Jane Tanner identifies Robert Murat as the abductor on 13 May 2007. Who's telling the truth?

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Who is telling the truth about the PJ identity parade on 13 May 2007?

0% 0% 
[ 0 ]
100% 100% 
[ 12 ]
0% 0% 
[ 0 ]
Total Votes : 12

Jane Tanner identifies Robert Murat as the abductor on 13 May 2007. Who's telling the truth?

Post  sharonl on Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:39 pm

The contradiction between Dr Goncalo Amaral’s account of how Jane Tanner picked out Robert Murat at an identity parade and the account of the same event in Dr Kate McCann’s book

Dr Amaral’s summary of the manner in which Jane Tanner identified Murat as the man she’d seen carrying a child 10 days earlier (in bold below) occupies just 93 words. By contrast, Kate McCann’s account takes 823 words.

The two accounts clearly contradict each other .

Which is correct?

1. The account in Dr Amaral’s book (from the translation by Anna Silvestro)

[Robert Murat’s] behaviour starts to seriously intrigue us. He often makes reference to similar cases that happened in the United Kingdom and which he seems to know in detail. He displays suspicious curiosity and seeks to know more. He offers to help us identify possible suspects. He knows the workings of the Ocean Club and the habits of the holiday-makers very well. He even, allegedly, tried secretly to access the investigation files. It is also known that he visits web sites of a pornographic nature.

His mother has set up a desk near the Tapas restaurant in order to gather and give out information about Madeleine. We don't know if this woman's actions are philanthropic in nature, or if she is hoping to keep well-informed of all the information circulating about the case. Members of the British agency CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre), take a close interest in Murat and work to develop his psychological profile.

If it's him that's holding Madeleine, we must monitor all his contacts and places he has access to. His house is therefore being closely watched. Technicians arrive from Great Britain with sophisticated equipment, capable of detecting the presence of people inside a building. Unfortunately, the characteristics of the building make this computer display impossible. So, stick to the investigations and conventional tailing. This is how we discover his relationship with a married woman of German origin, Michaela Walczuch. She is 32 and works as an estate agent. She is the wife of Luis Antonio, a Portuguese man aged 33, a technician responsible for the maintenance of swimming pools. The couple have an 8 year-old daughter and live in Faro. The relationship is strange. Michaela is still living with her spouse, and Robert visits them as if it's no big deal. All of them seem happy with this situation. And the little girl? What does she think about it?

On May 12th, the suspect rents a car, in which he drives kilometres over rough tracks for basic essentials. He explains later: that day, his mother had needed his car for her information desk. We are assuming that he noticed he was being followed.

We then decide to search his residence and the vehicles he uses. During the night of May 13th, the Prosecutor of the Republic and the judge go to the court in Portimão, where, in view of the growing suspicion and the urgency of the situation, a search warrant is issued to them.


Before the search, we want to assure ourselves that Jane Tanner recognises him as the individual she saw on the night of the disappearance. She is sitting inside an unmarked car, whose tinted windows allow her to see out without being spotted. The vehicle is parked at the exact spot where she was on the night of May 3rd. Robert Murat, anonymous amongst plain clothes police officers, goes up the road in the same way as the alleged abductor. Jane Tanner is adamant: it certainly is Robert Murat that she saw that night. She definitely recognises his way of walking. But does he resemble the description she painted previously?

Robert Murat is placed under investigation and interviewed at the offices of the police in Portimão from 10am…

2. The account in Dr Kate McCann’s book ‘madeleine’ (pp. 134-6)

“…we went round to see Fiona and David. Fiona told us she’d seen Robert Murat outside Apartment 5A on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance. Then I began to feel panicky. It had belatedly begun to dawn on me that it probably wouldn’t be good news at all if someone living as close as Robert Murat was involved. As Fiona and David speculated I became more an more anxious. I didn’t want to hear it. Within the space of a couple of hours I went from feeling cautiously optimistic to very, very low. Another long, dark night followed.

