Mr & Mrs Robert Murat: live in Lagos and had a 'fantastic' world cruise earlier this year

Jean wrote:I'd certainly be happier if, in view of the unanswered questions about Robert Murat in connection with the McCanns, he didn't boast about the lifestyle that he now has.

Tony Bennett wrote:Robert Murat – update

Robet Murat keeps us all up-to-date on Facebook with details of his happily married new life with Mrs Michaela Murat (formerly Walczuk).

They appear, from his FB page, to have a new home together in Lagos, where he apparently owns a computer shop and business. By now, one presumes, he may have worked out how encrypted material ends up on one’s home computer – a ridle he was unable to solve when questioned by police about Madeleine’s disppearance in 2007.

With the benefit of his £600,000-plus gains from being libelled, and an additional £100,000 to his bride-to-be Michaela, the couple (they got married in April 2009) were able to enjoy a fairy-tale world cruise on the Queen Mary II at the beginning of the year.

Stop-off points on the cruise included Dubia, the United Arab Emirates, Capetown, Western Cape, KwaZulu-Naral and Durban in South Africa, and Fremantle and Perth in Western Australia.

“A fantastic trip”, exulted Robert.

His brother Richard Murat, however, lives a more humble existence, working in a branch of Tescos in the English town of Warwick.

It’s an ill wind that blows nobody any good...

LuzLady wrote:Hi all,

I am just wondering if the Smethursts (Edward Smethurt's FIRST of his three families that is) called in to see the Murats in Lagos on their recent month-long holiday (their 14th) in Praia da Luz? - which, sadly for them, ends today.

It was only as recently as 10th August that the first-born of Smethurst's six children - Annabel - tweeted to the world:

Excited to go to Lagos tonight, literally having the best time ever in Portugal



P.S. I hear that Ed Smethurst is a fan of Pixie Lott!!!

Lance De Boils wrote:Any idea where they stay when they holiday there? Smethursts, that is.

Châtelaine wrote:Somehow the images of the previous post are not working. At least not for me on my Apple-approved iMac ...

Olive_Boyle wrote:Or you could look at it another way and think good for him after what they put him through. [...] Its no-one elses business how he spends it.

tigger wrote:QUOTE

“We should see a man, who is angry, violated, misunderstood and unjustly treated”.

She continues: “Is this what we see when we watch Murat speak here? Absolutely not. What we see, instead, is a man who is enjoying the spotlight. You'd think in this interview that Murat was sitting down for an afternoon tea, and not a serious conversation about how his life was ruined. He is enjoying speculating and bantering about this whole scenario as if it had no implications for him, yet he readily acknowledges he is still a suspect.

UNQUOTE

Jean wrote:Tony, perhaps it's because some people simply aren't aware of the doubts about Robert Murat, the same as others who only know what the media tells them about the McCanns.

Tony Bennett wrote:[ ...] But I'm afraid even this accurate analysis of Murat won't change the views of the likes of Olive_Boyle and Chatelaine who, Nelson-like, put a telescope to their blind eye and say: "I see no problems whatsoever with Murat's actions, I only see a saint who has been treated terribly"

jd wrote:Obviously not bothered about what may lie in Casa Liliana's backyard then

Olive_Boyle wrote: Or you could look at it another way and think good for him after what they put him through. [...] Its no-one elses business how he spends it.

Chatelaine wrote:: I agree.

Tony Bennett responded: "But I'm afraid even this accurate analysis of Murat won't change the views of the likes of Oliv:e_Boyle and Chatelaine who, Nelson-like, put a telescope to their blind eye and say: 'I see no problems whatsoever with Murat's actions, I only see a saint who has been treated terribly'"

Chatelaine wrote:I resent that comment, Tony. I really do. I have no idea why you would want to come down on me, as we [the two of us] have never, ever discussed Murat in detail. And I would appreciate, if you wouldn't do that again, until we'd have had the chance to go into detail as to what a possible involvement of a Mr. Robert Murat might have been in the case of Doctors McCann. I have been on fora since 5 years and have a wide and ready knowledge about this case. I have my ideas, prognoses, and I have my doubts. That's not necessarily something I would vent at n'importe which occasion, but I'm always ready for debate/discussion/analysis/theory, if you know what I mean.

Tony Bennett responded: Chatelaine, these are the facts:

1. Olive_Boyle said: "Good for him after what they put him through". INTERPRETATION: He's the wholly innocent victim of outrageous libels and deserves every hundred grand he can get

2. Olive_Boyle also said: "It's no-one else's business how he spends it

3. You (Chatelaine) said, emphatically: "I agree".

Unless I've minsinterpreted you, you agree with OLive_Boyle's view that 'they' put an innocenet man through the wringer, Murat deserves every pound going, and it's none of anyone's business how he spent it.

Now let's recall that this is about a British girl who went missing in circumstances which the spokesman for the Doctors McCann, Clarence Mitchell, described as 'a complete mystery' - hence the forum-owner's decision to name this forum as she has done.

Now let's also recall just one of the nine concerning things that I summarised about Murat on another thread recently, namely this: He lied 17 times when first questioned by Portuguese Police (on 14 May) about his movements between arriving in Portugal early on 1 May and 4 May. As is documented in the released Portuguese Police files, he changed his original story 17 times when re-questioned on 10 and 11 July - basically because by then the Portuguese Police had analysed his mobile 'phone pings and knew he wasn't telling the truth. He lied about his movements on the three days before the moment Murat was reported missing.

Despite the above and all the other items of concern - like the meeting he had with his lawyer and Brian kennedy and Edward Smethurst on 13 November 2007 - you agree that his £600,000-plus and his world cruise are: "good for him after what they put him through...and no-one else's business...".

I rest my case, Chatelaine, but nevertheless, as you've confirmed that you're "always ready for debate/discussion/analysis/theory", I look forward to continuing that debate [i.e. re Murat] amicably with you.

Châtelaine wrote:Tony, he got his money, that's what I agreed to. I will not question how he's spending it. That's immaterial.
I don't turn a blind eye to anything in this case, to the contrary. I'm just careful in stating what I believe or, as for that matter, what I imagine might be the case. I'm well versed on statements and PJ documents and TV and paper interviews. I know to a certain extent how to analyse statements and body language ... and the only thing I am confident in so far, is that "they" must know what happened. Nothing more than that. And as long as I'm not sure, I may post some IMO's at the max. And keep watching ...

Spaniel wrote:

jd wrote:Obviously not bothered about what may lie in Casa Liliana's backyard then

I'm shocked. I thought you were far more intilligent than that jd.

tigger wrote:
Asked to comment on his libel victory, Murat declared, on SKY TV, and reading from a prepared text: “The newspapers in this case brought about the total and utter destruction of mine and my family’s life, and caused immense distress”.