Situation “Critical” For Madeleine McCann And Robert Murat
MADELEINE McCann remains on the front of just one newspaper: the Express.
“MADELEINE,” says the small headline, “Search will reach critical stage this week, say police.”
News indeed to followers of crime who think the first minutes after the incident are the most vital. Who knew that the critical moment comes ten weeks after the apparent crime has been enacted?
The Express is at the forefront of investigative journalism. It tells readers that Robert Murat is to face further questions. Says a police source: “After a series of interviews last week, the investigation is moving forward and we now believe that the inquiry has reached the critical stage.”
So why has Kate McCann, Madeleine’s mother, flown back to the UK, the first time she has returned home since her daughter disappeared?
She cannot leave at a time like this, surely? Although she is soon back from the family Christening.
What next?
The Express hears prime suspect Robert Murat tell us: “I can’t carry on living like this, no human being could. I am the only suspect and it could take years for them to release me from this investigation.”
But the Express says this is the critical time. Although critical for what or whom, we are not told. Is this the crucial moment to find Madeleine McCann? Or has the story moved on and this is this now the critical moment to see if Robert Murat will survive?
“I wake up with this nightmare every morning and I go to bed with it every night,” says Murat. “I can’t speak on the phone because they are listening to everything I say. “I have had no help from the British authorities… I can see no light at the end of the tunnel.”
It is a critical time…
July 16th, 2007 at 11:12 am
you can talk on a phone if you have nothing to hide
July 16th, 2007 at 11:22 am
When will the Mccann parents be charged with neglecting their children? Why did they leave the children alone in an unlocked room in a foreign country and enjoy themselves at a restaurant? The true villains in all this are the Mccann parents, Kate and Gerry Mccann.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:43 am
Kate and Gerry also go to bed everynight with a bigger nightmare than Murat, they also wake up knowing that it is another night without Madeleine beside them, I wish the PJ would be a bit more forthright either with information or with an arrest. suspence is killing me
July 16th, 2007 at 11:53 am
I hope that she will be found very soon. The people who had negative things to say, keep it to yourself. You should thank god you’re not in that position.
If you ask the people around you, you will hear that people do leave there children alone.
Nobody should touch a child.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
Yes Lady they shouldn’t - but they do, and you have to live your lives accordingly.
These people were negligent and should be held accountable, but just because they were ‘respectable’ we are asked to make allowances because they would never have acted irresponsibley
July 16th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
If they were unemployed, or in menial jobs, and they’d gone over the road in the UK for a meal with friends, leaving three children under 4 alone in a flat, and got home to find one of the children had been snatched, what do you think the press response would have been?
Think about it.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
Its all very well saying what if what if, yes I agree with Anne UK but the fact of the matter is that this has happened and now the focus is on getting Madeleine back, Anorak is asking what is so critical? the PJ must either piss or get of the pot.
July 16th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Did Kate bring her other two kids to Britain with her, or did she leave them alone the the apartment. I think we should be told.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
don’t investigations take as long as they take, a lot of forensic evidence is taken from a body, so far no body.
Or is it acceptable to charge someone, anyone, even if innocent to ‘get off the pot’?
Some cases take years to resolve, accuracy is the point.
More haste , the less speed?
July 16th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
murat, it’s obvious that you’re related with the abduction! tell the truth to the police!
July 16th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
-I thought this was of interest-
It has been suggested that this be posted on all Madeleine threads so here is the translation
Quote: published in Sol, on June 30, 2007
an article by Felicia Cabrita and Margarida Davim
Madeleine Case
Pact of Silence
Madeleine’s parents and the friends with whom they spent their holidays in PDL are suspects in the inquiry. There are contradictory versions about the night of the kidnapping, and an assumed pact of silence in the group
The beginning of June is flowing in a strange way in the Algarve. A chilly wind and overhead clouds help to fill the auditorium of Lagos, where a solidarity concert is being held for the missing english girl. It’s been a month since Madeleine McCann vanished without a trace.
A few kilometres from Lagos, in the Ocean Club resort at Praia da Luz, the faint illumination further densifies the climate. At the reception, which leads to the Tapas restaurant, there is nobody. Getting inside is easy.
A portuguese waiter, but with a british ‘behaviour’, strikes the first blow on the journalist’s plan: “We only serve dinner to the club’s clients”. “What about a drink?”. He says yes.
It’s 9.30 p.m. If we were to believe the several members of the McCann’s holiday group, and after several mismatching versions, at this time Madeleine was being carried out of her apartment by a dark-haired man, who would be around 35 years old.
From the same table where the group of nine had dinner on that evening, one tries, in vain, to observe the apartment’s front – a ground floor apartment that faces the restaurant. A linoleum screen on the side of Tapas and the corridor of bushes that follows the limits of the apartment’s back yards prevents any vigilance to that level.
The image of Madeleine – big blue, questioning eyes and an innocent smile, fixed on the photographic films – is always present. It doesn’t leave the conversations of whom passes by. One remembers the words that the mother, Kate Healy, is supposed to have said to a friend (and that the husband, Gerry McCann, did not know): “I had a bad premonition about my children, when I found out the Ocean Club had no baby listening service”.
