Madeleine McCann: Robert Murat Investigates, Paedo Panic And A New Witness
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
DAILY EXPRESS front page: “MADELEINE – POLICE QUIZ WAITER FOR THIRD TIME – Tapas bar worker holds the key”
The Tapas One! Is he Jose Baptista, the Tapas Waiter? The Express says it is another waiter. The Tapas Two?
The Portuguese man is “said to have been the first person to see Kate McCann as she raised the alarm after discovering her daughter had gone missing from the family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz. He has allegedly given a dramatically different account of the events on May 3 from statements made by the McCanns and their friends”
Page 7: “Waiter’s evidence ‘will be trump card in police case against McCanns’” - Says the police? Says Metodo 3? No, says “a report”. One newspaper’s opinion is now another paper’s front-page news
Portuguese newspaper Diario de Noticias notes: “This waiter is a witness considered crucial to the investigation. The investigators want to find out about what happened during dinner – the conversations and the McCanns’ behaviour as well as their alleged trips to the apartment. The employee still insists it is not true that the child’s parents checked their children every half hour”
Kate McCann is a “39-year-old GP” – Such are the facts
Baptista told investigators that Kate screamed: “They’ve taken her. They’ve taken her” when she discovered Madeleine gone
Says McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell: “Kate has consistently and categorically absolutely denied she said that on the verandah. She may have said it at some stage as a general remark, but she did not run out with this phrase. Whoever this guy is, and if he is saying this, he is either making it up or he is mistaken. Kate, Gerry and their friends told the truth. They will continue to maintain their stories, because it is the truth. Whatever this guy is saying we reject it – it is not true”
DAILY STAR front page: “MADDIE: WE FIND MISSING WITNESS – REAL breakthrough as first man at scene tells all”
There is “BOMBSHELL evidence from a tapas bar waiter. And the Star has found him. Only it can’t name him. It found him in the pages of the Portuguese newspaper. And as soon as they have named him you can rest assured the Star will reveal the results of its investigation to its readers
DAILY MAIL front page: “MADELEINE – Murat sat in as police questioned Tapas Nine”
Page 7: “Murat, translator for the Tapas Nine – Friends of the McCanns reacted with disbelief and anger to the news. There were also fears that Mr Murat could have influenced the police’s understanding of the statements of the Tapas Nine”
But Murat didn’t meet all the Tapas Nine with the police, just Rachael Oldfield and Dianne Webster, the mother of Fiona Payne, who was at the Ocean Club’s tapas restaurant with the McCanns that night. A misleading headline?
Says Murat’s lawyer: “My client did not preside over police interviews of multiple witnesses. The only interview of which he translated was that of Dianne Webster”
Says one of the McCanns’ friends: “It beggars belief. It’s absolutely outrageous that someone who a few days later is declared an arguido was aware of much of what initial witnesses said” – Murat was later named a suspect. He was not a suspect at the time on his translating. Just as the McCanns would surely have been given some information on the case, and they were later named as suspects
“This disgusting soap opera, by suspect’s lover” – Michaela Walczuch says her “ordeal” is a “stupid, disgusting soap opera”
THE SUN front page: “MADDIE SHAMBLES – Daft police let suspect translate during quiz of Tapas 7 – SHE DESERVES BETTER”
But Robert Murat was not a suspect when he sat in as a translator in an interview with one member of the Tapas Seven/Tapas Nine. But then, who’s counting? Not the Sun…
Pages 4 and 5: “MADDIE COPS’ SHOCKING MURAT BUNGLE” – In allowing a man with no previous form to sit in on interviews with his countrymen, the so-called Tapas Seven, the Tapas Nine, the Tapas Two? Such are the Sun’s facts
Murat the helpful translator? The Sun: Murat the “oddball Brit expat”
A friend of the Tapas 7 says: “They are all furious – they thought Murat was a legitimate part of the investigation. He infiltrated himself and was privy to what was said by many of the key players. It’s just the sort of information a suspect would want. It beggars belief. Portuguese police have made mistake after mistake. This just adds to the list”
A source says: “It compromises an investigation when someone who turns out to be a suspect is given intimate details of what witnesses are saying. These are some of the people who have blown apart his alibi, yet police have allowed him to listen to them giving their evidence. He was not present when Rachael told police she had seen him on the night, but she gave plenty of details that would be handy for him”
Blown apart his alibi? Not according to his lawyer, or his mother…
“Family Xmas vigil at church” – “The McCanns plan to spend much of Christmas in church praying for Maddie. Kate and Gerry will be attending the midnight mass on Christmas Eve. They will also go to an earlier special children’s service with their twins Amelie and Sean, two”
How does the Sun know this? Say the McCanns: “We plan to have a very quiet, private Christmas with family in the UK.” But if the press know their movements in advance, surely they will be there to watch. What chance of quiet?
