Was KM coercing GM into buying a holiday home? They could rent it out but stay themselves for a couple of weeks per year.

I don't agree that they were broke and had to "borrow" mortgage money from the company. You don't have to be broke to take money offered on a plate. Just greedy.

If they were looking for a place and employed RM through friends, JT and RM may have been in the same flat. Hence the DNA.

Big problem with my theory, why did RM not relate any of that to PJ?

by Pershing36 27.06.12 9:34

Taken from another post by jd. Sorry to bring this back up.

The existence of contacts between Robert Murat and the so called Tapas Group was another conclusion of the meeting. Investigations in UK unveiled solid evidence that Gerry McCann and Robert Murat paths have crossed even before the family from Rothley came to Portugal. Questioned by journalists, in May, Gerry McCann refuse to confirm if he knew Murat.

This has really got me thinking. How would a Property consultant and a Dr cross paths in the UK?

Do we know anything about his property consultancy he does, residential or commercial? Could he have somehow been involved in the failed PFI bid?

What do we really know about Murat when he lived in the UK? I noticed he was a double glazing salesman but no more details on that.

by **Tony Bennett** 27.06.12 10:44

Pershing36 wrote:What do we really know about Murat when he lived in the UK?

REPLY: Quite a lot. See Chapters A and B from my long article about Robert Murat ('From arguido to applause')below. Quite apart from the fact that Dr Gerald McCann's answer in May 2007 suggested that he did already know Robert Murat, we also know the following:

1. Martin Smith, from Ireland, also already knew Robert Murat, as we know from his first witness statement, when he said, in terms: "I saw a man carrying a child, but it definitely wasn't Robert Murat".

2. That Edward Smethurst, co-ordinating lawyer for the McCanns and Brian Kennedy's right-hand legal man, has holiday in Praia da Luz for the past 13 years.

I noticed he was a double glazing salesman but no more details on that.

A. Introduction

Robert Murat is a name known to anyone who has followed, even only slightly, the case of missing Madeleine McCann.

Within days of Madeleine’s disappearance, Robert Murat was identified by a Sunday Mirror journalist, Lori Campbell, as someone who was acting suspiciously in relation to Madeleine’s disappearance. She made a telephone call to Leicestershire Police as early as Sunday, 6 May, expressing her concerns about Murat to a police officer, who hastily conveyed her suspicions to the Portuguese Police. Just eight days later, after being questioned by police, he was made a formal suspect, an ‘arguido’, in the Portuguese language. There followed a series of reports in the British and Portuguese press about Murat, portraying him as a sinister figure who was trying too hard to find out from police officers and journalists what was going on in the investigation. Details about his character and early life were endlessly recycled in the British media.

Another highly influential moment in the case happened at around the same date [6 May] - a top-level decision to send one of the government’s top media manipulators, Clarence Mitchell, to Praia da Luz. At the time, Mitchell was the Director of the Media Monitoring Unit at the Central Office of Information, directing, as he once boasted, 40 staff. Again, in his own words, his role there was to ‘control what comes out in the media’. During the weekend of 5-6 May, it appears that a decision was made to second Mitchell from the COI to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, to work full-time on the Madeleine McCann case. As we shall see later, he actually travelled to Praia da Luz on 22 May, but as this Parliamentary Question and its answer show (although the response is curiously worded), he was transferred from one department to another on Monday 7 May (7 to 31 May = 25 days):

Elliot Morley (Scunthorpe, Labour)

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether Mr. Clarence Mitchell was seconded by his Department to act as an official spokesperson for the family of Madeleine McCann.

Jim Murphy (Minister of State (Europe), Foreign & Commonwealth Office)

Clarence Mitchell was seconded to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, from the Central Office of Information (COI), for a period of 25 days in May 2007 to provide assistance with the media to the family of Madeleine McCann. He resigned from the COI in September 2007.

Quite why it was necessary to send such a high-profile government media manipulator to Praia da Luz has never been satisfactorily answered.

At the same time as Lori Campbell was suspecting Murat, and as Clarence Mitchell was beginning the handling the government’s media campaign on behalf of the McCanns (and as the original senior detective in the case, Gonçalo Amaral, documents in his book), various members of the British security services, certainly including staff from the controversial Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP), had also been flown over to Praia da Luz on an emergency basis. Among other things, they were busy compiling a profile of the person they thought might have abducted Madeleine.