The choice of Algarve as a holiday destination would come to change their lives. Everything was arranged with three other couples, with whom they used to travel. Some of them had recently been to Greece, with their children, and the Mark Warner agency, the same that prepared their trip to the Algarve, had done their itinerary for the islands. According to their reports, the hotel where they stayed had a baby listening service – a service that is assured by four or five members of staff who would control the children while the adults dined, by listening through doors and windows to confirm that everything inside was quiet.
At the Tapas bar, from bartenders to staff from the Kid Club, criticism is whispered: “We have a creche where they left their children for most part of the day, where they could be until 11.30 p.m. without spending another Euro. They could also have used our baby-sitters, who stay with the children in their rooms until 1 p.m. In this case, they would have to pay an extra fee, but these people looked like they could afford it”, an employee comments, concluding that “this was a very strange group, that never stayed with their children”.
The children’s routine
The story of Madeleine looks like a tangled ball of wool. In the last days of April, Kate and Gerry, both 39 and doctors, arrive with their friends in Praia da Luz. The weather is not very good, but the group makes the best of it. The children seem to exist outside of the adults’ world. In the morning, Kate would take Madeleine, almost 4, and the 2-year old twins, to the Kid Club. The other couples in the group did the same. While the little ones entertained themselves with collages and paintings, the group divides itself between tennis and jogging until lunchtime. In the creche, the girl’s picture is taken: “She was shy and had some difficulty in adapting to the group. She always stayed close to the english children she already knew”.
It is at lunchtime that the families socialize a bit. After a short nap, the children go back to the Kid Club, while the parents use the activities that the club offers. They only get to meet again in the late afternoon, when the children’s dinner is served. Before 8 p.m., Madeleine and her siblings, who seem to function like a clock, are already asleep. Half an hour later, the group of friends meets at Tapas. The staff remember that they only leave at midnight: “They were very lively and drank a bit too much. I didn’t even realize they had children, because I never saw them around”.
Mathew Oldfield, one of the elements of the group, is back in England. He reacts with surprise upon the contact of Sol, but he does not avoid the conversation: “We drank. We were on holidays. So what?”.
And thus the days followed one upon another, at the Ocean Club. The holiday week is almost over and the group’s spirit does not change. Nobody had noticed until then, how the children were kept at a distance.
The most reliable way to undrestand what happened on May 3, when Madeleine disappeared, is to analyze the various versions that emerged.
It would have been 10 p.m. when Kate decided to check the children at the apartment. This is the only moment in the story that gathers consensus. Madeleine had vanished from her bedroom and the twins were sleeping like nothing had happened. The mother was back at the restaurant in one leap. She was disoriented.
PJ called two hours later
In seconds, the resort is in turmoil. The group’s four men and the club’s employees check every corner. They seem to be oblivious of the essential: to call the authorities. GNR is the first to arrive at the scene, but the news only reach Policia Judiciaria (PJ) more than two hours later. The first explanations arise. Where were the parents when the child disappeared? Gerry explains that, inspired in the scheme that some of the friends had used on their holidays in Greece, the nine members of the group took turns in checking on the children with some regularity.
This is the beginning of a story that will change in many chapters. Gerry starts by saying that he first left the table to check on the children around 9.05 p.m. When he entered the apartment the children were fine, he just noticed that the door to their bedroom was partially open. He looked at the window, which was closed, just as the shutters, and relaxed.
Ten minutes later, his friend Jane Tanner, who went around the apartments, crossed ways with a dark-haired man who was walking in the opposite direction, carrying a child. She didn’t make any connections either.
A few minutes later, Mathew Oldfield enters the room, sees the McCann children fast asleep, and notices nothing out of the ordinary. It is at 10 p.m. that Maddie’s mother discovers her daughter has disappeared. The window was wide open and the shutters were up.
To GNR, who is in the area with sniffer dogs to search for the child, this is a highly unlikely scenario. One of the military assures: “This is an extremely silent area, where there are practically no passing cars. That shutter was very difficult to lift from the outside, and would have made a lot of noise. It would have been a lot easier to use the door, but there were no signs of a break-in”.
This was just one of the reasons why the group became suspicious in the eyes of the investigators. Russell O’Brien, Jane Tanner’s husband, is already back in England, but he knows he could be summoned back to Portugal for a deposition anytime. Over the phone with Sol, he tries to keep his british phlegm: “It is normal that we are suspects, and the DNA test is a consequence thereof. We were the closest people involved”.
The conversation always comes back to the same issue: the night of the disappearance. The account of that last dinner has disparate versions among the group’s members. Some swear that someone left the table every half hour to check on the kids; other reduce that time to half of it. Some say control is made window by window; others say the adults entered each other’s apartments.
One of the employees that was on duty that evening does not remember a lot of movement: “I only remember a tall, grey-haired man getting up once from the table”. It was Russell, who, two days earlier, also had attended dinner.
