The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

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 help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

Regards,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

MURAT revisited

Page 12 of 13 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 11, 12, 13  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Woofer on 06.08.14 22:35

@Hicks wrote:

That is very interesting woofer. This Howell James needs much further scrutiny.

And the Prince of Darkness !  who seems to have shrunk back into the darkness recently.

Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Research_Reader on 06.08.14 22:38

Heres another link: Howell James happened to be friends with Tim Bell, the PR guru from Bell Pottinger, which just so happens to be Mark Warner's PR firm who handled the media around the events in Luz during the first 10 days.


http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/Howell_James  

And heres the hotel he owns with Richard Branson's sister: 

http://el-fenn.com/about-us


Of course, these particular links may not mean much other than the fact that political/media/wealthy- folks in London tend to move in similar circles and know one another. Or it may prove highly significant...

____________________

Research_Reader

Posts : 261
Reputation : 60
Join date : 2013-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Hicks on 06.08.14 22:39

@Woofer wrote:
@Hicks wrote:

That is very interesting woofer. This Howell James needs much further scrutiny.

And the Prince of Darkness !  who seems to have shrunk back into the darkness recently.
Lets hope he stays there.

____________________
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time. Abraham Lincoln.

Hicks

Posts : 976
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-07-16
Age : 58

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Hicks on 06.08.14 22:47

@Research_Reader wrote:Heres another link: Howell James happened to be friends with Tim Bell, the PR guru from Bell Pottinger, which just so happens to be Mark Warner's PR firm who handled the media around the events in Luz during the first 10 days.

http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/Howell_James 

And heres the hotel he owns with Richard Branson's sister:

http://el-fenn.com/about-us
There are so many tentacles in this mystery that seem to reach far and wide. Imo there has to be some kind of club, or 'ring' involved.

You have the rich and the powerful, then you have two neglectful doctors, who nobody had ever heard of before their holiday, yet the two seem inextricably linked.

____________________
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all the people all of the time. Abraham Lincoln.

Hicks

Posts : 976
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-07-16
Age : 58

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Woofer on 06.08.14 22:55

@Hicks wrote:
@Research_Reader wrote:Heres another link: Howell James happened to be friends with Tim Bell, the PR guru from Bell Pottinger, which just so happens to be Mark Warner's PR firm who handled the media around the events in Luz during the first 10 days.

http://www.powerbase.info/index.php/Howell_James 

And heres the hotel he owns with Richard Branson's sister:

http://el-fenn.com/about-us
There are so many tentacles in this mystery that seem to reach far and wide. Imo there has to be some kind of club, or 'ring' involved.

You have the rich and the powerful, then you have two neglectful doctors, who nobody had ever heard of before their holiday, yet the two seem inextricably linked.

Maybe the two doctors just wanted a get rich quick scheme.  Somewhere I read that there was a new car in their drive when they arrived home from Portugal - can anyone confirm this is true?

Woofer

Posts : 3390
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2012-02-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by aquila on 26.11.14 1:23

I've just spent a couple of hours reading this thread and it's worth bumping up.

Best to read from the beginning. Lots of information and great posts from serious contributors to the forum. It does get a bit hijacked from about page 19 but returns to topic.

BUMP.

aquila

Posts : 7986
Reputation : 1224
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Sparks on 05.12.14 5:47

@aquila wrote:I've just spent a couple of hours reading this thread and it's worth bumping up.

Best to read from the beginning. Lots of information and great posts from serious contributors to the forum. It does get a bit hijacked from about page 19 but returns to topic.

BUMP.

I have just done the same, aquila ( I now have blurry vision and a nasty headache, lol!) and it is fascinating stuff indeed. Over the years i have been shot down whenever I have dared to suggest that Robert Murat's 'involvement' MIGHT have been anything more than pure chance. Winning his damages claim seems to have put him out of contention as a person worthy of interest for many people.

My own view has always been that he was a "local with specific knowledge and contacts" who was possibly drawn in to help AFTER the event in some way. For one person to have so many "coincidental", and possibly dubious, connections and activities seems beyond believable.

Sparks

Posts : 7
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by nomendelta on 05.12.14 8:31

I've always thought the damages for the T9 and Murat could be looked at in a different way. If you were in power and didn't want a secret to come out how exactly do you buy the silence of people involved? Secret moneys to their bank accounts would be uncovered by someone...but hide it in plain site like, say, a damages claim against a newspaper and everybody will swallow it. Just an idea.

nomendelta

Posts : 315
Reputation : 29
Join date : 2011-05-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Ayniia on 27.01.15 17:38

@aquila wrote:I've just spent a couple of hours reading this thread and it's worth bumping up.
Best to read from the beginning. Lots of information and great posts from serious contributors to the forum. It does get a bit hijacked from about page 19 but returns to topic.
BUMP.
Very good advice :) Read it all again and I stumbled upon this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-494591/Madeleine-Suspect-Robert-Murat-hires-publicist-Max-Clifford-clear-name.html

http://www.prweek.com/article/832833/clifford-not-happy-robert-murat-no-longer-advising-arguido-suspect

I'm just so surprised because to this day I HAD NO IDEA RM hired a PR company , let along that one!!! How could I not know that? eek  banghead

@Ayniia wrote:
“The reconstruction should cover the critical period just before and after the abduction.”
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/397244/Madeleine-world-exclusive-Bring-them-all-back-to-Portugal
...When reading the part of the files about him and his mother, it says he didn't had much money at the time and his mother was the one paying for his flights between Portugal and the UK. So I wondered, why book a flight at like 3am for the next morning when that would be much more expensive? Who paid for that? What was so urgent? Sudden business matters that can't be talked over the phone? I don't buy that one...

Also quoting (snipped by me) my comment on page 18 of the discussion because that BEFORE comment seems so obvious to me that shows that RM knows something and IMHO he said that to make some people afraid... subliminal message type of thing like the "famous" bag "found" near the airport with the ganga pants... ALL JMO MOO and all that

____________________
"My advice to any British tourist ,please come to Portugal,please come to the Algarve but if you're coming as a family holiday treat it as a family holiday and do things together, don't leave the kids"
Words from an ExPat Algarve resident

Ayniia

Posts : 546
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2013-03-21
Location : Portugal

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by skyrocket on 30.09.15 17:38

Someone in an earlier post on here asked whether the bloke who had the recorded telephone conversation with Murat on 15 May 2007, was an acting UK policeman at the time. I've skimmed all the previous posts and did not notice a response so I'm posting his statement taken on 11 July 2007, by the PJ.