By the time Murat was declared an ‘arguido’, these shadowy figures from British intelligence and security services were already pointing out to the Portuguese Police that Murat appeared to fit their profile of the likely abductor. Their precise role in the process whereby Murat was declared an ‘arguido’ may be examined in more depth in a forthcoming article.

From the moment he was declared an arguido, Murat’s private life was under intense scrutiny. Lurid stories about him appeared in the newspapers, including one story in which a local translator, Gaynor de Jesus, explained how she was at school with Mr Murat and how, as a ‘party trick’, he used to take out his glass eye. Other witnesses came up with more graphic stories about him, which we will not repeat in this article, although they may well be of significance. We will give the references to where those statements may be located.

In a SKY NEWS item broadcast the very day Murat was made ‘arguido’, titled ‘Journalist reported man to the police’, journalist Lori Campbell used an accompanying video, provocatively titled: ‘It reminded me of Soham’, hinting that Murat might have been responsible for something truly awful that might have happened to Madeleine. Murat later successfully sued SKY TV for broadcasting the interview - see Chapter P of this article, below.

Much later, in an article published in the newspaper Expresso on 29 September 2007, the McCanns’ chief public relations adviser, Clarence Mitchell, was quoted as saying: “An outcome similar to Holly and Jessica [Soham children murdered by Ian Huntley] is possible. I don't want to, and I can't, talk about Robert Murat, but some journalists who worked with me in Soham, and that were now in Portugal, saw resemblances between that case and Robert Murat. And I won't say more”. It would be unusual for a person of Mitchell’s stature and experience in the worlds of media control and public relations to come out with the words that he did about Murat just as a result of a careless accident. We will examine in detail how Murat came to be suspected and smeared.

We know from Mitchell’s own statement that he first met Dr Gerald McCann at Leicester Police Station on 21 May when Dr McCann was on a short visit to the U.K. - among other things to collect samples of Madeleine’s DNA which, bizarrely, could not be found anywhere in the apartment they were holidaying in, nor on any of Madeleine’s clothes or personal items like her hairbrush or toothbrush. Mitchell says he travelled to Praia da Luz on 22 May, but neither man has disclosed whether they travelled together or not.

As noted on the blog ‘thesargents.net’:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

"…Tony Blair’s then Head of Communications, Howell James, was personally responsible for seconding Mitchell to the Foreign Office, as reported by the journal PR Week on 23 May".

As a matter of interest, again as discussed on ‘thesargents.net’ blog, Howell James had worked very closely for former Prime Minister John Major as his Political Secretary. Major holidayed on a number of occasions with the Symington Family in Portugal. A member of the Symington family, David Symington, co-owns the Ocean Club, from where Madeleine disappeared. It is also of interest to note that Howell James also enjoys very friendly relations with Tim Bell, the owner of Bell Pottinger. Mark Warners, the holiday company who had recently taken over management of the Ocean Club apartments, immediately called in Bell Pottinger to help them with their media relations, after Madeleine was reported missing. They too hurriedly sent their top media relations man, Alex Woolfall, to Praia da Luz in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance. Tim Bell of Bell Pottinger also acted as Election Advisor to John Major.

We might also note that the experts flooding in to Praia da Luz to help the McCanns included the following:

a) at least three officers from Leicestershire Police

b) Sheree Dodd, a top civil servant from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, who reportedly was sent back to the U.K. after querying the McCanns’ account of events

c) Two prominent members of a private security and research firm, Control Risks Group, namely Keith Farrow and Michael Keenan

d) David Hopkins, one of the top managers of Mark Warners, and

e) Two top members from the Skipton-based group, the Centre for Crisis: Alan Pike and Martin Alderton.

So, by mid-May 2007, Murat was an ‘arguido’, suspected of having abducted or killed Madeleine, and had been compared in some of Britain’s news media to double child-murderer Ian Huntley. A large number of top people had been dramatically and suddenly called in to Praia da Luz to find out what had happened to Madeleine. Murat was right at the centre of an international storm and media frenzy.

Yet what a transformation there was about to be.

In July 2008, in a remarkable High Court settlement, several British newspapers agreed to pay Murat a reputed £600,000. He later got even more. In addition, his partner and soon bride-to-be Michaela Walczuk was awarded around £100,000 for alleged defamation of her, while his friend Sergei Malinka also got another £100,000. It was a huge libel payout, by any standards.

