Comments on: Madeleine McCann: Face To Face With Robert Murat

By: Frances Wicks

Frances Wicks — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 21:59:12 +0000

why dont you all go to hell, you know nothing, why post lies lies lies about Madeline when you have no fucking idea of what went on.

she was fucking kidnapped ok and there is nothing more too it

Mods and Admin
Grace

Do you have any information or evidence about the kidnap of which you seem so certain?
Do you know more about this kidnap than you are perhaps able to say on Anorak? Have you informed the police of this?
Unfortunately, there does not appear to have been any demand from kidnappers to date that we are currently aware of. Please feel free to forward anything which you feel will support your post and we will read it.

M&A
Artemis
It would be helpful if you explained why you believe that Madeleine was kidnapped, since this is your first post on the topic.

-agw: Just as a matter of clarification (sic) last time Ms Wicks appeared in these columns she said (among many other foul and obscene references):

“THIS GETS BETTER BY THE DAY..
YOU SHOULD HAVE REALISED FROM DAY ONE YOU CANNOT MESS WITH ME MATE. YOU CAN DELETE ALL YOU LIKE BUT THIS SHIT IS NOT GOING ANYWHERE. YOU SHOULD HAVE THOUGHT MORE CAREFULLY BEFORE YOU STARTED THIS, COS DELETING MAY MAKE YOU FEEL YOU WON THE BATTLE - BUT YOU ALREADY LOST THE WAR - AND YOU KNOW IT - WHICH IS WHY WE NOW HAVE THIS MEANINGLESS, EXCRUCIATINGLY EMBARRASSING FORUM - ANORAK IS TRYING TO SHIFT SOME OF THE BLAME ONTO MARLON - AND MARLON CAN`T ARGUE - SHE SAID IT - END OF.
It has all been hilarious from start to finish, but you know the funniest bit.. ?
I DID ACTUALLY GET PAID FOR THIS, AS A FEW PEOPLE KNEW - NO NOT FROM ANORAK AS SOME THOUGHT - HE COULDN`T AFFORD NEW SHOES LACES HIM..
MONEY DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT I AM A STAUNCH MCCANN SUPPORTER - I HAVE EVERY SYMPATHY - AND A LOT OF RESPECT - FOR KATE AND GERRY MCCANN - TWO DECENT PEOPLE WHO WOKE UP THE WHOLE WORLD AND SCREAMED FOR HELP TO FIND THEIR DAUGHTER - AND GOT IT !
WELL DONE MCCANNS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My work here is done i think - the ball is in the mccanns court now.”
That little charmer was July 26th, 2007.

There were two things which puzzled at the time.
Who would pay for such a loose cannon?
Why the reference to shoelaces? Young Mr Anorak wears a natty line in pull-up Chelsea boot.
The fashion not the football team.

Balance is all. So, on balance, Ms Wicks can stay on the shelf until a suitable suitor appears.

By: Donegal Jon

Donegal Jon — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 22:14:04 +0000

I haven’t read so much shite and insults for a long, long time. Leave this family alone. Everybody tries to get their oar in, and come up with conspiracy crap. And the comments from the armchair Sherlock Holmes’ makes me want to reach for the bucket.
Why do all you perfect, smug, emotional bullies pour the worst sort of insults on the Mc Cann family. At least they have dignity.

By: Melissa

Melissa — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 08:30:52 +0000

Hello,

This Madeleine case is driving me nuts they either have the guy or they don’t!
Poor Madeleine my heart goes out to her wherever she is!
They need to move faster as time is running out!

By: Colin

Colin — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:43:55 +0000

In some of the reporting I have detected a certain smugness about the splendid British police stepping in to show these pathetic foreigners how it’s done. Before we feel too superior we should remember that it was British police who did their best to frame Colin Stagg.

By: Colin

Colin — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:33:03 +0000

Something that seems to have been forgotten by damn near the entire British population: the word “paedophile” does NOT mean “child molester”.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:03:18 +0000

Carol Says:

“My only questions remain are - if he is innocent, why lie? ” ….

