Justice 4 ALL Madeleine McCann Family
You need to be a member of this forum in order to view its entire contents.
We welcome applications to join the forum from genuine caring compassionate people that wish to support Mr Mrs McCann in their never ending resolve to finding their daughter Madeleine and bringing her back home where she truly belongs.

All applicants are checked out so people with no sense, no moral compass, no rationality and only half a brain cell and even less grip on reality and who are devoid of all logic - need NOT apply!
This also applies to ex-members, who no longer want to be members, yet spend their lives viewing this forum and telling people they no longer want to be members.
This is said without prejudice with no one in particular in mind.

The Murats Alibies and Timelines

View previous topic View next topic Go down

The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by Rosie on Wed Sep 23, 2009 5:26 am

Maria translated this for us today and this is extremely interesting! We have copied them over to here so people can comment on them and we can keep the translated files clear.

Processo, Volume VI
pages 202-205

***************************************


Date 2007/05/23

Name Maria Cecília Pereira Pires
...
Born 1969/06/16
Nationality Portuguese
Address Lagoa
Profession Journalist
Employer Portugal Resident


To the inquiries said:

-- She has been a journalist for 16 years, working for the abovementioned paper for the last month.

-- When asked, she answered that on the past 4 th of May she was sent by her management to Praia da Luz, Lagos, in order to follow the disappearance of a minor girl.

-- She adds that she was informed that the child’s disappearance took place at the “Ocean Club” resort belonging to “Mark Warner” group and that the family of the missing child had McCann as surname.

-- Questioned she answered that she arrived at Praia da Luz around 09:30/10:00, having headed to the mobile GNR post where she got some information, having then joined other colleagues where she got deeper knowledge about the events.

-- She clarifies that due to the little information available and taking in consideration that the disappearance had taken place only a few hours before, she decided to wander about the streets surrounding the resort.

-- She adds that her decision was also linked to the fact that some questions were raised about the possibility that the young girl could have wandered herself and therefore could still be nearby.

-- During her wanderings she approached a scrubby place situated north and only a few meters away from the resort, being that at this point a male individual around 50 years old approached her, speaking in English asked her if she was involved in the searches for the missing child.

-- The now respondent answered no, although she also said that she too was looking for, a bit to appease her conscience.

-- In this context, the individual suggested the deponent that they both went to a villa, apparently inhabited but not abandoned, in order to look for the child and so that it wouldn’t be just one person which could look like “property trespassing”.

-- After they reached the parking area of the residence, where they called out in order to verify if there was anyone inside, they noticed that, on the outside, a female person, looking of old age, about 70 years old, of 1,5 or 1,6 meters high, grey hair pulled back as a “banana” hairdo, so the previously referred individual took the initiative of talking to this Lady, inviting her to go into the cited residence with him and the deponent with the intent of finding the missing child, to which the Lady agreed.

-- She clarifies that the man geared towards the swimming pool area while the deponent stayed a bit behind with the old Lady as she walked more slowly.

-- During this walk the elder Lady told the deponent that she felt somewhat uncomfortable with this situation of the missing child commenting that the parents surely were going through severe distress.

-- The talk with both abovementioned people was held always in English, having the Lady referred that she lived 100 meters away from the resort and that the night before she noticed the arrival of the Police around 22:00 because of the sirens.

-- The mentioned Lady said that she had been having dinner with her son when she heard the sirens, that is the Police, being that then was when she was aware [knew, perceived] the disappearance of a little girl from the “Ocean Club”.

-- The deponent clarifies that the Lady did not mention child [‘criança’] or little boy [‘menino’ also means child], she was precise referring a “little girl”, which the deponent didn’t find strange at the time as by that time on the 4 th everybody knew it was a little girl.

-- The abovementioned Lady also referred that her son was cooperating with the Police in the attempt to find the child.

-- She adds that after walking through the terrain around the mentioned residence where they found nothing, as well as the house pool, they were intercepted by a neighbour, she believes of German nationality, who asked them in English what were they doing there and after their answer informed that the Police had already been there with some dogs.

-- During the conversation the old Lady referred being a neighbour, having the now respondent asserting being a journalist, being that the other individual only referred being around only looking for the child, finishing the now deponent by leaving the place while the others stayed chatting between them.

-- All this situation looked quite normal to her under the circumstances.

-- Asked, she answered that she came to know the Lady’s son, person that the press identified as Robert Murat, person who moved at ease among journalists and police, speaking both Portuguese and English.

-- She refers that on the 5 th this individual told her that the british journalists were saying that him (Robert Murat) was one of the suspects for the little girl disappearance, looking very annoyed with the subject, having stated that he was going to stay away in order not to give chance to any more comments, being that from that moment on it was very difficult for her to contact him.

