Re: Disgraced Olive Press Editor, Jon Clarke, and his THIRD version of the same story

by **PeterMac** 02.02.22 8:52

He stayed for a long time, only going home for a birthday party, during which time Lori Campbell stole his thunder and named Robert Murat without reference to him.
He was furious and tells us so in his book.

The fact that between them they organised and instigated the grossest of libels on Mr Murat, for which he received
£ 600,000 in damages is conveniently omitted from the book . Reasons of space, you understand.

EXTRACT FOR RESEARCH PURPOSES:
By Saturday May 12 – print day – we didn’t have enough to pin anything concrete to Robert Murat. It was frustrating, but we could understand the newsdesk’s requirement for caution, legally, and so we didn’t hamper the police investigation. With the story at something of a dead end, I went home, agreeing to return the following week, if needed.

I was back in Ronda with my family when Murat got arrested. In a coordinated operation, police raided his home, Casa Liliana, before 6am on Monday, May 14, and by 7am they’d entered his girlfriend Michaela’s house and three other properties that were linked to him. By the time I woke up it was all over the national news networks and Sky reporter Ian Woods was reporting live from outside Murat’s home. It looked like a massive breakthrough so it was frustrating that despite Lori and I [sic] appearing to have almost cracked the case, I was in Spain. I could only flick from channel to channel as Lori appeared on Portuguese and British TV, explaining her theories.

Clarke, Jon. MY SEARCH FOR MADELEINE: One Reporter’s 14-Year Hunt To Solve Europe’s Most Harrowing Crime (p. 49). OP Books. Kindle Edition.

It is not until page 74 that Clarke grudgingly admits he was wrong

It emerged that his lazy eye was in fact a glass eye, after he lost his in a motorbike accident as a teenager. And what I have also recently discovered is that he apparently did have clearance to work as a translator in Portugal, having worked as one in the UK before, earning £150 a time for Norfolk Police. While this was never confirmed to the press at the time – nor even the McCanns – it appears that behind the scenes he was actually sanctioned by the British Embassy in Lisbon. So, in hindsight, it looks as though Murat is innocent.

Clarke, Jon. MY SEARCH FOR MADELEINE: One Reporter’s 14-Year Hunt To Solve Europe’s Most Harrowing Crime (p. 75). OP Books. Kindle Edition.

[And of course as the whole World knows, – with the exception of Clarke who does not concern himself with things like facts or details or checking information – Mr Murat does NOT have a glass eye. He suffered a detached retina as a youth and lost the sight. As did Gordon Brown and Lord Horatio Nelson]

by Guest 02.02.22 10:50

you would expect he would not risk a second run for the laurels, and by that ending up in the pockets of the one we also know as cb.

the 600.000 pounds it was i think, for murat from the british courts, must be a nightmare, if some nice civil lawyer finds a way to see his book as meant to serve the british market for sale. could be the reason he did not do very much promoting inside the uk borders, when cb never get the rank of suspect and told guilty by the courts.

if of course it is indeed a true story he and lori, instead of lori almost solved this case. and nor him, nor lori did exactly such a thing.

how he talks it serves a nice insight in his way of thinking, is doesn't matter if the case is solved, or who plays the rol of suspect or perp fitted in his definitions, as long as he had his juicy steak from it, is all that matters. forget his musings about the holy parents, they are just his material to work from. what child is not important.
again a book that is about the writer, nothing else to see.

but he must be scared already, and his return of his input in the cb part could hardly made a profit. he is still at risk for pay outs to a criminal, and i can see how this all could escalated into flustering unnamed sources. most people do learn, after a narrow escape, not this one.

it was quite a lesson to set your bets on the wrong horse, so could we fit his way of doing under the term obsession?

i must say, in the docu from jutta the editor of that piece knows how to solve a problem named jon clarke, he nmust have had a contract to be in it, so every time we got to see him in a space they normally fit in something as a bit of street life, or a church, we got him. he got a bit like the part the chicken usually plays in the cans of chicken soup, before they want to dipping in, the lid is placed.
it looks like the ladies around him, knows how to keep their elbow position in place.

by **PeterMac** 02.02.22 17:53

I think I get what yo are saying, but Clarke was not involved in the libel action

He and Campbell set Murat up, the PJ acted, then the British Press libelled him and it was the Sun and the Mail and others who had to pay the 600,000
Clarke obviously made a lot of money out of it and his house renovations probably reflect this sudden income.
Not known what Campbell did with hers.

Clarke had previously made a small fortune from the libel on Nicole Kidman and Jude Law. Against it wasn't him in his paper, so he bought his house, and boasts about it in his book

by Silentscope 02.02.22 18:36

Clarke made no mention of all the various attempts by people to smear or implicate Robert Murat in the SAT1 production. It was not just him and Lori Campbell that brought Murat into the frame.

The PJ received Information from various unidentified sources.

This was all obviously Orchestrated, and Brückner was not the Conductor in the Orchestra.

Disgraced Olive Press Editor, Jon Clarke, and his THIRD version of the same story