Playing Devils Advocate here, but one might ask the same of the McCanns - if they are innocent, why lie?

Sometimes people lie for all sorts of reasons which may have nothing directly to do with the main matter to hand - perhaps Murat and Malinka are involved in something illegal that does not have anything to do with Madeleine or children, perhaps they are having an affair and Murat wishes to keep it from his mother …. perhaps the McCanns were frightened of what their employers would say or Social Services or the Police.

A lie may well be an indicator that someone is guilty …. the REAL question though is ‘what is it that they are guilty OF?’ - It may very well not be what you may think.

Molly

By: Carol

Carol — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 12:39:30 +0000

Whether Robert Murat is guilty or not is not our decision to make. Someone has removed that innocent child and she must be returned. My only questions remain are - if he is innocent, why lie? He says he was at home in bed but his telephone records prove calls were made. His alibi isn’t completely accurate or viable. Obviously we are only aware of limited ‘facts’ and I hope to God that the powers that be have more information than we are aware. The net was closing in last week… now, where is the net?! The McCanns have received the ultimate in punishment for their ‘neglect’ and if my child were taken I would like to think I would use any opening to publicise the fact in an attempt to bring my child home, at whatever cost. I am not a religious person but I have prayed for this little girl’s safe return.

By: Celia

Celia — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:50:11 +0000

That is a very good point, I am sure if Roberts wife thought he wa dodgy she would have said something.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 07:24:43 +0000

Just a little food for thought …

Robert Murat has recently fought and lost a custody battle over his own daughter. Custody battles get nasty, REALLY nasty, and every last fault/misbehaviour/personality trait is picked up and used by both sides. Certainly I would expect that ANY aspect of child porn or possible paedophilia would have been exposed and used against him.

Now such things (if they exist) would be, of course, secure information available in court records only … but they would sure as hell have been taken on board by his ex wife and her family and held against him. Whilst she may not be able to give full details, it is highly improbable (given that he is her Ex) that she would be actively defending him in this instance if she had reason to believe that a lot of the accusations being thrown around were true. At best I would have expected a ‘No Comment’ approach.

Now I’m not saying that Robert Murat is innocent, but I’m not saying that he is guilty either and nor do I believe a fraction of what I read in ANY of the UK newspapers - they have already proved that their bias in this case is severe and that they cannot be relied upon to give accurate information.

Molly

By: Celia

Celia — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:00:17 +0000

Pete, so you think Robert probably kidnapped Madeleine, and you are 100% sure he is a paedophile, all that based on what you read in the papers. As you have now looked at some “big paper” as a source, then they will come in handy to wrap your fish and chips in.
You do have a tendency to believe everything you read and see on the television, you probably believed that the Queen had that hissy fit that was so badly misrepresented.
Never mind, you believe it so it must be true.
Once again I am not an apologist for Robert, let us wait for concrete evidence before we judge him shall we?

By: Alice

Alice — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 17:25:08 +0000

Maz/Celia

Not everyone is out for Murat’s blood.
I too hope he can clear his name, and not become colateral damage in all this.
Trial by Tabloid ? lets wait til he’s arrested and charged and convicted IF he is guilty.
Sad it is a child has maybe been attacked , but hopefully her attacker will be charged with crimes against her.
His /her name may well not be Murat

By: Celia

Celia — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:51:50 +0000

Maz,
I couldn’t have put it better myself!

By: Maz

Maz — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 15:15:25 +0000

Robert Murat is quoted in today’s Express, speaking of his “nightmare” and how he cares for himself and not for the McCanns and for Madeleine. This is presented initially as if we are supposed to view him as heartless. But his nightmare is no less real than theirs. If he is innocent he can do nothing to help them. (Look what happened when he did try to help!!) The police do not have the evidence they need to charge him, but they will not release him. We don’t know how accurately he has been reported but surely most of us know how hellish it must be to be falsely accused, especially of an horrific crime like this. Demonising and persecuting an innocent man will not find Madeleine.

