Clarence

If robert murat is involved in the case, why did 3 Tapas recognize him? I would expect them to protect him like they were protecting themselves and the McCanns.
Pointing him as a potential perpetrator, and if he was Tapas 10, it would mean a terrible risk to Tapas 9.

Perhaps there are inconsistences in his statements but it does not mean he was involved.Some people are not able to repeat the same  story without changing it.
My husband was like that.

(asking v politely) marconi / sally... do you have a reasonable explanation for the following then please?


It seems to me that the whole thing could be cleared up with the answer to one simple question, what did Robert Murat mean when he said

"“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"

Taken from the madelinefoundation website

Why call yourself the victim of the biggest ef up on this planet if your innocent and you have no REAL knowledge of a situation to which you could become victim?

What exactly is "the biggest ef up on this planet" solely in regards to this case of course ? and does he have the answer?

cockerspaniel wrote:(asking v politely) marconi / sally... do you have a reasonable explanation for the following then please?


It seems to me that the whole thing could be cleared up with the answer to one simple question, what did Robert Murat mean when he said

"“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"

Taken from the madelinefoundation website

Why call yourself the victim of the biggest ef up on this planet if your innocent and you have no REAL knowledge of a situation to which you could become victim?

What exactly is "the biggest ef up on this planet" solely in regards to this case of course ? and does he have the answer?

I've never been able to work out what he meant by that comment, and I also recall him saying that there was a lot more to come out (which never happened.

tasprin wrote:

cockerspaniel wrote:(asking v politely) marconi / sally... do you have a reasonable explanation for the following then please?


It seems to me that the whole thing could be cleared up with the answer to one simple question, what did Robert Murat mean when he said

"“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"

Taken from the madelinefoundation website

Why call yourself the victim of the biggest ef up on this planet if your innocent and you have no REAL knowledge of a situation to which you could become victim?

What exactly is "the biggest ef up on this planet" solely in regards to this case of course ? and does he have the answer?

I've never been able to work out what he meant by that comment, and I also recall him saying that there was a lot more to come out (which never happened.

Always intrigued me too.  It's like nobody dare be the first one to take their finger out of the dam.  A lot of innuendoes but nothing concrete

Finn wrote:According to Kate it was CM who put himself forward for the job. But I found it strange that from the very start the parents of a missing child would need (and paid for) a media monitoring service. Surely searching for Madeleine is a lot more important than searching through words?

Perusing some 'old' material I came across this interesting article which imo shows clearly how the spin was deployed. What needed to be pushed off the front pages at the time were the rogatory interviews/refusal to do the reconstruction/non-participation of the McCanns in the rogatories. The 'Amber Alert' campaign is used as well as a fitting excuse.
Here we have Mitchell spinning for all he's worth and taking it all personally..


Portuguese police accuse McCanns' spokesman Clarence Mitchell of 'lying through his teeth' Daily Mail (Updated version from report yesterday) 
 
By VANESSA ALLEN
Last updated at 12:16pm on 15th April 2008
 
The hunt for Madeleine McCann was engulfed in a war of words yesterday as Portuguese police criticised her parents' spokesman.
 
Detectives denied Clarence Mitchell's claims that police had deliberately leaked statements from Kate and Gerry McCann and said they regretted his 'baseless intervention'.
 
In an astonishing attack today Portuguese police union chief Carlos Anjos told respected Portuguese daily Jornal de Noticias: "Mr Mitchell wants to discredit the Policia Judiciaria and invent excuses so the McCanns do not come to Portugal to participate in the reconstruction of the night she disappeared.
 
"He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth.
 
"Finally we know what side truth is on.
 
"While the Policia Judiciaria were fulfilling their duty of investigating what happened to Madeleine, her parents' spokesman was manipulating public opinion."
 
The outspoken head of Portugal's Police Federation, who has previously claimed his force has better things to do than look for Madeleine McCann, added: "The person who hatched a plan was Clarence Mitchell.
 
"He needed to find an excuse for the McCanns not to take part in the reconstitution, saying that he doesn't trust the Policia Judiciaria."
 
