The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!


SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Mirage on 02.05.16 11:32

There are a few threads on Martin Brunt and so I was reluctant to open another. However, I feel this man has slipped off the radar and I want to highlight the transcripts of telephone calls he made to Murat on 15th May and 26th May 2007, respectively. They can be found on PJ files

 There are a number of issues around Brunt that need addressing and you need to go right back to these telephone calls to Murat IMO to track the leitmotif of Brunt throughout this case from 2007 to the present day, culminating in his "troll dossier".

For the moment I want to look at this  15 May phone call by Brunt to Murat. I am just letting the contents sink in again, as I have not looked at it for a long time. I was going to bold some dialogue but there came a point where the phrases that merited it were too many.

My question, after reading it, is as follows:
Is it a journalist's role to find legal support for an arguido?


For context, RM has just been made arguido at the time of the first call of May 15. MB talks to JM first and discovers RM is a little depressed at being made arguido After the preamble RM comes to the phone.

RM: Hello Martin.

MB: Hello Robert.

RM: Your number didnt show up, thats why I didn't know who it was...


MB: Oh my, I didn't send you my number...

RM: Thats OK.

MB: Well, I will see if I mange not to lose this one, if I can find the tool (laughs).

RM: (Inaudible).

MB: Ok we will try, I mean I have not seen it yet...But we will try to expl...The police say or was it the local journalists who say you should be treated as an arguido.

RM: That he is a suspect, basically..

MB: Yes, well, even so...given the tone of the interrogation..

RM: Hmmm.

MB: And the fact of being free which says a lot about the interest in you, eh..

RM: That is the same as finishing me off...It was not me...I didnt do anything..and now I am literally...

MB: Ok, I know, I think...

RM: It always on when I turn the TV on and even now...

MB: Yes...well it would be better to turn it off..

RM: Really. To have been quiet was the best thing I could have done.

MB: Yes.

RM: But when I turn the television on I think , eh...They are going to finish me off completely, they are finishing me off...

MB: Ok, ok I'm going to tell you that...

RM: In order to have an idea..

MB: I?ll tell you what we are going to do.

RM: Did you talk to the lawyer?

MB: Two things! We talked to the Sky Lawyer...

RM: Right.

MB: Whos is of the opinion that according to what you signed you reported your work as being that of a translator.

RM: Certainly, as far as... the thing is that is was...Let me ..eh...it probably is ...oh!...

MB: Go on, continue...





  RM: We talked, we talked to a Sky lawyer, but the problem with the Sky lawyer is that he is English!

MB: Yes...No, no, no... he is or lawyer.

RM: Hmmm.

MB: And can you see, he said what it seemed to be to him...

RM: Hmmm?

MB: according to his understanding.

RM: According to his understanding, exactly...

MB: And now we are reluctant to talk to the lawyer who contacted you.

RM: That riight. OK.

MB: We do not know him.

RM: OK.

MB: And you do not know him, well you dont?

RM: Exactly, thats right. I do not know him, mate.

MB: And we do not know where he came from or what his credibility is.

RM: Yes.
MB: And they told us that the police were going to play games with false leads and that was why. And who knows whether he is who he says he is?

RM: Thats right. OK.

MB: And he could be trying to test you out or hoping that we pass him some information.

RM: Certainly.

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

RM: Humm, hmmm.

MB: Right? Because of this reason we are very reluctant because we do not know him and you do not know him.

RM: But however...I mean the best option you have to come clean with this, would probably be to go with a lawyer from Lisbon. Eh...somebody...with someone from up there. Not from the Algarve. It would have to be someone from Lisbon. Is that OK?

MB: Thats ok, I will try to arrange for someone from there...but..

RM: OK!

MB: But our position in relation to all this, for the moment, as I has explained previously, is that we consider ourselves to be very important ? and I think it was your opinion initially ? to do something finally that would manage to be on your side...

RM: Yes and that would not lead to my being detained immediately!

MB: Of course, of course! And you know, many of the things that you told me were not attributed to me...I understand and I don?t want to enter into all those details and we did not do anything since I left you...

RM: No, no, no, no...

MB: I am sure that you understand.

RM: Yes, yes! Yes.

MB: And if there is anything that better clarifies, that you think you could say, that could also be used in the future.

RM: Of course.

MB: You know, you could quote Sky sources and others..

RM: Yes that would be perfect. That would be just perfect!

MB: But I think it is important that you should have the media there and if we could appear, briefly, and make statements in these terms: ?I was questioned, it was a vague questioning, I was not asked direct questions about Madeleine? and afterwards you explain to me how you felt that they made you a scape goat, that you have nothing to hide, even if your computer is analysed. And that at the end of the day you will be absolved and they will find the true abductor/kidnapper.

RM: We could.. you could.. Lets first look at this with a Portuguese lawyer, we will won't we?

MB: Yes...No...

RM: Are you going to do this?

MB: I will do my best to arrange for one now...

RM: Yes.

MB: But, but ...independently of what the lawyer thinks, I think that this is the clearest option. But we will have to try to find someone who.....

RM: Yes, I think this is the simplest. Can you confirm this. I am here having a family discussion to see what they think...

MB: Ah yes. Of course I will. But I am talking about making very clear statements.

RM: Yes, ok!

MB: That they do not enter into many details but into the way you can get your message across.

RM: Get it across..OK:

MB: That you give your version of the events, given that the only version of events is vague and...

RM: Yes, yes.