According to the article, Murat believes that people are now praying for him. At the risk of getting replies full of hate and prejudice I will suggest that this is wholly appropriate. Pray for an end to this horrible business.

By: Anna

Anna — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:43:04 +0000

I have been following this dreadful case in the press and on television and Murat certainly seems, from all accounts, to fit the label of “a suspect”. There has been no more mention of his mother, Jenny aged 71, and the her appearance as she gave the alibi, that her son was dining with her and at home during that fateful evening. Surely there have been trained psychologists who will have viewed the televised interview with her, and who have analysed her body language and unblinking, unwavering eye contact with the interviewer?
I cannot understand why there has been no more comment and investigation into her story, or why she has not been interviewed again a number of times. Her testimony would seem vital in trying to establish whether Murat WAS at home All that night.
I write this as a teacher who has made a fair study of body language etc., and to me the wide-eyed stare, with no natural looking away from her interviewer at intervals, could well throw suspicion on whether she was in fact telling the truth. Such rigidly held and controlled eye contact is thought to indicate the telling of a lie.
Surely Mrs Murat should be questionned again, in depth, and even by the three friends of the McCanns who confronted Murat himself?

By: Celia

Celia — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:41:22 +0000

There is something wrong with you Pete, I am not being an apologist for Robert, why should I be?
I am sick to death of reading such crap that appears in the papers and on many of the web sites. Why not await the results of the police investigations, although the way the Portuguese police are investigating is rather worrying.
Face to face with three of the McCanns friends, I don’t recall them seeing Robert when the investigation was first underway, but after seeing his face all over the place he would look familiar to almost anyone. Is there proof that Robert is a paedophile, oh sorry it was in the papers so it must be true! I don’t trust the papers to get the date right never mind facts of any other nature.
I don’t know Robert very well, but I was there, and saw for myself the behaviour of the press, as for the beastiality thing, well if it weren’t so horrible it would be funny.
So hear’s a suggestion, why don’t we all just leave it to the police and stop throwing accusations that are so far just that.
I hope there is an end to it soon, and that all concerned can try to get back to normality, although I doubt that it will be possible.
Poor Madeleine, think about what she has been through or is going through, and leave the detective work to the detectives.

By: Maria

Maria — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:03:45 +0000

There are countless people, of all social classes, who have “left” their children under similar circumstances, especially on holiday, and have never been reported to social services! This is an unpleasant side issue at the moment. Have they not been sufficiently punished for an unfortunate decision? Adding criticism now achieves nothing. The issue is to find Madeleine or find out what happened to her.
It is true that the McCanns have intelligently and courteously managed the media in such a way which has made it difficult for the latter to develop its usual mud-slinging campaign against them. It is true that they have a briiliant “team” which came together relatively quickly in several places in order to support them. They are doing this with only one desperate aim….to recover Madeleine.
Hopefully, the McCanns’ response will inspire others who may face unspeakable tragedies in their own lives to carry on with some element of hope and courage to try to overcome their despair and sorrow.
2000 people came together at a recent vigil for, and with, the family. Hopefully that says it all.
I can think of no worse catastrophe which could befall a family than this one.
As for Robert Murat; we know very little. We certainly do not know if he is guilty of any part in this crime. Who on earth would trust any newspaper’s reports on anything?! Whenever I have been personally involved in, or known about, anything which ended up being reported in a newspaper, the only certain thing was that they got it laughably ……..or tragically…….wrong in so many ways; it’s usually deliberate of course, to sell more papers. Sometimes it’s simple ignorance.
As Gerry said, the law, and only the law, must take its correct course with any witnesses or suspects.