An aerobic instructor from the resort entertains the dinner guests at Tapas with a ‘Quiz’. At 9.30 p.m. the game ends, and Gerry invites her to their table, where she stays for half an hour. During that time, as she later confided to friends, nobody left the table, but one of the chairs was vacant. Najova Chekaya refuses to talk to Sol. And Russell, when the questions start to surround him, loses his sympathy: “I have nothing further to tell you. I am not going to dishonor the compromise I assumed with Kate and Gerry. They want to control all infornation that is disclosed”.
Gerry changes his version several times, but he maintains that the door to his children’s room was open. Mat revokes his first statement: when he entered Madeleine’s room, the door was open and there was more light, as if the shutters had been raised. Here starts to develop the theory that there was already someone inside the apartment. Which reinforces Jane Tanner’s version (that she saw a man carrying a child).
Only Jane saw the man carrying a child
But there is a witness whose deposition contradicts this theory. Jeremy Wilkins – a tv producer who had met Maddie’s father during their holidays and used to play tennis with him – was walking his eight months old son at that time. He met Gerry, who went out through the apartment’s back door after having checked on the children, and the two man exchanged a brief conversation. At that time, if one is to believe the first accounts, Jane would have left Tapas in the direction of the apartment’s main entrance, and would have crossed paths with both of them. “It was a very narrow road and I think it would have been almost impossible to walk by without me taking notice”, Jeremy says, pointing out the fact that he saw no man carrying a child, as Jane states.
But Jane continues to guarantee that, at the top of the street, she saw a man with a child in his arms.
Although the area is scarcely lit, and the situation did not make her suspicious at the time, she describes the beige trousers, the dark thick jacket and the black classic-style shoes in a detailed way. Once again, Jeremy disagrees: “If that happened, I would have likely seen it”.
On the next day, the media circus was fully installed. The first reports are on Sky News first thing in the morning, even before portuguese press takes hold of the story. Journalists and locals dispute the information. Robert Murat, the son of an english mother and a portuguese father, with little luck in business, does not waste the opportunity. He moves from failed businessman into the role of a translator for the press and the police. Some british journalists, after sucking him to the bones, start suspecting his availability.
The Murat contradiction
Contrarily to the GNR elements and the Ocean Club’s staff, who participated in the searches on the night before and assure they did not see Murat around, Gerry and some of his friends guarantee that he was there. And thus he becomes an arguido.
Gerry and Kate’s friends, who are interrogated tightly by the PJ over almost a month, refuse to clarify this contradiction, when asked by Sol. “We have a pact. This is our matter only. It is nobody else’s business”, says David Payne, another element with the group. Minutes after we tried to contact Kate, Gerry, in a fury, calls the Sol journalist: “What do you think you are doing? Do you think you’re better than the portuguese police? I’m going to forward your contact to PJ and you will have to explain yourselves”.
——-
PJ says ‘everybody is a suspect’
The director of the Policia Judiciaria in Faro, Guilhermino da Encarnacao, confirmed with Sol that “we do not discard the possibility to have the family and friends as suspects”. This is always done “without neglecting other clues. Everybody who was at the resort at the time are suspects”.
http://sol.sapo.pt/PaginaInici…..t_id=42529
July 16th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
I still can’t believe that around half of the country are more interested in getting the McCanns ‘punished’ than doing their bit to help find Madeleine! This case has shown me that there is an awful lot of evil in this world, not only with 1000s of paedophiles out there but nasty individuals who are waiting with glee for the McCanns to be punished! For goodness sake this couple made the biggest mistake of theIr lives, they are going to pay for it for the REST of their lives, so what do all of you lovely people out there think, “when are they going to be punished”, “when are they going to pay for what they did”, “when are the social services goine to step in” HELLO! IF YOU HAVENT NOTICED THEY ARE BEING PUNISHED. They are coping each day with the thousand of messages of support they receive, by keeping involved in the case and perhaps the fact that they are trained proffessionals IS probably helping them appear strong, they probably break down behind closed doors. And the numerous comments that i have read about them ‘getting away with it’ because they are well off is utter rubbish, people have short memories, back in 1985/6 i believe, there was a little girl taken from a caravan in Great Yarmouth, she too was 3 almost 4, her mum left her in the caravan as she was asleep and went to the on site club with an older child, the little girl, Leoni was abducted from the caravan and murdered, i dont believe that her mum was arrested or charged and i think she was a single mum from a council area, i think she too had been punished enough and just cannot believe ‘decent ‘ people out there wish more suffering on anyone in this position, yes we ALL no that what these parents did was wrong but what is locking them up going to do except leave their other children in care. Have some compassion instead of acting like a bunch of witch-hunters.
July 16th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
From Sol
“Justine McGuinness, the McCann’s new public relations, guarantees that the collected money “is being managed by a group of independent persons”, and subject to “very rigorous rules that are imposed by british law to all charities”. Still, McGuinness refuses to explain who are the “highly qualified lawyers and managers” that are managing the fund, just highlighting they are not remunerated, and offered as volunteers. ”
Ms. McGuinness will likely not be one of the ones ‘not renumerated’.
