Madeleine McCann: Robert Murat’s Relief
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann
DAILY MIRROR: “Murat: It’s big relief”
Madeleine McCann suspect Robert Murat, 34, last night spoke of his joy that he looks likely to be officially cleared in days.
After having his computers returned, he said at his Praia da Luz home last night: “I’m so relieved.”
No mention of the Mirror’s super sleuth Lori Campbell who fingered “weird” Murat.
DAILY MAIL: “Murat could soon be cleared as Madeleine suspect after police return his possessions”
Even his computer - with the Sun’s “kid porn”.
His lawyer Francisco Pagarete said: “The police received an order from the public prosecutor to give everything back to Robert. All his items have been returned. We believe it is another step towards his clearance as a suspect. It’s a good sign.
“But we will have to wait and see. There is nothing official saying his status as an arguido is being revoked.”
Even if yesterday the Sunday People had “CLEARED” him.
No word from the The Mail’s Neil Sears, who told us: “There was something more to the friendly expat who called himself ‘Rob’ than met the eye.” Murat made Sears “feel slightly uncomfortable”.
DAILY TELEGRAPH: “Robert Murat close to being cleared over Madeleine McCann disappearance”
Robert Murat has moved a step closer to being cleared as a suspect in Madeleine McCann’s disappearance after police returned possessions seized from him 10 months ago.
Says hi mother, Jenny Murat, 74: “Every single item that the police took has been returned to us. Of course we hope it means Robert’s arguido status will be lifted shortly. But we’ve had no official confirmation that that is the case and we’re not getting too excited.”
Madeleine McCann: Speculation and survival
Posted: 24th, March 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (978) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- eggman on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- agw on Daily Mail Scuppers BBC’s Wrong Shipping Forecast
- Bat E Bird on I’m A Celebrity: Samantha Fox Is Shrinking As ‘Lesbian’ Lover Katie Price Quits
- Bat E Bird on In Photos: Susan Boyle Sings Rockefeller Center Plaza In New York City
- yampster on Daily Mail And Tax Payers’ Alliance Attacks BBC Over Its Free Trees For A Better Planet
March 24th, 2008 at 10:49 am
44
Matt
“Nithgmaring” you mean?
Did you go and look for your easter egg in the garden yet?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:49 am
One of the most damning things, in my opinion, is the McCanns broken promise to return to Portugal to help the PJ.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Was it not the MW staff who washed the curtains? And when they were washed? It might have been an old stain from anyone. In any case, surely Kate would not be so ignorant as to think that washing them would remove the blood? It hardly does that from the naked eye point-of-view, never mind forensic testing!
That article is full of all sorts of speculation anyway!
March 24th, 2008 at 10:43 am
41…jo
oic.
I must have been dreaming.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:43 am
25 great debate Says:
“It tells me that after a match of 99% of body fluids etc, in the boot! Her body must of been there.”
It was never claimed that there was a match of 99% of body fluids. Instead, there were claims of a DNA match and claims of body fluids, but not of a DNA match of the body fluids. The nature of the body fluids still remains unclear to me.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:43 am
ooh its so difficult to say what happened, seeing as we were no there. But im a scientist and there is certainly something fishy going on. Maybe its another case like the Police in Goa? Sometimes im on the fence, other times i think they had something to do and then other times i think what a mystry that looks like it will never come to a conclusion, i our life times anyway.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:41 am
40
Matt
Arguidos? Why? How? When?
Na…its only a joke!
March 24th, 2008 at 10:38 am
38…jo
I thought there were 3 Official Suspects ?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:38 am
#
18
wigit Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:12 am
……here are plenty of unanswered questions in this case - but there always are-and one can hardly blame them for wanting to get home with the PJ’s reputation.
—————-
I mean, lets face it. They didnt beleive an abduction took place. One detective was heard saying that he believed she had just walked out of the apartment.
They handed the apartment back to MW six weeks after the start of the investigation. And then after MW had re let it twice they take another check of the apartment and miraculously discover blood (apparently) between the floor tiles which also showed evidence that the apartment had been scrubbed!
Get on there boy? Would you believe it?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Morning all
Fantastic! If the Daily Mail has cleared Murat then all is fine
No more arguidos nor speculation what else do we want?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:36 am
31 Ferdinand
So I guess the 14 occasions would include also the way back to the bar. This means during 14 minutes out of 90 there was someone near the appartments, leaving 76 minutes for the abductors.
————————————————————-
Wasn’t the point that an abductor couldn’t know when the coast would really be clear? A lot of people coming and going. I thought that was the claim of those who think there were too many checks to make abduction “easy”.
Of course, others are only too happy to state, with no evidence, that they never checked the children at all………….leaving all evening for an abduction!
Any stick…..
March 24th, 2008 at 10:36 am
33…Garth
Time will tell.
I doubt if he will sue though.
Bet a certain Miss C is checking her reportages thoroughly.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:33 am
30…Garth
I can understand that…your Daily doesn’t seem to be running the “story”.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:32 am
http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/2007/09/16/exclusive-brit-cops-to-quiz-kate-mccann-98487-19796880/
======
curtains washed…..
morning easter bunnies.
8 paragraphs down.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Good news indeed for him. Now he can go off and make himself a few quid. Of course, if this is all indeed true eh?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:30 am
25
great debate Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:24 am
————————————
Kate is sufficiently well-educated to know that washing the toy could never completely destroy evidence. In any case, the police had already tested it, hadn’t they, when she washed it…..if she did?