MB: And that the two local journalists and everyone are very against you...and that there is nobody with the exception of my interview with Sally...

RM: Yes?

MB: There has nobody who has spoken in favour of Robert Murat because of this...

RM: In fact of the many interviews given I have heard that there were some positive ones...people contradicting each other...

MB: Yes?


RM: They arrived and said....no, no...they have been very positive about this...

MB: Of course. people from the area...

RM: People from here..Exactly, exactly...

MB: Inaudible

RM : exactly


MB: Who know what happened...


RM: Many people from the area said very positive things about this...about me, which is useful.

MB: Of course, well I will see what I can find and get back in touch with you.

RM: OK, Bye.

MB: And if we agree on this..

RM: Yes..

MB: And if we could agree to appear for 15 minutes..

RM: I never have any problem with making a statement..

MB: OK

RM: I have no problem whilst...Whilst I have the legal cover to do so. Because I dont want to end up in prison....(sigh)


MB: That would be the last thing we want...

RM: Firstly, for something I did not do and secondly for something that would break their contract rules...

MB: I understand that and I understand the sensitive nature of everything that we have been working with since we arrived here, so...

RM: Ok..

MB: Can I phone you again in half an hour?

RM: Good bye, thank you very much.

MB: Good bye.

Mirage

Posts : 1905
Reputation : 758
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by HelenMeg on 02.05.16 16:11

Its absurd isn't it - this conversation taking place.

IMO, there was already a cover up taking place and MB had been assigned a role - 'to get involved' and 'keep an eye on RM and help him to do what 'they' needed him to do.'
So I think MB was being directed to both be 'reporter on the ground' and to build a very good relationship quickly with RM so as to ensure RM was only speaking to him and that the right stuff was being portrayed in the media which was conducive to what the wider 'Team Mc Cann' wanted.  MB seems throughout to have played a role... reporter with an added assignment - to ensure the right story got across and that RM was 'looked after closely'.

HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Reputation : 209
Join date : 2014-01-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Mirage on 02.05.16 17:57

@HelenMeg wrote:Its absurd isn't it - this conversation taking place.

IMO, there was already a cover up taking place and MB had been assigned a role - 'to get involved' and 'keep an eye on RM and help him to do what 'they' needed him to do.'
So I think MB was being directed to both be 'reporter on the ground' and to build a very good relationship quickly with RM so as to ensure RM was only speaking to him and that the right stuff was being portrayed in the media which was conducive to what the wider 'Team Mc Cann' wanted.  MB seems throughout to have played a role... reporter with an added assignment - to ensure the right story got across and that RM was 'looked after closely'.
HelenMeg I think you are spot on. Who better to control the situation on the ground. I was interested to see who else picked this up.

No one was likely to ask, "Say, who was that guy?' When he's camped  out at the media digs and is out and about talking to the salient people. All perfectly normal.

The impression I get is of a huge tension between the Murat camp and the Mccann camp right back at the start. Two factions. GM "It's  a disaster." And RM "It's  the biggest cock up in history." 

Question is, was MB in the Murat camp as it appears from this he was. In that case when TM were eventually in the ascendancy, did he change allegiances?  Perhaps under pressure.That might explain the troll dossier. I saw him drop his head in his hands when he thought the camera was off him after a video link. This was shortly after and he looked defeated. I looked out for a repeat on the hour but they never ran it. I was taken aback at his demeanour and was not surprised it hit the cutting room floor. 

Or, was he a double agent? Feigning help to the hapless Murat, while monitoring the situation.

I remember when MB had a blog on Sky. It was riddled with pro Mc shills who were very nasty pieces of work. In the end comments unsympathetic to TM were whooshed overnight - and  in huge numbers. The pro comments would remain, having accrued astronomically high ratings from nothing. No amount of complaints rectified the situation and in the end it felt very edgy to post anything - it felt as if you were being watched.

Mirage

Posts : 1905
Reputation : 758
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by BlueBag on 02.05.16 18:38

@aiyoyo wrote:

More than beyond belief !
Are people expected to believe that OG or Home Office would leak operational details to S&S.
I believe they would brief S&S.

It's on record they did meet wlth OG.

Which begs the question, why did S&S get access that is denied other citizens?
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4579
Reputation : 2377
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by j.rob on 02.05.16 18:58

I agree. That phone conversation between MB and RM is staged. It's ridiculously staged right down to RM's mother Jennifer answering the phone and MB affecting not to know what 'arguido' is. Yeah, right, pull the other one, MB.

If it is true that Murat booked his ticket from the UK to Faro at the last minute late on Monday night, arriving in the early hours of Tuesday morning (has this been verified?) then that might support the theory that *something* had already happened by Sunday night/Monday.

The media reports that detectives believed the McCanns visited Sagres on Monday are a curiosity. The McCanns never mention this themselves. So there is something sensitive here?  Whether or not they actually went. Why would what detectives thought the McCanns did on Monday be leaked to the press when this might interfere with the investigation? Maybe this was a 'warning' shot from the detectives, along the lines of: "We know what happened so you must play ball..."

Monday was a 'key' day, imo. So many red flags that something had happened by then not least the McCann routine deviating from that of their friends. The creche sign-ins are also indicative that something had happened by Monday, imo.

Did something go wrong on Sunday night (quiz night - GM pays too much attention to curvaceous quiz host) or Monday? Or was some nefarious activity taking place (on Monday maybe) which spiraled out of control? (There has been speculation that some sort of photographic shoot might have been going on - at Burgau - see thread below on CMoMM. The suggestion being that some of the inappropriate photos of Madeleine Lolita-style might have even been taken there. Plus speculation about the sad make-up photo). 