In an extraordinary turn of events, Anjos told Jornal de Noticias his union was offering advice to officers who felt they had been identified by Mr Mitchell's leak claims and wanted to take legal action.
 
Yesterday, in a rare public statement - only the fifth in the 11-month investigation - the Policia Judiciaria said Mr Mitchell should not have spoken out, because the police operation had reached a 'significant' stage.
 
But last night Mr Mitchell insisted he stands by his claims that the statements were 'shamelessly' leaked to overshadow the McCanns' high-profile visit to the European Parliament to promote a missing child alert campaign last week.
 
Coverage of the visit was dominated by the revelations that on the morning of May 3, just hours before she disappeared from the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz, Madeleine asked her mother: "Mummy, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?"
 
Mr Mitchell said: "I'm not retracting a word of what I said. The Portuguese police have yet to explain how these statements came to be leaked.
 
"Their criticism of me doesn't explain how that confidential material came to be made public, and with very curious timing."
 
He warned police last week that 'the gloves were off' following the leaking of the couple's police statements, and branded the leak 'brazen, shameless and cackhanded'.
 
Detectives hit back yesterday after a meeting between the head of the investigation, Paulo Rebelo, and public prosecutor Jose Cunha Magalhaes e Menezes.
 
In a statement posted on the force's website, a spokesman said: "The spokesman for the couple, Clarence Mitchell, publicly expressed the view to diverse media outlets, that he was certain the Policia Judiciaria was responsible for the leaks.
 
"The PJ want to make it clear that it is entirely false that this report included material from the inquiry, which is covered by the secrecy of justice.
 
"The PJ regrets the baseless intervention of the spokesman, above all at a moment when significant moves were being made in the investigation."
 
The police refused to reveal what was meant by 'significant moves'.
 
There has been speculation that the named suspects in the case, the McCanns and British expatriate Robert Murat, could be cleared soon. They have always denied any involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.
 
Mr Mitchell said: "We had hoped the meeting (between Mr Rebelo and the prosecutor) would result in something positive, not in them trying to blame me.
 
"I don't want to get into a row with them. None of this helps to find Madeleine. We just want them to concentrate on that."
 
Since the disappearance of Madeleine - who would now be four - the police have refused to comment on their investigation on an almost daily basis.
 
Police in Portugal supposedly operate under strict secrecy laws which ban officers, witnesses or suspects from speaking about ongoing investigations.
 
But in practice the laws have meant there have been a series of anonymous leaks and wild allegations from inside the police operation.
 
The McCanns' wealthy benefactor Brian Kennedy hired Mr Mitchell in September, in part to counter the anti-McCann smears circulating in Portugal.
 
The 46-year-old former BBC correspondent was initially sent to Portugal by the Foreign Office in May, to help the couple deal with the intense media interest in their daughter's disappearance.
 
He forged a close bond with the McCanns, both doctors from Rothley, Leicestershire, and quit his job with the Government's media monitoring unit to become their full-time spokesman, on a reported £75,000-a-year salary.
 
Meanwhile, Portuguese police have yet to make any official comment about the outcome of last week's interviews with the 'Tapas Seven', the friends who dined with the McCanns on the night Madeleine vanished.

unquote

Châtelaine wrote:There can be many reasons for people to be economical with the truth. And it's sometimes trying to hide something which has no direct relation with the subject case, but on the other hand is not always completely unrelated either. To give you an example [hypothetical]: a lot of people in stressful jobs [celebrity entertainers, politicians, medics, e.g. cardiologists] do for the benefit of relaxation tend to drink and use recreational drugs [e.g. cocaine]; something which is not freely available on holiday abroad and can absolutely not be taken on a plane ... Enter stage left: the "dauphin" of PdL, as a friend of mine in Portugal once described Murat, the man who knew everyone and everything ... Just saying ...

Yeap, great mind thinks alike.  I didn't care say it but agree totally with you.  
He's the "go to" guy  who knew everyone and everything; and if you need a bit of help here and there for this and that, he's the guy you go to.  