If read in context with the transcript of the phone call, what strikes me straight away is:
-that Jenny Murat appears to be expecting the caller (DC Philip Allen) and almost seems to let this slip; 
-that Murat 'I'm the man on the TV at the moment' and Philip Allen 'call me Phil' make out that they don't know each other;
-that it is abundantly clear that DC Allen and Murat have actually known each other for a couple of years;
-that it seems DC Allen has 'forgotten' about the telephone converstaion he had with Murat on 15 May until confronted with the transcript;
-that DC Allen was interviewed by Leics Police before 11 July 2007, and that the PJ have not released this statement;
-that it is apparent that Philip Allen is good friends with the Eveleighs; 
-that DC Allen told the Leics police that he had felt 'uncomfortable' with the situation of him and Murat spending time together and discussing the MBM case.

All very odd and can't figure it out yet. The way Jenny Murat, Murat and Allen behave initially, suggests that they are aware the phone conversation may be being tapped but then why does DC Allen not admit to the conversation when he is being interviewed by the PJ? There's something about the Eveleighs/Salsalito.

Witness statement of Philip Norman Allen 2007.07.11

Date of investigation: 2007/07/11 Time: 10:15 Location: DIC - Portim'

To the matter of the file he said:

--- Not knowing the Portuguese language either spoken or written form he was assisted in this act [interview] by the official interpreter of the Judicial Police/ADT, Carla Romana Fidalgo Esteves.
--- That he is a Detective Constable in the English Police, stationed in Thames Valley Police, but currently is detached to the Department of Criminal Investigation Support of the English police.
--- That he has been coming to Portugal for several years to spend holidays, usually to the area of Burgau - Luz - Lagos, having even purchased an apartment about 3 years ago in the area of Luz, which was only completed during this year. He states that the apartment in question is located in Vila Baia - Jardim da Luz - **************** - Praia da Luz - Lagos.
--- He advances that he began coming to Portugal for holidays in the company of his family, namely with his brother-in-law G***** T*****, he being certain that on one of his trips he stayed as a guest in the residential boarding house called "SALSALITO", whose owners are Ralph and Sally Eveleigh. With the passage of time and having stayed there several times he ended up establishing a relationship of friendship with the couple.
--- He states further and recalls that in mid-2005 he met their nephew, Robert Murat, with whom he has had several casual contacts, always at the boarding house, discussing the purchase of an apartment. He does not think that he had a relationship of friendship with Robert Murat, he being certain that the conversations he had with him at the time were circumstantial.
--- That he came to Portugal on 10 May 2007, to spend a week's vacation in the company of his family, having the objective to occupy the apartment he had acquired, however, this did not happen for reasons beyond his will, specifically certain missing licenses allowing the property to be occupied. Accordingly, they had to take another apartment and part of the family ended up as guests in the Salsalito boarding house, that being the reason they had spent much time in those facilities [at that place].
--- When he came to Portugal he was already aware of the disappearance of the child Madeline McCann, as the matter was widely reported in the English press.
--- Some relatives were put up in the Salsalito boarding house, he being certain that he stayed in an apartment located in Praia da Luz, although and as said above they spent much time at the premises of the boarding house.
--- Taking into account the relationship of friendship he has with the owners of the Salsalito boarding house, Ralph and Sally Eveleigh, during the weekend of 12/13 May 2007, from hearing several conversations he perceived that Robert Murat had become a suspect in course of the investigation by Portuguese police in connection with the disappearance of Madeline McCann, however he did not know any concrete details about the situation.
--- He confirms that on May 14, 2007 he was certain about the situation of the suspect Robert Murat, given that his family, Sally and Ralph Eveleigh had a conversation with him. The content of this conversation was in essence that Sally and Ralph were fully convinced of the innocence of Robert Murat in respect of the disappearance of Madeline McCann. Effectively, the friends wanted some clarification on the legal and police procedures in such situations, but due to lack of evidence they had about the facts he had limited himself only to making a short comment on the way things were done in England.
--- Robert Murat's situation was much commented on
[criticised] in the Salsalito boarding house, he recalling that there was a large movement of family friends who went to give support, but also a large influx of phone calls, so this subject was constantly being addressed in many different ways, but always on the side of the innocence of the identified man.
--- That on 16 May 2007, when at the Salsalito boarding house, he became aware that Robert Murat had come to the bar of the boarding house, perhaps at 14H00/15H00, he being certain that this occurred after he [
RM] had left the premises of the Judicial Police, where he had been questioned for some time. That his [PA] friend, Sally, introduced him [PA] again to her relative Robert Murat, informing him [RM] that he [PA] was a police officer in England.
--- That he had had some conversations with Robert Murat, which were always in the presence of others, either because they found themselves in the same location, or because they spent time together, but always on the premises of the Salsalito boarding house. The content of these discussions was always the same, namely Robert Murat expressed his innocence regarding the disappearance of Madeline McCann. Regarding his observations of the behaviour of Robert Murat ' expression, manner, physical gestures ' he did not note any strange or suspicious behaviour or at least he never "disarmed" [dropped] his calm posture.
--- Robert Murat said that
[in] his approach to the case before us - Madeline McCann ' he had only intended to help find the child, due to his command of English and Portuguese.
--- That the talks he had with Robert Murat they never detailed any particular fact, namely about the McCanns, nor were any comments made about the police investigation that was taking place, because at that time the deponent had no knowledge of how it [the investigation] was going. He reaffirms that the talks relapsed into general issues, or on the procedures that are usually adopted in these situations, but nothing concrete, detailing only two situations that he realls, the first related to a message left on Robert Murat's cell phone, supposedly from the Leicestershire Police, but was surprised given that he did not know the police author of the message, leaving in doubt if it was true or false, someone could be playing a game with the situation. Accordingly Robert Murat wanted to know how it would be possible to find out if the message in question was true or not, and whether the deponent was able to contact Leicestershire Police. After contacting Detective Constable IVOR it was determined that it was a confirmation relating to the testimony of a woman who allegedly travelled on the plane with Robert Murat when both moved to Portugal.
--- The second situation referred to a contact that Robert Murat had had with a female British citizen, who informed that after the disappearance of Madeline McCann had thought that the behaviour of a couple, with characteristics of "Hippies" was strange, and who lived in a villa close to the Praia da Luz, which seemed very expensive in terms of rental for those people. The outcome of this matter and the solicitation of Robert Murat resulted in him [PA] talking by phone with the lady referred to, who was identified as C******** M*** and was retired from the English Police, explaining again her suspicions, having advised her to address the Leicestershire Police again, so that the possible lead would not be lost.
--- That he returned to England on 18 May 2007, and is sure that up to his return Mr. Robert Murat was residing in Salsalito boarding house, that being the reason that he had more contact with him.
--- Confronted with the deposition that he gave to the Leicestershire Police on the matter at hand, concerning the paragraph which affirms that his position was uncomfortable, he explains that it had to do with the fact that this is a very serious and grave subject, it being that the way his friends Sally and Ralph were upset with what was happening to Robert Murat, and taking into account his position as a Police officer, but that in Portugal he had no possible way of helping [them], he felt very uncomfortable, however, he was never compromised in the sense of explaining how the police acted in these types of situations. He advances further that he considered the possibility of getting involved in this matter, even before he travelled to Portugal as it concerned an English child, however and after becoming aware of the way that the Portuguese police were handling the matter, he decided not to meddle [intervene; interfere] in the investigation.
--- He explains that whilst still in Portugal enjoying the holidays, he contacted his superior in order to inform him that he was living in the same area as suspect Robert Murat - Praia da Luz - and that the press were also there, given that in his work as an English Police Officer he has to preserve its image, and was promptly advised to not get involved in the situation.
--- When asked he replied that after having returned to England he does not recall having had [established] any contact with his friends Ralph and Sally Eveleigh, nor with Mr. Robert Murat. He states that some of his family returned again to Portugal and they had maintained normal contact with the above mentioned, but always with a casual nature and of friendship.
--- Asked if he ever spoke to Robert Murat about the possibility of locating mobile phones, he answered that he recalls a conversation that he [PA] had with him [RM], he does not know if the question was approached by Murat himself, or by a friend of his by the name of Tuck Price. The purpose of the conversation ended up being Murat's interest in whether the police could locate his phone, and if this had occurred would it have proved his non-involvement in the disappearance of Madeline McCann. Moreover, he remembers that the interest relapsed into the possibility of a location being detailed, that is, almost the exact location. He states that he responded that this was possible, that it could be located in a very precise area, but emphasised that it was the phone that was located and therefore the user could not be determined. From what he remembers this conversation occurred in the Salsalito boarding house and in the presence of other people, and associates this conversation with the bar.
--- Moreover, he states that these matters relating to the location of mobile phones are an information that is generally known in England, given that during trials there is great emphasis on this evidence, so this type of information is of common knowledge. He affirms with certainty that this conversation took place after the 14 May, 2007, i.e. after Robert Murat was a suspect in the investigations arising from the disappearance of Madeline McCann.
--- He adds that the tenor of the question now before us seemed as a genuine intention of Robert Murat wanting to prove his innocence and not as a way to collect information on police procedure. As stated this information is widely known in England, and he thinks that his explanation did not break any confidentiality or professional secrecy.
--- That he will not have had any further conversation with Robert Murat that was so specific, indicating that he made a great effort not to do so, since the goal of every citizen and of the police in particular, is trying to discover Madeline McCann's whereabouts, and as directed by his superior decided not to do so [not to converse further].
--- Confronted with the content of the conversation that he conducted on the telephone with Robert Murat on May 15, 2007, between 15H15 and 15H27 as "Statement of Hearing and Transcript of telephone interceptions" in the case pages 1683 onwards, he replied that he recalls this conversation now, but honestly had the idea of a bar environment, because this conversation may actually have occurred on the phone installed there. He confirms the content of the conversation and that it follows the state of anxiety and anguish in which his friend Sally Eveleigh found herself. It follows in the same sense as above, i.e. as in the location "to the meter" of a cell phone. He explains further that at this time he cannot state exactly if there were two conversations, in other words, one personally with Robert Murat himself and one that took place on the telephone, however, does not exclude the possibility of both having occurred.
--- He wants to make it very clear [be explicit] that the content of the conversations he had with Robert Murat, had the objective of proving his innocence and he is certain that the information he provided is well known, not believing [to be] serious what he explained to the people, stating that what he had said could be explained by any lawyer.
--- He states further that in giving the testimony to the English Police he had completely forgotten this conversation, because he had not thought it important, taking into account its content.
--- Asked if hae had spoken with anyone about the content(s) of the(se) talk(s), he replied that he had not.
--- When asked he states that he does not recall any other detail of interest to this investigation.