I think there was a pre-planned media hoax - Sky seems to feature heavily in this, imo, but Murdoch press generally. I think *something* went wrong that week (by Monday). Or possibly someone/several people decided to deliberately sabotage something. 

Despite TM desperately trying to keep up an appearance of normality, several people (close to the hoax maybe?) became suspicious. If Detective Amaral is right and Madeleine died that week, that is an incredibly difficult thing to conceal in the midst of a large group of families and in a holiday resort with many other people around. Madeleine's siblings and the other children have to be kept 'in the dark' which would be quite an undertaking and I am sure is the reason that, from Monday morning onwards, the McCanns hide away in their apartment at both breakfast-time and lunch-time.  There is a pressing need not to be seen 'en-famille' and to confuse everyone about when Madeleine was last seen.

Robert Murat was drafted in after something had gone wrong for several reasons, imo. One was to get close to the police investigation and have direct access to eye-witness testimony as he worked as a translator. Given he worked for the UK police as a translator in Norfolk, his role as translator must have been authorized at quite  a high level, imo. He is known to police not just in the UK but in the Luz area too as that is where he lives. I think he might also have been drafted in to help - even if unwittingly - as he has local contacts and access to property locally. His mother also owns a large villa very near OC.  

Murat would have been privy to very important eye-witness testimony. I suspect he was promised that he would be rewarded handsomely. Despite his claim that his life had been ruined by his arguido status and everything that had been written about him in the press, I see no evidence of this. He received a huge lump sum compensation award. I do believe Sergei too received a large sum in compensation for being made arguido. As indeed did the McCanns. 

I think it's a question of joining the dots between the media, especially Rupert Murdoch and Sky, the police - both UK and Portuguese, the political atmosphere at the time, and some other interests as well (defence/medical/business). I do believe there is also a ring operating (or several in fact) and I am not talking about a Colgate ring of confidence. I suspect the Gaspers hit the nail there. 

Below is interesting. It suggests that Martin Brunt was very much caught in the cross-fire. Given that I believe some of the pro shills were indeed very nasty pieces of work it could even be that Brunt felt quite threatened. It is not of course unheard of for investigative journalists to meet with a very sticky end if they do not toe the line - think Jill Dando.

MB had a blog on Sky. It was riddled with pro Mc shills who were very nasty pieces of work. In the end comments unsympathetic to TM were whooshed overnight - and  in huge numbers. The pro comments would remain, having accrued astronomically high ratings from nothing. No amount of complaints rectified the situation and in the end it felt very edgy to post anything - it felt as if you were being watched.


https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2793-what-was-so-special-about-burgau

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Mirage on 02.05.16 19:49

J Rob Thank you. You have articulated pretty much my line of thinking.

Add JW and BoD into the mix. How amazing that a documentary maker and a former Crimewatch team member were woken up at one in the morning, told there was a child missing, that the place was crawling with searchers but they were not needed. "Oh right. We'll just get back off to sleep then." And the point of that was...?

Then the bizarre "My Months with Madeleine" article!! Pretty blonde girls all in pink - so much so that BoD didn't know who was who. What a load of tripe. She even tells of KH arriving at the pool on the Sat morning. Can anyone ANYONE imagine your child is possibly lying dead or seriously injured somewhere in the scrubland around PdL and you can go to the pool??? And this supposed stoicism is admirable???? What planet is that woman on?

JW also complained of sporadic calls from GM (IIRC) over months with regard to timings and details of their talk in the road.

Anyway, I digress. MB is quite a key figure in my opinion. As I have said, the head in hands image shocked me. Was he got at in the end?

The RM translating duties was very convenient wasn't it? Someone at the heart of the investigation, knowing exactly what was going on. Also helping check empty apartments, I believe.

There is also the bizarre information stall set up by JM for those who had info but maybe didn't want to go to the police. How was that allowed to happen? Bonkers! Never known anything like this case. It is knee deep in God knows what and I have a great sense of menace and evil  - yes, evil - off the whole shooting match.

Who was the woman journalist who blew the whistle on RM? Very very odd. And MB seems to allude to that in the phone call.

The lead up to that troll dossier was very choreographed with that dreadful S&S. What a bunch of unsavoury people.

Mirage

Posts : 1905
Reputation : 758
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by whodunit on 02.05.16 21:24

@Mirage wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Its absurd isn't it - this conversation taking place.

IMO, there was already a cover up taking place and MB had been assigned a role - 'to get involved' and 'keep an eye on RM and help him to do what 'they' needed him to do.'
So I think MB was being directed to both be 'reporter on the ground' and to build a very good relationship quickly with RM so as to ensure RM was only speaking to him and that the right stuff was being portrayed in the media which was conducive to what the wider 'Team Mc Cann' wanted.  MB seems throughout to have played a role... reporter with an added assignment - to ensure the right story got across and that RM was 'looked after closely'.
HelenMeg I think you are spot on. Who better to control the situation on the ground. I was interested to see who else picked this up.

No one was likely to ask, "Say, who was that guy?' When he's camped  out at the media digs and is out and about talking to the salient people. All perfectly normal.

The impression I get is of a huge tension between the Murat camp and the Mccann camp right back at the start. Two factions. GM "It's  a disaster." And RM "It's  the biggest cock up in history." 

