The Mystery of Robert Murat: From Arguido to Applause:

An examination of Robert Murat’s involvement in events following the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

By Tony Bennett, April 2010

 

PART SIX:  CHAPTERS P TO S, AND APPENDIX

 

In March 2008, the remainder of Murat’s computers and other possessions seized by the Portuguese Police were returned to him.  He described this at the time as ‘a very positive sign’, adding: “Why would they return something if it was in the middle of being investigated in any way, shape or form? We are very happy to have the computers back, and I hope I will have my arguido status dropped very shortly”.

The following month, his lawyers, Simons Muirhead & Burton, revealed that their client planned to sue 11 leading British newspapers and Sky TV over allegedly libellous stories.

When the Portuguese Attorney-General, in July 2008, published a final report on the Portuguese Police investigation and stated that there was insufficient evidence to charge anyone with an offence, Robert Murat, along with the McCanns, had his status as ‘arguido’ - suspect - lifted.

But before that, and one might almost say in anticipation of that, he received one of the biggest-ever payouts for libel - a reputed £600,000. In addition, his partner Michaela Walczuk apparently netted a further £100,000, as did his friend Sergei Malinka. These awards came around four months after the McCanns received, in March, a libel pay-out reputed to have been £550,000 and two months before the ‘Tapas 9’ group of the McCanns’ friends received, we were told, a total of £375,000 - over £50,000 each. The total libel pay-out to these 12 people amounted to around £1¾ million.

Simons Muirhead & Burton had announced in April that they were pursuing 11 leading British newspapers and SKY TV over allegedly libellous stories. The newspapers were the Sun, Daily Express, Sunday Express, Daily Star, Daily Mail, London Evening Standard, Metro, Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror, News of the World and the Scotsman. The Scotsman said of its article about Murat:  “We made a number of seriously defamatory allegations which were wholly untrue”. Altogether, there were said to have been ‘nearly 100 false media stories’ about Murat.

The libel settlement, which included an apology, was achieved because the 11 newspapers and SKY TV each admitted that they had been wrong to allege that Robert Murat had in any way been involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Daily Telegraph correspondent Joshua Rozenberg said: “They realise that this is one of the most damaging things you could say about anybody, and it appears that they have all clubbed together and agreed to settle the libel claim out of court. The only way in which the newspapers could defend this case would be if they could prove the truth of what they alleged”.

Murat flew to London for the settlement, being photographed on the steps of the High Court. Media commentator and journalism professor Roy Greenslade was quick to comment. He said: “This case shows that newspapers had lost their heads over the Madeleine story. They need to be more aware that when crimes happen abroad, it does not relieve them of the normal rules that they should apply. Competition has driven them to ‘bid each other up’ in terms of what they thought they could get away with in their reporting. Profits and sales ruled, rather than principles and ethics”.

Asked to comment on his libel victory, Murat declared, on SKY TV, and reading from a prepared text: “The newspapers in this case brought about the total and utter destruction of mine and my family’s life, and caused immense distress”.

Five days after Robert Murat received his libel pay-out, and while still an arguido, he gave a TV interview for the BBC. This is how the interview went:

Murat: “I would like to know why...um...er... I was made an arguido...er, because, er, sincerely, I don't understand why I was made an arguido. Erm, yeah, I would like to find out. I would like to find out.

Reporter: “Would there be satisfaction or anger when the police, if they do, fully clear you?”

Murat:  “Well, I can't really answer that because, er, they may have...they may have had, um...they may have felt, should I say, that, that there was a reason to do it, and if there's a justifiable reason to make me an arguido, um, then...I have to look at it and be sensible about it. Um, it doesn't help in any way, shape or form, me, um, here, 14 months down the line, er, still an arguido, but that is the law of Portugal. Now this happened in Portugal and as much as we do not like how the legal system works in Portugal, this is their legal system and they are doing their job”.

The U.S.-based website ‘Eyes for Lies’ has analysed this interview, looking at the facial expressions. The full analysis by the ‘Eyes’ website (run by a U.S. lady) can be viewed here: http://www.eyesforlies.com/

In summary, the ‘Eyes’ website makes these points:

‘Eyes’ suggests that five day later, we would expect Murat to be showing the same sign of distress as in the statement he made five days earlier on SKY.