No more was said. Read through, ratified and will sign together with the interpreter who witnessed the act.
Signed in the presence of myself who took the testimony.

skyrocket

Posts : 489
Reputation : 452
Join date : 2015-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Tony Bennett on 30.09.15 23:04

Well, @ skyrocket, it's been 8 months since Murat was last 'revisited', as it were, but thank you very much for bringing this revelatory PJ interview to our attention.

I hope many people on here will now revisit this thread, and carefully read this statement of Phil Ellis, and ponder on it. And comment on it and analyse it.

For all those who have not studied Murat in any detail, I should explain that the PJ were tapping certain telephones in May 2007 and picked up a long conversation between D.C. Phil Allen and Murat, in which Murat was basically pumping Ellis for information about whether the PJ could trace his movements by checking his mobile phone connections to local mobile 'phone masts. It turned out that they could! - resulting in Murat having to drastically change his initial story about what he was doing the three days before Madeleine McCann was reported missing. 

I haven't the time to post a full analysis of Ellis's role in all this, but here is his statement - in larger type that on skyrocket's post, with my resposnes in bold.

Thank you once again @ skyrocket for unearthing this illuminating interview:

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

      
Witness statement of Philip Norman Allen 2007.07.11

Date of investigation: 2007/07/11 Time: 10:15 Location: DIC - Portimao

To the matter of the file he said:

--- Not knowing the Portuguese language either spoken or written form he was assisted in this act [interview] by the official interpreter of the Judicial Police/ADT, Carla Romana Fidalgo Esteves.
--- That he is a Detective Constable in the English Police, stationed in Thames Valley Police, but currently is attached to the Department of Criminal Investigation Support of the English police.


I suspect that means the National Criminal Intelligence Service, or the Serious and Organised Crime Directorate, and if that’s right, he was probably part of the top echelon of British policed and MI5 advisers who had their sticky beaks to this affair right from the off.        

--- That he has been coming to Portugal for several years to spend holidays, usually to the area of Burgau - Luz - Lagos, having even purchased an apartment about 3 years ago in the area of Luz, which was only completed during this year.