And his reason for being economical with the truth may have nothing to do with the crime in question, but his co-relation in other aspect  to those main players may have serious implications for him.  
Side trading quick profit is only good if one can get away with it.
If truth be told he might drag others name  into the mud, that have nothing to do with the crime against the missing child, but nonetheless will get some other people into trouble, hence the need to be economical with the truth.

marconi wrote:If robert murat is involved in the case, why did 3 Tapas recognize him? I would expect them to protect him like they were protecting themselves and the McCanns.
Pointing him as a potential perpetrator, and if he was Tapas 10, it would mean a terrible risk to Tapas 9.

Perhaps there are inconsistences in his statements but it does not mean he was involved.Some people are not able to repeat the same  story without changing it.
My husband was like that.

My gut feeling is they pointed at him because they know he's hiding a secret (nothing to do with Madeleine), but if Police were to get wind of it he will be in deep shit dragging a few with him. Hence they know even if they fingered him he would do nothing against them.

PeterMac wrote:

suzyjohnson wrote:I have always wondered just what Clarence was doing getting involved with all this. Having just read a bit about his background, now I think I know, who is best placed for all the inside story irrespective of whether Madeleine is found alive, or whether some other evidence surfaces regarding who is responsible for her disappearance, or whether the McCanns themselves were involved. Oh yes, it's Clarence, ready to cash in, whatever the outcome, he can't lose in that respect can he?

I think he can.   He never, so far as I know used the form of words "The McCanns want me to say on their behalf . . ., or The McCanns want to make it clear . .   or The Mccanns wish to deny  . . ."
He always spoke in the first person, as if he had the evidence and the knowledge of what he was saying.
If and only IF, evidence surfaces about who was really responsible, I think he can and should be taken to the cleaners.
Even investigated for attempting to pervert, or obstruction.

I wonder why a professional former bbc spokesperson was ever needed at all. Gerry was blogging away in his own right and the Macs gave tv interviews and press conferences/statements themselves both at the outset and right up to a few weeks ago. What motivated Clarence to take the job?  If a professional spokesperson was sought after, why did it have to be someone whose profile was so high, why not an adequate experienced publicity or pr person. Who, if anyone, might have pointed Clarence in the direction of that role? Was he ordered to take on the role? Why would anyone such as that offer their services out of sympathy when it could easily turn out to be a right poisoned chalice and destroy his own reputation in the process. Why would he take that risk? He cannot be a naive man. So why? I can't understand why a member of the family could not have acted as the family spokesperson, especially since didn't one of them give up his job to help? Clarence is the one who sticks out like a sore thumb in this case, whereas an ordinary family spokesperson wouldn't have seemed as odd. Just my opinion.

Is it possible that Clarence Mitchell has some guilty secrets to hide of his own regarding something to do with Madeleine? And the best way to hide these secrets was to become the McCanns' spokesman? All pure speculation on my part...

canada12 wrote:Is it possible that Clarence Mitchell has some guilty secrets to hide of his own regarding something to do with Madeleine? And the best way to hide these secrets was to become the McCanns' spokesman? All pure speculation on my part...

Certainly possible and/or a VIP could possibly  be very grateful to him for protecting them

If an Oppenheimer was staying there then it's not out of the realms of possibility for other well connected people to be staying there

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]"

Gerry looking staunch, resolute - holding his bewildered wife firmly by the hand.

Clarence taking charge...

Just what is it he is helping the McCanns to try to cover up?

In this instance, I would suggest the gate to the family's home :

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]"

My interpretations only...

Why would the gate to Rothley Towers need to be covered up?

I can think of plenty of things that do need covering up but the gate is innocent!

sally66 wrote:

tasprin wrote:

cockerspaniel wrote:(asking v politely) marconi / sally... do you have a reasonable explanation for the following then please?


It seems to me that the whole thing could be cleared up with the answer to one simple question, what did Robert Murat mean when he said

"“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"

Taken from the madelinefoundation website

Why call yourself the victim of the biggest ef up on this planet if your innocent and you have no REAL knowledge of a situation to which you could become victim?

