Re: Robert Murat's mother to the rescue - A mystery “woman in purple” is the prime suspect British police are thought to be searching for over Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.

by Roidininki on 02.05.17 12:28

I don't think Mrs. Murat should be accused of "coming to the rescue" .
Jeremy Wilkins said he saw a woman whose name he didn't know but recalled she was wearing purple ?

What the article's done by saying the police have been scouring Europe for this woman is making the Met look incompetent imo.

by ChippyM on 02.05.17 12:30

It's like the burglars that we were promised would be arrested in 2014.

"Brit cops know who snatched Maddie" etc. etc. and various other headlines about arrests. Except they were questioned, not arrested. I wonder who started that rumour ?! If the burglars were 'arrested' then that means the McCanns were too, what do you reckon Clarence?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/01/24/madeleine-mccann-news-three-burglars-face-questioning-portuguese-authorities-met-request_n_4657584.html

"A spokesman for Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry McCann described the letter as “significant”, that they believe it indicates an arrest is imminent and that “it’s likely it is the three burglars.”

by **Verdi** on 02.05.17 12:32

"They want to know exactly where she was on the night Madeleine was taken from the apartment. After months of tireless police work they will soon be in a position to move in and finally get some answers after a decade of dead ends.”

They already know exactly where Missus Purple was on the night Madeleine was taken (allegedly) from the apartment - she was standing outside looking intently at the apartment. Mrs Murat said!

Still laughing!

Haven't they forgotten vital evidence?

by MayMuse on 02.05.17 12:36

@Roidininki wrote:I don't think Mrs. Murat should be accused of "coming to the rescue" .
Jeremy Wilkins said he saw a woman whose name he didn't know but recalled she was wearing purple ?

What the article's done by saying the police have been scouring Europe for this woman is making the Met look incompetent imo.

Wilkins recognised woman as one of McCanns friends, Jenny Murat did not recognise.
Both saw her between 8 to 8.30pm.
It is in the files.

The police know who she is,MSM are belittling them and all who have investigated this case.
If JT is the last line of inquiry, interesting where that now leads?

by Roidininki on 02.05.17 12:43

@Verdi wrote:"They want to know exactly where she was on the night Madeleine was taken from the apartment. After months of tireless police work they will soon be in a position to move in and finally get some answers after a decade of dead ends.”

They already know exactly where Missus Purple was on the night Madeleine was taken (allegedly) from the apartment - she was standing outside looking intently at the apartment. Mrs Murat said!

Still laughing!

Haven't they forgotten vital evidence?

I don't see Jez Wilkins being criticised for his statement in which he said he saw a woman in purple .
The dogs are not being forgotten .
Couldn't she have been the lookout in respect of something being moved as opposed to being taken from the apartment ?

by sandancer on 02.05.17 12:44

Will Missus Purple be like Crechman and still have the clothes she was wearing that night 10 years ago whilst standing under a lamp post watching the apartment intently ?

by ChippyM on 02.05.17 12:53

The Sun have another rent -an expert and have picked up on one particular thing he said for their headline . She Was a Nurse! This is despite him saying if it was a woman.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3460024/madeleine-mccann-nanny-nurse-woman-purple-disappearance-theory/

He also gives a psychological profile - someone living local and a sex offender, not someone who wanted to keep a child. So out of a town of 3000 how likely is it that this female child abuser couldn't be found or would even try and snatch a child?! Or that dressed as a (purple) nurse they wouldn't stand out in a holiday resort? It just gets more and more silly!

"Speaking exclusively to The Sun Online clinical forensic psychologist Mike Berry said he would “put forward the possibility that the abductor was a female”.
Mr Berry, who lectures at the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, said: “There has, over the last few years, been an increased recognition that females can also be sex offenders either on their own or with a male partner.
“They might have been in some sort of uniform – a nanny or a nurse – to make themselves look less suspicious.”
.......

Likely characteristics of an offender according to Consultant Clinical Forensic Psychologist Mike Berry

Age: early 30s to late 50s (unfortunately male sex offenders often operate in their 60s and older).
Previous: Would have a history of sexual assaults on young children (most of which for a number of reasons would not be reported to the police). This offence would be an escalation from earlier offences.
Locality: Most offenders commit their offences within David Canter’s circle of work, play and offence and usually live within a short distance of the overlap. As such it is unlikely to live in another country or initially transport Maddie too far from the town. I am not being flippant when I say paedophiles go on holiday but it is unlikely they would have had the knowledge to carry out the abduction and more importantly would have been able be able to successfully hide her body.

by **Verdi** on 02.05.17 12:56

@sandancer wrote:Will Missus Purple be like Crechman and still have the clothes she was wearing that night 10 years ago whilst standing under a lamp post watching the apartment intently ?