So, another one who holidays in Praia da Luz regularly, along with Jon Corner, Freemason Edward Smethurst, and of course Martin Smith and his family.  He ‘purchased he apartment three years ago, but has only just completed it? Something ‘lost in translation’ maybe?   

He states that the apartment in question is located in Vila Baia - Jardim da Luz - **************** - Praia da Luz - Lagos.
--- He advances that he began coming to Portugal for holidays in the company of his family, namely with his brother-in-law G***** T*****, he being certain that on one of his trips he stayed as a guest in the residential boarding house called "SALSALITO", whose owners are Ralph and Sally Eveleigh.


A-ha!

With the passage of time and having stayed there several times he ended up establishing a relationship of friendship with the couple.

Wait a minute? ‘On one of his trips’ he stayed as a ‘guest’ – but then ‘stayed there several times’. I take that to mean that he was a guest the first time, but then stayed as  a good and firm friend of theirs.
  
--- He states further and recalls that in mid-2005 he met their nephew, Robert Murat, with whom he has had several casual contacts, always at the boarding house, discussing the purchase of an apartment.


I wonder… ‘Several casual contacts’, ‘discussing the purchase of an apartment’. Not that ‘casual’, then.

He does not think that he had a relationship of friendship with Robert Murat, he being certain that the conversations he had with him at the time were circumstantial.

What?! Are you a friend of Murat’s? ‘Er, well, I’m not really sure, er, I don’t think so, I’m pretty sure it was, well, circumstantial – you know, sort of casual’.

--- That he came to Portugal on 10 May 2007, to spend a week's vacation in the company of his family, having the objective to occupy the apartment he had acquired, however, this did not happen for reasons beyond his will, specifically certain missing licenses allowing the property to be occupied.

Come off it! Pull the other one, it’s got bells on it. He bought it three years ago, took his family to stay there, but couldn’t enter his property because he didn’t have a licence or three? Sorry – to quote Wendy Murphy, ‘I’m not buying it’.  

Accordingly, they had to take another apartment and part of the family ended up as guests in the Salsalito boarding house,

Where else? How convenient!

that being the reason they had spent much time in those facilities [at that place].
--- When he came to Portugal he was already aware of the disappearance of the child Madeline McCann, as the matter was widely reported in the English press.


Or his bosses had fully briefed him and sent him there on a mission, more like.

--- Some relatives were put up in the Salsalito boarding house, he being certain that he stayed in an apartment located in Praia da Luz, although and as said above they spent much time at the premises of the boarding house.


Hmmm.

--- Taking into account the relationship of friendship he has with the owners of the Salsalito boarding house, Ralph and Sally Eveleigh, during the weekend of 12/13 May 2007, from hearing several conversations


Like with whom?

he perceived that Robert Murat had become a suspect in course of the investigation by Portuguese police in connection with the disappearance of Madeline McCann, however he did not know any concrete details about the situation.

No?

--- He confirms that on May 14, 2007 he was certain about the situation of the suspect Robert Murat, given that his family, Sally and Ralph Eveleigh had a conversation with him. The content of this conversation was in essence that Sally and Ralph were fully convinced of the innocence of Robert Murat in respect of the disappearance of Madeline McCann. Effectively, the friends wanted some clarification on the legal and police procedures in such situations, but due to lack of evidence they had about the facts he had limited himself only to making a short comment on the way things were done in England.
--- Robert Murat's situation was much commented on [criticised] in the Salsalito boarding house, he recalling that there was a large movement of family friends who went to give support,


I wonder who all those ‘family friends’ were? Fellow-members of the Britosh ex-pat community, no doubt.

but also a large influx of phone calls, so this subject was constantly being addressed in many different ways, but always on the side of the innocence of the identified man.
--- That on 16 May 2007, when at the Salsalito boarding house, he became aware that Robert Murat had come to the bar of the boarding house, perhaps at 14H00/15H00, he being certain that this occurred after he [RM] had left the premises of the Judicial Police, where he had been questioned for some time.


…and made an arguido the day before

That his [PA] friend, Sally, introduced him [PA] again to her relative Robert Murat,

‘Phil, this is Robert. Robert Murat. Robert - Phil. You remember, the bloke you’ve been meeting regularly for the past three years over buying an apartment’.  ‘How do you do. Pleased to meet you. Again’.

informing him [RM] that he [PA] was a police officer in England.
--- That he had had some conversations with Robert Murat, which were always in the presence of others, either because they found themselves in the same location, or because they spent time together, but always on the premises of the Salsalito boarding house.


Never anywhere else. Oh no.

The content of these discussions was always the same, namely Robert Murat expressed his innocence regarding the disappearance of Madeline McCann. Regarding his observations of the behaviour of Robert Murat 'expression, manner, physical gestures' he did not note any strange or suspicious behaviour or at least he never "disarmed" [dropped] his calm posture.

Murat is cool under pressure.

--- Robert Murat said that [in] his approach to the case before us - Madeleine McCann' he had only intended to help find the child, due to his command of English and Portuguese.


Plus sneaking a look at confidential police papers and bombarding the PJ with all manner of abduction theories.

--- That the talks he had with Robert Murat they never detailed any particular fact, namely about the McCanns, nor were any comments made about the police investigation that was taking place, because at that time the deponent had no knowledge of how it [the investigation] was going.


Wait a minute! A minute or two earlier he admitted that during the weekend of 12/13 May he knew about Murat being a ‘suspect’ because of ‘hearing several conversations’ about him

He reaffirms that the talks relapsed into general issues, or on the procedures that are usually adopted in these situations, but nothing concrete, detailing only two situations that he recalls, the first related to a message left on Robert Murat's cell phone, supposedly from the Leicestershire Police, but was surprised given that he did not know the police author of the message, leaving in doubt if it was true or false, someone could be playing a game with the situation. Accordingly Robert Murat wanted to know how it would be possible to find out if the message in question was true or not, and whether the deponent was able to contact Leicestershire Police. After contacting Detective Constable IVOR MESSIAH it was determined that it was a confirmation relating to the testimony of a woman who allegedly travelled on the plane with Robert Murat when both moved to Portugal.

Who was this ‘woman who travelled on a plane with him’?

--- The second situation referred to a contact that Robert Murat had had with a female British citizen, who informed that after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann had thought that the behaviour of a couple, with characteristics of "Hippies" was strange, and who lived in a villa close to the Praia da Luz, which seemed very expensive in terms of rental for those people. The outcome of this matter and the solicitation of Robert Murat resulted in him [PA] talking by phone with the lady referred to, who was identified as C******** M*** and was retired from the English Police, explaining again her suspicions, having advised her to address the Leicestershire Police again, so that the possible lead would not be lost.