Interesting political connections, lol.
http://forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=2685&start=0
http://www.reasonstation.net/b…..um=3&5
Posted: 2007-07-10 12:43
binar
Check the following… why have the McCanns employed a failed ex LibDem candidate from various by elections and general elections… she would appear to be fairly up the LibDem hierarchy… as one person commented in one of the links below, what is her purpose, political lobbying for what? are we to expect one of the McCanns to be handed a safe seat somewhere anytime soon? How exactly is she going to be helpful besides raising the McCanns to even bigger celebrity status? I can’t help feeling that something smells totally rotten about this whole episode, and poor maddy is an inocent pawn in something pretty ****** here…. anyone else agree?
Justine McGuinness, Find Madeleine Campaign Manager +44 7912067489 justine@findmadeleine.com
July 16th, 2007 at 4:25 pm
At the end of the day, no-one knows the full details of this case, apart from the Portugese police that is, and even they do not have all the pieces of the puzzle. I strongly believe that the McCanns are at fault for leaving their children alone in a foreign country, however I am sure they will never forgive themselves and that they will carry that guilt with them forever. This I believe is punishment enough. Saying all of that, I find the conflicting statements from the parents and their friends highly suspicious, and as mentioned they are all suspects, even Madelaine’s parents!!! Until they are ruled out of the investigation it is completely natural for people to be wary of their motives and their reactions as the case develops.
This is a highly publcised case, and with that brings opinions, which everyone has, but not everyone agrees with.
All that actually matters is that hopefully Madelaine McCann is found alive and well, and those involved in her kidnapping, whoever they may be, are brought to justice. What Madelaine is or has been going through is the only thing that matters.
July 16th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
I personnaly agree with jhonnie the Mc Canns should be held responsible for madeline being missing. I beleieve that Gerry as something to hide, every interview thay make he does all the talking, he don’t let Kate say a word, all she does is look at the ground..
July 16th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Gerry McCann is a very strange bloke, can’t be trusted. something very strange about him.. Being a consultant and Kate a GP.. They should not be treated any different.. When they do return to England they should be arressted for neglect..
July 16th, 2007 at 5:17 pm
There seems to be quite a mix of opinions here and I can see both sides.
It is right that they should not have left their child/children and it is probably only the fact that they are professionals why this seems to have been forgotten. Anna (UK) makes the point perfectly. My limit is washing my car on my drive while having the baby monitor with me while my 3-year old son is in his bed upstairs asleep, I would never dream of going to the neighbours house for a meal etc with or without a baby monitor never mind down the road to a restaurant. Checking every half hour was really not sufficient and in my view was grossly negligent.
However, on the other hand, being intelligent people I do not doubt for one second that they know what they have done and as other people say this is probably a much harsher punishment than anything the law could throw at them. Is it really in the public interest to lock them up? Are they not publicly disgraced anyway. Kate looks absolutely broken to me.
Whatever the outcome of all this, I just hope the publicity highlights the dangers of leaving children for whatever reason and for whatever period.
Also just bear in mind that we (general public) only know what the newspapers and the TV tell us and they have a habit of sensationalising things or getting it blatantly wrong.
Maybe an independent enquiry should establish the facts and administer punishment if it is deemed necessary.
July 16th, 2007 at 5:44 pm
From Sol
“Justine McGuinness, the McCann’s new public relations, guarantees that the collected money “is being managed by a group of independent persons”, and subject to “very rigorous rules that are imposed by british law to all charities”. Still, McGuinness refuses to explain who are the “highly qualified lawyers and managers” that are managing the fund, just highlighting they are not remunerated, and offered as volunteers. “
Ms. McGuinness will likely not be one of the ones ‘not renumerated’.
Interesting political connections, lol.
forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=2685&start=0
.reasonstation.net/b…..um=3&5
Posted: 2007-07-10 12:43
binar
Check the following… why have the McCanns employed a failed ex LibDem candidate from various by elections and general elections… she would appear to be fairly up the LibDem hierarchy… as one person commented in one of the links below, what is her purpose, political lobbying for what? are we to expect one of the McCanns to be handed a safe seat somewhere anytime soon? How exactly is she going to be helpful besides raising the McCanns to even bigger celebrity status? I can’t help feeling that something smells totally rotten about this whole episode, and poor maddy is an inocent pawn in something pretty ****** here…. anyone else agree?
Justine McGuinness, Find Madeleine Campaign Manager
July 16th, 2007 at 6:00 pm
I’m starting to learn, slowly and painfully, that not everyone loves their children in the same way, and this love is being taken for granted in this case. It’s a cliche of British upper society (and not only Brits, probably) that children are reared and educated by servants.
What is this business about the McCanns “controlling information?” It seems that IF that’s true they are guilty not only of the neglect that enabled someone to take this sweet baby, but of impeding the investigation as well. That makes them suspicious people.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:19 pm
The McCann’s may be professionals but they are most definitely not the product of the British upper classes. It is obvious from their accents that they have working class origins. This is not to suggest parents from all socio economic backgrounds are capable of neglecting their children.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:20 pm
I don’t buy this “they’re being punished enough, maybe for the rest of their lives” crap. If I have six pints, then when I’m driving home drive into and kill my own child, does that mean I should be let off because I’ll live with that guilt for the rest of my life?