It later transpired that on the evening before Murat was taken in for questioning, the police had summoned Jane to a mysterious rendezvous in the car park next to the Millennium area, refusing to say why they wanted to see her and insisting she told no-one. Their behaviour seemed so sinister that she was quite scared.

Russell walked her to the car park. On the way they passed Casa Liliana [home of Robert Murat], just as Murat was returning to his villa in his van. He stopped to speak to Russ, whom he must have seen around, eager to tell him what he and his mother were doing to find Madeleine. Jane, who had never met Murat, was not taking much notice. She was just anxious to get going and for this cloak-and-dagger meeting to be over with. When Russell managed to extricate them, Murat said he needed to be off, too, mentioning that the police wanted to see him.

From the car park Jane was driven round to a nearby street, where a PJ officer asked her to get into the back of a van disguised to resemble a refrigerated delivery vehicle (‘Like Sooty’s van’, she told us). The police took her straight back to the Ocean Club. They had wanted to park at the point where she’d seen the man and child on 3 May but there was another car there and they had to stop further down the road. She was instructed to look out of the window and tell the police whether she could identify anyone crossing the junction of Rua Dr Gentil Martins and Rua Dr Agostinho da Silva as the person she had seen that night. Three men walked by. Two of then looked nothing like the figures she had described: one was blond and tall and the other too fat. The third could have been him, but at that distance she couldn’t make him out properly and unfortunately, just as he crossed the road, he was obscured by the car in the space the police had wanted, which chose that moment to pull out.

The police moved the van to the car park opposite the Ocean Club entrance to try to give Jane a better look at the third man, but here he was walking along a path and her sightline was blocked by foliage. By now the van windows were steaming up, too. She told the police she could not be sure either way. One of the officers made a phone call to check whether she needed to sign a statement to this effect but then informed her it wouldn’t be necessary.

When Murat appeared on the TV news the next day, Russell pointed him out as the man who had stopped to talk to then outside Casa Liliana the previous evening. Jane was concerned that he might have been picked up purely as the result of the amateurish identity parade in which he unwittingly participated. Like Fiona, Russell declared he’d seen Murat outside Apartment 5A on the evening of 3 May, as, they discovered, had Rachael.

Jane phoned Detective Chief Superintendent Bob Small. She told him she’d encountered Murat before her rendezvous with the PJ and mentioned that Russell and Rachael had said they’d noticed him outside our flat on the night Madeleine vanished, on case either piece of information was important. Although at that stage it didn’t appear to our friends to be noteworthy for Murat to have been nearby when Madeleine was abducted - he lived juts along the road , after all, and there was no reason why he shouldn’t have been there - the police took further statements from Fiona, Russell and Rachael.

It was perhaps telling that Jane had not been required to sign anything, since the absence of documentary evidence to the contrary allowed claims to be made later that she had identified Murat as the man she’d seen on 3 May. This was completely untrue. Jane would’ve loved to have been able to make a definite identification, because it might have helped the investigation, but the fact is she couldn’t. The set-up was so inadequate that he was unable even to recognise Murat as the man she had met half an hour earlier, let alone say with any certainty that he was the one she had seen ten days before.

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


Posts : 3539
Join date : 2009-12-29


Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner identifies Robert Murat as the abductor on 13 May 2007. Who's telling the truth?

Post  tigger on Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:51 pm

'Amateurish identity parade' - Thank you Kate. So there was a car in the way and then there was foliage in the way and next the car windows steamed up, so poor Jane didn't say one way of the other if it was Murat. Always over-egging the pudding when you're lying.

Dear, dear, Kate, people with more than room temperature IQ will be able to work this one out. Jane pointed him out because she was told to do so by TM or the spooks that were hanging around. At the same time PdL and the area around 5a seems to have been more like Piccadilly Circus than a quiet holiday complex. Murat was there and was seen by no less than three of Kate's dearest friends who lost no time, after he was identified by Jane as the original Egg man, to identify him as the man hanging around.

So when exactly did ROB get Murat's phone number on his mobile?

Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.


Posts : 8112
Join date : 2011-07-20

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

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