A retired female British bobby, then?
 
--- That he returned to England on 18 May 2007, and is sure that up to his return Mr. Robert Murat was residing in Salsalito boarding house, that being the reason that he had more contact with him.


Murat said he was living with his mother. But then we know that he lied a lot about what he ws really doing after he flew back to faro Airport early on 1st May.
 
--- Confronted with the deposition that he gave to the Leicestershire Police on the matter at hand, concerning the paragraph which affirms that his position was uncomfortable, he explains that it had to do with the fact that this is a very serious and grave subject, it being that the way his friends Sally and Ralph were upset with what was happening to Robert Murat, and taking into account his position as a Police officer, but that in Portugal he had no possible way of helping [them], he felt very uncomfortable, however, he was never compromised in the sense of explaining how the police acted in these types of situations.


But he did – in his later telephone call to Robert Murat.

He advances further that he considered the possibility of getting involved in this matter, even before he travelled to Portugal as it concerned an English child, however and after becoming aware of the way that the Portuguese police were handling the matter, he decided not to meddle [intervene; interfere] in the investigation.

Was he in touch with his British bosses at the National Criminal Investigation Service, or whatever it was? – see next point.   

--- He explains that whilst still in Portugal enjoying the holidays, he contacted his superior in order to inform him that he was living in the same area as suspect Robert Murat - Praia da Luz - and that the press were also there, given that in his work as an English Police Officer he has to preserve its image, and was promptly advised to not get involved in the situation.


And he never told his bosses about this before this ’phone call? ‘Boss! Guess what! I’m in Praia da Luz! You know, where that Madeleine McCann has gone missing!’

--- When asked he replied that after having returned to England he does not recall having had [established] any contact with his friends Ralph and Sally Eveleigh, nor with Mr. Robert Murat.


Scratches head. ‘No. sorry, I just can’t remember’.

He states that some of his family returned again to Portugal

What for?

and they had maintained normal contact with the above mentioned, but always with a casual nature and of friendship.
--- Asked if he ever spoke to Robert Murat about the possibility of locating mobile phones, he answered that he recalls a conversation that he [PA] had with him [RM], he does not know if the question was approached by Murat himself, or by a friend of his by the name of Tuck Price. The purpose of the conversation ended up being Murat's interest in whether the police could locate his ’phone,


Exactly! Murat would be fearful that once the PJ checked his mobile ’phone antennae records, his bogus story about what he’d been doing those first three days back in Portugal would he exposed.  

and if this had occurred would it have proved his non-involvement in the disappearance of Madeline McCann.

Hmmm. Depends when Madeleine ‘disappeared’

Moreover, he remembers that the interest relapsed into the possibility of a location being detailed, that is, almost the exact location. He states that he responded that this was possible, that it could be located in a very precise area, but emphasised that it was the phone that was located and therefore the user could not be determined. From what he remembers this conversation occurred in the Salsalito boarding house and in the presence of other people, and associates this conversation with the bar.

So Murat had a conversation in a bar at his aunt and uncle’s house with a British police officer who was attached to the National Criminal Intelligence Service?
     
--- Moreover, he states that these matters relating to the location of mobile phones are an information that is generally known in England, given that during trials there is great emphasis on this evidence, so this type of information is of common knowledge. He affirms with certainty that this conversation took place after the 14 May, 2007, i.e. after Robert Murat was a suspect in the investigations arising from the disappearance of Madeeline McCann.
--- He adds that the tenor of the question now before us seemed as a genuine intention of Robert Murat wanting to prove his innocence and not as a way to collect information on police procedure. As stated this information is widely known in England, and he thinks that his explanation did not break any confidentiality or professional secrecy.


Phil Allen was talking to someone who had been formally declared a suspect in the investigation.

--- That he will not have had any further conversation with Robert Murat that was so specific,


Only some ‘non-specific ones’

indicating that he made a great effort not to do so, since the goal of every citizen and of the police in particular, is trying to discover Madeleine McCann's whereabouts, and as directed by his superior decided not to do so [not to converse further].
--- Confronted with the content of the conversation that he conducted on the telephone with Robert Murat on May 15, 2007, between 15H15 and 15H27 as "Statement of Hearing and Transcript of telephone interceptions" in the case pages 1683 onwards, he replied that he recalls this conversation now, but honestly had the idea of a bar environment, because this conversation may actually have occurred on the phone installed there.


Caught out! You weren’t in the bar chatting to Murat. You ’phoned him!

He confirms the content of the conversation and that it follows the state of anxiety and anguish in which his friend Sally Eveleigh found herself. It follows in the same sense as above, i.e. as in the location "to the meter" of a cell phone. He explains further that at this time he cannot state exactly if there were two conversations, in other words, one personally with Robert Murat himself and one that took place on the telephone, however, does not exclude the possibility of both having occurred.

Ah! So maybe two conversations after all!
 
--- He wants to make it very clear [be explicit] that the content of the conversations he had with Robert Murat, had the objective of proving his innocence and he is certain that the information he provided is well known, not believing [to be] serious what he explained to the people, stating that what he had said could be explained by any lawyer.
--- He states further that in giving the testimony to the English Police he had completely forgotten this conversation, because he had not thought it important, taking into account its content.
--- Asked if had had spoken with anyone about the content(s) of the(se) talk(s), he replied that he had not.
--- When asked he states that he does not recall any other detail of interest to this investigation.

No more was said. Read through, ratified and will sign together with the interpreter who witnessed the act.
Signed in the presence of myself who took the testimony.

____________________


2007 (28 June) Dr Gerry McCann: “I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for Madeleine’s disappearance in the long-term”.

2017 (February) Dr Kate McCannthrust into a global bidding war…news giants battle to sign her up for the 10th anniversary…offered huge bids…bombarded with offers…30 sitting on the table…getting new bids every other day…one told Kate and Gerry: ‘Name your price!’
                        


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 14224
Reputation : 2420
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Verdi on 01.10.15 0:22

I'm equally interested to know why on the very same day of 15th May 2007, Robert Murat was in telephone conversation with Martin Brunt of Sky News.  In particular..

Martin Brunt:  Eh...we know that you suspect that your calls are being listened to, because of this...

Robert Murat:   Humm, hmmm.


