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
- susan jones on Susan Boyle Weeps As The Press Set About Destroying Her
- The Real Stig on The Great Cathay Pacific Blocked Toilet Mystery
- SoDak-GhostDog on Interview With Survior Of James Arthur Ray’s Sedona Sweat Lodge
- Katie Norman on I’m A Celebrity: Joe Bugner’s Career In Pictures
- HOTWATER on Madeleine McCann: The Media Creates A New Maddie Monster And Twists The Facts
March 24th, 2008 at 11:18 am
66 great debate Says:
“both samples were blood, and one source close to the inquiry told The Daily Telegraph that the nature of the samples led police to believe that they had come from Madeleine’s body being placed in the car.”
As you have studied forensics: Could it be blood if it leaked from a more than three week old corpse?
March 24th, 2008 at 11:17 am
73
great debate Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 11:15 am
————–
No offence mate but you ought to change your name!
March 24th, 2008 at 11:17 am
65
Matt
This is why, I suppose, they are desparate to get hold of those police files so that they can actually get a story to fit.
March 24th, 2008 at 11:15 am
67
jo Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 11:10 am
***************
I believe than NONE of the posters here (for example) would refused to answer.
Nothing “sticks”
——————-
Looks like you’re wrong! Again!!!!
March 24th, 2008 at 11:15 am
The test were carried out in Britian, two test came back with 99-100% positive match of Maddie, from her blood!!
There was also blood to be Maddies in the apartment, to say she had dies on there. The body was then moved, i believe to Murats, as there was a match there too. They hire a car some weeks later and move Maddie. Also the times do not add up, the time they reported the abduction, K&G both said different things, it was kate who rang the police, oh no it was gerry that told the hotel manager who then allerted the police. some hours after?
March 24th, 2008 at 11:14 am
68
Matt
Its off topic
March 24th, 2008 at 11:13 am
#
63
Châtelaine Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 11:06 am
52
SteveT Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:52 am
“[…]
“Refusal to answer Police questions is carries a high suss rating”
Together with hiring the best lawyers money can buy.
*****
I sincerely cannot imagine ANY question I wouldn’t answer in such situation, be they incriminating, nasty or insulting. I can imagine being in shock at the kind of questions and maybe the direction in which they may be pointing. But … refusing to answer. That doesn’t stick with me …
—————
It doesnt stick with you but I can imagine how they felt. It sticks with me!
March 24th, 2008 at 11:13 am
66
great debate
An article here: Kate fears charging…..
Fear and panic
I do not like to witness this kind of things
I cant help: my stomach churns
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/sep/07/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
March 24th, 2008 at 11:11 am
62 Justlooking Says:
“I was commenting from the ‘predator’s’ view point, that s/he thought they were an easy target.”
There are all kinds of easy targets for predators. Woman walking alone, or old people, are easy targets for robbery. So what’s your point?
March 24th, 2008 at 11:11 am
64…jo
Wot were you doing in Afghanistan ?
March 24th, 2008 at 11:10 am
63
Châtelaine
I sincerely cannot imagine ANY question I wouldn’t answer in such situation, be they incriminating, nasty or insulting. I can imagine being in shock at the kind of questions and maybe the direction in which they may be pointing. But … refusing to answer. That doesn’t stick with me …
***************
I believe than NONE of the posters here (for example) would refused to answer.
Nothing “sticks”
How is Maman? Back yet?
I miss mine
March 24th, 2008 at 11:09 am
both samples were blood, and one source close to the inquiry told The Daily Telegraph that the nature of the samples led police to believe that they had come from Madeleine’s body being placed in the car. T
March 24th, 2008 at 11:08 am
62…Justlooking
Yes….not only that…but a nervous need to alter their backfitting’s
several times.
March 24th, 2008 at 11:07 am
53
Matt
I wasnt in PLD either…I was in afghanistan
Lets talk about children
Nightmare
March 24th, 2008 at 11:06 am
52
SteveT Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:52 am
“[...]
“Refusal to answer Police questions is carries a high suss rating”
Together with hiring the best lawyers money can buy.
*****
I sincerely cannot imagine ANY question I wouldn’t answer in such situation, be they incriminating, nasty or insulting. I can imagine being in shock at the kind of questions and maybe the direction in which they may be pointing. But … refusing to answer. That doesn’t stick with me …
March 24th, 2008 at 11:06 am
57
Ferdinand
I was commenting from the ‘predator’s’ view point, that s/he thought they were an easy target. This is irrespective of what K thought.
58
Matt
Yes, I know it was back-fitting.
They do seem to feel they need to tell people what to think.
March 24th, 2008 at 11:04 am
59…Garth
Indeed.
March 24th, 2008 at 11:03 am
#
42
great debate Says:
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.
—————–
You dont think that fishiness might have something to do with the sardine munchers per chance?
March 24th, 2008 at 11:01 am
58
Matt. Says:
March 24th, 2008 at 10:58 am
48…Justlooking
That “statement” was quoted well after they had conducted their Flight into UK.
Merely backfitting
—————–
Merely backfitting
March 24th, 2008 at 10:58 am
48…Justlooking
That “statement” was quoted well after they had conducted their Flight into UK.
Merely backfitting.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:57 am
48 Justlooking Says:
“What does it say about the parents’ mode of childcare that a career criminal would consider them an easy target especially given there was also large family group around them also checking on kids?”
It tells me that they felt save and didn’t expect an abduction. And it is indeed an extraordinary event. I don’t think that parents always fear the worst in any situation. That would be paranoid.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:57 am
Jo,
Looks that way.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Stevet
Matt
“If Mohammed will not go to the mountain,the mountain must come to Mohammed”
….and they will have to answer
March 24th, 2008 at 10:55 am
52…SteveT
Other people’s money…..that is.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:54 am
47…jo
I have nothing on my conscience and so…don’t have nightmares.
I was not in PDL in May 2007.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:52 am
51
Matt.
46…SteveT
“Refusal to answer Police questions is carries a high suss rating”
Together with hiring the best lawyers money can buy.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:51 am
46…SteveT
Refusal to answer Police questions is carries a high suss rating.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:50 am
37 Maria Says:
“Wasn’t the point that an abductor couldn’t know when the coast would really be clear?”
I guess that checks were performed preferably between the courses of the meal. So best time for an abduction would be right after the meal had been served.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:50 am
I wonder whether John Corner has a point about the McCanns night time activities being observed from a balcony across the road from the complex have any bearing?
It would appear that whoever took Madeleine had planned the snatching of her?
CoolandCalm has stated that she believes someone within the complex itself ie staff etc had something to do with Madeleines disappearance. However, we are led to believe this person took Madeleine across the road towards the apartments that someone may have observed from. This begs the question : how thorough was the checks on the apartments across the road? Were they occupied by tourists or residents? One thing I guess would make you wonder is why the abductor would carry the child in such a manner? He certainly wouldnt have been carrying her for a long distance as his arms would have been down by his ankles!
It also needs to be remembered that we have independent claims of person/s snooping around the end apartment on previous occasions.
March 24th, 2008 at 10:50 am
31
Ferdinand
All these alleged checks on kids…
K was reported to say that the predator must have been watching their family, studying their every move etc.
What does it say about the parents’ mode of childcare that a career criminal would consider them an easy target especially given there was also large family group around them also checking on kids?