DAILY MIRROR front page: “McCANNS SHOCK – MURAT HELPED COPS QUIZ TAPAS 7″
“EXCLUSIVE” news on the Tapas 7
Page 4: “’People just don’t feel like celebrating Christmas..it’s all about keeping our children close rather than razzle dazzle,” says Gwyneth Green who runs a flower shop in Rothley, where the McCanns live
Increase the fear. Spread the anxiety
But Madeleine McCann went missing in Portugal, not in Leicestershire. But in Rothley “celebrations have been more subtle and sedate as people worry for the lost little girl”
Says the Mirror: “Around the trunks yellow ribbons, now faded and frayed, hand rigid in the frosty air”
The Mirror no longer equips its masthead with yellow ribbon.
Madeleine McCann – the news so far
Posted: 17th, December 2007 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (867) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
December 18th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Now I’m sure of it. Hideki and Stevo are the same person… !!
——————————
Mods and Admin
Ok , prove it, use your journalist expertise and prove it!
December 18th, 2007 at 7:23 am
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/sep/20/marketingandpr.crime
“Who’s who in Team McCann
Esther McVey, 39
McVey has been friends with Kate McCann since they went to school together and is a board member and spokesperson for the Find Madeleine Fund. A former television personality - she appeared on GMTV and in programmes such as 5’s Company, The Heaven and Earth Show, Shopping City and Channel 4’s Nothing But The Truth with Ann Widdecombe - McVey now runs a PR firm in Liverpool, and hopes to become a Tory MP at the next general election. A former girlfriend of shadow culture minister Ed Vaizey, she narrowly failed to win Wirral West in 2005, losing by about 1,000 votes to Labour’s Stephen Hesford.”
December 18th, 2007 at 6:51 am
800
Meejician Says
‘…. I now know that AN Other has been rather less than truthful about his/her educational background,’
*********************
There are lies, damned lies, and …….. C.Vs
December 18th, 2007 at 6:44 am
New Thread.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:40 am
868
Kris Says:
“And I must say, England’s defamation/libel laws must be really odd , if we’re allowed to publicly state we believe the McCanns killed Madeleine in England and transported her corpse to Portugal…”
No one here stated that they believe this.
You are a liar to write this, and may be subject to a lawsuit, Kris. Are you familiar with the law in your state?
December 18th, 2007 at 5:35 am
867
Kris Says:
“Hideki, you are so clearly insane, I can hardly believe it. What evidence do you have…”
I do not approve of your personal attacks, Kris. I made no assertions that require evidence.
May I suggest that you
1) get away from your computer, and get more exercise
2) stop constantly eating junk food
3) learn to read
4) give up journalism, you have no talent
December 18th, 2007 at 5:29 am
861
veritablequandary Says:
“I don’t really support the idea that she never arrived in PDL and that another child stood in for her. I think that would have been taking a very great risk and can’t see how it could be done. Children of that age know their own names very well and would have been vociferous about any puzzling changes.”
Look at the McCann’s behavior if you want to “see how it could be done.” You are correct that there is “great risk” but IMO it was not the McCanns’ decision to make — they were persuaded or pressured to follow this course of action. Notice that the “great risk” falls upon the McCanns, but they may have had no choice, for the alternative could have been presented as a definite conviction on murder charges, proof of sedation and other heinous crimes. Quite possibly, if they did not agree to the plan, the corpse would not have been hidden for them, etc.
The “great risk” does NOT fall upon whoever has decided on the plan , however (T10, or whoever you imagine it). It’s not likely the McCanns could have been persuaded of such a plan unless their guilt was fairly extensive. For instance, if (hypothetically) T10 is a paedophile drug addict who has killed Madeleine, the McCanns are unlikely to take such a great risk. Yet even in that case they could have been persuaded that the risk was not too great, in comparison with charges connected with (hypothetically) selling sex services of a child, sedation of a child, child abuse and neglect, drug orgies, etc.