'I'm leaning on the lamp post at the corner of the street in case a certain little lady goes by - oh me oh my - I hope the little lady goes by'

'willo the wisp'

by **Verdi** on 02.05.17 13:08

@Roidininki wrote:
Couldn't she have been the lookout in respect of something being moved as opposed to being taken from the apartment ?

Who Jane Tanner? That's who Jeremy Wilkins reckoned to see on the night of Thursday 3rd May, wearing purple!

It makes you wonder why it's taken Jenny Murat ten years to come up with this vital piece of evidence - the key to the mystery! On the eve of the 10th anniversary to boot.

Pull the other one!

I dread to think what's in store for tomorrow.

by Philip Anders on 02.05.17 13:11

I think I've solved it!!

It wasn't a woman wearing purple it was Gogol Bordello who has a passing resemblance to Tannerman.

It was under our noses all the time.

Lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkkIwO_X4i4

by Mirage on 02.05.17 13:20

@Get'emGonçalo wrote:
@Mirage wrote:
@Get'emGonçalo wrote:
@Mirage wrote:Mrs Murat gkoes on to concede there was also sympathy from Kate McCann in the book towards Murat and has this to say:
Didn't Kate write that she wanted to kill Murat?
I certainly have a recollection of that GGEG. Although I don't have provenance at the moment.
Kate McCann; “I had lots of hope that there would be progress in Murat’s situation. I’m sure that he is involved and I feel like killing him, but I can’t”.

https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/07/kate-mccann-tried-everything-to-frame.html

Then she forgave the abductor.

It's a small world. winkwink

I like the "but I can't".

It seems to invite an unnecessary "because".

by NickE on 02.05.17 13:23

@Verdi wrote:
@Roidininki wrote:
Couldn't she have been the lookout in respect of something being moved as opposed to being taken from the apartment ?
Who Jane Tanner? That's who Jeremy Wilkins reckoned to see on the night of Thursday 3rd May, wearing purple!

It makes you wonder why it's taken Jenny Murat ten years to come up with this vital piece of evidence - the key to the mystery! On the eve of the 10th anniversary to boot.

Pull the other one!

I dread to think what's in store for tomorrow.

Jenny Murat came up with this 2 years ago.
Ive post a link on the previous page.

by Get'emGonçalo on 02.05.17 13:26

@sandancer wrote:Will Missus Purple be like Crechman and still have the clothes she was wearing that night 10 years ago whilst standing under a lamp post watching the apartment intently ?

Gawd help her when the cops catch up with her if she's got a pair of flip flops in her wardrobe.

by nglfi on 02.05.17 13:30

Funny how all these people keep going on about how the Madeleine case has affected them negatively, it's ruined life in Praia da Luz, yet Mrs Murat is still more than willing to give an interview to a national newspaper about it, dragging it all up again. GO AWAY!

by Roidininki on 02.05.17 13:31

@Verdi wrote:
@Roidininki wrote:
Couldn't she have been the lookout in respect of something being moved as opposed to being taken from the apartment ?
Who Jane Tanner? That's who Jeremy Wilkins reckoned to see on the night of Thursday 3rd May, wearing purple!

It makes you wonder why it's taken Jenny Murat ten years to come up with this vital piece of evidence - the key to the mystery! On the eve of the 10th anniversary to boot.

Pull the other one!

I dread to think what's in store for tomorrow.

Yes.
It seems you're accusing Jenny Murat of making things up?
Perhaps it's the journalist here making it up as she goes along ? :baffled:

by MRNOODLES on 02.05.17 13:45

@Roidininki wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Roidininki wrote:
Couldn't she have been the lookout in respect of something being moved as opposed to being taken from the apartment ?
Who Jane Tanner? That's who Jeremy Wilkins reckoned to see on the night of Thursday 3rd May, wearing purple!

It makes you wonder why it's taken Jenny Murat ten years to come up with this vital piece of evidence - the key to the mystery! On the eve of the 10th anniversary to boot.

Pull the other one!

I dread to think what's in store for tomorrow.
Yes.
It seems you're accusing Jenny Murat of making things up?
Perhaps it's the journalist here making it up as she goes along ?

Or is this just a game of tit for tat?

You accused my son and put him in the spotlight. I'll do the same to you JT.

by Phoebe on 02.05.17 13:47

Having read the Sun article it's odd that eminent forensic psychologist Mr. Berry has to cite David Canter in his piece. Am I wrong in seeming to recall that the same Mr. Canter was recently linked to the Incurable Trolls research? Funny that!

by Roidininki on 02.05.17 14:07

@MRNOODLES wrote:
@Roidininki wrote:
@Verdi wrote:
@Roidininki wrote:
Couldn't she have been the lookout in respect of something being moved as opposed to being taken from the apartment ?
Who Jane Tanner? That's who Jeremy Wilkins reckoned to see on the night of Thursday 3rd May, wearing purple!