QUOTE

“We should see a man, who is angry, violated, misunderstood and unjustly treated”.

She continues: “Is this what we see when we watch Murat speak here? Absolutely not. What we see, instead, is a man who is enjoying the spotlight. You'd think in this interview that Murat was sitting down for an afternoon tea, and not a serious conversation about how his life was ruined. He is enjoying speculating and bantering about this whole scenario as if it had no implications for him, yet he readily acknowledges he is still a suspect.

“Look at how he smirks and grins. More importantly, we don't see any distress, or feelings of violation. We don't see anger for all the pain he has supposedly had to endure. We don't see a hint that this is a man who was wrongly looked at, put under the microscope, called a suspect and had his life destroyedas he says himself.  His behaviour is a complete contradiction to the circumstances that he wants us to believe here. It is totally different than the script he read out to the media after he won his libel suit, but it shouldn't be.

“It’s one thing not to be bothered by the entire frenzy and to ignore it because he knows he is innocent, and that the police couldn't possibly have anything on him. It's quite another to tell us it devastatedhis life and to go after the press, but to then turn around and act like it was no big deal, and entertain the idea that if the Portuguese police had reason to call him a suspect that they are just ‘doing their job’ and that he should be ‘sensible’ about it, is absurd.

“It's flat out pompous. If the police inaccurately labelled you a suspect, would you ever entertain such nonsense? I can't believe I am even seeing this arrogance. Is that how you would feel if you have been wrongly looked at as a suspect for an entire year? After the police searched your house multiple times? After your life was supposedly ruined, and the media trashed your name around the world?

“If shoddy detective work destroyed your life, was inaccurate or faulty, I can be 100% confident in saying that you'd never go there. It defies logic. If there is one person on this earth who should never have doubts about Murat's innocence, it should be Robert Murat himself…”

UNQUOTE

We think these are perceptive observations and would recommend people to view the full article.

Murat steadfastly refused to comment on the Madeleine McCann case, but early in 2009 it was revealed that he would be appearing in a Cambridge Union debate on the behaviour of the tabloid press. It was held on 5 March, and with the help of an invitation from a student, I attended the debate along with other members of The Madeleine Foundation. The motion for debate was: ‘This house believes that the tabloid press do more harm than good’. Murat was chosen as one f the speakers for the motion. And without doubt, he turned out to be the ‘star’ of the evening.

There was almost a full house. Most unusually, several security guards in high visibility yellow jackets, mobile ’phones at the ready, were seen around the Cambridge Union building, which was unprecedented. When Murat arrived, he was flanked by several men. It was as if a celebrity had entered the building. TV cameras and journalists were present, the event having been widely trailed in the press.     

There was a reverent hush as Murat began to speak. He began by explaining that he wasn’t used to public speaking. He then spoke for perhaps 20 minutes, reading from a prepared script. He explained how Lori Campbell of the Sunday Mirror (although he did not name her) was “so anxious, it appeared, to break a story that she literally created her own”.

Here are extracts from an accurate report by the Cambridge Student Union newspaper on the meeting:

QUOTE

‘Robert Murat holds Cambridge Union spellbound in tabloids debate’

A packed Cambridge Union chamber fell utterly silent last night as Robert Murat, the man named as an arguido (formal suspect) in the Madeleine McCann case ,and later cleared of any involvement, spoke about his experiences in a debate titled: ‘The tabloid press does more harm than good’.

Speaking on a public platform for the first time in his life, Murat  described how he had been caught up in a nightmare and, as the world's press closed in on him and helicopters circled over his Portuguese home, he had felt ‘like a fox pursued by hounds’. It was an ordeal that almost destroyed both him and those close to him, he said.

He had initially come forward to help in the search for Madeleine as he was fluent in Portuguese, Murat told the chamber. A journalist for one of the British tabloids had literally ‘invented’ stories that he had been behaving suspiciously. The tabloids went into overdrive with an unstoppable web of lies, one paper offering huge amounts of money to a relative to discredit him.