What exactly is "the biggest ef up on this planet" solely in regards to this case of course ? and does he have the answer?

I've never been able to work out what he meant by that comment, and I also recall him saying that there was a lot more to come out (which never happened.

Always intrigued me too.  It's like nobody dare be the first one to take their finger out of the dam.  A lot of innuendoes but nothing concrete

I think  that RM was promised a nice payout for his 'help' and this was achieved. He probably had to promise to not reveal anything in order to get the payout. We wont hear from him again. He is happy with however many 100's of thousands that he received. (was it 600k)

I'm sorry about going off at a tangent here. Who would actually be likely to 'talk'?
Not RM - he has had a nice pay off. Not the people who are being protected by the government, obviously.

Possible but doubtful - if someone was going to talk they would have done it by now.
Only when they start feeling under pressure will someone talk. And Op Grange dont seem to be applying pressure   

Someone from the Private Investigators used
Ocean Club Member
Nanny
TAPAS 9 - not unless they suddenly start feeling the pressure.
UK Policeman
Clarence

He hasn't disappeared yet, HM.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:He hasn't disappeared yet, HM.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

No! Thanks for the link- and amazingly Rolf-like

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Why would the gate to Rothley Towers need to be covered up?

I can think of plenty of things that do need covering up but the gate is innocent!

The cross bars on the McCann's sturdy wooden gates are to me, reminiscent of the square and compass symbol.

Perhaps such a potential visual allusion may have been required to be gently obscured...?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

'Ladies and gentlemen of the press. Before I introduce the latest two members of The Pussycat Dolls, could I just give you my rendition of Moon River? Thank you.'

missbeetle wrote:

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Why would the gate to Rothley Towers need to be covered up?

I can think of plenty of things that do need covering up but the gate is innocent!

The cross bars on the McCann's sturdy wooden gates are to me, reminiscent of the square and compass symbol.

Perhaps such a potential visual allusion may have been required to be gently obscured...?

They do indeed missbeetle, you have such an eye for detail  . Well Rothley did contain a manor of the Knights Templar so we can allow them a bit of civic pride...


I would have thought that the myserious extended garage would be far more interesting thou.  Wonder what goes on in there ...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].


Just wondering it anyone has any thoughts, or info on this link? It is the Parisio Restaurant.

If you magnify the picture you can read the words underlined in red.

Is it saying that Clarence Mitchel was there with the McCann's on the 3rd May?

Is it for real?

That certainly is what it appears to say - a mistake, maybe?

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Why would the gate to Rothley Towers need to be covered up?

I can think of plenty of things that do need covering up but the gate is innocent!

The clip should carry the disclaimer 'no gates have been harmed in the making of this news item but the same can't be said of the innocent 3 year old without whom the world would not have been subjected to the sight of her parents, her other relatives, and the limited company's spinmerchant, hamming it up for the camera'.

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:That certainly is what it appears to say - a mistake, maybe?

Or maybe not!

The Manager was convinced that the McCann's were there in the restaurant on the 3rd May, so much that he handed over the tape to prove it. He states that GM danced with Madeleine on the sand.

Lets look at this in more depth.

Everything we are told about the 3rd may is designed to have us believe that Madeleine is alive and well,
such as the crying story and the tea stain.
KM also has to put forward a story that she was bitten by a dog whilst running to give the illusion that she was not on the beach at the Parisio. I believe that everything we are told about the 3rd, by the whole group, is one big lie. Imo madeleine sadly died late on the Tuesday night/ early Wednesday morning.

On the 3rd the routine changes, according to the McC's. They put Madeleine in the crèche...err... no they don't. GM signs in another child pretending to be his child. See crèche sheet. Possibly there were rows on this day about what to do. Kate and her bruised wrists are testament that there was some kind of conflict, physical conflict.
Did GM say he could sort it, so no need to confess?  All those frantic phone calls early Wednesday morning, was this getting help, I suggest that Clarence Mitchell was involved from this moment.