Question is, was MB in the Murat camp as it appears from this he was. In that case when TM were eventually in the ascendancy, did he change allegiances?  Perhaps under pressure.That might explain the troll dossier. I saw him drop his head in his hands when he thought the camera was off him after a video link. This was shortly after and he looked defeated. I looked out for a repeat on the hour but they never ran it. I was taken aback at his demeanour and was not surprised it hit the cutting room floor. 

Or, was he a double agent? Feigning help to the hapless Murat, while monitoring the situation.

I remember when MB had a blog on Sky. It was riddled with pro Mc shills who were very nasty pieces of work. In the end comments unsympathetic to TM were whooshed overnight - and  in huge numbers. The pro comments would remain, having accrued astronomically high ratings from nothing. No amount of complaints rectified the situation and in the end it felt very edgy to post anything - it felt as if you were being watched.

Two factions is absolutely right. One faction identifies Murat, the other fires back identifying McCann.....A couple of strategic meetings and a cease-fire is reached....

RM: I have no problem whilst...Whilst I have the legal cover to do so. Because I dont want to end up in prison....(sigh)


MB: That would be the last thing we want...

RM: Firstly, for something I did not do and secondly for something that would break their contract rules...

Who is WE? Whose CONTRACT RULES?

There is an undercurrent to this conversation that fairly screams 'we know what we're talking about just don't say it out loud'.


avatar
whodunit

Posts : 467
Reputation : 443
Join date : 2015-02-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Mirage on 02.05.16 22:32

Portuguese journo (sounds like Felgueiras): Did you know Robert Murat?
GM: (cough) I'm  not going to answer that.

A straightforward  enough question.  Why the reluctance?

The interesting thing is what prompted her to ask?
Sandra Felgueiras, eh.. What a class act. The only journo to ask that pair the right questions. And boy, did she get under their  skin.

Mirage

Posts : 1905
Reputation : 758
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Jill Havern on 02.05.16 22:43

@Mirage wrote:Portuguese journo (sounds like Felgueiras): Did you know Robert Murat?
GM: (cough) I'm  not going to answer that.

A straightforward  enough question.  Why the reluctance?

The interesting thing is what prompted her to ask?
Sandra Felgueiras, eh.. What a class act. The only journo to ask that pair the right questions. And boy, did she get under their  skin.
Superb journalist. She puts the UK journalists to shame!
avatar
Jill Havern


Posts : 11652
Reputation : 5593
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

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

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by whodunit on 02.05.16 22:47

"Ask the dogs, Sandra!"

I love it when journalists take their duty seriously. What is their duty? To  "comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable"


Wiped that smirk right off his face, didn't she? roses
avatar
whodunit

Posts : 467
Reputation : 443
Join date : 2015-02-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by MayMuse on 02.05.16 22:50

@whodunit wrote:
@Mirage wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Its absurd isn't it - this conversation taking place.

IMO, there was already a cover up taking place and MB had been assigned a role - 'to get involved' and 'keep an eye on RM and help him to do what 'they' needed him to do.'
So I think MB was being directed to both be 'reporter on the ground' and to build a very good relationship quickly with RM so as to ensure RM was only speaking to him and that the right stuff was being portrayed in the media which was conducive to what the wider 'Team Mc Cann' wanted.  MB seems throughout to have played a role... reporter with an added assignment - to ensure the right story got across and that RM was 'looked after closely'.
HelenMeg I think you are spot on. Who better to control the situation on the ground. I was interested to see who else picked this up.

No one was likely to ask, "Say, who was that guy?' When he's camped  out at the media digs and is out and about talking to the salient people. All perfectly normal.

The impression I get is of a huge tension between the Murat camp and the Mccann camp right back at the start. Two factions. GM "It's  a disaster." And RM "It's  the biggest cock up in history." 

Question is, was MB in the Murat camp as it appears from this he was. In that case when TM were eventually in the ascendancy, did he change allegiances?  Perhaps under pressure.That might explain the troll dossier. I saw him drop his head in his hands when he thought the camera was off him after a video link. This was shortly after and he looked defeated. I looked out for a repeat on the hour but they never ran it. I was taken aback at his demeanour and was not surprised it hit the cutting room floor. 

Or, was he a double agent? Feigning help to the hapless Murat, while monitoring the situation.

I remember when MB had a blog on Sky. It was riddled with pro Mc shills who were very nasty pieces of work. In the end comments unsympathetic to TM were whooshed overnight - and  in huge numbers. The pro comments would remain, having accrued astronomically high ratings from nothing. No amount of complaints rectified the situation and in the end it felt very edgy to post anything - it felt as if you were being watched.

Two factions is absolutely right. One faction identifies Murat, the other fires back identifying McCann.....A couple of strategic meetings and a cease-fire is reached....

RM: I have no problem whilst...Whilst I have the legal cover to do so. Because I dont want to end up in prison....(sigh)


MB: That would be the last thing we want...

RM: Firstly, for something I did not do and secondly for something that would break their contract rules...

Who is WE? Whose CONTRACT RULES?

There is an undercurrent to this conversation that fairly screams 'we know what we're talking about just don't say it out loud'.


That's the bit that jumped out to me also (we/contract rules)... Does he mean as a 'translator'? Who he works for. Or sky news contract? Or like a "pact"? Do Freemasons sign 'contracts'? 

Has this been a set up from the beginning? 

