GUEST BLOG - TAPAS AND MURAT

With many thanks to JJ, who always manages to sort the wheat from the chaff!

 

Which Politicians are blocking the truth?

 

Fiona Payne and Rachel Oldfield both gave written Police statements and confronted Robert Murat directly in a Police interview that they saw Murat outside 5a that night.

 

The PJ investigated this extensively and found no evidence to support him being outside 5a that night.

 

RD Hall states in his films that they had both retracted this testimony by the end of December 2007.  Tony Bennett emphasises this retraction by the end of 2007 ad nauseam.

 

How do they then explain the rogatory statements of  FP and RO  in April 2008 (note the date).  Both stating:

 

“RM came up to me shook me by the hand and said I am Robert Murat.  I noticed he had a squint and he gave us his phone number.  I am 100% sure it was Robert Murat”.

 

No ambiguity.

No genuine mistake

No chance of mistaken identity

No error.

 

But a deliberate and malicious attempt of the crime in Portugal, of calumny and in the UK, of attempting to pervert the course of justice.

 

Serious criminal offences punishable by jail terms in both countries.

 

Payne and Oldfield deliberately and maliciously implicated a man in a serious crime.  Why did they do it?  “He came up to me, shook me by the hand and introduced himself as Robert Murat. He had a squint,  he gave us his phone number.

 

Could they be any clearer?

 

There is always a concerted effort to divert attention from these actions.

 

If RD Hall/Bennett or anybody else can produce evidence, FP and RO have retracted their identity of Murat, will they produce it or apologise for misleading people.

 

Bringing the topic up with TB leads to a ban and RDH ignores all contact.

 

Ask yourself, why would “honest researchers” adopt this attitude.  Is there an agenda, or are they just plain stupid.

 

CMOMM ,Bennett and Hall have spent hundreds of hours delving into all aspects of the Smith family but key players like FP and RO are not only ignored but shielded by stating they retracted their statements by the end of December 2007 and banning any discussion of their involvement.

 

It is most unlikely Payne and Oldfield thought this strategy out for themselves which leads to the question who did, when and why.  Have the Police in the UK asked them, if not why not?

 

Their actions do not directly concern the Mccanns and surely they too must wonder at their friends actions, and if not why not?

 

Who assured Payne and Oldfield they would not be investigated for a serious crime?

 Is it a conspiracy, this is for the Police to investigate but they have had since 2008, surely an interview under caution would be worthwhile.

The Mccanns may or may not be able to shed light on Madeleine’s fate but Payne and Oldfield certainly can.  Why does nobody care/dare to ask them?

 

Four elements of this case are rarely if ever discussed.

 

Who authorised the Leics police to involve themselves in illegal

activity in PDL on Saturday 5^th May 2007?

 

The role of James Landale and the BBC on the night of May3rd/4^th

 

Lori Campbell deliberately lying about Murat and why Ian Woods of Sky, backed her up in the deception.

 

The blatant involvement of FP and RO in falsely accusing Murat.

 

There maybe in this case some honest diligent UK Policemen but can anybody find an honest UK Politician of any party?

 

The farce will go on. 

 

 

 

MY REPLY

 

To be honest I am not sure what the situation is with the tapas members who lied when saying Robert Murat was outside 5A on the night.  I thought they were called into the police station and had to reiterate their allegations in front of RM - face to face that is, but I'm afraid I can't remember what the outcome was.

 

I do remember that Robert Murat brought, or was going to bring, a criminal prosecution against Jane Tanner for her allegations, in any event Jane Tanner has lied about exactly what went on in the police surveillance van, ever since.  In Goncalo's book, she told the British detective  (Small, I believe) that RM was the man she saw carrying a child.  This evidence doesn't appear in the police files and she has since denied it, but RM was picked up the next day and named the first Arguido.   Other members of the Tapas group then came forward claiming that after seeing RM on the TV, they too remembered he was outside 5A on the night.  To be honest, I always thought the allegations against RM were stupid - if RM had 'just' kidnapped a child why would he hanging around outside the apartment - surely he would have been otherwise occupied?

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you about the 'researchers'.  For whatever reason, these completely incompetent idiots (psychos) have completely ignored the lives and times of the most obvious suspects outside the McCanns, that is, the ones who had the means and opportunity (if not the motive) to assist in making a child disappear, the ones disappearing from the dinner table for long intervals with valid 'child was sick' etc excuses for their absence.   

 

CMoMM and indeed Richard Hall seem to be oblivious to the most clear and obvious 'suspects' - the party of 9 who are up to the necks in it.  The entire last supper is like a badly written Whitehall farce that gives all the players a speaking part, but not necessarily in the right order, or the right place.  It is botched together.  Lines were chucked in in the hope and prayer that the audience would buy them - there wasn't any time for re-writes. 

 

Whilst Bennett and Hall are salivating at the thought of nailing Robert Murat and every outsider who had feck all to do with Madeleine's disappearance, they are ignoring the sideshow that was created to give the abduction story it's wings.  Doh!  It still doesn't appear to have registered with them that the police, both in Portugual and the UK are stuck on the collective alibi of the entire Tapas group.  Those few scribbled lines on the back of Madeleine's colouring book have held out for almost 10 years, and notably, they still haven't done a reconstruction.  Whilst Jane Tanner was pointing the police and the public in the direction of a stranger abductor, it distracted from the fact that her own partner Russell, was missing from the table during the crucial period, and she too, was flitting back and forth.  She was saying don't look at us, look at someone else, and the police, public and members of CMoMM and Richard Hall have obliged ever since. 

 

In the whole scheme of things, the Tapas group have got off relatively unscathed, despite the fact that it is their collective story that has enabled this debacle to continue for so long.  That they obviously conspired to accuse an innocent man takes evil to a whole new level, are they completely without conscience?  How do you gauge the seriousness of perverting the course of justice for a decade?  How much police time has been wasted? How much public money has spent?  What of the knock on effects, the genuine charities deprived of much needed funds, all the real, live, children deprived of much needed resources?  What of the lives destroyed, those men blasted onto the front pages of the tabloid, accused (with no evidence) of being Maddie's abductor, rapist, killer?  What of the former Portuguese detective, forced out of his job and vilified by a sneering, baying, nationalist, British media? 

 

Many thanks for bringing this subject up JJ, like yourself, I agree the Tapas group deserve, at the very least, an honourable mention.