Sunday December 2,2012
By James Murray
A MOTHER whose son was wrongly linked to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has hit out at the way he is portrayed in a best-selling book about the mystery.
Briton Robert Murat was cleared of any involvement in the case four years ago but Kate McCann’s book Madelaine, about her missing daughter, has brought back painful memories for Jenny Murat, 76.
Having seen the McCanns’ suffering at the hands of the British press highlighted in last week’s Leveson report, she is anxious to stress her son’s total innocence.
She and Robert had hoped their nightmare would end in 2008 when he won £600,000 damages from British newspapers, but last night at her home on the Algarve, Mrs Murat spoke of how still the “tragedy consumes us, day in, day out”.
The widow and former nurse said: “Kate of all people should know what it is like to be wrongly accused, so how can she be comfortable repeating wrong allegations about my son in her book?”
In the book published last summer, Kate wrote: “Two officers talked openly about Robert Murat, who remained an arguido [suspect] and drip-fed us snippets of ‘evidence’ linking him to Madeleine.”
However, later in the book she writes: “Nothing we were told by the police indicated Murat took Madeleine or was in any way involved in her abduction.” Mrs Murat argues: “Surely it would have been wiser not to mention the allegations from the outset if there was ‘nothing relevant’.”
The police spotlight fell on Robert 11 days after Madeleine vanished from the McCanns’ holiday apartment in Praia de Luz, Portugal in May 2007.
Mrs Murat said: “Robert was at my home throughout that night and thankfully that is now fully accepted as fact. He did not leave once.”
She feels Robert, too, should have been called to give evidence to the Leveson inquiry.
She explained: “Again we were denied an opportunity to put our side of the story. Robert was the subject of a most disgraceful character assassination, yet was not even invited to contribute to the debate. His life has been hugely damaged. This tragedy consumes us, day in, day out.
She added: “Kate’s book and the resulting publicity did not help. I do feel sympathetic towards the McCanns and obviously wish they could find their daughter. We can’t fathom the hell they must go through but they seem oblivious to the impact all this has had on our lives and the lives of others.
“We tried our best to help, but have ended being pilloried and abused and still it goes on.”
Mrs Murat, now working on her own book about the case, added: “I am sick of all the half-truths and innuendos, so I do want a full and accurate record of the truth. It is important that our story is told.”
And what do the Black Hats have to say about this in their little, tiny, and getting tinier, corner of the internet? It seems they don't feel sympathetic towards the elderly lady:
"Re: Express: Murat's Mum Complains About Kate McCann's Book
bb1 Yesterday at 11:26 am
I think young Robert might want to keep his mum away from reporters.....she seems blissfully unaware that he is a co-signatory of assorted legal documents, along with the McCanns and others.
Did he actually submit evidence to Leveson in the first place? I don't recall him doing so, but he got a special mention anyway:
Mr Robert Murat was wrongly accused of being involved in some way in the abduction and
was traduced in the British press
I will believe Mrs Murat is writing a book when I see it; I can see her son confiscating her keyboard/typewriter/pen before she drops him in it even further.
That's like one of James Murray's wierd and wonderful interviews with Lovely Sofa."
What strikes me the most and find so interesting is the phrase "she drops him in it even further". So he was always in it. Mum's just dropping him even further.
These bothersome elderly ladies from PdL. They seemed such great assets at the time but time has come to prove them to be such liabilities...
Mais uma que via escrever um livro?
ReplyDeleteAchei particularmente interessante esta observação da senhora: " we tried our best to help, but have ended being pilloried and abused and still it goes on"
Será isto o assumir de alguma coisa? É que oficialmente sabe-se que Murat foi tradutor para a PJ mas não creio que se considere isso ajudar, porque provavelmente foi um trabalho remunerado. E porquê "we"? É agora que vai contar porque montou uma barraca para procurar informações que só deviam ser dadas à policia?
O certo é que quem quer que tenha esconddido o corpo teve de ter a ajuda de alguém residente próximo do local do crime e Murat falhou um importante Passo na sua inocência ao não processar Jane Tanner e outros Tapas 7 que o colocaram no Ocean Club na noite de 3 de Maio.
Venha o livro. Pode ser que seja tão interessante como o da Kate que nem teve volume II. Não o comprei, mas nos estratos publicados por bloggers dá para ver como o desaparecimento da filha se tornou numa fonte de inspiração..... Para mais mentiras. Agora vem aí mais uma versão da noite de 3 de Maio e dos dias que se seguiram? Que número é? Perdi a conta mas isso é irrelevante quando a realidade permite tanta ficção.
ReplyDeleteRelevante é o facto de ainda não ter havido uma reacção do Casal ou do seu Homem, ao artigo deste post. Silêncio quanto baste, é a melhor resposta quando o assunto não lhes convém...ou Será que convém e este não é mais que o resultado de um jogo de bastidores com a idade e a imagem da senhora a representar a melhor campanha de marketing a favor de uma velha lenda que é preciso reavivar...a do papão que chega de noite e leva crianças sem deixar rasto? É que a velha senhora podia ter sido omissa numa idéia que ressalta logo a meus olhos....a de mostrar simpatia pela dor de Kate e esperar que ela reencontre a filha....viva. Há um cuidado especial na mensagem, para não chatiar os McCann e para passar a idéia de Maddie viva. Porquê se a senhora vive no Algarve, mesmo ao lado da cena do crime e esteve no teatro de operações, a ver o trabalho da policia desde o primeiro minuto? Sabe com certeza que há indicios fortes a apontarem para a morte da criança no 5A. Então porquê este desabafo em género de queixa com um apoio encriptado? Ah, já sei.... Em Rothley trabalha-se forte no sentido de que um moribundo pedöfilo tenha levado consigo para a eternidade um segredo diabólico relegando para os McCann a busca eterna da criança....viva. um end of story que serve os interesses de todos quantos estarão envolvidos e se sentem ameaçados pelo trabalho de investigação feito por gente anónima ( ou não) que conseguiu interpretas files da PJ e a poluição feita pelos potenciais suspeitos, à volta da investigação . É a velha arma...tentemos calá-los antes que eles nos calem. Parece que um bébé no reino de sua majestade, resolveu estragar os planos e retirar-lhes protagonismo- é o bébé real, a encher todas as páginas dos jornais, relegando Kate, Murat e Jenny para o lixo mediático que já nem serve para o jornalismo de encher chouriço.