I’d assume T10 is just as anxious to get away from the mess as the McCanns, but he is more powerful, and it is not his child.
Even if this mystery man killed Madeleine, the McCanns are stuck not being able to rat on him, without having their own crimes fully exposed. If Kate is accused of killing Madeleine, she would be constrained to fashion a defense that leaves T10 (and Dianne Webster) out of the picture. So is this good news for pro-McConns? — a scenario in which Kate is “innocent”… of murder, anyway.
All hypothetical speculation.
December 18th, 2007 at 5:06 am
And I must say, England’s defamation/libel laws must be really odd , if we’re allowed to publicly state we believe the McCanns killed Madeleine in England and transported her corpse to Portugal (with doctor’s notes giving them permission)… but we’re not allowed to say, “Boy those McCanns are not too bright, are they?”
December 18th, 2007 at 5:04 am
Hideki, you are so clearly insane, I can hardly believe it. What evidence do you have to back up this lunacy???
December 18th, 2007 at 4:59 am
459
Remigius Says:
447 Ade, Stevo & Ian & Hideki
“then maybe this is why, initially, the McCanns said they didn’t want to return to England, but stayed on in Portugal, until things finally got too hot for them there.”
The impulse is to assume they stayed in Portugal to pretend that they were determined to find the girl. But I think it is likely that they were not in charge of the decision. Someone had decided to make sure there was a media circus with the spotlight on them. What would “normal” parents have done? Probably stay for a while, (a month maybe?) and then AFTER ANSWERING ALL POLICE QUESTIONS, ETC return to work back home, dejected. No normal parent would want to be over-seeing a huge enterprise supposedly designed to get everyone in the world looking for their daughter — especially when police advised them that such publicity would endanger the child, not be helpful. The McCanns are not merely abnormal, they are incapable of imagining what normal people might be like. Thus they allowed someone to persuade them to stay there basking in the “limelight” until it shone too brightly and burned them.
“But if the cadaver dog story is true, then I suspect she was killed in Portugal at the resort, and then her body was moved around. But did it all happen on the last day of the trip? Seems doubtful. Perhaps it happened earlier.”
I agree that the corpse evidence is crucial for this — otherwise we would have the McCanns bringing a corpse with them (not impossible, seeing how deranged they are). If someone persuaded them to do such a thing, maybe they did. The girl could have died in England, and in fact the Mark Warner resort was then chosen as the spot to announce her disappearance. I don’t know if the forensics could explain this (for example could blood result from handling of a corpse, etc). If they planned to carry a corpse with them, perhaps they had some documentation with them (as doctors) giving them permission — otherwise too risky. Anything is possible with the McScams.
But I think the girl died on the first day there, and that T10 is involved.
Does anyone think T10 is a Jehovah’s Witness, and that there is a connection between Michaela, Murat’s girlfriend, and Brian Kennedy (also a Jehovah’s Witness)? How did Murat meet his girlfriend? Who introduced him? T10?…
December 18th, 2007 at 4:43 am
veritablequandary
I’m on my Palm out on the town so will make this brief. Governor Connally (not Connolly) was injured in the limousine with Kennedy. James Teague was a bystander injured by another bullet. Please read all the facts in that case. My friend is a top Kennedy Assassination researcher and Teague is his friend. Read all the facts and you’ll find Mr Teague.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:39 am
303
Remigius Says:
298 Hideki
299 Sherlock
“It would be interesting to ask that Guardian gal about when she last actually saw Madeleine, and how could she be sure it really was Madeleine at all? She herself wrote about how identical the blonde British children looked.”
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but O’Donnell FALESLY gave the impression that she knew Madeleine, by blabbering on about how she became “friends” with the McCanns. But she merely had dinner at the “doctor’s” table on Wednesday, and even had to leave from that early. She notes that one time she could not recognize Madeleine in a group, leaving the reader with the impression that this was because she could not see clearly at that time, or some such. The fact is that she had NEVER MET MADELEINE, and had NEVER SEEN HER. That is why she had no idea which girl in the group was Madeleine.
