From The Sun.
"THE main suspect in the Madeleine McCann kidnap case “peeked” into her apartment the night she was snatched, Algarve cops have been told.
Dr Fiona Payne, a friend of the McCann family, said she saw Robert Murat looking into the flat in Praia da Luz.
Her claims came after Murat, 33, was hauled in for questioning by cops on July 10 and formally confronted by the McCanns’ pals in a bid to assist identification."
However - the article then continues to mention
"Cops said Murat’s alibi was backed by other statements."
Notice the pluralisation of statements. Previously we have always been led to believe that only his mother backed up his alibi that night. So where are these other statements coming from then? Why haven't they been publicised?
And more importantly in this whole case, why NOW do they remember seeing Robert Murat 'peeking' into the apartment?
Im telling you, next they will have claimed to see him killing Madeleine.
2007-07-26 21:35:10 · 24 answers · asked by dave s 2 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Selina - Dont worry I do think of other things, but are you saying that we should just all move on and forget about Madeleine? That justice can only be served within a couple of months otherwise we might as well drop it? As far as I can tell the tide is finally turning against the McCanns and we need to keep up this final push to ensure that Madeleine gets the little bit of justice she deserves.
2007-07-26 21:58:26 · update #1
Faith - Damn right, if only to bring a little balance to the story. We all know the media's spin on it.
2007-07-26 22:11:51 · update #2
Helmut - I do speak a little german (strange of you to post german in an english speaking forum though) and I know exactly what schadenfreude is and although that does apply to me a little bit ,in this particular case it doesnt apply since I only want to see the McCanns held to account for what they did. No more. No less.
2007-07-26 22:16:12 · update #3
morning Dave, so fiona saw murat peeking into the maccanns apartment?, so being such a loyal friend i presume she told the maccanns this, and they still left the children there alone, knowing some one was peeking in on them,? or was it the case that she means after Madeleine went missing? either way, their powers of observation, are publicly well known, they would not even observe their children
2007-07-26 22:38:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 0⤋
On a previous question I had stated that I did not believe that the police would allow witnesses to confront Murat.
With the publication of this new revelation, I am sorry to admit that I have been very naive.
My confidence in this investigation is nearing zero. I for one feel that not enough heat is being aimed at the local police. The McCann's, the press and most of us in this forum are letting them off the hook.
2007-07-27 04:27:36 · answer #2 · answered by Bob C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Aye right after all this time they suddenly remember Murat peeking in the window how convenient, this gets more stinking by the minute which makes me more convinced that they all know what happened to that poor child
BTW Dave keep your clothes and hair on for the party tonight and saturn remove your hat otherwise yer no comin in!!
2007-07-26 22:39:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 1⤋
How discusting.
So they're now admitting they saw a strange man peering into the apartment and yet by their own admission they did nothing about it.
I am not at all surprised though by their total non reaction. It's like when you see the footage of Madeleine falling over as she tries to walk up the plane steps. No one rushes to help her. No, they just keep on filming.
2007-07-26 22:47:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
One day, the world of Yahoo answers are going to look back and say
Dave S was right all along, How could I have been so naive??
Dave, this pantomime from team McCann just gets stranger by the day.
2007-07-26 22:51:26 · answer #5 · answered by Paul C 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋
it amazes me the 'selective memory' the other members of the mccann's dining party on the night 3 may.
2007-07-27 00:31:52 · answer #6 · answered by daisy 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
interesting that parts of the police investigation can be discussed when they involve the theories/opinions that murat 'dun it' but cant be used for jerrymanderer to answer pertinent questions about him and his wifes behaviour. funny that innit
2007-07-27 09:06:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can only answer this with another question.What If you saw a stranger "peeping" into an apartment with three sleeping children, would you do nothing? Was this one of the so called "children checkers" we have been told were ensuring the children were safe?
2007-07-26 22:03:48 · answer #8 · answered by LOOBYLOO 3 · 10⤊ 1⤋
I have just been reading this on the sky news website. The friends have been shouting at him, 'I know you were there, I would recognise you anywhere'
would they not have recognised him the day after? he was translating for them.
none of this is making sense.
2007-07-26 23:21:04 · answer #9 · answered by weezyb 5 · 6⤊ 0⤋
I think he has probably been let of the hook a while ago but becuase of the PJ rules we will never really know but Team McCann are happily drip feeding stories to keep themselves in the paper.
Has anyone even mentioned the fact their baby is STILL missing?
2007-07-26 21:44:11 · answer #10 · answered by Lovely Lady 4 · 15⤊ 3⤋