Parabéns aos futuros papás e ao povo inglês que não se revê nesta charada chamada McCann. Kate deve estar a odiar a outra Kate que lhe tirou protagonismo.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4678003/Hacked-Off-petition-to-enforce-Levesons-proposals-is-hijacked.html#ixzz2DytymPlv
ReplyDeleteAh, Ah, the Petition flooded with fake names, including Mickey Mouse.
Following the recipe of Madeleine Petition settled by her parents to reopen the case?
Weake up Britain, this guys want to rull the country under their exceptional methods.
Insane, did you finnish your report? Any doubts that who falsifies petitions also could ask a journalist to enlarge a ordinary patio table in to a BRT?
Your friends are at the top of the Petition and enpowered by a fake petition tried to pressure the PM to do the right thing. What is the right thing for a group who seems to drive their lives always on the wrong side of the road?
Nenhum jornal portugues deu espaco ao casal desgostoso com o voltface de Cameron. Tambem parecem nao estar muito interessados nas lamechas de Jenny. Nem mesmo o tabloid que deu tempo de antena as 'Birch'aradas.
ReplyDeleteQue chatice....a sra nao publicita o livro e os outros dois nao se fazem de vitimas para enganar mais uns otarios e tentarem encaixar uns euritos no Fundo. Agora, ate as migalhas contam e sao bem vindas.
Kate tried everything to accuse Murat -Correio da Manhã
ReplyDeleteKate's notebooks - McCanns and friends against the Anglo-Portuguese
29 July 2008
Thanks to 'astro' for translation
Madeleine McCann's mother engaged in collecting indicia that would lead to the accusation of the Anglo-Portuguese [man] over the little girl's disappearance
Kate McCann bet everything into blaming Robert Murat over the disappearance of her daughter, and it was with that purpose in mind and with the help of friends that she engaged in collecting evidence and in convincing the Polícia Judiciária of the Anglo-Portuguese [man's] involvement.
On the day that Murat is made an arguido, already after friends of the McCanns referred his presence in the surroundings of the apartment on the evening of the disappearance of Madeleine to the authorities, Kate registered in her notes that she had become "very hopeful, excited about this".
Three weeks later, Kate, who met frequently with the PJ during the investigation, writes that "Robert Murat continues to be the main suspect". "For good reason", she adds, lamenting that there is not "strong evidence".
When three of the friends are called to the PJ to repeat their statements following contradictions about the presence of Murat at the Ocean Club, on the 11th of July, Kate tries to excuse her friends with the fact that they were questioned in the presence of the Anglo-Portuguese [man]: "What happened was that they were questioned in the room, sitting beside Murat and his lawyer. He apparently said that they were lying, which made them quite angry. They started thinking that he was certainly involved. What was he hiding???"
In her notes dated July 18, almost two months after Maddie's disappearance and at a time when there are starting to appear indicia against the McCanns, Kate sounds disheartened and reinforces the accusations against Murat: "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". Nine days later, Madeleine's mother receives a message from a woman that tells her that Murat tried to photograph the granddaughter of a friend, also three years old and blond, and Kate sends "the whole" information to the PJ. "I'm certain that he is guilty and I just want to scream", she writes on the 27th of July.
Premonition with Malinka
Sergey Malinka, aged 23, had been living in Praia da Luz for eight years. He was a friend of Robert Murat – one of the first suspects of the disappearance of Madeleine – and he ended up becoming involved in the turmoil of suspects because he was the last person to contact the Anglo-Portuguese [man] after the child disappeared. He was also close to Murat because he set up the online page for Romigen – the company that belonged to the Anglo-Portuguese and to Michaela Walczuch.
Although Malinka was only heard as a witness, he ended up becoming involved in the abduction. The questioning was hard and outside the PJ, the agents' irritation could be heard because the questions remained unanswered. His phone was tapped, just like Murat's, but nothing relevant was detected.
In her notes, Kate refers to Malinka as one of the persons involved in the little girl's abduction.
(read more)
Source: JillForum
Sorry Textusa to bring here the link to another site, but I found this very interesting. Thanks
How does this bb1 know what JM has co-signed? It was said the her son received an amount of money. No one but he knows what he signed much less what his mother signed. How does bb1 know? The fact the she feels to speak out appears to be that she hasn't signed anything.
ReplyDeleteThe difference is that the tabloids now feel that they can publish what she says and she feels that if she speaks out the tabloids will publish.
If she writes the book then I see her do the same as Kate did. That night the she JM and TM were at home. That will be all about themselves. Then the rest of the book will be lashing out on all those she feels have mistreated her. I think it will be a very interesting book.
JM is "co-signatory of assorted legal documents". We suppose the other co-signatory be Robert.
ReplyDeleteRobert received £600,000 from damages from British papers. That makes him the offended party and the offending party the British papers.
What reason could there be for the offended party to sign assorted legal documents unless to declare that what he's received is satisfactory and will not ask for any more money? Why would a offended party sign a silence legal document as bb1 implies?
I insult you. You pay me for the damages and I sign a paper that I'll keep silent about what you offended me??
That can only be if what you "offended" me did not offend at all but I'm paid to keep quiet about it because it's the truth.
We all know that Murat's silence has been brought. What we don't know is if they remembered and it seems they didn't, to buy JM's silence as well.