This indicates to me that the telephone calls on 15th May were arranged in order to check out if they were being recorded - and clearly they were!  Think of it this way, if you think your phone is bugged would you engage in a conversation concerning your precarious position in relation to a missing child or would you use a phone that wouldn't normally be associated with you?  I know which I would do..

I smell rotting sea bass.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 4116
Reputation : 2510
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re Murat revisited

Post by willowthewisp on 01.10.15 14:45

Hi to Tony and posters
So here we have
(1) A serving UK Police officer engaging in conversation with an arguido talking against his conditions imposed)about the case, appears on holiday 10 May 2007?
(2) The officers Supervisor, confirms not to engage with the Subject,  ignores what has been told to do?
(3) Has hospitality with close members of the Murat family?
(4) Engages with Sky news (Martin **nt) about phones being tapped (RM)?
(5) Engages PA to RM about the traceability of a phone signal but not the user of the phone at the timing of the trace?
(6) Phone records of RM and GM being activated prior to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?
(7) The deletion of mobile phone calls texts, Gerry and Kate up to 3 May 2007?
(8) PA then denies having contact with an arguido, when speaking to Leicestershire Police?
(9) Has Martin Brunt ever been interviewed by the police of his close connections to the Madeleine Mc Cann family involvements dossier?
There certainly has been a mass effort to hide the Truth from the public by such a huge amount of people, I only hope they are able to sleep well at night with the murkey muckey fingers of deceit?

willowthewisp

Posts : 1431
Reputation : 563
Join date : 2015-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Carrry On Doctor on 19.10.15 9:18

Not sure if been posted already, but interesting recent article from Dr Martin Roberts. Apologies for any formatting error in copy and paste.

http://onlyinamericablogging.blogspot.com/ 


Access All Areas by Dr Martin Roberts

In retrospect there are a couple of topics surrounding this case to which I feel I should have given more attention, the crèche records to mention one and Robert Murat another.

My reasons for not doing so, or my excuse if you will, is that the amount of work I was producing at the time was such, that some areas of this case received less than my undivided attention. In truth the crèche records receiving no attention whatsoever.

But of Murat I can offer no excuse, I committed the cardinal sin, I took him at face value. And if there is one thing this case has taught us, nothing but nothing can be evaluated thus.

There was one occasion however when Murat chinked my hinky meter. After having…


"the total and utter destruction of mine and my family's life and caused immense distress"

for which he was duly compensated, later went on to utter this:

Mr Murat said: “It must be a ­tremendously difficult time of year for them and of course as a human being you feel for them and for the loss of their daughter. Express 

Now I know it could be a matter of personalities, but had I gone though all the trauma that Murat claims to have experienced, I don't think I would be quite so forgiving, or quite so magnanimous. Far from it. Very far from it.  

Given the subsequent revelations writ below, I conclude that every word that has passed Murat's lips is suspect, and by default must also include anything said by his mother, Jenny Murat. 
 
ACCESS ALL AREAS


]
By Dr Martin Roberts
15 October 2015 

On the 4 May, 2007, following the international (no less) announcement of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance from apartment 5A, the Ocean Club literally played ‘open-house’. Robert Murat, who was on the scene and talking to GNR officers that very morning, later said, when questioned as ‘arguido’ on 14 July:


“Together with an officer of the GNR and an employee of the resort with several keys, entered several apartments, opened with the keys or by the tenants in order to locate the child. Some of the apartments were closed and there were no keys, these sites were flagged by the GNR man.

“At that time he met John Hill, manager of MARK WARNER, who supplied them with more keys to other apartments.

“Prior to this occasion, he did not know the interior of the "Ocean Club", only entering the resort after the disappearance.

“In the meantime the tracker dogs arrived that undertook a more rigorous form of search.”


Sure enough. There is a statement on record from Marina Castela (Ocean Club general manager), taken on 16 May, which describes Robert Murat’s entering various apartments as he later said, but not quite the way he said it:

“She saw the suspect, Robert Murat, for the first time on that day at about 12.30 when the witness went to meet GNR officers whom she cannot identify, to open the doors for them and speak to guests staying in apartments in block 6….

“When she was beginning this task together with GNR officers, this individual appeared, she does not know from where, he immediately saw what operations were going on, speaking ostensibly to the guests from the first two apartments, explaining to them what they were doing there, showing much will and anxiety in the transmission of this information. 
 

Not exactly the tandem task as described by Murat. John Hill also seems not to have put in an appearance on this occasion either (in his own statement to police of 20 June, he makes no mention of his own activities that day or any interaction with Robert Murat for any purpose whatsoever).

Since Ms Castela describes Murat’s intervention here as occurring shortly after 12.30 p.m., we might suppose that he was dressed in a blue t-shirt and jeans – not because she says so, but because others did.

Sisters Annie Wiltshire and Jayne Jensen were reported (The Sun - 27 December, 2007) to have interacted socially with Robert Murat that very same day (4 May), having not long previously been to the police to report having seen two men acting suspiciously on the ground floor balcony of a supposedly empty (block 5) apartment the afternoon before (3 May). The sisters apparently thought it odd when Murat announced:


‘I must go and shower and change, I’ve been in these clothes all day.’

According to their account, he had been in a striped shirt and grey trousers not long beforehand. 

This report was picked up from one first appearing in the Portuguese press (Diario de Noticias). The Sun also tells how the sisters ‘have given an "extensive interview" to cops detailing their suspicions about suspect Robert Murat’ (and of which there is no trace among the files released to the public – perhaps because the sisters apparently voiced their concerns to Leicestershire Police on their return to the UK, and the questionable Spanish agency Metodo 3 subsequently, their information welcomed by that ubiquitous ‘source close to the investigation’).

The reliability of Witshire and Jensen’s further sighting of Robert Murat (outside the apartments on the night of 3 May, and deemed significant by that aforementioned ‘source’) is of less immediate relevance than their description of Robert Murat’s keenness to divest himself of a blue t-shirt, which he had presumably done by the time he made his way to block 6 and his interaction with Maria Castela. Although she had misgivings about his demeanour, she made no comment as to his ‘sweaty’ attire.

Someone who did observe Robert Murat’s style of dress, however, was property manager Barend Weijdom (interviewed by police on 16 May, 2007). He recalled seeing Murat on the morning of 4 May dressed in a yellow shirt and light coloured trousers. These may or may not have been grey, but Weijdom makes no reference to stripes in respect of the shirt (as distinctive a feature as its colour one would imagine).