There is something quite sinister (to me) about that conversation, and since when are journalists allowed to contact 'suspects'? 

Interesting too that they speak like they have spoken before? 
I wonder if MB knew RM before May 2007?

____________________
“Basically, I’m just an ordinary, straightforward guy who’s the victim of the biggest f***-up on this planet – if you’ll excuse the language.” bingo

Robert Murat talking to David Jones, Daily Mail, 02 June 2007
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-459316/Madeleine-Is-Robert-Murat-suspect-scapegoat.html

MayMuse

Posts : 2033
Reputation : 1399
Join date : 2016-04-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Mirage on 02.05.16 23:16

You are right, MayMuse. The  conversation is sinister. Brunt is, and so are those two gargoyles S&S who infected my television screen hissing hhh...aaaters' at us all. Backed up by JG. And in an attempt to outdo Tanner, this pair threw out yet another ridiculous suspect , this time with unravelling bandages on his feet.

Have these people escaped from a secure unit?

Mirage

Posts : 1905
Reputation : 758
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by j.rob on 02.05.16 23:21

@Mirage wrote:J Rob Thank you. You have articulated pretty much my line of thinking.

Oh good - I am glad someone else is thinking along similar lines....

Add JW and BoD into the mix. How amazing that a documentary maker and a former Crimewatch team member were woken up at one in the morning, told there was a child missing, that the place was crawling with searchers but they were not needed. "Oh right. We'll just get back off to sleep then." And the point of that was...?

I refuse to believe this is a coincidence. A journalist who used to work on Crimewatch and a TV documentary maker who specializes in drama/sensationalist drama just so happen to be in the resort that week. And not only that - Jez Wilkins just so happens to bump into Gerry at such a crucial time in such a crucial place. I refuse to believe this is a coincidence - whether or not this meeting actually happened at that time and in that place. If it did, I suspect it was anything but a chit-chat about the weather... 

Then the bizarre "My Months with Madeleine" article!! Pretty blonde girls all in pink - so much so that BoD didn't know who was who. What a load of tripe. She even tells of KH arriving at the pool on the Sat morning. Can anyone ANYONE imagine your child is possibly lying dead or seriously injured somewhere in the scrubland around PdL and you can go to the pool??? And this supposed stoicism is admirable???? What planet is that woman on?

Agreed. It is all a load of rubbish. There is a photo in the media I do believe of Kate sitting at the pool-side with Fiona and I think Sean is there in arm-bands. I totally agree - the idea that anyone is expected to believe this was an abduction when the mother just plonks herself by the pool less than 48 hours afterwards is just 'ludicrous' as GM might say. 

JW also complained of sporadic calls from GM (IIRC) over months with regard to timings and details of their talk in the road.

I hadn't read about that. However, I do think it is on record that Jez Wilkins' finds the way that the McCanns' detectives contact him heavy-handed. It is most certainly on record that Detective Amaral is extremely interested in the Jez - Gerry encounter at 9.15pm that fateful night. Plus also interested in how the pair might know each other and whether Jez was familiar with the Mc family routine that week. Bridget, in an article in the Guardian later in the year, lies by writing that the Portuguese police 'never bothered to contact Jez'. This is a total lie as Detective Amaral sent an urgent fax to Jez a few days after the alleged Tanner-man nonsensical abduction asking him all sorts of probing questions. Not the least of which was: would Jez know of any reason why someone might want to kidnap Gerry McCann's daughter?

Call me old-fashioned, but I think that shows quite a high degree of understanding on the part of sardine-munching Dr Amaral who has two-hour lunches that he is on the case pretty damn quick....


Anyway, I digress. MB is quite a key figure in my opinion. As I have said, the head in hands image shocked me. Was he got at in the end?

I think he is probably a bit of a pawn. I think the early reports were quite critical of the Mcs...his included I do believe? Then the TM shills went into attack mode. He probably got put on the firing line. Murdoch couldn't give a flying whatnot what happens to him, nor the Sky echelons....it has shown itself to be an organization without any kind of moral compass. Not good. He could even have been threatened....this case has been very dirty...What really happened in the Brenda case....very strange.

The RM translating duties was very convenient wasn't it? Someone at the heart of the investigation, knowing exactly what was going on. Also helping check empty apartments, I believe.

Yes -  I think he was drafted in to find out what really happened. To get first hand account of witness statements and maybe also to facilitate with local contacts and finding out about apartments.

There is also the bizarre information stall set up by JM for those who had info but maybe didn't want to go to the police. How was that allowed to happen? Bonkers! Never known anything like this case. It is knee deep in God knows what and I have a great sense of menace and evil  - yes, evil - off the whole shooting match.

Beyond weird...maybe a little sanctuary for those 'in the know' of some kind of hoax....or maybe just to catch the gullible and get some insider info before the police got their hands on it. Maybe trying to get her son off the hook. I just don't know. But the phone call between JM, RM and Brunt is so ridiculous, imo.

Who was the woman journalist who blew the whistle on RM? Very very odd. And MB seems to allude to that in the phone call.

Mirror Journo Louis Campbell. I think she claimed that he behaved like Ian Huntley and took too much interest in the case, hanging around......I'd check her out. IMO Ian Huntley was stitched up. I bet she knows that...what a creep.....

Murat, on the other hand, received rather a large pay-out. How can these people (Murdoch hacks) sleep at night? I hope they have nightmares because that is what they deserve...


The lead up to that troll dossier was very choreographed with that dreadful S&S. What a bunch of unsavoury people.