According to the Black Hats the ASSORTED LEGAL DOCUMENTS (note the plural) is this open letter to DC:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/mar/26/mccann-open-letter-david-cameron
“Dear Prime Minister
The legal aid sentencing and punishment of offenders bill will have its third and final reading on Tuesday in the House of Lords. Parliament is therefore on the cusp of passing a law that will grossly restrict access to justice for ordinary people in privacy and libel cases, without even any saving to the public purse. We strongly object to the passing of this unjust measure and urge you to amend it before it is too late.
Of course we are the first to recognise that legal costs in many cases are too high and also that some reforms are justified, but the bill includes changes to conditional fee ("no-win, no-fee") agreements and to after-the-event ("no-win, no-premium") insurance schemes which will effectively make them non-viable in libel and privacy cases, where financial damages to a successful claimant are far too small to cover these costs as the bill currently proposes they should. So only the rich could take on a big newspaper group. A successful libel defendant obviously does not get any damages so these reforms will prevent all but the rich from being able to defend their right to free speech against wealthy or corporate libel claimants. Although the aim of reducing costs is very laudable, the position of lower and middle income claimants and defendants in these types of cases has simply been ignored.
Even if a lawyer will take a high-profile case without a "success fee" that compensates for the risk of losing some cases, or even does the case pro-bono, there is still the enormous risk to defendants and claimants that if they lose, they will have to pay the other side's costs. A person of ordinary means in that position basically has the choice of living with injustice or risk losing their home.
Lord Justice Jackson recognised this problem when he proposed an alternative to insurance in his review but the government – without explanation – has not accepted his recommendations in these cases.
In practice this means that in future ordinary defendants, like Peter Wilmshurst, Hardeep Singh and Heather Brooke will also be unable to get support for legal action taken against them, often by large institutions with deep pockets trying to silence them. That would be bad news for science and medicine, for free religious debate and for transparency in the public interest. And victims of the tabloid press like Christopher Jefferies, Bob and Sally Dowler, Kate and Gerry McCann and Robert Murat will not be able to take legal action against the tabloids for hacking into their phones, for false accusations and for gross misrepresentation. Newspaper corporations with big legal departments and their own insurance would scare people off by the prospect of facing a million pounds worth of costs if they lose. This is obviously both wrong and unfair to the ordinary citizen with a good case.
The bill simply fails to consider people like us. Unless a change is made on Tuesday, the government will have succeeded only in uniting both claimants and defendants from modest backgrounds – together with their supporters – against the government and much of the good will generated by the setting up of the Leveson inquiry and promising a libel reform bill will be lost.
We urge you to take action now to amend the legal aid, sentencing and punishment of offenders bill to specifically remove libel and privacy cases, or you will stand accused of being unfair to ordinary people and giving yet more power to large media corporations and corporate libel bullies.
Christopher Jefferies
Gerry and Kate McCann
Peter Wilmshurst
Robert Murat
Hardeep Singh
Nigel Short
Zoe Margolis “
Because of the letter I posted in the previous comment Robert should confiscate Jenny’s keyboard/typewriter/pen before Jenny drops him IN IT EVEN FURTHER.
ReplyDeleteCould somebody tell me why? What has Jenny’s book have to do with Cameron “will stand accused of being unfair to ordinary people and giving yet more power to large media corporations and corporate libel bullies” which becomes a laughable phrase when you see that 2 people, Kate and Gerry McCann, who’ve most successfully hidden for more than 5 years behind large media corporations and corporate libel bullies have signed it.
Mind you, I agree with the sentence, juts denouncing the sheer hypocrisy of some who’ve signed!
The "drops him in it even further" appears show that the foot-in-the-mouth is a highly contagious disease in the Black Hat part of the woods!
Anon #8 and #9
ReplyDeleteThat is not an assorted document or LEGAL document. That was just an open letter. Bb1 has either made up the co signatory thing or she knows something. I don't think she made it up. What I think is that who wrote up those papers for Robert to sign forgot to include Jenny!
Anyway silence was brought and so it has value. What this goes to show is the Murats have something to say and I just hope Jenny goes after the T9 and their helpers the way they went after Murat back in May 2007. He was playing his role to the best of his capability and they went and stabbed him on the back. For some reason he said then "This is the biggest f*ck-up". Jenny please hurry with that book!
If Jenny Murat spoke about what she really knows then this non-mystery would be solved in the bat of an eye.
ReplyDeleteIt's evident she won't speak against herself but she's spiteful and has reason to be. I bet the Black Hats are running around making their greatest effort to stop this.
They're either threatening publishers or I wouldn't be surprised if some tabloid coughed up more money "in damages" to pacify the Murats.
But coming this far and this open I'm not seeing Jenny stop. She seemed throughout as a very resolute person and has always shown openly how very unpleasant she felt by the way they treated her son.
I think the Black Hats are up for nice surprise this Christmas! Last year it was Textusa with the Paraiso photos that ended up spoiling the Black Hat Christmas. This year it's Jenny. If Textusa hasn't something up her sleeve until then that is. I hope she has!
The McCanns "suffering at the hands of of British Press".
ReplyDeleteWe shall never forget, British Press, including you, The Express, the way you treated Goncalo Amaral and his family as well as the PJ.
C'mon AUTHORITIES! This thing smells worse than a rotten fish on a sunny day!
ReplyDeleteI'm just curious on who's going to take the blame. If David or if Kate. The waiting is killing me! You know this won't go away so let's put some people facing the music!
Sorry to bring disgust and hatred here but I went to JAT and this is what bb1's friend sabot replied:
ReplyDelete"Is that it? Textusa, I mean. She usually manages to post up a great deal more long winded, unintelligible crap than that.
And it is obvious to any idiot who read that Newspaper article properly that what little Jenny Murat did have to say has been twisted.
After what they did to her son she really should know better."
After WHAT was done to RM that should be make JM know better? All I remember is the British Press and BHs jump on the Robert Murat and shred him to bits. Remember Jim Gamble profiling RM has the likely abductor?
