Madeleine McCann: Robert Murat Tells All, Neil Hogan Investigates And The Irish Family
MADDYWATCH - Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.
DAILY MAIL: “McCanns bring in cold-case detective”
“Kate and Gerry McCann have hired a former Met Police officer to carry out a ‘cold case’ review into Madeleine’s disappearance. Noel Hogan, a former CID detective, has spent hundreds of hours interviewing British witnesses in the case”
Why not just read the papers, or Anorak?
Hogan has interviewed the so-called “Tapas seven”, also known as the Tapas Nine
Has Hogan enjoyed many success in his new private detective firm? Says the Mail: “Mr Hogan had been investigating one of the 7/7 suicide bombers before the terror attacks in 2005 after the man’s bank became suspicious of his spending patterns” – Would that be one of the men who then went on to play his part in the murder of 52 people? Did Mr Hogan find anything suspicious?
“The McCanns’ official spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, declined to comment”
“CHARGE MURAT OR CLEAR HIM, RELATIVES SAY” – Robert Murat’s aunt Sally Eveleigh, says: “Either charge him or let him go. The worst thing that could happen would be for this to be allowed to carry on as it is”
THE STAR: “MURAT ‘TO MAKE 1M’”
The film. The book. The TV show. The DVD. The computer game. The glass eye. The T-shirts
DAILY EXPRESS: “MURAT WANTS £1M FOR HIS TALE OF WOE”
“Robert Murat hopes to make £1million if he is formally cleared over Madeleine McCann’s disappearance”
A source close to Murat says: “Maddie was the biggest story of 2007 and Robert Murat has been a massive part of that. He’s been living under a cloud since being named a suspect and feels he should at least have some compensation for the trauma”
Why not write his story, the Daily Express has already produced its book - “Madeleine: A Most Heartbreaking And Extraordinary Disappearance, by Robert Downing. It’s published by Northern & Shell, who own the Daily Express.
“Publicist Max Clifford speaks regularly with Murat and has pledged to represent him if he is ruled out of the investigation. Mr Clifford said: ‘He has been attacked from all sides and not been able to defend himself thanks to Portuguese secrecy laws’”
Look out for Murat in OK! magazine and his going on to appear on Strictly Come Dancing
Says Sally Eveleigh: “There is not a shred of evidence against him but we have had to live through eight months of whispering and suspicions. We’re all praying this nightmare will come to an end and he will no longer be a suspect, but if that’s not going to happen then charge him so he can defend himself in court”
Who needs court when you have daytime telly? Perhaps Jeremy Kyle can interview him?
HOLIDAY family may hold clue” – Martin Smith, his wife and children were on holiday in Praia da Luz. They saw a man carrying a child towards the beach. They told the police. Metodo 3 investigators are going to speak with them. The man they saw was “about 5ft 6in”
THE SUN: “MADDIE HUNTERS QUIZ IRISH FAMILY”
Hunters? Run, Maddie, run!
“PRIVATE detectives hunting for Madeleine McCann are to quiz an Irish family who may have been the last to see her alive”
Says Mr Smith: “I’d talk to anyone to move this investigation on. I think about Maddie every day.”
And what about the Portuguese police? Can you tell Sun readers about those bunglers: “I found the Portuguese cops not to be the most efficient bunch.” Job done.
Says Mrs Smith: “We saw a man carrying a blonde child. It was just such a normal thing to see in a holiday resort — we didn’t think anything of it at the time”
THE MIRROR: “MADDY: WE SAW SNATCH”
The Smith says the man they saw was between 5ft 7in to 5ft 9in
The speculation and sensation so far
Posted: 3rd, January 2008 | In: Madeleine McCann Comments (1,011) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- Marie on Susan Boyle Watch: Sharon Osbourne Knows A Hairy Arsehole When She Sees One
- Graeme (aka eggman) on Ringo Starr Appears In A Water Drop, Jesus Unimpressed
- Graeme (aka eggman) on Madeleine McCann: Let’s Blame The Muslims
- Marie on Susan Boyle Watch: Sharon Osbourne Knows A Hairy Arsehole When She Sees One
- Tranzgrrrrrrrrrrrrrrl on Susan Boyle Is My Transsexual Jesus
January 3rd, 2009 at 6:01 pm
well anorak wheres the sketch from the irish persons memory do you care or what and detective same thing do you care and metodo 3 just what circus are they from had enough time to find that out and found out or not if not why whats keeping you from it the same thing that kept anna stam from saying strangers! well i’ll call the police because i know its wrong for strangers to have someone elses child?
Moderator - what did the police say?
February 25th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
“SUNDAY EXPRESS – Page 9 – 24 February 2008
QUOTE “Hogan International: an apology
On January 13 we published an article headed “Fears that new Maddie detective is ‘not up to task’” in which we wrongly claimed that Noel Hogan’s investigation agency had taken over the private investigation into Maddie’s disappearance and accused it of being “not up to the task.”
We wish to withdraw unequivocally the suggestion that either Mr Hogan or his agency are incompetent or had misled the McCanns about their capabilities. We are happy to clarify that Mr Hogan’s company has been retained by Metodo 3, the Spanish agency who work for the McCanns, to carry out work in the UK.
This is part of a long-standing arrangement between the two agencies to instruct each other for work in their respective countries. The impression we gave that there is animosity between them and that Mr Hogan breached professional confidences was also wrong.
We apologise to Mr Hogan for the embarrassment and distress caused by our article and have agreed to pay him and his agency compensation and legal costs.”
Only available in hardcopy
this is already onsite posted yesterday jj 25th
January 4th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
what a BIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIG mess, no?
Mccans and Murat are still arguidos…to shut them up,so Pj and others can carry on their investigation.
I personally believe that it is bigger than Mccans and Murat.Much bigger….says a “source”.
Hey! what about Madeleine? and HER human rights????
January 4th, 2008 at 5:30 am
706
Tony Bennett Says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 9:08 pm
675 Totje says (January 3rd, 2008 at 8:52 pm)
“re: 655 Tony Bennett re twins [being left by McCanns in the creche every day] after disappearance of MM: [I say this was an emotional stressy situation [protecting the twins from that], questioning by police, searching, focussing on what’s happened to MM, focus on Madeleine and finding her. Not that strange imo”.
REPLY: I have an idea that 99% of mothers out there would disagree with you. And with a paedophilic predator or gang on the loose?
________________
REPLY: I guess I’m that one percent that agrees with her, Tony B. I’ve stated that earlier today on here my thoughts of wee ones not being around stressful, emotional and upsetting situations. Any mother wants to protect her child from that. Children feel it, sense it and react to it negatively. Best they be kept out of it and preoccupied with playing with others in a calm environment. I believe every mother knows that if a young new mother is nervous around her new baby or young one her child reacts accordingly. You get a screaming baby in your arms and you get upset and nervous and tense the baby screams all the longer. Hand your baby to a calm person to hold the baby calms down. The same applies as they grow even at 1, 2 or on up. The parent seems sad the child changes in their own mood and if older asks questions and becomes puzzled and concerned. Children react to emotions around them as do adults. However, adults can usually understand whatever the emotion may be about but children don’t always. Yes, in one’s grief you want to hug your child and hold them very close and not let let them out of yours arms. Is it fair to your child to cling tightly to them when they are too young to understand why and they become agitated and start acting out sensing the change in Mommy and/or Daddy?
January 4th, 2008 at 5:18 am
Cheryl
We may all react differently.
But what is the difference between :
1. Seeing that someone isn’t showing standard signs of grief and assuming that they’re not feeling it
2. Seeing someone isn’t showing standard signs of grief but assuming that they must be feeling it because that would be normal.
Except that one is a suspicious interpretation and the other is a generous interpretation - neither is more objectively right or wrong than the other.
January 4th, 2008 at 5:14 am
708
Jane Says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 9:11 pm
658
the watcher Says:
with respect to TONY BENNET and CO
all your information time lines etc are based on newspaper stories.
this is all worthless.
only the police truly know the evidence that has been gathered so to rely on so called leaks to the papers is foolish.
we actually know nothing.
just like the papers.
…………………………………………………..
Excellent point, watcher. Yet here we have a solicitor (active, retired, or former solicitor depending on which accounts you read) and a number of clearly well educated people who are prepared to condemn suspects, largely on the basis of distorted information and leaks reported in newspapers or in TV reports - plus a whole industry of contradictory rumours circulating on the internet.
____________
REPLY: Jane, you may agree or not, but fiction can be quite exciting for the readers or even the author when writing. One can embellish, write their wildest thoughts and dreams, and write for the readers who enjoy such books. You buy a well-written fiction and one can possibly fantasize through it as the hero, heroine or even the villain! Non-fiction books can be quite blah frankly depending on the subject it covers.
January 4th, 2008 at 5:09 am
Denzylle
I haven’t read ‘All that Remains’, but if the McCanns wanted to hide something they would have the knowledge to hide it. Although, if they really did say that they transported used nappies and rotting meat in the back of the hire car, then they may not have the sense to cover things up.
January 4th, 2008 at 5:00 am
695
Remigius Says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 9:02 pm
674 Cheryl
Re: Your post on “Normal–You said: “Here we go again - just what is “Normal” - I’ll let you in on a little secret - NONE of us are the same and we all react differently.”
But in fact, this isn’t true, is it?
Most people react very similarly to an X kind of situation. This is why polls are paid attention to. This is why certain aspects of human behavior can be quantified. This is what statisticians do all day long!
Are you just spreading around self-serving Maccanite rationalizations?
_________________
REPLY: First of all it does not good to attempt to explain my th0ughts on how what you said are wrong as your statement “Are you just spreading around self-serving Maccanite rationalizations?” tells me you are closed minded, as you think I’m a pro-McCann. In fact, I’m right in the middle of the fence waiting for the real FACTS which will only come from the Investigators for me to know the truth. Do I think they may not have done bodily harm to her - yes I do think that and have thought it through carefully in my own mind from my own thoughts from following the case very closely. Do I think they could have - yes but I can’t put all the pieces together to figure out how and how they could have carried a charade this long without someone breaking down to tell the truth. BUT I will not be ‘normal’ , I guess according to your calling normal for most people, who in my eyes lose their own identity when ‘following the crowd’, and follow all the others on here in their reasoning one way or the other and thus prejudge the McCanns one way or the other. I have my standards and beliefs thus I will not prejudge the McCanns. Once again, what is normal for one person to react to in a certain way is not necessarily normal for another person to react that way - we all have different make-up in our personalities from how we were raised and how our personalities were formed from childhood on up.
January 4th, 2008 at 4:43 am
989 Karen
Bringing things back on topic-
- and since you refer to Cornwell -
what do you infer (on topic) from:
i) the defecating dogs in ‘All that Remains’ ; and
ii) the use of oxidates being used in lightening hair to render negative evidence of drug use?
January 4th, 2008 at 4:39 am
Mods and Admin
Cheryl , don’t always believe what you see - my ‘welcome’ was as frosty as he deserved, and he was moderated throughout his sojourn here.
No one on here has ever made fun of or at Madeliene, they are very aware she is the innocent victim, and is sadly being overshadowed by the black drama being played out.
The poster concerned was revelling inthe thought of violence, had it not been a little girl it would have been someone else. These posters crop up on here for their own reasons.
____________
Respectfully I’m not going to disagree over it on here with you. I read what they were saying one way and others obviously the other. And also will say I did not read any other of their postings on here to possibly see a different slant - that was a hit and miss day for me on here with other things going on over here.
January 4th, 2008 at 4:30 am
Denzylle
I’m not American, what’s happening on UK TV?
I am interested in who wins though. I don’t think the Republicans deserve to get back in, not so much for the War - any government can get war fever - but they couldn’t even sort out New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.
January 4th, 2008 at 4:25 am
634
Tony Bennett Says:
January 3rd, 2008 at 8:14 pm
439 Stevo says (January 3rd, 2008 at 5:06 pm)
“If the McCanns are found guilty, I think their sentence should be doubled or trebled for the hoax factor. It’s one thing to commit a serious crime but to go to elaborate lengths to conceal it is almost as bad as the original crime IMO”.
Mods and Admin:
“Fraud also?”
REPLY: Theft Act 1968: Obtainig a pecuniary advantage by deception…
____________
REPLY: Tony B., you’ll find this case interesting. Over 20 plus years ago here in VA a boy ‘disappeared’ from his house. Police spent time investigating his disappearance as to what could have happened to him and where he was. They found a blood stain on a corner table in the living room and then it all came out. He and his brother had been rough housing in the house while the mother was at work. The boy got knocked against the table and died. Turns out mother to cover up what happened between the two boys, buried his body in backyard. Since it was an accident on one son’s part no charges against him. BUT only charge they could get the mother on in covering up was it was against the law in VA to bury a body in your backyard!
January 4th, 2008 at 4:23 am
Well, I wonder where Obama stands on the McCann issue? Someone definitely needs to ask some hard questions here!
January 4th, 2008 at 4:21 am
OK, I see that, UK time 4.15am and with internet timedrift, I’m lost amidst Americans who want to talk US politics and not OT MM, so I’ll come back tomorrow with my point # 2 which relates to UK television Thurday evening (and no, it’s NOT Elizabeth Smart).
January 4th, 2008 at 4:16 am
Yes, Bush ruined it … plus, Republicans are extremely fractured right now and they don’t have a good candidate. Huckabee is a joke. Listening to Obama’s speech right now. I like him. I could get behind him more easily than Hillary.
January 4th, 2008 at 4:14 am
I think it’s almost certain the Democrats will win in November.
January 4th, 2008 at 4:12 am
994
Karen Says:
January 4th, 2008 at 4:00 am
Obama seems nice. Do you think the Democrats will win though?
________________
REPLY: Karen, I think the Democrats will win next election. Bush has ruined it for any good Republican candidates. And also too many scandals for the Republicans to overcome in time. I thought we’d see a Clinton/Obama ticket and still may but I think this country is finally ready to vote in a Black President, at last. In fact, if Colin Powell had run years ago when he was asked to we would have had one then.
January 4th, 2008 at 4:00 am
Obama seems nice. Do you think the Democrats will win though?
January 4th, 2008 at 3:55 am
But how ’bout that Barack Obama?!!!? woo hoo!
January 4th, 2008 at 3:55 am
Denzylle, I think they will go down together if they go down.
January 4th, 2008 at 3:54 am
Oh I can see it’s blanket coverage over there. We haven’t heard a word about it on this side of the pond in weeks. It is the weirdest , most interesting crime case I’ve ever read about, actually… love it… but nothing new has happened in weeks, no new news, no new interviews, no new leaks, nothing. Dead horse, at the moment.
January 4th, 2008 at 3:52 am
I came in tonight to make two points (actually, it’s 3.40am, so yesterday - I’m UK).
One can wait.
As for the other, I’m still 10 pp. behind in reading, but I’d like to say:
Forget the T7, plus or minus, (and don’t tell me they don’t already), when the two McCs engage separate lawyers, that will be the day we get some truths.
January 4th, 2008 at 3:44 am
It’s a fascinating case.
If the parents are guilty it’ll be the biggest sensation in British Media History. You’d have to be here to appreciate just how blanket the coverage has been.
If they’re not guilty, then it’s Jack the Ripper, Who Did It territory and some future Patricia Cornwall will probably reveal that it was Damian Hirst.
January 4th, 2008 at 3:42 am
Won’t it be nice when it’s all said and done and the culprits are locked in jail? But what would we do with ourselves? I suppose there are other dead horses in the world.
I’d better get back to work. Madeleine is my anti-work.
January 4th, 2008 at 3:41 am
Admittedly, however, Clouseau’s post from earlier today is very interesting, even if he is still flogging the same dead horse. (Somewhere in the 400s)
January 4th, 2008 at 3:40 am
When I say sounded, I actually meant looked. Obviously.
January 4th, 2008 at 3:40 am
Hi, Karen!
January 4th, 2008 at 3:39 am
Anything is possible, but it does appear to me you are in fact still here beating the dead horse. That does not mean you could not simultaneously be on the Amy Winehouse thread and only want us to think you are strictly on the Madeleine McCann thread. Next thing you know, you’ll be releasing photos with false date and time stamps on them.
January 4th, 2008 at 3:39 am
That sounded so mean, Hi Kris
January 4th, 2008 at 3:35 am
Still hanging around the dead horse like a vulture, I see.
And why is that a question mark?
Is is possible you’re hallucinating and we’ll post back and tell you, nah, we’re not here, we’re all on the Amy Winehouse thread?
January 4th, 2008 at 3:24 am
Still beating the dead horse, I see?