Anyone who believes that to be true is nothing short of idiotic.
July 16th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
No clues against Murat.
Therefore, the sighting by “Jane Tanner” is dubious at best, and spurious at worst. If spurious, what was being ingested that night to make two other members of the party have ‘flashbacks’ weeks later?
forums.mirror.co.uk/viewtopic.php?p=99979#99979
Article translated and posted by Astro:
I decided it deserves its own thread - hope you don’t mind Astro!!!
in: SOL on July 13, 2007
an article by Graça Rosendo and Felicia Cabrita, with Margarida Davim
translated by: astro
No clues against Murat
PJ suspected a connection between Robert Murat and one of the McCann’s friends. Apart from that, there are few clues: at the arguido’s home, all they found was a ******** and an article about Casanova
Policia Judiciaria (PJ) returned this week to the investigation line that had been established on the days right after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from Praia da Luz, and that was focused only on two targets: the group of nine english people that were on holidays in the Ocean Club, which included the little girl’s parents, and Robert Murat, the only arguido in this inquiry. The various leads that were followed in other countries seem to be fully dismissed.
On Tuesday, PJ in Portimao interrogated Murat tightly for six hours. On the following day, they confronted him with three friends of the McCann couple. According to what SOL could establish, none of them was confronted with the existence of new information. PJ centered their inquiries on the contradictions that were spotted in the various interrogations they were subject to during this investigation – namely the fact that, among several dozens of witnesses, only the couple’s friends and one female employee of the Ocean Club saw Murat in the vicinity of the McCann’s apartment on the night that Maddie disappeared.
Not even GNR agents, the first authority that arrived on location, remember his presence that night, and guaranteed they only saw him on the next morning.
Judiciaria keeps Robert Murat as a main suspect anyway, and has been exploring the possibility of connections between him and Russell O’Brien, one of the members of the group of nine. But the only connection seems to be the fact that Murat went to Exeter, in England, where a sister of his lives, and where also Russell and Jane live, ten days before the child vanished.
This friend of the McCann’s, who returned to Portimao to be confronted with Murat, is one of the three elements of the group of nine who says he saw Murat at the place where the case happened.
******** and Casanova
Robert Murat, the son of a british mother and a portuguese father, was in the place where everything happened, on the morning after the disappearance, and immediately became a translator for the press, the GNR and the PJ.
It is immediately perceived how easily he moves around, entering the McCann’s apartment and the tourist club several times. He therefore watches the authorities’ diligences and listens to some of the depositions that are taken on those first days. But his friends say he likes being noticed. He boasts about having done translations for the british police in Norfolk, and that he knows about the actions of paedophiles in the Algarve.
But in just two days, Murat becomes a suspect. British press remembers a case that happened in London, when the author of a crime was always present during the investigations, and started raising doubts. The police was alerted, and without him even noticing, started inquiring about his personal life, preferring to keep him close, rather than excluding him from the investigation.
But Murat also noticed what was being said about him. And he stated informally, as a sort of alibi, that on the night of the events he had been with his girlfriend – as some friends have told SOL.
A week later, Murat was constituted an arguido. On the first time his deposition was taken, he presented a different version of what he had done on that night: he had not been with his girlfriend, but at home with his mother, having dinner.
This is just one of the contradictions with which Murat was confronted at PJ on Tuesday. Apart from that, the police have little to point against him, except for the fact that he owns a car – which would give him more mobility than anyone in the group of nine had, to drive away from the crime scene with the child, according to a police source.
The searches that were done in his house produced a ******** and an article from ‘Telegraph Review’ with the title ‘Lock up your daughters’. It’s an article about a literary work on Casanova, which poses the possibility that the famous charmer was a paedophile. It was also discovered that Murat and his girlfriend used to visit adult porn sites.
‘A big confusion’
Jennifer Murat, the mother, states she had dinner with Robert at home that evening. The telephone records between 8 p.m. and midnight prove just that, according to sources close to Murat: “There are phone calls both from phones and cell phones that prove that, at the time he was seen, he was actually at home”.
Barend Weijdon, a dutchman who established himself in Praia da Luz as a real-estate manager 10 years ago, took notice of the child’s disappearance around 10 p.m., through a friend. He was a few metres from the location, entered the Ocean Club and participated in the searches. He was there before the authorities arrived, he guarantees to SOL. “I know Robert very well, and if he had been there that night, I, just like many other friends of ours who were there, would have certainly noticed him”. And he adds: “I arrived there just after 10 p.m. and stayed until 3 a.m. I didn’t see him. But I remember sseing Maddie’s father and a friend, talking to GNR”.
Also June Wright and her husband, who own a bar in Praia da Luz, upon hearing the news, joined the crowd and participated in the searches that night. They have known Murat for many years, and they are sure that they would have noticed his presence, if he had been there.
“It was full of people that we didn’t know”, June told SOL. “It was a big confusion”, she adds. A confusion that, according to an employee of the hotel, could have permitted about anything.