The words "she really should know better" are always covert to a threat. Jenny has nothing to lose and if she speaks the truth she has to gain is her reputation back. I don't think she's someone that the BHs should mess with lightly.
O Sunday Express é um tablóid.
ReplyDeleteO James Murray é o editor das investigações.
Há muitos artigos escritos por ele e que são pro mcs.
O JM do SE trouxe a Gail C. até à PdL. Lembram-se?
A Senhora Jennifer M. irá mesmo escrever um livro de resposta à progenitora de Maddie? Só? Ou vai escrever acerca das invasões ao jardim?
Não conheço a maneira de ser dos ingleses mas penso que tudo isto será muito suave e muito "ingleses com ex-pats".
The Sunday Express is a tabloid.
James Murray is the editor of investigations.
There are many articles written by him and who are pro mcs.
The JM SE brought Gail C. until PDL. Remember?
Ms. Jennifer M. will even write a book in response to the mother of Maddie? Only? Or will write about the invasions to the garden?
I do not know how are the British temperament or contention but, probably this will be very soft and very "with British ex-pats."
Se a Senhora nos conseguir surpreender pela positiva esta notícia poderá tornar-se interessante.
If Ms. us get surprised by positive news could become interesting
I think those involved directly, namely the Murats, the Smiths and the T9 are starting to realizing they're sitting on bestsellers.
ReplyDeleteKate has had her chance and blew it.
I wonder who is next, after Jenny, in trying to cash in.
Yes, Mc, I remember Gail Cooper's "fuzzy" photo of a stranger that the tabloids reported as their latest abductor at the time!
ReplyDeleteThere was a fuzzy photo of a man GC said she saw, which was on the promenade, but I think it was taken later than t9 holiday and looked like G to me. He had a strange gait and looked as if he was leaning at a strange angle. Another red herring.
ReplyDeleteMc's probably right that Jm and GC knew each other as it's a small place. Murray seems to be a common denominator. From this post GC was not living in PdL at the time as it refers to her being brought back.
http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2010/05/against-all-odds.html
http://textusa.blogspot.pt/2012/03/very-pertinent-question.html
ReplyDeletehttp://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=sLUovEerpcc&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DsLUovEerpcc&gl=PT
Como foi escrito, GC revisitou a PdL na companhia do James, viagem essa patrocinada pelo Sunday E.
Não consigo fazer o login com a minha conta. No entanto vou tentar novamente.
It was a book out in November, remember? Know? The War of McCann, written by Paulo Reis. At the moment it is not known when the book will be published.
ReplyDeleteOnly the pro Mcs are healthy
There is a discussion around, if the victims of the media will turn themselves against Cameron, in the next elections.
ReplyDeleteOne is wondering if Gerry will take part in it.
Cameron did a great favor to the McCanns, the Yard in the case, and will they turn themselves against him?
The solution is to hurry up with the green light from Portugal, to start the process.
Se isto aparecesse num jornal de referència talvez fosse noticia. Como aparece num tablóide assinado por um tal Murray, é mais uma campanha. Quer o pseudojornalista, quer a sra, jogam no mesmo team- team McCann.
ReplyDeleteIsto sö revela o ambiente de aflição que começa a acometer o team. já não basta o Homem rosa ( por mais skills que tenha) vir a Tv largar frases feitas, que o público já não o suporta. Também esgotaram a velha táctica da fonte ligada à familia. Portanto agora são os que ainda nāo têm a imagem queimada que têm de dar a cara e trabalhar. Nada melhor que uma velha sra no seu papel de vitima. Claro que contráriamente aos desejos do team, várias coisas serão reveladas nas entrelinhas.
Na minha opinião pessoal, a subida à ribalta de Jenny já é uma assumpção de culpa. Primeiro porque a Pj é uma policia competente, de renome e nunca teria atribuído o estatuto de arguido ao filho baseada apenas na proximidade do local do crime e nas pseudosuspeitas de uma jornalista. Alguma evidência ou denuncia a policia encontrou que o manteve como arguido tanto tempo quanto os pais. Depois, Kate pode ter sido muito perversa ao tentar culpar apenas Murat e os jornais podem ter sido muito oportunistas nesse jogo das audiências, mas para mim nenhuma dessas campanhas teve a dimensão nefasta dos últimos artigos de Birch, também largamente publicitados nos UK e Portugal. E a sra. Jenny ficou calada. Birch assume que lhe invadiu o jardim ( coisa que a PJ só faz com autorização e notificaçào prévia ) e diz abertamente que o corpo da criança está enterrado no seu jardim, numa altura em que Murat já não é arguido, e este e a mãe calam-se? Isto só pode ter duas leituras e em nenhuma Murat fica bem. Ou o Birch passou a ser parte do team e fez uma jogada combinada para desviar atenções dos Uk onde um processo judicial a envolver os McCann, decorria. Ou os McCann, esgotadas as outras estratégias para obter ar fresco e sabendo quão preso ao caso Murat está, sabem que podem pressionar naquele lado quanto quiserem porque a Corda nào vai partir. Ou seja, em vez de atirarem a bola para fora do campo, como sempre fizeram.... Jogam-na dentro do campo fuzilando o guarda- redes.
Birch, Jenny! Murat, Kate, Gerry, Tapas 7 mais alguns expats no Algarve, fazem todos parte do mesmo team e têm uns pseudojornalistas que lhes vão fazendo jeitinhos de vez em quando. Os jeitinhos têm sido bons para o negócio de ambas as partes, é por isso que eu não compro nenhum jornal que traga as pseudo histórias deste grupinho. Um grupinho tåo ávido de dinheiro e falha sempre os processos mais óbvios ? Murat, se é inocente, devia ter processado Kate, os Tapas 7, a PJ e Birch. Calou-se, mas processou os jornais seguindo exactamente a mesma fórmula que os principais suspeitos. Se algo não cheira mal aqui, então não sei onde cheira. Até porque Gerry nunca escapou bem à pergunta dos jornalistas sobre se conhecia Murat e eu já li algures na net que Jane Tanner e Murat ainda eram primos. O mundo é pequeno demais no circulo da PDL. Quase todos se conhecem e já se conheciam antes de 3 de Maio, o que facilitou muito o desenrolar dos acontecimentos depois do acidente que terá vitimado Maddie.
That lady must knows what happened to Madeleine. She was on the scene since the beginning. She settled a stand to receive news/ information about who knows what, acting like a police. Was revealed later that her actions were not in consistence with police. Then for who and for what was she doing that job? Something very suspicious and touching the criminal field. On the other side, her son was working with police, then very inside the investigation, knowing all the steps done by the police. For me, it looks like, who keep that lady under that job wants to know not only what reached already the police site but also what the public knows, probably to act preventing any potential dangerous witness to reach the police station.
ReplyDeleteA stall takes time for a old lady to settle and is not something very sympathetic for a expat lady to do in a foreigner country, where a crime just happen. Some desperate issue drove that lady into a so strange situation.
When PJ reopen the case, that lady needs to be enrolled as a witness because she is a person with a lot of interest for the investigation. I still believe, she was a good friend of mrs Fenn and a usual visitor of the OC along with his son.
The all crime goes around that group: Tapas 9, the Murats and some expats and the OC.it looks a lot, but could be very few with good connections and a good knowledge of the secrets of others with power. Mitchell and Carter-ruck were the perfect partners.
If Murat would have helped to hide the body, Tapas 9 would not have attracted the attention to him because he could have talked, under the police pressure.
ReplyDeleteKate attracted the attention to him because she knew he did no know anything about the case.
The McCanns needed to hide the body, and I read that a Kate's relative(cousin?) arrived the day after, together with some of Gerry's. My idea is that one or two of them went to the beach on the 4th, 10pm, while Gerry was talking to the media and they took Maddie's body away, probably out of Luz.They could have hired an apartment somewhere far away (and a car at the airport). If the body was hidden in cold salt water, it was not very much decomposed yet. Maybe under a small rock, touched by waves. The PJ never told wether there was sand mixed with blood or DNA, in the boots of the car.
Police don't tell everything as long as a case is not solved.
Speaking about solving, where is Andy Redwood?
24, I understand your point of view, but I disagree.
ReplyDeleteSometimes the best strategy to hide something is opening it to a full view.
The crime, if there was a crime (and according to the police there is evidences pointed to that) starts after the dead of the child, when they decide to conceal the body. There is no many time, to organize all that and organize a good speech trough which all the witnesses should prepare their statements. All learn the main story to deliver, but failed to organize the details. The police, when starts an interrogatory, pay a lot of attention to the details, because they know, if there is something to hide, the main story his delivered as a tape (cassette), but the details no. They all failed the details including Murat and Malinka.
The Tapas 7 did not put Murat on the crime scene at the begining of the investigastion. If he has nothing to do with crime and they just want to frame somebody, they will have done that, even without naming him. On their first statements no mention of Murat or any suspect. Later, under pressure, JT start building the egg man and the Mccann's Maddie Pyjama. They just start framing Murat close to the time he became a suspect. We should not forget the Mccann's had diplomatic support and a source of information close to the investigation. At that time, who had helped with body, most probably already had handed back the body to the Mccann's, since they all know, the abduction was not convicing the police. whatever had the body was already clear for that, then no risks for that person if his name was brought to the police. At the time the EVRD dogs were not at mind of any of the Tapas 9.
Murat called Malinka on the night of May 3 and gave a ridiculous excuse for the conversation. Gerry was spotted by the Smiths carrying a child on the same night. Malinka car was destroyed with a strange fire and without many noise from the owner. Was it checked by the EVRD dogs? I don't think so. The fact, the EVRD dogs find nothing on Murats villa and car, means only the body most probably was not there, but he could have helped in other way, without having to store the body on his property. He was a real state man. How many empty properties around at the time?
Had the police been free to do their job without pressure and the crime could have been solved on the first month.
5 years after, the suspicions did not go away from that group, including Murat. This, must means something.
I agree with what was said in comment #22, how strange the silence and lack of action from the Murats towards Birch's invasion(trespassing) of their property! If it had been me I would have made a fuss about it, I surelly would have reported Birch to the police and would have taken legal action against that man!
ReplyDeleteThe Murats chose to "lay down, play dead", very much like David Payne did with the Gaspars statements...strange people, aren't they? Serious accusations are raised about them and they do not move an inch to defend themselves!
"it takes all kinds to make a world"
http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/leveson-report/50406/press-victims-could-stand-next-election-against-leveson-deniers
ReplyDelete"The likes of rom-com actor Hugh Grant and TV comedian Steve Coogan may not be up for standing for Parliament, but Charlotte Church came over as a budding politico when she appeared on Question Time recently, and Gerry McCann, father of the still missing Madeleine, is seen as another possible candidate. McCann believes strongly that MPs owe it to the general public to back statutory measures."
Gerry in Parliament?!
Goodness gracious me!!!
#24
ReplyDelete“Talking under police pressure” in Portugal is a myth created by Black Hats. Any arguido has the right to have a lawyer present when questioned and can as Kay did remain silent. But even if he was to be pressured would he have to lie to the questions put to him? No
“Did you go into that apartment and abduct the girl?”
“No”
“Did you kill the girl?”
“No”
He would be 100% truthfully. They were looking for an abducted girl and questioning a man that was pointed out by the child’s friends. No one would ask him the question he had to lie:
“Did you take care of the body that night before its was taken to a safer place”
But if they pointed to a complete stranger then, yes, they would run a risk of pointing someone who knew about all goings on at OC and say “Why don’t you ask all those people that party night and day?”
It had to be someone they knew, someone who had to lose as much as they did and keep his mouth shut. Murat might have been surprised, I’m sure he was deeply disappointed, but he in on the whole thing and knew how much the British Authorities were controlling all so he just did his role, answered the obvious “I was all night at home with mum”.