It makes you wonder why it's taken Jenny Murat ten years to come up with this vital piece of evidence - the key to the mystery! On the eve of the 10th anniversary to boot.

Pull the other one!

I dread to think what's in store for tomorrow.
Yes.
It seems you're accusing Jenny Murat of making things up?
Perhaps it's the journalist here making it up as she goes along ?

Or is this just a game of tit for tat?

You accused my son and put him in the spotlight. I'll do the same to you JT.

Oh could anyone be so unwise ,foolish as to play that kind of game in so serious a case?

by ChippyM on 02.05.17 14:12

@Philip Anders wrote:I think I've solved it!!

It wasn't a woman wearing purple it was Gogol Bordello who has a passing resemblance to Tannerman.

It was under our noses all the time.

Lol.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkkIwO_X4i4

Not the Gypsies again! .......(gypsy punk that is. big grin

)

by liars a to e on 02.05.17 16:58

It's getting more like Cluedo every day. Professoress Plum, by the apartment with the dodgy lamppost.

by Portia on 02.05.17 17:22

1. Who now points at 'the woman in purple' as the prime suspect?

2. Jenny Murat says she saw ms Purple around 20.00 hrs. At what time did 'Jez' notice her? Do these moments match?

3. Did Jane Tanner perhaps have a vested interest in having people believe Maddie was carried of in direction A, by a man; when she in fact was carried of in direction B, by a woman?

4. Same question: did the time-line conjurors KNOW about (3) when they vectored in Janes' so called observations?

5. Could it be -hopefully- that indeed OG has now whittled away all dross from their files and is gearing up for the last leg: identifying those (very) few people left standing: the untouchables under the OG remit?

by Mirage on 02.05.17 18:10

I remember how upset Tanner was when Gerry refused to acknowledge she'd passed him and Jez in that narrow street (the Mockumentary). He even disputed what side of the road he was on, insisting he was looking at a high wall all the time he was talking to Jez..

I can't get that slip of the tongue of hers on Panorama out of my head either. "I was holding across the body like this".

What with her sighting being dismissed by Redwood and now the woman in purple "lead", I can't help wondering if something very odd is going on.

by Phoebe on 02.05.17 19:19

Jez says he set off from his apartment with the baby in the buggy at 8.30pm so it was shortly after this when he spotted Jane, wearing purple "stopped on the street in front of one of the group's apartments". I think this is also where Mrs. Murat would drive past on her way from her house to the supermarket. Oh dear! What as Jane doing, staring at the apartment so fixedly as to attract Jenny's notice? She must have been there for a full half hour if Mrs. Murat's given time is correct. In contrast Jane's rogatory claims her children weren't even in bed by 8.15 and that she was down at the tapas ready to go at eight thirty.

by sallypelt on 02.05.17 19:54

I just saw this on Twitter feed. It made ME laugh, so I thought I would post it here:

by sallypelt on 02.05.17 20:33

I'll start with the conclusion: I think this was probably the crime of the century in Portugal. On May 3, 2007, in Praia da Luz, little Madeleine disappeared to never be seen again. The case shocked the Country and the World, giving the motto for a deaf conflict between the Portuguese and English police authorities ... which still remains today!

Still we have all the images in the head: the despair of family and friends, the strange and undebatable expression of his mother, Kate McCann, asking for the return of the daughter, the solidarity of the popular, the massive police presence. A whole country startled by the sad fate of a girl who could be the daughter of any of us. After ten years of a mystery that has never been solved, doubts are more than certainties. But the hypothesis that the parents themselves, or one of the friends of the inner circle, are involved in the event, whether in an intentional or negligent way, is increasingly consistent. The research data, in my opinion, point it this way.

Why was it - and no one suffers so much from the disappearance of a daughter as her own mother - evasive answers given to the police, even responding, sometimes with disdain for police work? Why are the contradictions evident in the statements of Kate and Gerry regarding simple facts, as if they had or had not discussed the night before or if any of them had slept in the bedroom with the children? Why did the dogs smell the corpse in the van used by the McCanns?
It is possible that we are facing the crime of the century, when the disappearance or death of a girl ends without guilty, in a plot where everyone insists on barking over hidden powers or incompetent police. I leave the question: if the much acclaimed effort of the English police to find Maddie does not bear fruit, despite the fortune already invested, will not be to reopen the investigation in Portugal, putting the homicide again on the table

http://www.cmjornal.pt/opiniao/colunistas/andre-ventura/detalhe/o-crime-do-seculo