The press and police focus on Murat as a suspect had constituted, he said, ‘a huge waste of time and money’ - resources that might otherwise have been devoted to the search for Madeleine. He said that his and his family's suffering, though hard to bear, was overshadowed by that of the tragedy experienced by McCanns whose daughter has never been found.

The debate, which brought together some famous names from the media, was notable for emotional highs and lows, as well as some colourful tabloid-style language and plenty of laughter.

Speaking for the motion were Michael White, Associate Editor of the Guardian, Robert Murat, his lawyer Louis Charalambous, and the Liberal Democrat MP Lembit Opik, whose personal life has regularly been splashed across the front pages of the tabloids.

Against the motion were Murray Morse, Editor of the Daily Sport and former editor of the Cambridge Evening News, Shane Murray, Cambridge undergraduate and joint-editor of The Cambridge Student, and Peter Bazalgette, co-creator of Big Brother and a former Cambridge Union President.

All the speakers held the chamber riveted with their arguments. Opik and Bazalgette, in particular, impressed with their brilliance, quick-wittedness and humour. But it was Robert Murat's calm and measured account of his terrible ordeal that the audience will remember most vividly. The motion was carried by 230 votes to 30.

UNQUOTE

Murat added: “To my personal cost, I now know what the maxim ‘never let the truth get in the way of a good story’ really means. Over a period of many months, day after day, a torrent of outlandish, untrue, and deeply hurtful allegations about me were systematically splashed across the pages of British newspapers. The intense press interest in me turned my home village into a ghoulish carnival and nearly destroyed my family's lives. There was never a shred of evidence that I was in any way involved, despite eight months of lurid headlines. At times, I felt like a fox being pursued by a pack of hounds. I was literally forced to jump over fences to avoid the scramble of photographers waiting outside. I was one day said to be a sexual predator, another day a kidnapper. The tabloids reported apparently that I had been outside the McCann flat on the night Madeleine went missing, with her DNA apparently found in my home. They even came up with a story that I had a secret chamber under the floor of the house. Fairytales. Every single one of them, as the police themselves concluded”.

He went on: “The tabloids are a travesty and a force for harm. My own life will be scarred for ever by the lies they printed. British journalists sent out to Portugal were so anxious to develop new angles that they fabricated stories. The lies got bigger and bolder. To my personal cost, I now know what the maxim: ‘Never let the truth get in the way of a good story’ really means. Mobiles glued to their ears, ringing through to their newsdesks to bid and outbid one another for the next outlandish tale, British tabloid journalists did not so much cover the story as move it on from one breathless mix of speculation and invention to the next”.

His lawyer, media litigation expert Louis Charalambous, said: “My client’s reputation has been destroyed by the press. Although Mr Murat's good name has now been rightfully restored and he and his family have begun rebuilding their life, the intolerable distress and stress they experienced as a result of such malicious reporting, to benefit ad revenues and market share, is a shameful episode in the history of the British press”.

Of more than passing interest was the fact that this event was one of a ‘trio’ of events featuring the McCann case that took place over a period of just five days. The following day, the McCanns’ chief public relations adviser, Clarence Mitchell, delivered a speech to an Oxford Union meeting - well trumpeted in advance, but poorly attended in the event. Then, on Tuesday 10 March, Dr Gerald McCann gave oral evidence to the Department of Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee hearing on press freedom, press standards and libel, along with his libel lawyer from Carter-Ruck, Adam Tudor.

The Committee had heard that morning from Max Mosley who had, a few months earlier, been the victim of a front page News of the World story outing him as someone who had enjoyed sado-masochist session for most of his adult life. In the afternoon, the McCanns’ public relations spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, and their chief libel lawyer, Adam Tudor, gave oral evidence to the Select Committee.

Both Dr McCann and Max Mosley had good cause for restricting press freedom. All three events were well covered in the press. Was it sheer co-incidence that these three publicity opportunities, featuring, in turn, Robert Murat, Clarence Mitchell and Dr Gerald McCann, took place within the space of five days? All of them focussed on the conduct of the press. All of them featured the Madeleine McCann case. All of them raised the issue of whether there should be tighter controls on the freedom of the press to report.   