Blue t-shirt, yellow shirt, striped or otherwise, wearing the garment since breakfast hardly equates to ‘all day’ endurance when scarcely noon. If the Wiltshire-Jensen retelling has any substance, then there is something odd about Murat’s apologia to them, just as there would seem to be about his inspection story, as it relates to Block 6 at least, especially since none of the GNR officers interviewed, including dog handlers, recorded having been in the company of one Robert Murat that morning, 4 May. But someone else did.

Barend Weijdom’s role as property manager saw him responsible for apartment 5E, which, like 5J diagonally above it, was unoccupied at the time. Such was his professional concern, that on the morning of the 4th he suggested to the authorities that they check it out, in case it too had been entered inappropriately (the McCanns having first reported a break-in don’t forget). The core of Weijdom’s statement is particularly germane:


“He went to the apartment with a GNR officer and after a few seconds Robert Murat also entered the apartment without anyone having requested his presence.

“The witness says that he found Murat's presence in the apartment to be strange, adding that after he entered the apartment he gave the witness a 'pat on the side' and said 'thanks for your collaboration'. During this situation the witness thought that Murat worked for the police. On that morning the witness saw Murat moving around the site a lot…”


Here, at last, we have Robert Murat entering an Ocean Club apartment in the company of a GNR officer and one other. Except he didn’t. He followed them inside. And far from being an Ocean Club employee brandishing a set of keys, Weijdom was an independent operator, making use of one key in his possession. (It seems as if Murat has deliberately conflated his experience at 5E with that of his later visit to block 6).

Robert Murat’s explanation of his activities in relation to this sorry tale are therefore inaccurate, and not for the first time. Weijdom’s brief account enables us to draw a few pertinent conclusions besides.

Murat’s attention grabbing (‘Look at me, I’m a policeman’) behaviour, enacted in the presence of Maria Castela and her GNR associates at Block 6 on the Friday afternoon, had first been practised in and around block 5 that same morning. Apartment 5E was one of six in block 5 that were not in Mark Warner’s custody, so to speak (E, F, G, J, N, O were not on cleaner Maria da Silva’s rosta). Since we know that 5G was occupied by its owner, Mrs Fenn, and that responsibility for 5E had been delegated to Barend Weijdom (who had a key to the place), it seems only reasonable to suppose that 5J, also known to have been empty for quite a period of time, was itself owned in absentia, and the key left in the charge of a local ‘manager’ (such as Barend Weijdom, for example).

We don’t really know what Robert Murat was wearing that morning; the different accounts conflict. We can however tell that his self-aggrandizing explanation for his presence in and around the Ocean Club on Friday 4 May is an exaggeration at the very least, a lie at worst, as is his claim, again made during his ‘arguido’ interview that:

“never in his life has he entered the apartment where Madeleine was when she disappeared, neither before nor after the events under investigation."


‘Never’ was a rather dangerous word to use under the circumstances, especially when one considers Weijdom’s further evidence:

“On that morning the witness saw Murat moving around the site a lot and saw him enter and leave the apartment Madeleine disappeared from, without knowing whether he was with anyone there. He said that Murat moved a lot between the authorities and journalists.”

Indeed the witness testimony of conscientious Barend Weijdom should be given more than merely due regard:

“He heard about the news being investigated on the evening of 3rd May at about 21.30 - 21.40 from P**** B******, a Dutchman and owner of the Atlantico restaurant, who passed by the witness near the Baptista supermarket, in P da L and who asked for his help in searching for Madeleine.

“He then went to the place where the events occurred which was at about 21.45 - 21.50. At this time various local people and MW staff were present.”


When did Kate McCann say she did her ‘check’ again?



[Re-formatted by a Mod]

Carrry On Doctor

Posts : 352
Reputation : 157
Join date : 2014-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Murat back under the microscope - and quite right, too

Post by Tony Bennett on 19.10.15 10:24

@Carrry On Doctor wrote:Not sure if been posted already, but interesting recent article from Dr Martin Roberts.
It has been posted elsewhere on the forum, but it's fine to have it posted here as well, as we should never lose interest in Murat's role in all of this.

Regrettably, there are some activists in 'McCann-Forum Land' who will not hear any of any criticism of Robert Murat, refuse to discuss him, and even bad-mouth those who attempt to do so.

'JillyCL' is one such notorious example who would have everyone believe that Murat is whiter than white. And I think she rules the roost over on Maddie Case Files, a pro-Murat forum which somehow managed to expel JOana Morais from its membership.

Anne Guedes, who reported helpfully on the McCann v Amaral libel case proceedings, is another who won't hear any criticism of Murat.

How can any serious Madeleine McCann researcher ignore, for example:

* Murat being summoned to PdL on 30 April
* Jetting out there hours later, catching a 7am flight
* Telling the PJ 17 lies about his movements 1 to 4 May      
* Being in the right place to translate many of the early witness statements
* Sneaking a look at confidential PJ documents whilst translating
* Feeding all sorts of theories to the PJ
* Having encrypted material on his computer
* His teenage sexual perversions
* The British security services profiling him as the likely abductor
* Murat's mother setting up an 'information stall'
* Hairs of Murat's haplotype and Jane Tanner's haplotype being found at the Sol e Mar apartment where Wojcek Krokowski stayed   
* Jane Tanner adamantly identifying him
* Three of the Tapas 7  (RO, RO'B, FP) saying he was around the Ocean Club the night of 3 May
* Gerry McCann evading whether he knew Murat or not
* The high-level summit meeting between the McCann camp and the Murat camp and their lawyers on 13 November 2007.

JillyCL, Anne Guedes and quite a few others don't seem to want us to look into these things

____________________


2007 (28 June) Dr Gerry McCann: “I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for Madeleine’s disappearance in the long-term”.

2017 (February) Dr Kate McCannthrust into a global bidding war…news giants battle to sign her up for the 10th anniversary…offered huge bids…bombarded with offers…30 sitting on the table…getting new bids every other day…one told Kate and Gerry: ‘Name your price!’
                        


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 14224
Reputation : 2420
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Get'emGonçalo on 19.10.15 10:43

@Tony Bennett wrote:
@Carrry On Doctor wrote:Not sure if been posted already, but interesting recent article from Dr Martin Roberts.
It has been posted elsewhere on the forum, but it's fine to have it posted here as well, as we should never lose interest in Murat's role in all of this.
I 'filed' it in the mccannfiles section with the rest of Dr Martin Roberts articles: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12041-dr-martin-robert-access-all-areas-robert-murat-article-fao-tony-bennett#324517

____________________
I'm not saying Gerry McCann is obsessed with what comes out in the media but Kim Jong-un thinks he needs to lighten up a bit.