Then, to crown everything, Murat was the guest speaker at a high-profile Cambridge Union debate on 5 March 2009 on the conduct of the press. He was the star speaker in favour of a motion condemning the British tabloid press. His short, carefully scripted, speech received thunderous applause. I know, I was there. The motion that he supported that night was overwhelmingly carried. It was a personal triumph for him.

Just over a month later, on 17 April, he married his partner Michaela Walczuk.

This essay will attempt to trace the steps leading up to his arrest and being placed under ‘suspect’ status, and follow the various twists and turns in Murat’s history up to the day he received that hero’s applause at Cambridge. He had travelled in less than two years from being the chief suspect in a terrible crime to becoming the reluctant hero who had, so it seemed, been treated so shamefully by the British tabloid press. He had triumphed over adversity by receiving a standing ovation for his 15-minute speech. Hence the title for my essay: ‘From arguido to applause’.

B. Robert Murat’s life before the Madeleine McCann case

Robert Murat was born Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, at Queen Charlotte’s Hospital in London, on 20 November 1973 and, at the time of writing, is 36 years old. His parents were living in Richmond-on-Thames at the time. He married an older woman, Dawn, in 2001, and in 2002 they had a child, S____, now aged 7. That was the only child of this union. The couple are now divorced. His former wife lives in Hockering, Norfolk.

His mother, Jennifer Ann Murat, nee Eveleigh, now aged 73, lives in Praia da Luz. She had moved to Atalaia near Lagos, Portugal, within a month of Robert being born in 1973. Also living nearby in Portugal are Robert Murat’s uncle, Ralph Eveleigh, and his cousin Sally Eveleigh.

Robert's father, John Henry Queriol Murat, was born on 24 January 1924 and died in Westminster, London, in 1986 aged 62 (when Robert was 12). Although his family were based in Portugal, the young John Murat was tutored in England at an exclusive boarding school, Hill Brow School (now Somerset Court), in Eastbourne. Later he went to Bradfield College where he was a contemporary of comedian Tony Hancock.

Robert Murat began his primary education at the School of Barlavento, an English language school in Portugal. Then he changed to the International School for two years. After that, he returned to study in England for a while, then returning to study at a public school in Lagos until he was 16 (1989). Then he returned to England once again to live with his maternal grandmother in southern England. He began selling double-glazing, and later worked as a car salesman for ‘Nissan’. He was said to play darts and go clay pigeon shooting for recreation.

One newspaper published this sympathetic portrait of him, about his time in Norfolk, by 85-year-old Colin Shackcloth:

QUOTE

“One resident said: ‘He [Robert Murat] is ever such a likeable guy and probably one of the most helpful people you could come across. He was very conscientious when I worked with him and spent masses of time with customers - almost to the point where he would become annoying. It’s just the way he is. He is one of those overly helpful people who likes to get involved. Sometimes at work, I had to tell him to go away in a friendly way’.

“Mr Murat had a reputation, not only in the car trade but also in Hockering, as something of a Good Samaritan.

“His next-door neighbour, Colin Shackcloth, 85, said: ‘He is a lovely man, but, two years ago, I realised he was gone. I went round with a little present at Christmas, a box of chocolates and Dawn said: ‘Robert has gone back and he is stopping there’.’

“Mr Shackcloth, a retired display manager, added: ‘He always struck me as a down-to-earth kind of fellow. If you wanted anything, he would help. If you needed it, he would be round to replace a bulb for you. What he is supposed to have done just doesn’t fit. They were both very nice to us. We never had an angry word since they moved in about 11 years ago. I can’t say a bad word about him’.”

But there were other, sharply contrasting, voices. At this point we will refer to the evidence of two witnesses who came forward to the Portuguese police with what they said was relevant information about Robert Murat. The second of these two statements was from an anonymous witness.

Witnesses may be anonymous for all sorts of reasons. There are three common explanations for why some witnesses prefer to remain anonymous. Some do not give their names out of malice. Or perhaps they are attention-seekers. Others hide their real identity out of fear of repercussions.

These two witnesses both gave evidence which suggested that Robert Murat had something of a history of sexual perversion, certainly as a teenager, and also a propensity for violence. A number of comments were made by these witnesses whom the Portuguese Police found of interest.