So what did Murat actually say in his Cambridge Union speech about the Madeleine McCann case? It had been heralded in advance that this would be ‘the first and last time’ that he would speak about the Madeleine McCann case. The only time, then. So what did he say about it?

In fact, extraordinarily little.

Robert Murat at the Cambridge Union meeting, 5 March, flanked by (left) The Cambridge Union President and (right) his lawyer, Louis Charalambous

Apart from detailing how badly he, and the McCanns, had been treated by the press, all we heard from him was that the priority should still be to pursue the search for Madeleine. He said nothing at all about the evidence provided by the cadaver dogs, nor all the circumstantial evidence which might suggest that Madeleine had not been abducted as claimed. He was quite certain that Madeleine had been abducted and that the entire Portuguese Police operation and press coverage of Madeleine’s disappearance had hindered, not helped, the continuing search for Madeleine.  

As many noted, whilst Murat bitterly attacked the British tabloid press, he completely failed to tell his student audience that the McCanns’ chief press spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, was amongst those to articulate a possible connection between Robert Murat and double child-murderer Ian Huntley. Neither did he mention the McCanns having pointed the finger at him in January 2008; they had claimed that there was cogent evidence that Murat was a ‘spotter for a gang of paedophiles’.

Just as puzzling: neither did Murat criticise Jane Tanner for identifying him as the abductor on 14 May 2007, nor did he have a word of condemnation for the other three members of the ‘Tapas 9’ who had a day or two later positively identified him as having been hanging round the Ocean Club apartments on the evening of 3 May.

Clarence Mitchell had made the ‘Huntley’ reference to Murat. The McCanns referred to evidence that he was a ‘spotter for a paedophile gang’. Jane Tanner was adamant that he was the abductor she’d allegedly seen. Three others of the ‘Tapas 9’ claimed they’d seen Murat near the McCanns’ apartment the night Madeleine was reported missing - and tried to out-face Murat at a tense confrontation with him organised by the Portuguese Police on 11 July. Yet in his Cambridge Union address, Murat was totally silent about all of this.

Why?  Why did he vent his spleen on the tabloids - and not on Mitchell and six members of the ‘Tapas 9’ who had so actively conspired to smear him?

If we knew the answer to this riddle, we would be much the wiser - and perhaps nearer the truth about what really happened to Madeleine McCann.    

Here’s how one newspaper reported Murat’s wedding to Michaela Walczuk on 17 April 2009:
“Robert Murat has married the woman who stood by him when he wrongly became a suspect in the Madeleine case”, writes James Murray.
“His bride, German-born Jehovah’s Witness Michaela Walczuch, 34, never doubted Mr Murat for a second and remained loyal throughout the time he was under suspicion. The civil ceremony, held on April 17 on a beach just a few miles from Praia da Luz, was witnessed by 50 close relatives and friends of the couple.

“Among them was 35-year-old Mr Murat’s daughter S_____ from his first marriage. Mr Murat’s brother Richard was best man. Also there was Mr Murat’s mother Jenny, 72, who still lives just 100 yards from the apartment where Madeleine vanished”.

Most stories would end here, with the words: ‘And they lived happily ever after’. But perhaps there is more yet to be revealed about the involvement of Robert Murat in the Madeleine McCann mystery. One of the outstanding questions that still remains a puzzle is just what made him book that flight to Portugal in the early hours of 1 May 2007.

Here is the record of telephone numbers the Portuguese police retrieved from Robert Murat’s telephones: 

From the ‘PDA’ records

28276xxxx: landline in Michaela’s (MW) home
91988xxxx: mobile ’phone number for Michaela (MW)
96014xxxx: another mobile ’phone number for Michaela (MW)
96647xxxx, mobile ’phone of ‘Lithograph’ (L), a graphics printing company in Albufeira which undertakes printing for Romigen
441392xxxxxx, landline of Samantha (SM) - ’phone installed in his sister's house in Exeter Devon
441926xxxxxx, landline of Richard Reid (RM) - ’phone installed in the house of his brother Richard in Warwick
447803xxxxxx, Not sure, but thinks that this is the ’phone number of a former co-worker of Nissan in Norwich called Neil (N)
447811xxxxxx, mobile ’phone of his sister Samantha (SM)
447877xxxxxx, mobile ’phone of his brother Richard (RR)
491622xxxxxx, telephone of Mike, Michaela’s brother who lives in Germany
13922xxxxx, ’phone installed in the house of Mr Ian C______ in Exeter, ‘ansião’ of the Jehovah's Witness church in Exeter, with whom he maintains a close relationship because he had received teaching on the Bible from him in Exeter
77887xxxxx, mobile ’phone that Michaela used when she was in England
79095xxxxx, mobile ’phone of his ex wife, Dawn (D), but this has been changed recently;
79226xxxxx ’phone of a friend of the accused called Mário R____ Czech (C), who lives in England, where he is an accountant in the National Health Service of England; they have known each other since childhood and contact each other frequently
79706xxxxx, cellphone of a boy, Raj, whom he met when he was helping in the search for Madeleine, who chatted to him
79772xxxxx, mobile ’phone of Ian C____ (IC) - see above
2826xxxxx, ’phone number of 26 Montinho (ZM) for a repair garage used by his mother
2827xxxxx, landline of Murat’s mother, Jennifer Murat
9123xxxxx, cellphone of a Jehovah's Witness, Vital R____, a Lagos resident whom he  met through Michaela, with whom he does not maintain close relationship
91405xxxx, mobile ’phone of Mr Manuel W___ (MM), whom he met with professionally about twice
91416xxxx, mobile ’phone of Sergei Malinka (SS), with whom he has a professional relationship
91487xxxx, mobile ’phone of Ricardo H____, a colleague of Murat’s in ‘Remax’, with whom he is not currently in contact
9160xxxxx, mobile of a colleague of the accused, Sara N (SN) from Remax, with whom he does not have a current relationship
9160xxxxx: mobile ’phone of Nuno B, married to the former manager of ‘Remax’ in Lagos, with whom he had maintained friendly relations but was not currently in contact
9163xxxxx, mobile ’phone of Rita D (RD), an Irish girl who he met about two years ago in a fashion event, and who then worked with Michaela in the property company ‘Century 21’, but with whom he has lost contact and doesn’t know where she lives
91738xxxx, mobile ’phone of Sonia C____, a former manager of ‘Remax’ in Lagos, and the former wife of Nuno B____
91746xxxx, mobile ’phone of his mother, Jennifer Murat (JM)
91891xxxx, another mobile ’phone number of Sónia C____
91978xxxx, mobile ’phone of Michaela’s husband, Luis Antonio (LA)
9341xxxxx, the telephone of Tina C____ (TC) at the nursery that Michaela’s daughter, Christine, attended in 2006,
9394xxxxx, Laura C, a seamstress in Lagos to whom Murat had taken clothes on several occasions
96031xxxx, mobile ’phone number for ‘Robbie Murat’, which he said was ‘the mobile number I used when I worked for ‘Remax’’
96101xxxx, telephone number of Telma N (TN), a former colleague from ‘Remax’
96299xxxx, mobile ’phone of Lita O (LO), another former colleague from ‘Remax’, and mother of Ricardo H____
96382xxxx, mobile ’phone of Rui C___ (RC), another former colleague from ‘Remax’, with whom he had a relationship between June 2005 and early 2006 when they travelled to Germany twice together to buy cars
96452xxxx, mobile ’phone of Luis S, another former colleague at ‘Remax’
9647141 17, telephone number of Pedro M____ (PM), Manager of  ‘Century 21’ in Lagos whom he only contacted on professional issues
96679xxxx, mobile ’phone of ‘Aunt M’, i.e. Filomena S____, Michaela's aunt, who lives in Lisbon, whom they have visited two or three times
967082962, telephone number of Lindsay Gr L – he does not remember who this is
96773xxxxx, mobile ’phone of Prazeres R (PR), a friend of both Murat and Michaela with whom they had a close relationship but had not seen for many months
96744xxxx, mobile ’phone of  Lurdes M____ (LM), another former colleague from ‘Remax’
96839xxxx, mobile ’phone of Tania R (TR), another ex-colleage from ‘Remax’,
96919xxxx, he believed that this was the mobile ’phone of Joseph N____ (ZC), another former colleague from ‘Remax’
96984xxxx, mobile ’phone of Veronica F (VF), another former colleague of ‘Remax’.
Anna 44784xxxxxxx, mobile ’phone of Anna, Murat’s niece - Samantha’s daughter
44777xxxxxx, the mobile ’phone of Chris S (CS), former boss of ‘Inchcape’, the car sales company in Norwich, with whom he remains friends and is in sporadic contact
447909xxxxxx, the former mobile ’phone of his ex-wife, Dawn
441603xxxxxxx, the landline of his ex-wife Dawn
9664xxxxx, mobile ’phone number of Elena, a friend of a Solicitor with offices in Portimão and Monchique with whom he used maintain close links but are not for some time;
28241xxxx telephone number of Elena at her house 
9163xxxxx, mobile ’phone of Lucy C_____, his mother’s housemaid  with whom he is on friendly terms
Lucy 2827xxxxx, the landline telephone of  Lucy
96817xxxx, mobile ’phone of Maria, wife of Murat’s former colleague and friend, Rui C____ (see above)
9683xxxxx, mobile ’phone of Murat’s friend Nelson P____, who lives in Lisbon and has known him since the age of 16, but with whom he only speaks sporadically
9698xxxxx, ’phone number for ‘Rob’;Murat did not remember who this number was for
Rob 9191xxxxx, Murat’s current mobile ’phone number
9178xxxxx, mobile ’phone number of Celly(C), Murat’s aunt, Sally Eveleigh;
2826xxxxx, landline of Celly/Sally Eveleigh
91891xxxxx, mobile ’phone number of Sonia C, a former Manager of ‘Remax’
91781xxxx, mobile ’phone number of António F___, a builder in Lagos whom he knew professionally
91730xxxx, mobile ’phone number of Carlos D, another builder from  Lagos whom again Murat knew professionally
28278xxxx, telephone number of Diane M (DM), an American lady who had a home for sale in Praia da Luz who was not in business
33610xxxxxx, ’phone number of Fernandes, a potential Spanish client with whom he did not actually do business;
9172xxxxx, ’phone number of Manuel C, another builder whom he knew professionally
9642xxxxx, the ’phone number of Paulos, a man who had an apartment in Lagos to sell but with whom he did not actually do business
91296xxxx, ’phone number of Peter W, responsible for a building in Lagos with whom he maintained a professional relationship
28269xxxx, ’phone number of Steve A____, he can’t remember who but most likely a former client
96851xxxx, the ’phone number of a Police Inspector with the Portuguese Police
35191xxxxxxxx ’phone number of Jo (Sky); Murat was a friend of her uncle in Burgau, but he was not in contact with her 
9180xxxxx, ’phone number of Nuno J, Murat can’t remember who this was
9141xxxxx, ’phone number of Jorge CB, a builder whom he knows professionally
(without number), the name ‘March M’, the name of a friend from ‘Remax’ days and who lives in Lagos and he keeps in touch with
12591xxxxx, ’phone number of Paul, the owner of the firm ‘125 Computers’ who maintained their computers
2824xxxxx, telephone number of Skoda
96913xxxx, ’phone number of Teresa, a lady known to Michaela and her husband who performed administrative services for Lusi Antonio’s office  firm and also provided some help to ‘Romigen’
9184xxxxx, ’phone number of Valter who had  a mechanic’s workshop in Lagos and serviced the Murats’ VW van
9172xxxxx, ’phone number of Pedro _____; Murat can’t remember who he is does not recall who this person is
9669xxxxx, ’phone number of Inspector Reis of the Portuguese Police who contacted him during this investigation
28278xxxxxxx, ’phone number of Dr. Alexandra S____ who has an office in Praia da Luz, who he contacted as part of his work for ‘Remax’
9189xxxxx, the mobile ’phone number of Dr Alexandra S____
9636xxxxx, ’phone number of Carla B____, the Co-ordinator of ‘Remax’ in Lagos
9177xxxxx, ’phone number of John N, another former colleague from ‘ Remax’