The versions of the friends
The three friends of the McCanns who have returned to Portimao state the contrary. Fiona Payne and Rachel Mumpilly assure they saw Robert Murat at the Ocean Club around 11.45 p.m., while Russell O’Brien says he saw him around 1 a.m. These guarantees were given after Murat was constituted an arguido. Because before, when they were confronted with the possibility that they might have seen anything suspicious on the night of the disappearance, they said nothing.
“He even told me he had a daughter of the same age as Madeleine”, Russell said, as he spoke to SOL about this case 2 weeks ago. And Fiona Payne said at that time she told police that “he seemed to be peeking into the apartment” on that night.
This was the highest point of the confrontation that PJ held this week, and which put the McCann’s friends in front of Robert Murat. But the contradictions that led the PJ to suspect the group of nine british people right from the start, are still to be clarified.
We remember it was 10 p.m. when Kate decided to check on her children in the apartment. And this is the only moment that gathers consensus in the various versions the group delivered during the investigations. Madeleine had disappeared from her room, and the twins remained sound asleep.
In seconds, the resort was in turmoil. The four men in the group, and the club’s staff checked out every corner. GNR arrives over an hour later, and PJ arrives over 2 hours later. The first interrogations start: Where were the parents when the child disappeared? Gerry replies the nine were eating at the Tapas restaurant and took turns in checking the children were ok, at regular intervals.
He starts by saying he first checked the children at 9.05. When he entered the apartment, he just thought it was starnge that the bedroom door was partly open. But he checked the window, which was closed, just like the shutters, and relaxed.
His friend Jane Tanner, Russell’s wife, says that ten minutes after he returned to the table, it was her turn to check the rooms. She crossed ways with a dark haired man who was walking in the opposite direction carrying a child, but she didn’t find it strange. But she memorized the individual from head to toes, so she could later describe him in great detail.
A few minutes later, it’s time for Matthew, the husband of Rachel, to leave Tapas. He entered the room and saw the McCann children asleep. He noticed nothing out of the ordinary.
When, at 10 p.m., the mother notices her daughter is missing, the window is wide open and the shutters are up. To GNR, this is an unlikely scenario. One of the military guaranteed to SOL two weeks ago: “This is a silent area, where there are practically no cars passing by. Those shutters were difficult to lift from the outside, and they would have made a lot of noise. It would have been so much easier to enter the door, but there were no signs of a break-in”.
The story of the group’s last dinner also includes some deviations. Some guarantee that someone left the table every half hour to check on the children. Others reduce this time to half of it. Some say the checking was done through the windows. Others state that the adults entered each other’s apartments.
One of the employees that was serving that evening does not remember that much movement: “I just remember a tall, grey-haired man to get up from the table”. This was Russell, who had not attended dinner two days earlier, either. An aerobics teacher from the resort entertains dinner guests at the Tapas with a Quiz. At 9.30 p.m., when the game is over, Gerry invites her to their table, where she stays for half an hour. During that time, she told friends, nobody left the table, but there was a vacant seat.
Jeremy contradicts
Gerry alters his version several times, but he maintains that the door to the children’s room was open. Matthew later denies his own statement of that night: He says that the bedroom door was open and there was more light, as if the shutters had been raised. The theory that there was already someone inside the apartment starts to take shape. And it reinforced Jane’s story.
But there is a witness at the right time, on the wrong location. Jeremy Wilkins, who had become accquainted with Maddie’s father during the vacations and played tennis with him, was walking his eight months old son around. He met
Gerry, who had left the apartment through the back door, and exchanged a brief conversation with him. At that time, according to the first statements, Jane was leaving Tapas, heading for the apartments’ main entrance, and meets them both. Jeremy contradicts: “It was a rather narrow street and I don’t think anyone could pass there without me noticing”.
When the british woman reaches the top of the street, she sees an individual carrying a child. In spite of the dim lighting, and the situation not raising any suspicions for her, she describes the beige trousers, the dark thick jacket and the black classic style shoes in great detail. Jeremy insists: “If that had happened, I would probably have seen it”.
Jane did not come to Portugal to participate in this new round of depositions. And the reconstitution of the events on that night has yet to be made. Therefore, we do not know yet whether the man that the british woman claims to have seen carrying a child on that night, is Robert Murat or not.
July 16th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Reading through some of these posts, I detect the beginnings of some sort of conspiracy theory. On the one hand, there is an almost obsessive poring over tiny details by people who have no access to the full file of facts amassed by the PJ. Next to that, the growing consensus around the least likely culprits, the McCanns, and a bizarre desire to condemn and punish them. None of this is quite sane or healthy. Apart from the sheer unlikelihood that the McCanns would hand over their own daughter to paedophiles, there is the condemnation for very natural negligence. Given the conditions (a reasonably upmarket family resort, proximity between the child’s bedroom and the restaurant, and Portugal not being awash with paedophiles), I think many or most parents might have become a little over-confident, especially when caught up with holidaying friends. It may have had a dramatic outcome on this occasion, but I can well believe that the same thing goes on round the world regularly and nobody notices. It’s the price we pay for living balanced lives.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Denis…..
it was so nice to read a post that is neither crazily vindictive about Robert Murat or reeking of inverted snobbery aimed at the McCanns.