By: Maz

Maz — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 05:23:41 +0000

Some allegations are so ridiculous they are not worth denying. Don’t forget that you can’t get legal aid for libel actions. Murat isn’t rich as far as I know. I don’t think a complaint to the press complaints commission is a viable option in this case either.

There is no proof that Murat is a “paedophile”. Remember one of the “Forest Gate Two” was supposed to have porn on his computer when it became obvious that he had no links with terrorism. We must be able to find something. No smoke without fire etc.

Lori Cambell, a “red top” journalist, not a car hire rep or police informer, was responsible for Murat getting fingered. She found him “creepy” and compared him with Ian Huntley. Now that is truly bizarre behaviour. I wonder if she actually met that guy.

By: Pete

Pete — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 02:23:48 +0000

Celia, I tried to post links to the car hire story but every time I try to reference a point with a web link my post gets ‘awaiting moderation’ and doesn’t appear.
However, here’s the name of the source and business of the car hire firm in question, its opposite the church where the McCanns pray.
Mario Rocio, an assistant at Auto Rent III, claimed that Murat needed a car in a hurry as his own 2 vehicles were being used by police !? Murat also claimed to be working for the police. This bizarre story, an obvious lie, resulted in the police being contacted.
On the child porn question the story has appeared in every major UK newspaper, on the front pages of most of them. The most worrying one I read was in the Guardian which claimed not only that there was child porn on Murats PC but bizarre home made porn and bestiality video’s.
I can’t stick up the web pages but a google search will bring up lots of sources, not just the drunken ‘gutter press’ but the ‘big papers’ too.
At the very least Murat seems to have a side to him that even those close to him don’t know about. I think before you act as his apologist you should bear in mind he is a paedophile.
I would add that the press complaints commission, and the libel laws, could be used if Murat is innocent of this allegation. However its interesting to note that neither Murat or his lawyers have denied this well publicised allegation.

By: Pete

Pete — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 01:37:41 +0000

Celia, after Murat realised he was under surveillance and was being followed he tried to hire a car and gave the explaination to staff that his own vehicles were being used by the police in the search and he needed another !? This story is such an obvious and foolish lie that staff were immediately concerned
You don’t trust the ‘gutter press’ so I’ll use a ‘big paper’ as a source for this although the story has been widely reported
http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article2556469.ece

Furthermore if there isn’t any child porn on his PC then he can contact the press complaints commission or sue for libel. The press seem very confident though

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2005320001-2007240420,00.html
and
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/news/tm_headline=madeleine-suspect-s-vile-kiddie-porn–&method=full&objectid=19208710&siteid=66633-name_page.html

and so far no denial from Murat or his lawyer on this one ? If this is unsubstantiated then Murat is in line for a whopping damages claim.
On the balance of probabilities I think Murat kidnapped Madeleine. However I am 100% confident he is a paedophile, and so apparently are the police and the media. Its only his apologists like you who seem to be in denial about this nonce.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 00:09:02 +0000

[Maz Says:
July 14th, 2007 at 3:45 pm

Tarina Charlesworth has missed my point. I wasn’t criticising the McCanns for being “intelligent and resourceful”. ( They weren’t intelligent and resourceful when they left their three children alone.) But what I was trying to point out is that they are getting support, money, sympathy and adulation in a situation where a poor, working class or uneducated single parent would only be castigated, prosecuted and have their remaining children taken into care. It is as if their occupations excuse the McCanns from facing the full consequences of their actions.]

I absolutely agree with Maz. It is strange that the McCanns have not been prosecuted or even investigated for negligence. Less fortunate people have had their children taken away or put on a “watch” for lesser offences. Take the working-class mother with the morbidly obese child; children’s services threatened to take the child away for him to lose weight. The McCanns have admitted to losing one of their daughters and yet the public and the authorities still trusts that they can hang on to the remaining twins? Without the blame-deflecting tactics of the Find Madeleine campaign, these parents would indeed be in deep kaka with the authorities.

And to the readers who disagree, no need to call me stone hearted and such, I’ve heard it all before.