Get'emGonçalo


Posts : 7672
Reputation : 3193
Join date : 2009-11-25

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Carrry On Doctor on 19.10.15 10:49

thanks

Carrry On Doctor

Posts : 352
Reputation : 157
Join date : 2014-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Verdi on 19.04.16 12:31

I'm never quite sure what to do with Robert Murat, I'll stick him here as it is a revisit.

What a pity Wikipedia can't be 100% relied upon in terms of accuracy.  I came across this entry which I don't think I've seen before..

Robert Murat, a suspect in the investigation, has tried to generate his own publicity by selling his story. However, publicist Max Clifford indicated that he would only represent Murat if he was cleared of suspicion of kidnapping...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx

Verdi

Posts : 4116
Reputation : 2510
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by MayMuse on 20.04.16 1:49

Would that be the same Max Clifford who is in prison for ' inappropriate' (to put it mildly) behaviour? 
There are many 'dots' joining up, soon we may have the complete picture Wink

MayMuse

Posts : 1346
Reputation : 981
Join date : 2016-04-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Tony Bennett on 20.04.16 6:54

@Verdi wrote:I'm never quite sure what to do with Robert Murat, I'll stick him here as it is a revisit.
I suggest there are two obvious starting points that should get every person who is interested in the Madeleine McCann case looking very deeply into Robert Murat. These are:

1. The 17 lies he told the PJ about what he was really doing from 1 to 4 May [Reminder: He was summoned over (by someone) to Portugal late on Sunday night, 29 April, and the following day he booked a flight to Faro Airport at 7.00am on Tuesday 1 May. When questioned by police on 15 May, when first pulled in for question and made an 'arguido', he comprehensively lied about his movements those four days. His lies were exposed only by the PJ analysing his mobile 'phone data, which showed that most of the time he was nowhere near where he claimed to have been. Searching for an excuse for his lies, he claimed he was 'too tired' to have been able to tell the truth on the first occasion] 

2. Gerry McCann's angry response when asked a simple question: 'Do you already know Robert Murat?' Gerry's answer: "I am not going to comment on that".

____________________


2007 (28 June) Dr Gerry McCann: “I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for Madeleine’s disappearance in the long-term”.

2017 (February) Dr Kate McCannthrust into a global bidding war…news giants battle to sign her up for the 10th anniversary…offered huge bids…bombarded with offers…30 sitting on the table…getting new bids every other day…one told Kate and Gerry: ‘Name your price!’
                        


Tony Bennett
Researcher/Moderator

Posts : 14224
Reputation : 2420
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Harlow, Essex

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Research_Reader on 20.04.16 7:48

@Tony Bennett wrote:

2. Gerry McCann's angry response when asked a simple question: 'Do you already know Robert Murat?' Gerry's answer: "I am not going to comment on that".

I find it interesting that Gerry dodged that question. In my opinion he's lied countless times, yet he answered with a politician's/legal type avoidance on that one. Why? Did he think that there is some easily discoverable evidence that would show he did know Murat? Was he unsure at that stage which way things would go?

____________________

Research_Reader

Posts : 261
Reputation : 60
Join date : 2013-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by BlueBag on 20.04.16 8:05

@Research_Reader wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:

2. Gerry McCann's angry response when asked a simple question: 'Do you already know Robert Murat?' Gerry's answer: "I am not going to comment on that".

I find it interesting that Gerry dodged that question. In my opinion he's lied countless times, yet he answered with a politician's/legal type avoidance on that one. Why? Did he think that there is some easily discoverable evidence that would show he did know Murat? Was he unsure at that stage which way things would go?
I still think that Gerry's comment didn't mean as much as people would like to read into it.

Murat had just been made arguido and it was big news and an obvious question. The McCanns were probably told not to comment on it.

You can't read anymore into it than that without proper context.

BlueBag

Posts : 3736
Reputation : 1607
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Carrry On Doctor on 20.04.16 10:36

@BlueBag wrote:
@Research_Reader wrote:
@Tony Bennett wrote:

2. Gerry McCann's angry response when asked a simple question: 'Do you already know Robert Murat?' Gerry's answer: "I am not going to comment on that".

I find it interesting that Gerry dodged that question. In my opinion he's lied countless times, yet he answered with a politician's/legal type avoidance on that one. Why? Did he think that there is some easily discoverable evidence that would show he did know Murat? Was he unsure at that stage which way things would go?
I still think that Gerry's comment didn't mean as much as people would like to read into it.

Murat had just been made arguido and it was big news and an obvious question. The McCanns were probably told not to comment on it.

You can't read anymore into it than that without proper context.

I think the WAY that GM answered that question was more significant than the words he used. RM being mentioned was dismissed immediately and appeared to be a sensitive / taboo subject to GM, who immediately tried to change the subject and move on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRpKThIO5HA

Even if GM had been told not to comment, if the circumstances were genuine, GM might have said something along the lines of.....'I'm aware of this person but it would seem inappropriate to comment at the moment'......this would have been a more natural answer and less suspicious.

That short video clip of him answering strongly suggested to me that GM at least knew of RM, and importantly the role he had to play, but this is just my own thoughts. RM's confession about all the lies he told regarding his movements that week is a huge red flag, and is very much in keeping with the continued development of something happening much earlier in the week.

Hobs may be best placed to provide more in depth analysis. She is much better at this sort of thing.

Carrry On Doctor

Posts : 352
Reputation : 157
Join date : 2014-01-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by BlueBag on 20.04.16 10:39

@Carrry On Doctor wrote:

I think the WAY that GM answered that question was more significant than the words he used. RM being mentioned was dismissed immediately and appeared to be a sensitive / taboo subject to GM, who immediately tried to change the subject and move on.
It was!

Murat had just been made arguido - it was a hot news topic.

GM may have expected it and been told not to comment.

You can't read anything into his reaction. Subjective opinions are meaningless without full context.

BlueBag

Posts : 3736
Reputation : 1607
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: MURAT revisited

Post by Research_Reader on 20.04.16 11:40

I agree its open to personal interpretation. Nevertheless I'd put it into the box marked 'Potentially highly suspicious'.

____________________

Research_Reader

Posts : 261
Reputation : 60
Join date : 2013-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 12 of 13 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 11, 12, 13  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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