We are not going to reproduce either of these statements in this article as they contain sexually explicit comments and other material of quite a graphic nature. Below, however, we inform you as to where you can read these two statements. They are also reproduced in full in our complete article which we’ll be pleased to send you on request - contact us via our ‘Contacts’ page.

The first witness - Carlos Manuel Mateus Costa

This was by businessman Carlos Manuel Mateus Costa and you can read his statement here on Pam-a-Lam’s website:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It’s in the Portuguese Police files at: Processos, Vol V, pages 1286 to 1288. Mr Costa gave his statement to the Portuguese Police on 15 May 2009.

It should be noted that he did not give his evidence anonymously and the details he gave about the sources for his knowledge about Robert Murat suggest that he is a credible witness.

[ADDITIONAL NOTE: Pam-a-Lam’s website has been subject to letters from libel lawyers Carter-Ruck asking her to take down her website. At the date of publication of this article, it is still there].

The second witness (anonymous)

This second, anonymous, witness who came forward to the Portuguese Police explicitly says that she wanted to remain anonymous ‘for reasons of safety’. Her ’phone call came at 8.00pm on 8 May, just five days into the investigation. It was from a ‘withheld’ number, and from a female, obviously speaking in her native Portuguese.

She said she thought she knew who had abducted Madeleine, and then referred to a male whom she said ‘knows how to keep quiet and is quite close to the police’. We should say at this point that we don’t know if this witness meant that the man was close to the local police force, the GNR, or to the national police force, the Polícia Judiciária (PJ).

She went on to give the following information about him, which clearly identifies him as Robert Murat:

· his name is Robert

· he lives in Praia da Luz

· he has an English mother, who also speaks Portuguese very well

· the man has been in and around the area since Madeleine’s disappearance, supposedly with the intention of helping the investigation.

We have left out the rest of what she told the Portuguese Police for the reasons we gave above, but you can read her full statement here:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Her statement can be found in the Portuguese Police files at:

02-Processos Volume II PJ Record 8th May 2007.

What Murat said about his background and history in his first police interview (14 May 2007)

What did Murat tell the police about his background and history when he was first interviewed by the Portuguese Police on 14 May?

He was asked to give his occupation. Despite later claiming he made a living from selling real estate by advertising on the Internet, Murat told police he was ‘unemployed’.

He said he had no criminal record, had never been charged with any crime, nor even arrested. Although born in London, his parents had moved to Canada when he was just two weeks old, returning to the U.K. in 1979, when Robert was six. His father died when he was twelve; thereafter he lived with his mother in Portugal, living in Lagos and Alrnádena.

In recent years Murat had also lived in England, mainly in Norfolk and, before that, in Sidford, Devon. He had an elder sister, Samantha, then aged 35, and a younger brother, Richard, then aged 28, who had both lived with him and his mother in Portugal. They now both live in England. Murat said he had four nephews, adding that he comes from a happy family with good relationships all round and frequent contact with them all.

Murat went to school in Espiche, and then attended the International School at Porches and after that Secondary School in Lagos. Since then he had been on some technical and professional courses, including an accountancy course in the U.K.

He seems to have left school early, and in his teens admitted to ‘often’ drinking and taking drugs. He appears to have left Portugal for England sometime in his late teens.

Whilst living in the south of England, he worked as a care assistant for elderly people, and then on the search and rescue of shipwrecks. He said he had a few ‘fleeting’ relationships with females. More important, it was here in 1992 that he met his future wife, Dawn Chapman, when he was 19 years old and she was 27. It was during this time, apparently, that he had a motorbike accident, crashing into a wall, where he lost his right eye.

It seems that he moved to Norfolk in 1994, where he lived with Dawn. They bought a modest, semi-detached, three-bedroom house in the village of Hockering. At that time, Dawn already had a son aged six. She got divorced, and the couple married at Gretna Green in March 2001. Their daughter S____ was born 18 months later, in late 2002. Murat once described her as ‘the spitting image of Madeleine’.

In Norfolk, he had a variety of jobs, including that of a salesman for a glazing and windows company, a factory worker in the meat business at Bernard Matthews’ factory at Lenwade, and a car salesman, working first for Inchcape and then for the Desira car dealership in Norwich, selling Nissans, Alfa Romeos, Fiats and Citroens. After a while he became an accepted translator for Norfolk Police, frequently translating for the increasing numbers of Portuguese working in the agricultural sector in Norfolk.