Indeed, when the police (in O’Donnel’s account) asked her about the photo, her response was ‘that is the girl you are meant to be looking for’. She does NOT say that the picture is of Madeleine. She can’t, because she does not know. She could only assume. That little phrase was obviously one of the snippets required by whoever commissioned her to write. How strange that O’Donnell is blaming the police for not knowing who Madeleine is, when she herself has never seen her.
How many people saw “Madeleine” at the PDL? Just T9 and the nannies, who were told that ‘this is Madeleine’. All other witnesses said they were even surprised to learn that the McCanns had children.
“I had considered it early on and discarded the idea, but there are so many holes now apparent, and the photo work that Stevo and others did raises the real possibility…”
Another thing O’Donnell mentions is the “Madeleine” bag hanging on a peg. (bag with her name on it) Presumably it contained items a child would use at the creche — non-perishable– and was left their every day. Why was that the only one left there? Everyone else apparently took their bag home and brought it each day.
Answer: the stand-in for Madeleine (for example Ella) would use that bag, but the parents would not want to be seen carrying a bag with Madeleine’s name on it, in case they ran into someone who would be inquisitive. This might depend on who was dropping off/picking up “Madeleine”, Ella’s parent or Madeleine’s parent. Too bothersome, so better to just leave the bag there. Just a guess.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:22 am
630
Ade Says:
December 17th, 2007 at 9:29 pm
629 bountyhunter
14 feet deep could also be a well
body in still water has been mentioned…
******************************************
This was Christine ( the Medium) who said Maddie would be found after a search at a dilapidated farmhouse, where there would be clues to follow, and that she was in “still water” - as opposed to the sea or a river .
December 18th, 2007 at 4:10 am
857 Murder Says:
Goodnight all. Remember to be polite and careful about what you say
—-
you are a dear, rest well.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:09 am
853 Logic
I also think it would have been pretty impossible to organise things so quickly as well as appearing “normal” at dinner. I don’t really support the idea that she never arrived in PDL and that another child stood in for her. I think that would have been taking a very great risk and can’t see how it could be done. Children of that age know their own names very well and would have been vociferous about any puzzling changes. The day or two preceding 3 May would make more sense.
———————
I agree that she likely arrived, but a day or more proceeding is possible for whatever incident. IMO, I don’t believe it was a planned.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:07 am
Goodnight all.
Remember to be polite and careful about what you say
December 18th, 2007 at 4:05 am
VQ - check the links at the top of the page…
Start>Run>tracert for the route from your computer to their current location in cyberspace
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whois for how to find more technical details
…Or just ask a moderator… they self-report extensive alcohol abuse (like many journalists), but always appear to be friendly, focused and informative (unlike many journalists).
December 18th, 2007 at 4:03 am
821 — Postman Pat — “…the initial investigation was seriously flawed.” The McCanns’ lawyers surely will argue that the investigation was seriously flawed — has there ever been a defense lawyer who didn’t argue this? — but I believe that this will not deter the PJ from bringing charges against the McCanns. In spite of all the McCann hype and the worldwide pro-McCann hysteria, the PJ kept quietly plugging along and eventually declared the McCanns suspects. I see nothing that indicates they will give up before bringing charges against the McCanns. Could the McCanns’ lawyers find away to prevent an actual trial? Sure, but it will still be a real blow to the McCanns if they are charged and I think the PJ are determined to do that.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:48 am
VQ - an element of this mystery that bears underlining is that the key adult protagonists are nearly all doctors, very well trained and accustomed to flipping into ‘emergency mode’, and remaining calm and focused in life-and-death situations where most people would panic and behave in a chaotic, uncoordinated manner.
Dr O’Brien, for example, who spent only a very brief time in public view at the Tapas Bar, is a specialist in ‘emergency’ medical intervention.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:44 am
845 veritablequandary
I also think it would have been pretty impossible to organise things so quickly as well as appearing “normal” at dinner. I don’t really support the idea that she never arrived in PDL and that another child stood in for her. I think that would have been taking a very great risk and can’t see how it could be done. Children of that age know their own names very well and would have been vociferous about any puzzling changes. The day or two preceding 3 May would make more sense.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:43 am
850 Murder
this helps, but who is Anorak?
where do we get by tracking the domain name?
(I forgot how to do this!)