What the British Press did to him after that was what was appalling but that didn’t weigh in anyway in the decision to point him out as the possible abductor.
About the cousin or other relative coming quickly. You try to book and take a flight plus rent and occupy an apartment all for today. You can’t and much less would you be able from about early evening the time Maddie probably died.
All your talk about salt water and hiding the body at the beach has been debunked by in Textusa in various of her posts. Just google Textusa and Beach.
#21
ReplyDeletePortugal doesn’t have nor does it depend on Portugal to give any green light to open the process. It depends only on Britain.
The process was archived in Portugal and will be reopened if any new evidence is produced or by the wish of the parents.
We know there’s no new evidence. Whatever may be new about the case lies in Britain.
These are the possibilities that I see for the case to reopen:
1. Find the body. I believe that by now there’s no body and that Maddie has long been cremated, so this isn’t even a possibility. But if there’s a body it can only be found if someone from Britain says where it is.
2. Someone confessing. The would be in Britain.
3. The scientific evidence that “disappeared” be found and sent to Portugal. That would be Britain’s doing.
So please don’t put the responsibility on Portugal to reopen the process. That responsibility is ONLY of Britain and not coming out saying that they have 195 new leads or that they are coordinating with the Porto PJ.
We all know who is guilty of what. We may not know the details of what exactly happened but have a general idea. No abduction massive post-mortem cover-up.
We also know that only a British political decision will reopen the case.
You want the case reopened? Ask David Cameron. He’ll reopen it for you. If he wants to. He doesn’t. Not right now at least.
Gerry will jump to the moon to appear in parliament. All their business had been creating a mirror of a power they really don't have.
ReplyDeleteCarter- Ruck and Mitchell must know some secrets from a lot of politics in all party's. Now is Cameron who is ruling the country, but with a very weak power since he didn't got the majority of the votes. Gerry think, he can have a go with Cameron and pressure him, based on what he believes is a very pro- McCann public opinion.
The Mccann's are convinced that the big majority of the British citizens stand on their side and are sympathetic with them. And they know, the opposition can use that against Cameron if he decide to let down the parents of a missing child. But, Cameron, if he wants has all the power on his hands. He just need to open Uk to the information they were prevented to. Who reads the Internet is informed, the rest lies on the stories delivered by the tabloids. Let Amaral book be published in UK, let the information flow on good newspapers and let ask journalists to invite the Mccann's for serious debates regarding their daughter. They will refuse every single debat that was not controlled by them. Expose that and reopen the case forcing the all Tapas 9 to do the reconstruction even in Uk. Wasn't difficult to set something similar to the 5a and do the reconstruction, if they refuse to go to PDL.
Politics can't be under the commands of ridiculous citizens who still under suspicion in another country. In 5 years, nor PJ or SY found other suspects to replace them and politics all know, cases like that are not stored. Every single evidence coming at each moment is checked. Police still working on it with or without being reopened.
Imo, nothing depends on Britain but on Portugal because the crime happened there and not in the UK. Who told you that there is no new evidence?
ReplyDeleteAt the end of BBC Panorama The Last Hope, the journalist said that the Met had new evidence.If they had it, they must have sent it to the PJ.
And maybe Portugal has new evidence too and it is not talking about it now.
Where cremated? In Portugal? Using a crematorium without calling the attention of its ownor? What a risk!
About the green light: I'm not accusing Portugal of anything. I'm saying that Portugal has to be ready with the review, with the information it is getting from the Yard and ,after all of that, it can give the green light in order to reopen the case, to make the reconstruction, to arrest the parents and some of the Tapas.
You got to realise that the final step has to come from the PJ.
The Yard can not talk now, before the PJ allow them to do so.That is what I mean with the green light.
I agree with you: The Met police must know a lot by now but they have to wait because it is a Portuguese matter.
I wish very much that the freelance journalist and blogger improve his health and that his book is published.
ReplyDeleteGood recovery, PR!
#31
ReplyDeleteNo you don’t agree on anything with me so don’t go saying you do because it won’t buy you any sympathy.
I was right in having been suspicious of your words about your utter belief in the SY and your "green light" from Portugal.
The crime did happen in Portugal so the majority of the legal proceedings will take place in Portugal. Other legal proceedings such as those related with the Fund will be in the UK. These don't need any sort of green light from anywhere but Britain so if SY has the new evidence you proclaim they should start at once to declare publicly that there was no abduction and the Fund will be under immediate investigation. That will give a clear sign to all that the SY really want to solve this case truthfully. If they don't it's not because of the lack of a green light from Portugal.
The Yard can talk and do all it wants so the can the PJ. Neither force depends on each other for anything. If there was any sort of coordination between them the SY wouldn’t have come out publicly with the 195 leads that have apparently led nowhere except to the public embarrassment of the Met and goes to prove the forces act separately and independently.
You speak of BBC. Are you talking about the same BBC that broadcast the F-word slander against Amaral and then took ages to recognize, very unperceptively I must add, its error and didn’t have the common decency or politeness of publicly apoligising to the man they had so violently defamed?
The journalist, you say, said the Met had new evidence. Are we talking about the same Met that as of May last year until now has produced “195 new leads” that not only is an absurd number as the only thing it achieved was to ridicule SY itself?
And what new evidence? Please do by all means clarify on certain terms what you mean. You don’t have to prove anything. Just typify what kind of new evidence you think they must have.
Is it a new abductor? Two new abductors? A dozen new abductors? Because that’s as far my imagination can go outside the PJ Files.
As I see it besides a new abductor all the rest is in there as Textusa has been proving all along and comments like yours do try so hard to deride her readers from her writing.
You say if they had it they must send it to the PJ. Well why don't they start by sending all the forensic evidence that got lost somewhere in Britain? That’s not new evidence, that’s an old one that somebody conveniently hid in some cabinet.
After doing that why don't they also send all the statements that were withheld in Britain from witnesses like those such as JW?
Who told me that there was no new evidence? The PJ Files did. The PJ Files are very clear that there isn’t any new evidence to be found. The investigation was thorough and properly done.
The continuance of the existing evidence is what is required, to allow the investigation to proceed without outside influence and tie up all the little loose ends, like the forensic results and unsent statements, so that all accountable can be charged according to the law.
This with the legal proceedings in Portugal. About the Fund it's not required any forensic results or withheld statements. It's up to Britain to kick off that investigation.
(cont)
(cont)
ReplyDeleteYou come up with the classic “it can’t be because it can’t be” reasoning about the body being cremated with your “Where cremated? In Portugal? Using a crematorium without calling the attention of its owner? What a risk!
Yes, I remember that one of the reasons the Black Hats presented for the man seen Smith Sighting not to be Gerry was “What a risk!”
You have to change your tune I’m afraid. Who said it was in Portugal? Who said it was cremated? I said that it was my opinion and didn't refer a place and all that has the value of what it is, an opinion. And my opinion is that Maddie was cremated. Where I don't know but that could have been done in either Country, risk-free, based on my conviction that this cover-up had Top-Brass support from both of the Countries so if the body was to be cremated, it simply was. The “owner” knew very well what he was doing. And you want to know my opinion when it happened? Sometime shortly before Gerry said arrogantly “show me the body to prove that Maddie is dead”. But again that’s my opinion and although valueless I’m entitled to express it.
Soft spoken words may sound like music but if people listen closely it’s the hissing sound of a snake.
Anon #33/#34 Brilliant post!
ReplyDeleteThe fact that SY is not moving in on the Fund is the very proof that their investigation about Maddie has been biased from the start. All British Media have called one way or another the PJ incompetent.
It's been 18 months of worthless guzzling up our tax-payers money because they were sent not on mission to investigate but on one to end up with the results that they were set up to end and they've flunked completely!
By the way, with the forensic results and assorted statements they could also send the credit card records that were asked for. i bet those records would tell a much truer story than jenny Murat despite all her want to get back at those that stabbed her and her family in the back!
Anon 33
ReplyDeleteYou raise a very interesting point!
I’ve heard time and time again about NEW EVIDENCE. It’s what is supposed to open the pandora’s box that is this whole issue.
Now that you ask you made me think.
What NEW EVIDENCE is there that can be found? We know that there was no abduction so anymore stories like the Hewlett one will stick as much as water on a peeled potato. Outside the abduction scenario there’s the evidence that will further incriminate those that were in PDL!
So you’re absolutely right. Unless there’s a confession or a formal accusation from the SY there will NEVER be NEW evidence to reopen the file.
It’s a purely political decision. If the British politicians are willing to commemorate year after year the “unsolved disappearance” of Maddie plus the inevitable comparison to Maddie of every child that disappears worldwide for many years to come with all the embarrassment it implies or they take action and restore dignity to Britain.
No tapas dinners means no abduction. A not credibly solved Maddie case means no dignity for Britain. It may not be outspoken but it will always be lurking over every Brit both in and out of the Country.
Mc, PR is in my prayers as well. haven't heard from him for quite some time now. Hope he's able to overcome all the problems he may be facing.
ReplyDelete37 I wish to thanks to You. He post in His blog, about the situation:
ReplyDeleteSorry to Sisters by the links:
http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.pt/2012/09/time-to-slow-down.html?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lacunar_stroke
Very few people are criticising the McCanns, according to themselves. "An incredibly lot of support"
ReplyDeleteAnd now, on the Independent (McCann files), Gerry says : "You don't want to show your face anywhere".
Probably those half dozen people who don't believe the parents are everywhere and all the time that's is why they don't want to show their faces.
England has a lot of stores selling burqas, they can buy some.
I notice that Kate and Gerry are separated in public, the last months.
Their honey-moon seems to be over.
This could mean that they are under a terrible pressure and I wonder how their life is at home.
The twins must feel that something is wrong.
'And how the mother of Madeleine McCann, Kate McCann, had her private diary printed without her permission and how she and her husband were falsely accused of keeping their daughter's body in their freezer.'
ReplyDeleteFrom D Cameron statement regarding Lev report.
Interesting the detail of the freezer, which I don't remember to see it largely printed in the media. Not even on Amaral book.
From what I can remember, Amaral one time in an interview, while asked about what was found in the car, he said was body fluids which only can come from a defrost body. He never spoke about the Mccann's keeping the body on their freezer. Any way.... after all that noisy from the Mccann's, I was waiting for Cameron to say 'falsely accused of having lie to the investigation', 'falsely accused of being involved on the disappearance of their daughter', 'falsely accused of not cooperating with investigation', 'falsely accused of having concealed the body of their daughter', 'falsely accused of misuse of the money from the Fund'. Mr. Cameron was very careful and went on with a very detailed detail, the freezer. Means in all the rest the Mccann's were not falsely accused and that big parcel of the investigation is in fact what was largely printed in the papers and could have damaged their image, if....was false. Looks like this was not false because the PM who order a review of the investigation, and I presume after having read the PJ files and meeting the british police involved in the investigation, did not highlight the main accusation pending on the Mccann's heads- THE LIES, THE INVOLVEMENT ON THEIR DAUGHTER DISAPPEARANCE AND THE WRONG USE OF THE MONEY FROM THE FUND. After that, the connection of that couple with Lev Enq is wrong and is an act of pure opportunism which reduces the importance of that enquire and make the conclusions very ridiculous and very dangerous, since if implemented they will affect the all public.
On top of that, saying the papers destroyed the life of that victims is relative. Just compare the changes on the lifestyle of that victims before and after winning the jackpot from the papers. They look much, much better now. Their wardrobes changed 100% for top quality. They had never achieved that condition without the money they earned from the papers. No matter how honest and hard workers they were. At the end they were lucky and the real victims were the victims that die or went missing and on Mccann's case, Amaral was the victim. But regarding that victims, the Lev Enq was omisse and ignore them.