Couldn't agree more. This whole case is about sleaze, sleaze and more sleaze. Vultures arrived at the trough of an innocent child and helped themselves.

Pathetic, utterly pathetic. 

I am quite convinced that Murdoch's wedding to the photogenic (but dim) Gerry Hall is a (rather desperate, imo) attempt at a PR exercise. I do believe that is the case. But lawyer/barrister friends also think it is to do with inheritance stuff. Quite so - money I am sure is at the forefront of Murdoch's  reptilian brain . (He does actually look a bit like a reptile now.. big grin )

IMO!


j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Roxyroo on 02.05.16 23:38

@MayMuse wrote:
@whodunit wrote:
@Mirage wrote:
@HelenMeg wrote:Its absurd isn't it - this conversation taking place.

IMO, there was already a cover up taking place and MB had been assigned a role - 'to get involved' and 'keep an eye on RM and help him to do what 'they' needed him to do.'
So I think MB was being directed to both be 'reporter on the ground' and to build a very good relationship quickly with RM so as to ensure RM was only speaking to him and that the right stuff was being portrayed in the media which was conducive to what the wider 'Team Mc Cann' wanted.  MB seems throughout to have played a role... reporter with an added assignment - to ensure the right story got across and that RM was 'looked after closely'.
HelenMeg I think you are spot on. Who better to control the situation on the ground. I was interested to see who else picked this up.

No one was likely to ask, "Say, who was that guy?' When he's camped  out at the media digs and is out and about talking to the salient people. All perfectly normal.

The impression I get is of a huge tension between the Murat camp and the Mccann camp right back at the start. Two factions. GM "It's  a disaster." And RM "It's  the biggest cock up in history." 

Question is, was MB in the Murat camp as it appears from this he was. In that case when TM were eventually in the ascendancy, did he change allegiances?  Perhaps under pressure.That might explain the troll dossier. I saw him drop his head in his hands when he thought the camera was off him after a video link. This was shortly after and he looked defeated. I looked out for a repeat on the hour but they never ran it. I was taken aback at his demeanour and was not surprised it hit the cutting room floor. 

Or, was he a double agent? Feigning help to the hapless Murat, while monitoring the situation.

I remember when MB had a blog on Sky. It was riddled with pro Mc shills who were very nasty pieces of work. In the end comments unsympathetic to TM were whooshed overnight - and  in huge numbers. The pro comments would remain, having accrued astronomically high ratings from nothing. No amount of complaints rectified the situation and in the end it felt very edgy to post anything - it felt as if you were being watched.

Two factions is absolutely right. One faction identifies Murat, the other fires back identifying McCann.....A couple of strategic meetings and a cease-fire is reached....

RM: I have no problem whilst...Whilst I have the legal cover to do so. Because I dont want to end up in prison....(sigh)


MB: That would be the last thing we want...

RM: Firstly, for something I did not do and secondly for something that would break their contract rules...

Who is WE? Whose CONTRACT RULES?

There is an undercurrent to this conversation that fairly screams 'we know what we're talking about just don't say it out loud'.


That's the bit that jumped out to me also (we/contract rules)... Does he mean as a 'translator'? Who he works for. Or sky news contract? Or like a "pact"? Do Freemasons sign 'contracts'? 

Has this been a set up from the beginning? 

There is something quite sinister (to me) about that conversation, and since when are journalists allowed to contact 'suspects'? 

Interesting too that they speak like they have spoken before? 
I wonder if MB knew RM before May 2007?


Freemasons say an " oath" at their initiation ceremonies, which they really do not like to break, ever
avatar
Roxyroo

Posts : 413
Reputation : 272
Join date : 2016-04-04
Location : Scotland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Mirage on 02.05.16 23:50

Just returning to the two camps issue. It is interesting that RM was front page  in the Express with the "Bring them all back to Portugal" headline a couple of years ago. JM also said she was writing a book, though it never materialised.  She was particularly sore at KH for her vehemence towards her son at the time he was under suspicion.

All of the above indicates to me that there are unresolved grudges  beneath the surface. Two camps with an enduring enmity does not bode well for those with much to hide .

Mirage

Posts : 1905
Reputation : 758
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Martin Brunt and Robert Murat

Post by willowthewisp on 03.05.16 10:56

Another strange point,Jez Wilken's partner Bridget who worked for an organisation,"Crime Watch" and the shenanigans of "Operation Grange,creche Dad" revelation moment?
So we now have at least "three" so called re-enactments of events appertaining to what was supposed to have happened on the 3 May 2007,two Crime Watch specials and the Dave Edgar scenario,Jane Tanner,Jez Wilkens,Gerry scene,who was where and which side of the Road,"to me to you?
Ask a question as to whether or not was Jez Wilken's holiday apartment was searched on the 3 May 2007 by GNR or Police tracker dogs and where did "Two chums" go to in the early hours of the 4th May 2007?
avatar
willowthewisp

Posts : 2173
Reputation : 866
Join date : 2015-05-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Murat calling for a reconstruction?

Post by j.rob on 03.05.16 12:29

It's interesting that Robert Murat was suggesting the Tapasniks return for a reconstruction. Because of course this might shed some light on the mighty peculiar circumstances of Jane Tanner's Tanner-man sighting. 