December 18th, 2007 at 3:35 am
846Tinsel Says:
I agree. So much seems staged, alibis attempted to fit to a schedule–what to touch, what not to touch, what to say, how to say only the truth and still not tell the truth, who should find her–mom not dad, not anyone else–has to be the mom. Be calm, drink wine, chat and laugh and keep your focus.
It does reek of some type of premeditation or earlier accident.
—-
Yes, I don’t believe the very narrow window of opp that Ian has timelined allows for a coverup.
Regardless of sentiments about the McCanns, I am inclined to believe that it was an accident and coverup, and the shock would have been to great to orchestrate a coverup on such short order. More and more, I am thinking of an earlier “incident.”
December 18th, 2007 at 3:35 am
VQ - in my limited understanding UK defamation law is not very clear or predictable, with the result that hyper-rich media ‘barons’, for example, especially those who have demonstrated that they are litigious, can suppress a lot of discussion simply by a vague fear of litigation.
The court history of the most prominent British ‘old media’ satirical organ (love that word), ‘Private Eye’ well demonstrates these dangers.
But ‘old media’ have no choice of the jurisdiction in which they are distributed. This makes the choice to MOVE a new-media organ of debate and information from an offshore to a domestic site all the more perplexing.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:35 am
nite-nite
hasta mañana.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:34 am
847
veritablequandary Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 3:30 am
842 Tinsel
There has to be a compelling reason for the 9-headed hydra, T9, to be locked together as they are. It’s clearly a defensive posture.
One group, one lawyer, with G as ring-leader.
But defense against what? What do they have to hide? What is it that they fear being exposed, and how deep does it go?
————
I don’t have an answer beyond professional careers (which I believe is most likely) or the more sinister (sexual abuse and the such).
I hope that someone has cracked and will not continue to condone the coverup.
Someone asked earlier today about why continuing to support Jane Tanner’s version of events, which appears increasingly unlikely. My thinking is that they continue to support her story just to keep the fragile narrative together.
***
My spidey-senses tell me it has something to do with the children.
Although I have never trusted any of their credentials. I have heard too much about people faking their way into degrees.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:30 am
842 Tinsel
There has to be a compelling reason for the 9-headed hydra, T9, to be locked together as they are. It’s clearly a defensive posture.
One group, one lawyer, with G as ring-leader.
But defense against what? What do they have to hide? What is it that they fear being exposed, and how deep does it go?
————
I don’t have an answer beyond professional careers (which I believe is most likely) or the more sinister (sexual abuse and the such).
I hope that someone has cracked and will not continue to condone the coverup.
Someone asked earlier today about why continuing to support Jane Tanner’s version of events, which appears increasingly unlikely. My thinking is that they continue to support her story just to keep the fragile narrative together.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:30 am
845
veritablequandary Says:
December 18th, 2007 at 3:25 am
Ok, back to the case.
I believe M encountered problems before the night in question because I have never understood how a cleanup campaign could be orchastrated so quickly.
***
I agree. So much seems staged, alibis attempted to fit to a schedule–what to touch, what not to touch, what to say, how to say only the truth and still not tell the truth, who should find her–mom not dad, not anyone else–has to be the mom. Be calm, drink wine, chat and laugh and keep your focus.
It does reek of some type of premeditation or earlier accident.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:25 am
Ok, back to the case.
I believe M encountered problems before the night in question because I have never understood how a cleanup campaign could be orchastrated so quickly.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:23 am
841 Murder Says to Maria:
Forgive me, but I must now ask: have you ever met or communicated directly with Kate or Gerry McCann, or with anyone that you know to have met or spoken directly to the McCann parents?
—-
great question. let’s put it to music: how do we solve a problem like maria?
December 18th, 2007 at 3:19 am
Ok. someone help me. I don’t understand what must not be said in the UK context.
I can say George Bush is a liar (true in my opinion) or a cretin (opinions vary).
I can shout this from the rooftops.
But specifically what is the line we cannot cross now on Anorak? I really don’t get the politics.
December 18th, 2007 at 3:18 am
There has to be a compelling reason for the 9-headed hydra, T9, to be locked together as they are. It’s clearly a defensive posture.
One group, one lawyer, with G as ring-leader.
But defense against what? What do they have to hide? What is it that they fear being exposed, and how deep does it go?