To be accurate, this Lev Enquire should never mix people like the Mccann's with stars like Hugh Grant, because stars normally trie to hide their private lifes and the papers always fuss around to see if they can grab a scandal. This ones, yes they are victims of the wrong apetizer from some papers.
Oldfield, Tanner, O'Brian and Payne were nearly declared arguidos in 2007. One of two of them went to a lawyer in London, asking for advise and telling they wanted to change their statements. If it is true that the McCanns can again be declared arguidos, when the investigation is reopened, it is very much possible that all of the four Tapas mentioned above will also be declared arguidos.
ReplyDeleteThey will be on all front pages of all of the papers in the UK. "Formal suspects".
Unless they changed their minds and already told the truth to the police.
The truth is always cheaper.
Who is PR?
ReplyDelete'"Our case has probably helped people understand how bad it is; and how it can be for so long, with so little truth."
ReplyDeleteGerry Mccann in Independent
Ah,Ah, so long with so little truth. His he talking about themselves or about Antonella L or James Murray? Because what we saw during the last 4 years, was the Sun, the Daily Mail and many others, printing the' poor Kate Mccann ', 'the painful Madeleine parents'....always pink color, always presenting them as the victims of a Paedo, of an abductor, of PJ, of Portugal, of the Internet.... bla, bla....There is on all that LITTLE TRUTH?
Was all a PRO Mccann's campaign setled by their PR machine with help of Murdoch empyre, which serialized Kate book paying millions. We all suspected that. Now the big boss assuming it. Could only be for that campaign because this was what we saw massively during the last 4 years. All to fool the public with little truth. As a fish, Gerry dies trough his mouth. OH that difficult to stay quite aside and out of the spotlights of the media. While criticising the behavior of the media h, he is jumping to new interviews with such rubbish...VERY RELEVANT.
Anon #42,
ReplyDeletePR is Paulo Reis. His blog, the link is in our blogroll:
http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.pt/
PR is a freelance journalist. He was among the very first to show the public that some sort of hoax was happening. He was harassed physically such as being chased by strangers in cars.
I remember that he showed an enormous courage by posting his face and his full address on his blog. A courage that only a man with a clean conscience can possess.
We have in the recent past linked one of our posts to one of his as he was the first to link JW Mockumentary character to J. Weinberger.
He was supposed to publish a book in November but at the end of September for self-assumed health issues he postponed the publication date to an uncertain date.
We at the blog join in prayer with Mc in wishing all the best to PR a valliant warrior that Maddie has always counted on and will continue to do so.
I think Gerry is playing a very dangerous game. He must be desperate or in psychotic panic frenzy holding onto anything before looking where he's holding.
ReplyDeleteKate with her book bit the hand that had fed them at PDL by pointing the finger at an inside job at OC.
Now Gerry is biting really hard the hand that fed them all the time up to the book: the Press. He's going like a rabid dog after the tabloids forgetting that those who've made him will make him fall hard. They have the resources to be patient Gerry and you may hide behind Caneron's back. But Cameron's back won't always be there and when he, Cameron, starts to feel that it's time to leave he'll have many things to worry about, starting with himself, than with a liability like you Gerry.
Gerry you know what your problem was from the beginning? The same problem Insane has. Not saying you're Insane although you could well be. You both don't know to zip it. To shut up. To be quiet. To be silent. But Insane has an advantage over you Gerry, he's doing a job. You assumed a status that it wasn't yours to assume. That's why the BHs hate you so much. You forgot what your place was and thought you owned the world. You've become a liability. A liability to the OC and now to the tabloids.
Do you want to know how quickly you're expendable? If they want tomorrow they'll "scrutinize" the Funds expenditures at the time you were responsible and make a big fuss on how much you spent on legal fees and image improvement and break a scandal that will end where you know it will end.
Thanks for explaining who is PR. Sometimes I have difficulties to understand comments because of the abbreviations: "NG gave the right answer to BC, after HJ complained to the DX. None of us expected such a reaction. Good news, specially for TE and MO!"
ReplyDeleteTextusa 44 many thanks by Your´s words about the so super and true compliment about Paulo Reis.
ReplyDeletehttp://gazetadigitalarquivo.blogspot.pt/2007/05/em-directo-da-praia-da-luz-algarve-news.html
@26
ReplyDeleteMural said he would sue Birch if he had trespassed but it turned out a hoax. A Team McCann paid plant - the survey never happened. If Team McCann need to gain sympathy, attention and contributions by paying someone to stand up and say Madeleine is buried in Murat's garden they are beyond belief.
I too admire Mr. Paulo Reis work! I wish him a speedy recovery and all the best in the world.
ReplyDeleteI too wish Paulo Reiss a speedy recovery, his work has been outstanding and we all need him back. I hope his book is released soon too
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to Jenny Murats book as well. This is what she said in December 2007
The mother of Robert Murat today launched a scathing attack on the girl's parents. Jenny Murat claimed her family was being punished simply because Kate and Gerry McCann left their daughter alone in their holiday apartment.
In an interview today, Mrs Murat, 71, also accused the private detective agency hired by the McCanns of allegedly bribing witnesses into changing their stories.
Mrs Murat also said friends of the McCanns, who claim to have seen Mr Murat outside the apartment on the night Madeleine vanished seven months ago, were lying. Her allegations have all been vehemently denied.
She said the Metodo 3 agency had hired detectives to follow her for a week. "Metodo were getting people to change their statements; following everybody everywhere. They were certainly following me."
It is also claimed today that British diplomats were ordered to "avoid offering support" to Robert Murat.
The paper reported: "An internal document, sent by the Foreign Office of the United Kingdom, orders British diplomats 'to avoid offering support' to Robert Murat, one of the suspects in the Maddie case, unless charges are presented against him."