By one of those huge coincidences that abound in this case Jane Tanner's sighting coincides precisely with the time that Gerry McCann is talking with Jez Wilkins outside apartment 5A. Gerry allegedly bumped into Jez after his 9pm check on the children when he found all was well. Jez was allegedly pushing his pram around the resort as his youngest child couldn't sleep

I refuse to believe that this meeting - if it took place - was a coincidence. How beyond extraordinary that the father of Gerry McCann just so happens to bump into a TV drama producer (whose partner worked on Crime Watch) at precisely the same time that Jane Tanner claims she saw Madeleine being whisked away by the abductor! One of the biggest news stories of the decade is breaking right in front of the eyes of a TV drama producer...

It's all nonsense, of course, because it gives a tiny window of opportunity for 'the abductor' who must have managed to get in after Gerry's 9pm check (unless hiding in a cupboard - ahem!) and rush up the road while GM was standing on the pavement outside the apartment talking to Jez. How come Jez didn't see the abductor? How come Jez didn't see Jane? 

If it is true (ahem!) that Gerry bumped into Jez at around 9.15pm then why didn't Gerry immediately go to Jez' apartment when the alarm was raised at 10pm. He would have been banging the door wanting to know if Jez had seen anything.  Jez would have been a crucial eye-witness. 

Who is to say that after Gerry went back to the dinner table Jez didn't whip into the apartment and do a spot of abducting? He even had a handy pram as a get-away vehicle. Of course I am not saying this happened but merely pointing out that Jez is a very important witness and would clearly need to be ruled out as he was in such a key place at such a key time.

The timing of Jane Tanner's sighting is critical, imo, for a number of reasons:

1. It gives Gerry an alibi for around 9pm - 9.15pm. A 'key' time, imo.

2. It places a precise time on when TM want the alleged abduction to have taken place. Well before the 10pm alarm was raised. (And well before the Smith sighting of course.)

3. It places Jez Wilkins (according to TM) at the scene at the time of the alleged abduction. This is of huge significance I think.

I strongly suspect Jez did not want to be placed at the scene at the time of the alleged abduction. I think he was 'landed in it' by TM at 1.30am - the early hours of Friday 4th May -  when Matt visited his family's apartment in the company of hotel manager Matt.  This is crucial, imo. Jez is apparently slumbering peacefully while the whole resort is in chaos, the media have already been alerted and the biggest news story of the decade has been crashing all around him for a good four hours. But both Jez and Bridget are, apparently, oblivious of this. Yeah, right! Not only that, but after Matt leaves, Jez and Bridget go back to sleep...so uninterested are they in the story and so unconcerned about the plight of their daughter's friend that they nod off after this news.

Jez and Bridget you really did need to line up your story to be slightly more believable you know. In trying so hard to disengage yourself from what was going on, you have, imo, incriminated yourselves. Because your account - if you had been entirely impartial eyewitnesses - is not credible. If you had been impartial eye-witnesses you would have joined in the searches and been shocked and worried.

But back to Matt who has been chosen as messenger. Matt apparently tells Jez that Madeleine has been abducted and Gerry saw Jez earlier. Jez replies to this: "You're joking." I think this is not in relation to the 'abduction' (which I feel sure Jez is not ignorant about) but in relation to having been told that Gerry saw him earlier that evening. I think Jez can't believe Gerry has 'landed him in it' in this way. 

TM are determined that Jez is placed firmly at the scene of the alleged abduction at precisely the time of the alleged abduction that night. And they are determined to do this in front of an eye-witness. 

Who else are TM determined to place on the scene that night? Robert Murat of course.

But there are crucial differences in terms of when, how and where TM want to place both Jez Wilkins and Robert Murat that fateful evening. I think these differences might be quite important in terms of understanding the different 'camps' involved and also in terms of understanding how and why the TM abduction story veered away from the media hoax story. 

Theories, as always.

I wonder if Jez Wilkins knew Robert Murat? 

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id327.html

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by MayMuse on 03.05.16 12:37

@j-rob Never believed Tanner or the JW 'bumping into'
It all seemed 'fabricated' 

This post has clarified it more, thank you.

MayMuse

Posts : 2033
Reputation : 1399
Join date : 2016-04-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Mirage on 03.05.16 14:23

Rachael Oldfield says in her rogatory that she was with GM around ten thirty. Instead of going to JW and hammering on his door to find out if he saw anything suspicious a scant hour and a quarter earlier.

I do not understand what building RO is describing with five floors. Were all the verandas interconnecting? Was their a "stairwell" as such? And would any path connecting apartments be described as "open corridors"?

1578 And that was just you and'
    Reply 'And Gerry'.


1578 'And what time was this''
 Reply 'Erm I mean that would have been you know about half ten or something like that, erm and then'.
 1578 'What was Gerry saying''
 Reply 'Erm I don't know, I don't remember, erm no I don't remember in particular, erm'.


1578 'And how long did you spend doing that search''
 Reply 'It was just really a quick you know, it would have been about five minutes, it was just up the flights and along the, you know the sort of verandas in front of the apartments, erm but there wasn't really anywhere you know, somebody could hide, well you know, if Madeleine had sort of wandered by herself, erm you know there were just really open corridors that we were just kind of looking to see if there was anything down there, erm'.    


So this wasn't a father running around like a headless chicken was it?

KH page 74 "madeleine"
"Gerry meanwhile was running from pillar to post, urging me to remain in the apartment"

No he wasn't, he was having a chat with RO. She couldn't remember what he said to her. Then he went off searching, at the beach she thought.