The couple moved to Portugal in late 2004 or early 2005 but soon separated his wife and daughter returning to live in England in the August of that year. It seems that as soon as he moved to Portugal, he immediately became involved in selling and dealing in property.

Murat then told the police he had been making regular trips back to England to see his daughter - in October and November 2005, then again in May, June, November and December 2006. He said he made a further visit to England in January 2007. He had gone back to England again in March, when he stayed with his grandmother in Devon, returning to Portugal, as we will examine shortly, on Tuesday 1 May, two days before Madeleine was reported missing.

He added that when in the U.K. he generally stayed either with his grandmother or his sister. As a matter of interest, Murat’s sister Samantha owns two homes, one in Sidmouth and one in Exeter (both in Devon). Her Exeter home is less than a mile from the house where Jane Tanner and Russell O'Brien, two of the so-called ‘Tapas 9’ group of the McCanns and their holiday friends, live.Strangely, Tanner and O’Brien are also near neighbours of James and Charlotte Gorrod, who were also at the resort at the same time as the ‘Tapas 9’. Indeed, the Gorrods travelled out to Praia da Luz on the same plane as the McCanns on 28 April.

Soon after Murat moved to Portugal, he joined the Remax property company in April 2005 and worked there on two separate contracts during 2005 as a Sales Executive. In between, from September to November, he worked for portuguesehomes.com

He seems to have been popular, but apparently left suddenly stating that he had to go ‘for personal reasons’. It was whilst working at Remax, Murat said, that he became instantly attracted to another member of the sales staff, Michaela Walczuk, a German-born Jehovah's Witness with a Polish surname. She also used the name Matias, believed to have been from a former marriage.

At the time, however, she was married to Mr Luis Antonia, whom we shall discuss further below.

Around one year later, Murat is understood to have moved into the apartment she shared with her husband Luis Antonio, apparently with his full agreement. He either stayed there or was a frequent visitor for the next few months. During this time it seems that Michaela Walczuk also began to spend a lot of time at Murat’s mother’s house, ‘Casa Liliana’...

[REST SNIPPED]

by Pershing36 28.06.12 10:31

That is great Tony, thank you it is very informative.

Whats the betting that when he was in Canada it was the same place that priest came from big grin

I would still love to know why the police think he and GM had crossed paths before.

by david_uk 28.06.12 12:50

with reference to the infamous `no comment` clip, maybe he was just fed up of being asked that line of question more than once that day and was being petulant? Just playing Devils advocate of course! devi1

by Guest 28.06.12 13:15

david_uk wrote:with reference to the infamous `no comment` clip, maybe he was just fed up of being asked that line of question more than once that day and was being petulant? Just playing Devils advocate of course!

That's possible, and it's also possible he thought it was a good opportunity to create another red herring - didn't GM say 'confusion is good' at some point. Why give a direct answer when you can create doubt by saying nothing?

TB I think you're reading too much into Jim Murphy's statement. I don't think it means 25 days ending May 31. Much as I mistrust Mitchell I don't think he was involved as early as you're suggesting.

Reading your summary I'm thinking it was perhaps a good job Murat didn't find himself in the middle of a situation in England - with all that (alleged) dodgy history and witness statements he might have been another Barry George. It always shocks me that those criticising the PJ - and Portugal in general - do so when at the time of the MM case Mr George was still locked up in a British prison. Clearly no police force - or legal system - is perfect and our own has more than enough history of shocking miscarriages of justice that ought to make us think twice before questioning anybody else's justice.

by Pershing36 28.06.12 14:43

The Mitchell statement doesn't bother me.

It's just why the police thought they had crossed paths before, probably in England as they claim this was their first trip to PDL.

by sonic72 04.11.13 2:43

Never seen this video before! Seems like Gerry does not like answering questions posed by Sandra Felgueiras!

When Sandra asked them about the dogs he got agitated, and in the video of her asking him if he knew Robert Murat he also got agitated..

Gerry doesn't hide his guilt very well, does he?!

I would like to see Sandra interview them again...

by Who?What?Where? 05.11.13 0:32

There has been some, truly, brilliant, detective work, done on this forum.

I don't tend to wear a hat these days, but if dd, i would take it off to you.

Thank you, for all of your effort's, in trying to find out the real truth about this case.