-- She clarifies that when she saw the pictures of the information gathering kiosk, built by Robert’s mother, she confirmed that the old Lady that she spoke to on the 4 th and who accompanied the now deponent on the search of the surrounding space of the house was the same person who had set up the kiosk.

-- To a question, she answered that today when reading the news she noticed a sentence, said by Robert’s mother, where the same affirms having had knowledge of the little girl’s disappearance by 07:00 on the 4 th through a phone call and that that would have been the time when she decided to set up that said information gathering kiosk, situation the she found highly strange and having in consideration the events on the 4 th and the conversation that took place then.

-- She affirms that she only knew the Lady’s name through the papers, as on the 4 th she did not identify herself.

-- She adds that she pondered several times to pass this information, but she always postponed it because she thought of no importance, only today and when she saw written with certainty that that Lady only had knowledge of the disappearance on the 4 th and through a phone call, clearly contradicting what she had told the deponent that morning of the 4 th, did she decided to come forward with the information.

-- Because asked she says she has no grievances against the mentioned people, never having met them before being however correct that the news of an alibi construction and the apparent incongruence between what had been stated to the deponent by the Lady on the 4 th and what she read on the papers today the 23 rd of May made her feel compelled to bring these facts to the authorities’ knowledge.

-- And she said no more. Read the report that she found correct, ratifies and is signing.




_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by christabel on Wed Sep 23, 2009 5:54 am

Now does this surprise us?

Well Jenny you lying toad Mur.
avatar
christabel
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1637
Age : 68
Location : OK
Registration date : 2008-04-26

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Wed Sep 23, 2009 6:54 am

[quote="christabel"]Now does this surprise us?

notonyournelly
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by Rosie on Wed Sep 23, 2009 9:38 am

So not only were all the other eye witnesses who said they saw Murat outside apartment 5a on May 3rd lying, this journalist was too?

This is a direct contradiction to him saying he heard nothing and went to bed, not even realising that a child had gone missing?

Not only this, the Vanity Fair interview, Murat himself says he dd not got to bed until past 03.00 hrs, when he told police he went to bed at around 22.00hrs after sharing a meal with his mother!

Did Amaral and subsequently Paulo Rebelo have him back for questioning about these obvious inconsistencies in his statement? Or did they think they should carry on falsely accusing people for a few minutes time differences between 9 people?

Something else bothers me, why did Jennifer Murat set up a stall gathering information, wasn't this a police job? How do we know all information was passed on?

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by clairesy on Wed Sep 23, 2009 10:03 am

With secrecy laws supposedly being so strong out there Rosie i am baffled that she was even allowed to contemplate setting up camp on the sea shore with her deluded information posters.Police should have stopped her.Not let her sit there like some sort of bingo fanatic taking inquiries at the front desk.

Shes looks like a typical ''i didn't do it we are on the wrong side of the
fence ...you see....just look at us... the side we are on is clearly finding the child....not
taking her
''


She like her son...a liar imo

That picture back there of her peeking around her wall laughing or freaking out as always struck me as odd to...she looks like shes hiding there..or panicking etc. peeking to see if the horrible men have gone away yet or if they are onto them yet?having a nose out of her bloody door to see if the atttention is still focused on her little boy and her expression says it all!

I wonder if she got her pasting table out and sat on the beach front for little Joana when she vanished??or for all the other mysterious sexual assaults that have gone on in that area?? Nahh didnt think so she had no reason to did she.

This pasting table malarkey was taking place on the morning of the 5th of may........why was she so keen to get in there and do all this when the child as been missing for less that 48 hours?? By that time media and cops were of course looking for an abductor but come on!!!!! an old woman down the road whos son is a later suspect gets her pasting table out and goes to the beach front armed with posters to take statements???Yer right...that's the sort of thing a family member or close family friend would do because they are desperately trying to raise awareness of their loved one being missing........ not some old Biddie who looks as if shes buckled over with arthritis from down the road who doesn't even know the english holiday makers from adam.
She doesn't move that fast to campaign etc for other community things in that area..she isn't some avid local fund raiser who helps all local causes...Shes not the local church woman who goes around helping all needy folk...so why the big sudden need to be right there on the side of the police supposedly helping a family that she knows nothing of?