He seems to have been around 5a when the police arrived at 11.10pm though (madeleine p 75), or shortly after. because while the officers looked around he called his sister Trisha (p77)

Mirage

Posts : 1905
Reputation : 758
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by jeanmonroe on 03.05.16 19:48

Has Mr Brunt 'commentated' on this year, 2016, 'anniversary'?

Or has he been 'shut down'?

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Reputation : 1665
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Mirage on 03.05.16 19:56

@jeanmonroe wrote:Has Mr Brunt 'commentated' on this year, 2016, 'anniversary'?

Or has he been 'shut down'?
Only if someone manages to lure him into a BHS store. And if Sir Philip could be persuaded to join him my life would be complete. :-)

Mirage

Posts : 1905
Reputation : 758
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by j.rob on 03.05.16 20:21

@MayMuse wrote:@j-rob Never believed Tanner or the JW 'bumping into'
It all seemed 'fabricated' 

This post has clarified it more, thank you.


Agreed. And Jez gives conflicting accounts of what he was doing that evening in his rogatory.

In terms of the Jez, Murat similarities, it IS striking, imo, that TM were determined to place the pair of them on the scene that night, albeit at different times and for different reasons I suspect.

While Jez 'chat' with GM obviously gives GM an alibi - he is cool and collected according to GM which he wouldn't be presumably if he had just been involved in something nefarious - it nevertheless throws a spanner in the works of Jane Tanner's sighting. As Jez claims not to have seen Jane and not to have seen Tanner-man. He will not, therefore, support the Tanner-man sighting. While I think Jez is not an entirely disinterested party, I think the fact that he will not support Jane Tanner's sighting means he is not sympathetic  to their story. 

I suspect that TM were forced to concoct Tanner-man when there was a last minute 'disaster'. He wasn't hatched for a good few hours, as far as I can tell, which I imagine meant TM in a panic concocted him to cover their backs after 'the disaster' happened.

I suspect there were two 'disasters'. One was that something happened to Madeleine earlier in the week which I think resulted in her death possibly a day or two later. I think the death was accidental in that it hadn't been pre-meditated (although there are those who think it might have been) but I think it was the result of some nefarious activity which went wrong. I think it was much more dark than simply a tragic accident. 

Another 'disaster' was that someone or several people pulled out of the hoax at the last minute. I presume because they became aware that all was not as it seemed. Maybe other reasons too of course - a deliberate sabotage perhaps? GM strikes me as a man who could make enemies quite quickly and easily. 

Whereas Jez is placed at the scene very early on - when Matt visits his apartment in the presence of the hotel manager in the early hours of Friday morning - Robert Murat is not placed on the scene until days later. A Mirror journalist claims that she thought he was acting suspiciously in the manner of Ian Huntley. That a Mirror hack's opinion should be given any credence at all is extraordinary, especially when this was supposed to be a crime scene. And at around this time or was it a bit later members of TM start pointing the finger at Murat too. I personally think he looks quite happy to have been made a patsy. The chummy little (staged, imo) phone call between him and Martin Brunt suggests that Murat is hardly chained up on death row and he got a huge amount in compensation for claiming his life had been ruined. When there is no evidence to support this. 

Did Murat come along, partly, to take the finger of suspicion away from the McCanns I wonder?  Possibly agreed on condition that he would be rewarded for being a patsy? That is how it looks to me.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 233
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by Tony Bennett on 03.05.16 21:13

@j.rob wrote:
I suspect that TM were forced to concoct Tanner-man when there was a last minute 'disaster'. He wasn't hatched for a good few hours, as far as I can tell...
Que?

When the PJ arrived, they had not one but two timelines handily written out for them by Russell O'Brien on the ripped-off cover of Madeleine's Activity Sticker book. That was well within two hours of the alarm being raised at about 10pm that night.

Another thing you've not factored in is the clearly pre-planned 'phone call from Nuno Lourenco to the PJ just as Wojchiech Krokowski's plane was taking off for Berlin on Saturday morning. He spun a web of utter lies about his daughter nearly being kidnapped by Krokowski. He had a photo of the car hired by Krokowksi that week. And most telling of all, his description of Krokowski matched in almost every fine detail that of Jane Tanner about Tannerman, right down to the light-coloured trousers, clothes made of cloth, classic shoes and, most of all, that meaningless phrase that was even copied by the Smiths as well: 'He didn't look like a tourist'.

I think, and with respect, @ j.rob, you need to factor in a lot more pre-planning to your theory

____________________

The amazing symbiosis between bees and flowers:

https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-for-creation/god-created-plant-pollinator-partners/  

avatar
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 14903
Reputation : 2996
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 70
Location : Shropshire

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by MayMuse on 03.05.16 21:43

Talking of pre-planning... ( move or delete if not appropriate) 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/666708/Missing-Child-What-To-Do-Advice-Madeleine-McCann-Disappearance-Anniversary

Next it will be "chipping" which are my thoughts on this fiasco!!!

MayMuse

Posts : 2033
Reputation : 1399
Join date : 2016-04-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: SK - Brunt still at it. Beyond belief

Post by MaryB on 03.05.16 21:46

I never believed in that Tannerman sighting.  So unconvincing from the start with neither GM or Jez saying they saw him too and disputing what side of the road they were standing on.  The Smith sighting I do believe.  Because that sighting was hardly ever mentioned in the papers.  Only on the forums which I think points to the fact they wanted to keep it quiet.
avatar
MaryB

Posts : 204
Reputation : 45
Join date : 2009-11-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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