It was Mark Warner who decided to rent out the apartment again. (Heaven knows why the police let them do this.) Obviously, it was their staff cleaned the apartment. I very much doubt if washing and cleaning would have been on the McCanns’ list of priorities when their child had gone missing.
I have no idea what happened to Madeleine on 3rd May but myths don’t help!
March 24th, 2008 at 10:30 am
13 Garth Says:
“In part for it was claimed that there were 14 seperate occasions when someone walked out of the tapas bar and up the road to the apartments.”
That’s not how I understand it. There were 3 families “in need” for checks, that would mean at least five checks per family wihin 1 1/2 hours (if Oldfield checked at least once for two families).
So I guess the 14 occasions would include also the way back to the bar. This means during 14 minutes out of 90 there was someone near the appartments, leaving 76 minutes for the abductors.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:29 am
#
28
Matt. Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:27 am
26…Garth
Don’t you read the speculation quoted on Anorak Headings ?
———–
Not always. Give me a mo and I’ll take a quick peekaboo.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:28 am
25
great debate Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:24 am
——————
Oh right……….so they cleaned the apartment did they? Along with washing the curtains hmm? Even though there werent any curtains. Do you get my point? Are you still troubled?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:27 am
26…Garth
Don’t you read the speculation quoted on Anorak Headings ?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:25 am
21
Matt. Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Good news re Mr Murat…if confirmed…huh, Garth ?
———————————————————–
Definitely. I hope he hears soon that his arguido status has been lifted. When is the official review date? Very soon, I think?
I hope he successfully sues the press…..especially the Express! They’ll probably give in at the first hint of a libel action. There’s also the Mirror, of course…..!!!!!!
March 24th, 2008 at 10:25 am
#
24
Matt. Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:23 am
22…Garth
Do I detect some grumplement regarding the possibility from you ?
—————
Matt
I dont know what you are going on about. No grumplement. So if you’d care to share your news then maybe I can comment hmm?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:24 am
I studied Forensics Science at university. It tells me that after a match of 99% of body fluids etc, in the boot! Her body must of been there. Whether its an unlikely coincidence that the “abducter” happended to hire the same car. Also there was so much evidence that was tampered with. The washing of the teddy bear, washed by Kate. The complete clean of the apartment, statements claiming again this was Kate.
Even if it was not Kate that destroyed vital evidence, Kate and gerry are WELL educated, would it not seem odd that cleaning and destroying such evidence might be WRONG, whether they were witness to all this. Id be screaming from the roof tops, DONT TOUCH THAT, DONT WASH THIS!!.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:23 am
22…Garth
Do I detect some grumplement regarding the possibility from you ?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:21 am
Garth and Chatelaine
Well, we can’t have it both ways. Either there were so many checks that night that it would have been very difficult indeed for an abductor to have time to take Madeleine (which is what people seem to have been saying up to now) OR the gaps between checks were long enough to leave plenty of time.
The waiter was reported in the press here (yes…..I know!) as saying the checks were done about every 20 minutes (the McCanns said about every 30 minutes) and that it was usually the fathers who did those checks. We also know that Jes Wilkins, an independent witness, saw GM outside the apartment just after 9.00pm when he’d just checked the children. That was about 20 - 30 minutes after they’d arrived at the tapas bar and fits in with the overall pattern which the McCanns have said was their usual checking arrangement.
I think it must be almost impossible to be sure from staff exactly what happened. Waiters don’t usually observe that closely. Would they notice everything, especially with a large party? Neither the guests nor the staff would be “clock-watching” on such occasions. The Jes Wilkins’ corroboration seems reliable. He didn’t know the McCanns before playing tennis with GM on that holiday and just happened to bump into him outside the apartment after the 9.00pm check. He was walking his own baby round in the pushchair at the time.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:20 am
#
21
Matt. Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Good news re Mr Murat…if confirmed…huh, Garth ?
——————
Go on…………..?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Good news re Mr Murat…if confirmed…huh, Garth ?
March 24th, 2008 at 10:18 am
#
17
Châtelaine Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:10 am
I agree with SteveT: let’s hope that after April 7 we will have more and more concrete information.
~~~~~
Garth: you cannot have it both ways.
In part 4 it would have been impossible not to notice Madeleine and her abductor because of 14 checks and in part 5 it must be abduction, because there was only one check…
~~~~~~~~~~
Im not having it both ways. Im just making a point.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As for a witness to the abduction, despite a reported coming and going of the Tapas 9, I think there have been many, many doubts about the reliability been ventilated here.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But why has there been doubts about this? What ‘facts’ do you know of that suggest that her evidence is unreliable? And I mean facts. Not daft information re eggmen etc.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:16 am
Morning All
Hey, Garth you’re in good form this morning.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Really interesting the CBS programme - really highlights how difficult it is to judge an individuals responses to crisis. And let’s face it the McCanns are well used to dealing with those in the course of their jobs.
I also find it difficult to understand why many people assume that because they left their children - stupid that may be & they have admitted that - they must be implicated in her disappearance!!
Being guilty of the first doesn’t mean that they are guilty of the abduction/disappearance.
There are plenty of unanswered questions in this case - but there always are-and one can hardly blame them for wanting to get home with the PJ’s reputation.