Back to the Parisio beach and Restaurant, I believe that the McCann's were there on the beach, if you study the black and white photo's it could be KM that you see in a couple of the pictures on the beach, possibly the twins also. Perhaps they were there waiting for CM. Perhaps CM flew out to PDL on the 3rd to assist in the cover up. Perhaps the plan was hatched there in the Parisio for Thursday night to be the time of the faked abduction. 

Look at the Parisio beach photo's in the McCannfiles. Sorry can't seem to upload them. Either fourth or fifth one down looks like KM. another could have the twins.

Perhaps the Manager was correct and the McCann's were really there, waiting for CM, though Madeleine was not. It could be that GM was dancing with Ella O'Brien instead as she could be taken for Madeleine.

The McCann's and their friends had to appear neglectful on Thursday night to make the plan work. I think that the twins were in another apartment being looked after. They were hastily returned after the alarm, hence, no sheets on the mattresses. The other give away is the position they slept in, on their fronts, both in the exact same position. Possibly sedated.
 
Another thought, remember the British couple who saw a black package being loaded onto a jetski very early the next day? It went out to a grey 'official looking boat'.
 

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

Hey Hicks -

The Telegraph article you cited - where the couple were over in PdL visiting relatives -

I looked up Patrick Matthews - it would seem he is a healer from Exeter and ex-professional sportsman.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Although he now seems to live in Biarritz as the director of a company called EQ-Love...

Interesting, though - that Devon connection again.

missbeetle wrote:Hey Hicks -

The Telegraph article you cited - where the couple were over in PdL visiting relatives -

I looked up Patrick Matthews - it would seem he is a healer from Exeter and ex-professional sportsman.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Although he now seems to live in Biarritz as the director of a company called EQ-Love...

Interesting, though - that Devon connection again.

Weird.......all roads lead to Devon!

The couple who did not want to be named.Hello spokesman for Kate and Gerry

Wouldn't that be terrible if cm was there on the 3rd? It deffo says cm!  NFWTD, what happened to Kirsten? Lol!

Could that 2-3ft black bundle be something being shipped back to uk?

Just remember this:

When your child goes missing, what you need most of all is a Media Monitoring Unit.

Yep.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

 
Hicks,
 
I assume this is the photo you are looking at, referring to the person standing on the beach below the left hand umbrella.
 
This person is still in shot at 17.46.07.
The men (exc. GM) ‘leave for tennis’ at 18.13.53.
DW & FP are still seated at 18.36.08, with RO & JT looking as though they are preparing to leave.
 
As with all things McCann, it would be interesting to see the whole sequence of photos that presumably the PJ had, right up to DW & FP actually leaving, together with verification of the time stamps from the camera.
 
Was ‘mystery person’ anything to do with the party?
Could it have been KM?
Was GM &/or twins anywhere in site at any time?
Any evidence of anyone waving to KM ‘on her run’?
What time did DW & FP leave, how long does it take to wander back with buggies & how does it tie up with her ‘bathing kids’ timeline?
 
 [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Doug D wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

 
Hicks,
 
I assume this is the photo you are looking at, referring to the person standing on the beach below the left hand umbrella.
 
This person is still in shot at 17.46.07.
The men (exc. GM) ‘leave for tennis’ at 18.13.53.
DW & FP are still seated at 18.36.08, with RO & JT looking as though they are preparing to leave.
 
As with all things McCann, it would be interesting to see the whole sequence of photos that presumably the PJ had, right up to DW & FP actually leaving, together with verification of the time stamps from the camera.
 
Was ‘mystery person’ anything to do with the party?
Could it have been KM?
Was GM &/or twins anywhere in site at any time?
Any evidence of anyone waving to KM ‘on her run’?
What time did DW & FP leave, how long does it take to wander back with buggies & how does it tie up with her ‘bathing kids’ timeline?
 
 [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Hi Doug D, in this photo it looks like the same person, a female that has Kate's build. Looks like the person could be using a mobile, texting perhaps. I am convinced that it is KM. 

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

Perhaps the McCann's had to stay on the beach to meet CM otherwise they would have be caught on film.