Time will tell exactly what happened to Madeleine, everything else is pure speculation that chops and changes according to which newspaper you read or which forum you contribute to.
July 16th, 2007 at 8:54 pm
Well Ray, im certainly Not Idiotic because i say that the McCanns have suffered enough and will pay for their terrible lack of judgement for the rest of thier lives, Im just a mum and grandma who thinks that it could be anyone of us with children, who could be going through what they are going through, I am putting myself in thier shoes and imagining how i would feel if it were my child, but theIr grief must be twice as great as they know it was from their lack of judgement that probably led to Madeleine being abducted. One thing that makes me angry though is that a lot of people who are condeming the McCanns for leaving the children are probably the same people who would complain about children running around ‘being a nuisance’ in restaurants and pubs! No i don’t think they should be arrested in fact i think in the future this couple could actually do a lot for missing children, as for Gerry being suspicious, what rubbish, he probably speaks for himself and Kate during interviews as she is probably very close to breaking down, if anyone cannot see the pain on this couples faces they must be blind!
July 16th, 2007 at 8:56 pm
I feel so sorry for Robert Murat. The British tabloids can say what they like about him and make insinuations against him, yet he is not allowed, under Portuguese law, to defend himself. It’s a nightmare situation where an innocent man and an defenceless child have had their lives destroyed because Gerry and Kate McCann wanted their evenings childfree.
July 16th, 2007 at 11:36 pm
This has been one of the more illuminating threads on the Kidnap, with some interesting, if unsubstantiated theories, that may involve members of the McCann holiday party.
There is still a lot of malice displayed towards the McCanns themselves though, and this is unfortunate as surely the bad guy in all of this is the kidnapper ? I beleive the McCanns had nothing whatsoever to do with the kidnap, although I do believe they put their kids at risk by leaving them unattended in the flat - regular / irregular checks is still not really adequate in my opinion.
I agree that the McCanns made an error of judgement, and shouldn’t have left their kids unattended for even 5 minutes. However, I feel all the hateful posts about them neglecting their children are probably the result of status envy more than anything else. I also think they will be paying for the mistake the rest of their lives. The pain and guilt that they are feeling must be horrendous.
Moving on here is my take on what has happened and who has done it and its similar to that of many senior police child abduction experts think except that I’ll name who I think did it. I subscribe to the lone, predatory paedophile typology typical in this type of case.
Here’s a quote from the independent from Sky’s crime correspondent Martin Blunt. I know Blunt isn’t an expert but he is merely stating the general police consensus.
“Most children who disappear in these circumstances are victims of paedophiles who plan everything and then panic. The easy option for them is to destroy the only witness to their crime. It was clear to me from very early on that this was going to be the most likely outcome. I think journalists in general tended to shy away from making that point.”
I think Robert Murat is a paedophile and is the offender, and that although he planned the kidnap, he was probally totally unaware of the global media attention the case would cause and that it has really panicked him. In fact I think the media spotlight - and pressure of being the next Ian Huntley or Ian Brady is crushing him.
I also think that is has been very lucky rather than clever and has made a great deal of mistakes, probably a lot we haven’t even heard of in the press - everything from trying to inject himself into the enquiry, and not having a solid alibi drew suspicion to himself. His bizarre attempt to hire a car even though he already had 2, and his ‘relevant sexual history’ all just add to my suspicions. He also seems to have lied to the police about having an early night as his phone records show he called Sergy Malinka very late on.
Finally I am confident that Murat will be charged and convicted. The Portuguese Police, assisted by experts from the UK’s specialist CEOP, are on to him and they are not just going to go away. They know he did it.
July 17th, 2007 at 5:19 am
If Murat is a paedophile there hasn’t been anything written to convince me so far. Having an article to lock up children with something about Casanova maybe being a paedophine in your house or even looking at adult porn with your girlfriend isn’t enough to convince me Murat has any “relevant sexual history” unless there is something I overlooked. I read that Murat called his sister that night so could he have pushed the wrong speed dial button on his cell phone and called the Russian guy’s voice mail or is he lying? I wouldn’t want people on the jury who would convict over having an article about Casanova or a wrong number pushed on the cell phone. Maybe Murat was calling the Russian guy’s girlfriend? Who knows. There must be stronger evidence to accuse a person of abducting a child, calling them a paedophile, and basically trashing the reputation world wide. I read an article that stated Murat hired a car because his mother was using the wagon to help carry items for a booth to help find Madeleine. I am not backing Murat but rather saying there is not enough clear evidence of his involvement in the abduction from what I have read. The McCann friends appear just as or more peculiar with the inconsistencies in statements, sightings other people didn’t see, and so on. If the McCann friends claim to have seen Murat during the initial search for Madeleine that would mean Murat couldn’t have gone far with Madeleine if he abducted her, maybe suggesting a third party if Murat is involved? If true, many people were around who know Murat and don’t remember seeing him during the search other than the McCann friends and maybe one other person? Then there is the man who was walking his son and spoke with Mr. McCann at the time the ladyfriend of the McCann’s claims to have seen a man walking off with a child. The man says he would have seen the man walking off with the child. So the man didn’t see the ladyfriend of the McCann’s either? If so, then not only are there inconsistencies in the McCann friends statements about how often children were checked and how but a sighting that someone else didn’t see but was there and now claims that Murat was at the search for Madeleine when many people who know him well didn’t see him. Ohhhhhhh There is a lot odd about the McCann friends too.