Sorry but its true.I have always had bad feeling where rm is concerned and will continue to because i just cant shrug him off.
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by Rosie on Wed Sep 23, 2009 6:03 pm

clairesy wrote: (snipped)

Shes looks like a typical ''i didn't do it we are on the wrong side of the
fence ...you see....just look at us... the side we are on is clearly finding the child....not
taking her
''
(snipped)


This part in particular Clairesy, it is s huge, huge thing and many people guilty of a crime behave this way, look at Ian Huntley, always there always offering help with searches etc, really saying "I am here so therefore I could never have been involved" something some of us have been pointing out for all of this time! So I agree with you Clairesy, of course we are not saying they had anything to do with it, but what we are saying and asking, is of all these things have been looked at properly. So much has been missed in this investigation thanks to Goncalo Amaral, that I believe this is a crime in itself, because such is the level of incompetence and buffoonery, with just about every single mistake in the book being made, that you realise this is NOT just mistakes, this is probably *deliberate* errors, just like the planting in evidence in a crime. Too much and too damned convenient. Just like all those places the dogs scented at, THREE MONTHS AFTER Madeleine disappeared, way too coincidental and way, way too much.

Something here, something definitely NOT right here.

I agree with you Clairesy.

I am also having serious reservations about the Martin Smith sighting, either they were mistaken abut the time, or there is something really not right about his sighting and if I were the McCanns investigators I would probe that! I am going to say it, I do not actually believe that Martin Smith saw anything, he may think he saw something, maybe, but that is all.
Who is Martin Smith? Does he have an apartment in PDL? Does he know Goncalo Amaral and teh GNR previously, like Murat did? Why didn't he return to Portugal when he was asked? Why did members of his own family appear to contradict his account?

As ever I believe this investigattion needs to go right back to the moment that Madeleine was discovered missing and maybe even using some of the compromised forensic evidence found at the aprtment and trying to check it out. What about if a crime has been conmmitted since, does that unidentified DNA evidence get checked against new results being filed?

I know if I was making a reconstruction, I would make sure that Robert Murat was pencilled in at the scene, there are far too many people who say they saw him, to have his presence ignored. It may not be him, of course, but there is sufficient doubt to have him placed there, not least because apparently he did change his story a couple of times! It is in his interests that this is cleared up once and for all.

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by rosemary on Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:05 pm

It was said at one time that the reason Mrs Murat opened up her stall was because she knew, being a resident of many years in Portugal, that local people are afraid of the Police......a motive that sounds plausible to me at first reading. But on reflection, if a local did know something and was afraid, why on earth would they confide in an old - ex pat - woman with a son whom many regarded as suspicious at that time?
Being more objective about her I would suggest she was acting out of fear herself, but fear of what I do not know and maybe neither did she. I agree it gave her a role to play during those initial terrible days.
As for the timelines. I don´t believe she was telling lies. She was probably saying she heard the sirens that night and knew something was up, but she wasn´t sure until the morning phone call of the details of what had happened that night. Jenny is talking after the event, that on the night of the abduction she "was aware, - knew, perceived, - of the missing girl".....I think this is confusion again because of the journalist´s own translation.

What I am saying is that I believe Jenny was/is a fearful old woman. That is all. And that she is protective of her son by whom she no doubt was treated like a senile old woman or a mushroom....if she knows anything she knows that something was being kept from her. If she has committed any crime it is one of default, she is in denial.

This is only MO and gut reaction.

rosemary
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 963
Location : spain
Registration date : 2009-05-13

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by Rosie on Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:22 am

The whole point being that Murat said he did NOT hear anything that night and went to bed early, now this seems to throw it all up in the air, as Jenny Murat did back her son!

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:24 am

He also said he didn't speak with Sergei Malinka on the night Madeleine was abducted Pinnochio
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by littleminx on Thu Sep 24, 2009 6:11 am

Thing is wots going to be done about this!! murat and his mother have lied since day one, and lets not forget murats aunt who wrks for an adoption agency!! and his girlfriend ( now wife) lied too.. WHY OH WHY dont someone take action! this is what really gets to me...
avatar
littleminx
Master
Master

Number of posts : 450
Age : 50
Location : west midlands
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by jean on Thu Sep 24, 2009 11:03 am

It's also strange that Sally Eversleigh runs an adoption agency - and 72 hours after Madeleine was taken a woman in Barcelona was asking where was her new daughter??? If we can see it, why can't anyone else??? There are too many coincidences surrounding Mr Murat and Co for my liking. And, I know that the majority have given up on Brian Ladd, but he has insisted that Madeleine is/or was somewhere in his house from day one.

jean
Master
Master

Number of posts : 474
Location : knutsford cheshire
Registration date : 2008-12-11

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by jean on Thu Sep 24, 2009 11:04 am

Then there is Murat's girlfriend/wife whose ex husband is the pool cleaner at the Ocean Club!!!

jean
Master
Master

Number of posts : 474
Location : knutsford cheshire
Registration date : 2008-12-11

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by littleminx on Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:30 am

well said jean, i totally agree with you, there are many people (including myself) who have said this since day one and nothing has been done!! maybe they know something we dont?
avatar
littleminx
Master
Master

Number of posts : 450
Age : 50
Location : west midlands
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: The Murats Alibies and Timelines

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum