What are your thoughts - Is Murat involved or not?

He was made Arguido at his own request (which he was entitled to do in order to protect his own interests)

Also, he seems far too dignified to engage in public protestations quashing McCann's claims - perhaps he did that in the proper way in interviews with the PJ? Not everyone is as arrogant and vain as Healy & McCann and feels the need to make a lot of noise.

Of course I could be wrong but at the moment I feel he had some involvement after the `disappearance`.

In the early days, I didn`t think he had involvement until I came across a video on Youtube which has long since gone. It was a woman talking about RM; she seemed plausible and was saying she had proof he was not at home with his mother when he said he was. I have often looked for it again but cannot find it, so would be interested to hear if anyone else saw it.

The mystery would slot in much easier if there had been someone with local knowledge and access to empty properties with freezers which RM did. There is also his sudden departure from Exeter/Plymouth back to PdL on the 1st. I get the impression RM is a people pleaser, probably a nice guy that could easily be patsy material especially if certain people had dirt on him. What was that business about his friend`s car being set alight and `tell the truth` being painted beside it?

If you remember Mitchell said the mccanns wanted the archiving off the case so that they could employ private detectives to look for Madeleine .

No, not fo ra momment
In the Panorama interview he did seemed quite fearful and critical of amaral
so not for a momment is he involved

snowflake wrote:No, not fo ra momment
In the Panorama interview he did seemed quite fearful and critical of amaral
so not for a momment is he involved

Eh?

How on earth does your perception of his state of mind in relation to a retired PJ Officer actually have any material reflection upon his potential involvement?

He's`either involved or not involved regardless of his (apparent) relationship with Amaral.

The End Is Nigh wrote:He was made Arguido at his own request (which he was entitled to do in order to protect his own interests)

Also, he seems far too dignified to engage in public protestations quashing McCann's claims - perhaps he did that in the proper way in interviews with the PJ? Not everyone is as arrogant and vain as Healy & McCann and feels the need to make a lot of noise.

Hi Tein

I remember Robert Murat's lawyer saying that Mr Murat had requested arguido status, because it gave him certain rights, that he didn't have as a witness. He had the right to have a lawyer present when he was questioned and he had the right to remain silent.

Robert Murat, co-operated fully with the PJ, unlike Kate McCann.

However, when the PJ deemed that Robert Murat was not involved with Madeleine's disappearance and he had all of his property, that the police confiscated returned to him, he was upset to learn that his arguido status was not lifted.

Robert Murat said he wished he had never asked for the status, which was only lifted, when the McCanns arguido status was lifted.

I don't know why Robert Murat, wasn't released from his arguido status, until the McCanns arguido status was lifted, because at the time he was cleared of any involvement with Madeleine's disappearance, the McCanns weren't even arguidos.

Robert Murat must have felt as sick as a parrot, to see the McCanns given a police escort to the Algarve airport, the day after they were made arguidos. He stayed behind and complied with the terms of the arguido status and they were able to return to the UK, with no restrictions at all. They were suspected of being involved with Madeleine's disappearance and he wasn't. Where is the justice in that?

Maybe Gordon Brown can answer that question, if he is lurking on this forum.

He's already involved - he worked as a translator for the PJ for the early T7 statements. That's probably why his Arguido status wasn't lifted right away - the PJ didn't want him leaking stuff to the press.

Oldartform wrote:Of course I could be wrong but at the moment I feel he had some involvement after the `disappearance`.

In the early days, I didn`t think he had involvement until I came across a video on Youtube which has long since gone. It was a woman talking about RM; she seemed plausible and was saying she had proof he was not at home with his mother when he said he was. I have often looked for it again but cannot find it, so would be interested to hear if anyone else saw it.

The mystery would slot in much easier if there had been someone with local knowledge and access to empty properties with freezers which RM did. There is also his sudden departure from Exeter/Plymouth back to PdL on the 1st. I get the impression RM is a people pleaser, probably a nice guy that could easily be patsy material especially if certain people had dirt on him. What was that business about his friend`s car being set alight and `tell the truth` being painted beside it?

:Excellant post and well put..Applaud:

snowflake wrote:No, not fo ra momment
In the Panorama interview he did seemed quite fearful and critical of amaral
so not for a momment is he involved

And not for a moment did he say a word or criticise the Tapas lot? remember the ones who pointed him out, who dragged him in to this.. imo Amaral was the last of his worries...IF he was/is innocent.

Imo he had a chance to atleast ask why the Tapas friends pointed him out, he stayed quiet about them, the one's who turned his life upside down?????

He did bad mouth the pj so that Includes mr amaral.


He had every opportunity to ask for the case to be reopened.....he didn't.



Instead he sued the newspapers instead off oldfield, Payne and O'Brien.....money meant more to him than his reputation.

I think you'll find Murat did not (and does not) have the right to ask for the Case to be re-opened - It was not his child that "disappeared". Simply being Arguido - for whatever reason - is not sufficient to accord him that particular right.

I have thought long and hard about this and cannot make up my mind.

There are so many strange things about Murat's arrival back in PDL that on one level you cannot ignore it. On the other hand the fact that parts of the group "identified" him, does not sit right. This would have been a huge risk on their part, if he were involved and they knew it. What was to stop Murat telling the truth to the police, in anger, having been put in the frame by the Tapas ?

Gerry's refusing the comment on whether he knows him or not - my first instinct is never trust McCann, he could be playing games. But then, looking at the video, he looks very annoyed at the question and seems to react with anger.

All in all the best guess I have is that it was not a direct McCann / Murat connection. It was a McCann connection with somebody else who in turn contacted Murat. Murat did not know what he was involved in, he was doing a favour for somebody else and a favour that on the face of it was nothing illegal. Perhpas providing a key / apartment / transport etc. In other words, somebody else put Murat in contact with the McCann group.

So, yes I think Murat was involved but unwittingly and absolutely not with the intention of helping with something of this nature.

mossman wrote:I have thought long and hard about this and cannot make up my mind.

There are so many strange things about Murat's arrival back in PDL that on one level you cannot ignore it. On the other hand the fact that parts of the group "identified" him, does not sit right. This would have been a huge risk on their part, if he were involved and they knew it. What was to stop Murat telling the truth to the police, in anger, having been put in the frame by the Tapas ?

Gerry's refusing the comment on whether he knows him or not - my first instinct is never trust McCann, he could be playing games. But then, looking at the video, he looks very annoyed at the question and seems to react with anger.

All in all the best guess I have is that it was not a direct McCann / Murat connection. It was a McCann connection with somebody else who in turn contacted Murat. Murat did not know what he was involved in, he was doing a favour for somebody else and a favour that on the face of it was nothing illegal. Perhpas providing a key / apartment / transport etc. In other words, somebody else put Murat in contact with the McCann group.

So, yes I think Murat was involved but unwittingly and absolutely not with the intention of helping with something of this nature.

You`ve put my thoughts into words. Also many people have said what a nice helpful guy he is - the ideal type to use as a patsy. But there would have to be something `on him` to persuade him to keep quiet, so there could be something dodgey in his past - either that or its something so big he lives in fear of speaking out.
I`m sure he knows too much.

kitti wrote:He did bad mouth the pj so that Includes mr amaral.


He had every opportunity to ask for the case to be reopened.....he didn't.



Instead he sued the newspapers instead off oldfield, Payne and O'Brien.....money meant more to him than his reputation.

As far as I am aware, Robert Murat, sued the newspapers because they sullied his reputation and who can blame him. I don't think Robert Murat, was in any position to ask for the case to be reopened. The perpetrators of Madeleine's disappearance, the McCanns, had already had their request granted that the case / process was archived.

In my opinion and if it was true that Robert Murat bad mouthed the PJ including Dr Amaral, he had every right to bad mouth them. He was hauled in for questioning, on the say so of a British Journalist, who said she was suspicious of him hanging around, when he was acting as a translator for the police.

The Tapas 7, who had already broken the law, when they left their children unattended while they were out, were allowed to question him, when there was no proof that he had any involvement with Madeleine's disappearance.

One thing I have noticed is, on various forums, is the level of aggression shown towards Robert Murat. Why?

Robert Murat's mum's apartment was all but torn apart, more than once and so was her garden. Robert Murat's personal property, including his computer, was taken away by the police and examined and eventually, he was found to have no involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. Yet the finger is still being pointed at him.

If Robert Murat did visit the UK on May the 1st 2007, it doesn't mean there was anything sinister in his visit. His daughter happened to live in the UK, with Mr Murat's exwife and it was highly likely he was visiting her. Even if he wasn't going to see his daughter, he had every right to go to the UK without having accusations hurled against him.

While the police were busy trying to pin Madeleine's disappearance on Robert Murat, the McCanns were bobbing in and out of Portugal and carrying on with their leisure activities.

In my opinion, the PJ should hang their heads in shame, for the way they treated Robert Murat and the way they allowed the McCanns to go anywhere they pleased. They knew full well that the McCanns were involved with Madeleine's disappearance.

Goncalo Amaral, said they'd made many mistakes in their investigations of this case. I don't think he can rule out making mistakes, where Robert Murat was concerned.

Robert Murat has remained in Portugal and stood his ground, every time the finger has been pointed at him. I suppose he has got to the stage, were he now thinks that as long as the people who matter, believe him, he doesn't care what the people who don't matter think about him.

I just hope Robert Murat's daughter isn't getting grief in the playground, because some people believe her father was involved with Madeleine's disappearance, even though he was found to be innocent.

Excellent Post, kathybelle. Excellent

Murat will be forever tainted by the case, just like Colin Stagg is still tainted by the Wimbledon Common murder, even though he is totally innocent.

I didn`t realise anyone at all had found it `sinister` that RM was in the UK - he was there, very plausibly, doing up a property. The only comments I`ve read are that is was odd how he returned so suddenly FROM the UK on the 1st, not that he was there in the first place.

I think I read somewhere that Robert Murat along with the mccanns being arquidos had the right to keep the case from closed or archived ...one off them could off done that, the mccanns excuse was because they wanted to employ their own private detectives and murats was what?

Being an Arguido may be necessary (and I'm not at all sure that it is, anyway), but it isn't sufficient.

I found it odd that he needed to slag off GA on Panorama, but when you think about it, I suppose he has to.

I'm wondering when the mccanns are going to sue the Portuguese police as they said they would if they found that after reading the files that they were Incompetant.


So when's that going to happen as redwood has found 195 opportunities...

I wonder why Robert Murat hasn't sued the McCanns for turning suspicion towards him and making remarks like he was a "spotter" for a paedophile gang.

Not Born Yesterday wrote:I wonder why Robert Murat hasn't sued the McCanns for turning suspicion towards him and making remarks like he was a "spotter" for a paedophile gang.

Maybe he's feart. Kate did, after all, say she wanted to kill him. That's enough to terrify anybody.

kitti wrote:I'm wondering when the mccanns are going to sue the Portuguese police as they said they would if they found that after reading the files that they were Incompetant.


So when's that going to happen as redwood has found 195 opportunities...

Maybe one of the psychics will be able to tell us.

Iris, I had no idea what "feart" meant and thought it was a typo! I hope that I'm not the only one who didn't know that it means "afraid".

Yes indeed, the McCanns and their team are a scary bunch.