Is it that Mr. Oldfield was the last person to check on Madeleine before Mr. McCann? If so Mr. Oldfield would be the last McCann party around Madeleine before her dad checked? Her dad found the bedroom door open? So the dad sensed something unusual after Mr. Oldfield’s check? So if that is accurate, Mr. Oldfield was the last non parent person to have been in the apartment to check on the children and then the father checked and said the children were in bed so where was Mr. Oldfield then? I read somewhere he was absent at the table at some point. No,I am not suggesting Mr. Oldfield did anything. My point is Mr. Oldfield is looking more suspect than Murat if you really think about it for a while. So if the media wanted to they could be trashing Mr. Oldfield the same way as Murat? If the facts are, I don’t know, that Mr. Oldfield was absent from the table while the ladyfriend made a sighting of a man walking off with a child that the gentlemen walking the area with his child didn’t see and the bedroom door had been opened possibly after Mr. Oldfield’s check, according to Mr. McCann then the McCann friends claim to have seen Murat when people who know him didn’t then ? okay Murat had a news article at his house with something about Casanova maybe being a paedophile and he supposedly has watching adult porn with his girlfriend ding ding ding so he is suspect? The bad media spin has been on Murat and who knows in the end maybe rightfully so but from what I have read there could be just as much bad media spin on the McCann friends considering the circumstances.
I can see how there is not enough evidence to arrest Murat at this point. The goal is to find the actual abductor and people involved. It is best not to only look at Murat until it is determined he should be arrested.
This holiday nightly routine appears a case of Murphy’s Law. First the children are left, three and under, unattended in an unlocked apartment with various people checking on them. So, how do you know that your friend is really checking or using the restroom and saying they did? On top of that the McCann party drinks so do they forget to check all the apartments each time? Next, Mr. McCann finds it unusual the bedroom door is open. So many people are in and out that Mr. McCann ignores a red flag. If only he and his wife had been checking they would have possibly mentioned the fact to the other and determined something unusual? Then there is the ladyfriend who says she saw a man walking off with a child but she didn’t realize the child was Madeline. Okay, maybe so. The ladyfriend can give detail of the man’s pants, shirt and shoes and how his hair grows down the back. I have read she could describe pajamas the child wore, if true? All a detailed observation although unable to recognize the child. Did she do any of the checks on children during the holiday stay? I mean maybe she didn’t know what pajamas Madeleine wore that night but did Madeleine wear the same pajamas other nights? I can see how the police had so much to sort! Then there is the man who was walking his child, a boy?, who didn’t see a man carrying a child away. Could that be the man the ladyfriend saw or she did give actual detail of the child being a girl?
Still no word on whether or not Mr. Chemello had any information worth checking? So he went to a lawyer saying he had info about Madeleine and that doesn’t sound like extortion. Then he is hauled off questioned about a possible extortion charge in secrecy and then sent away to face some other charge in France. Regardless of his previous sentence and suspected activity could he know something about the people who abduct children? Could he be shut up and sent off for some reason other than he was trying to extort money? So again, the media says the man was picked up for possibly trying to extort money from the McCann’s, been in trouble before, hauled off and no explanation whether he was really trying to extort money but how many of us believed without question he was trying to extort and had no info? Was he ever charged with extortion?
Earlier on someone asked if Madeleine was Mr. McCann’s biological daughter. I had wondered the same but didn’t ask. Somewhere I read that she is but that was still was an area to consider.
Madeleine’s parents have done a great job making the public aware of Madeleine. Still, no Madeleine, huge reward, dedicated police, public awareness, hopefully there will be a lucky break if nothing else. I understand Murat is the only official suspect and that is why there is so much focus. At the same time I hope the reporters will try to obtain information about other circumstances too, such as whether Mr. Chemello tried to extort or had info, the Frenchman, any previous trouble with the McCann friends, etc.
Thanks to the person who earlier posted gave a more detailed account of the evening Madeleine disappeared.
July 17th, 2007 at 5:47 am
I FIND IT AMAZING THAT YOU PEOPLE OUT THERE ARE MORE INTERESTED AT A TIME LIKE THIS THAT THE PARENTS NEED TO BE PUNISHED, IS WHAT THEY ARE GOING THROUGH NOT ENOUGH PUNISHMENT.
I AM DISCUSTED IN WHAT SOME OF YOU WRITE ABOUT THEM.
July 17th, 2007 at 5:56 am
Shouting is not going to attract any sort of sensible attention and weakens yourargument.
I don’t know who has Madeleine; I don’t know if she is alive or dead.
I do know the McCanns have to find answers to lot questions…for their sanity.