96851xxxx, the ’phone number of Luis F____ R____, an Inspector with the Portuguese Police
96913xxxx, ’phone number of a former colleague from ‘Remax’ 9674xxxxx, ‘’phone number of Lourdes, another former colleague from ‘Remax’
9160xxxxx, ’phone number of Nuno B____, the former husband of the former manager of ‘Remax’
96985xxxx, ’phone number of Richard M____, another former colleague of ‘Remax’.
9673xxxxx, ’phone number of Tania, another former colleague of ‘Remax’
96919xxxx, mobile ‘’phone number of Jose F____ of Zé Accounting, the  accountant for ‘Remax’ whom he knows professionally
91953xxxx, ’phone number of Anja, a German friend of both Murat and Michaela lives in Lagos whom they see often
9676xxxxx, the mobile ’phone number of ‘Czech’, the son of Mrs L____ whom he has known for many years and worked in England in health care
9186xxxxx, the ’phone number of Dan, who takes care of Villa Liliana when there is nobody at home and lives in Praia da Luz
2827xxxxx, Dan's landline
447775xxxxxx, the mobile number of Glyn, a friend of his aunt who stays with Sally Eveleigh when he comes to Portugal, and who lives near London
28278xxxx, The landline ’phone number of Murat and his mother
91978xxxx, the ’phone number of Luis Antonia, Michaela’s husband
4479801xxxxx, the cellphone that his mother used when visiting  England
91746xxxx, the mobile ’phone number of his mother
91822xxxx, the ’phone number of Dr. Francisco Pagarete, a friend but also his Solicitor
96985xxxx, the ’phone number of Rui Cristino, another former colleague from ‘Remax’ with whom he is in regular contact,
963827522, another telephone number for Rui Cristino
91416xxxx, Sergei Malinka 's mobile ‘’phone
9123xxxx, the ’phone number of ‘Vital’, a  Jehovah’s Witness who provided Bible lessons for Murat
91730xxxx, ’phone number of Carlos B, a builder in Lagos with whom he has a professional relationship
96860xxxx, ’phone number of Catherine, a friend of the Murat’s mother who lives in Praia da Luz,
9628xxxx (incomplete), ’phone number of Maria S____, Murat sold an apartment for a relative when he worked at ‘Remax’
4477688xxxx, ’phone number of Lloyd H, Murat sold an apartment to him when he was with ‘Remax’ but has no ongoing contact with him
91844xxxx, ’phone number of Mike H___, with whom he had a  professional relationship
91721xxxx, ’phone number of Paul A____; Murat is friend with his brother, Richard. Paul lives in Aljezur and he had a professional relationship with him
447802xxxxxx, ’phone number of someone called Roger
447709xxxxxxx, Murat doesn’t know whose ’phone number this is 
96283xxxx, ’phone number of ‘Vitor’, probably the same Vitor who had an apartment and a shop for sale in Lagos and whom he met while working at ‘Remax’
28208xxxx, ’phone number of Jorge S____’s office in Lagos, being the person with whom Murat was trying to develop a business relationship
you want to make a partnership
9175xxxx, landline of Mark, Manager of the newspaper ‘Algarve Resident’, whom he met through their involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine, but with whom he does not maintain contact
28249xxxx, ’phone number of the British Consulate in Portimão
91814xxxx, ’phone number of Lil B____, the former Manager of the Credit Agricultural bank n Praia da Luz, but he has no ongoing contact with her
28279xxxx, ’phone number of Michael G____, probably a boy he knew for about two years and was employed in a Lagos restaurant and with whom he is no currently in contact
96670xxxx, 28208xxxx and 91308xxxx, all numbers for ‘Pedro’, but he no longer remembers who this person is
91743xxxx, ’phone number of Sonia V___, a friend
96962xxxx, ’phone number of Tom H____, a seller of advertising space in the newspaper ‘Portugal News’ whom he knows professionally
91730xxxx, ’phone number of Zé F____, a supplier of firewood
96735xxxx, ’phone number of ‘Pleasures’, a friend who lives in Lagos
96510xxxx, ’phone number of Sally Eveleigh, owner of the ‘big house’ in Burgau with whom he has had a relationship with for many years
4479812xxxxx, Sally's mobile ’phone number in England
96688xxxx, ’phone number of Anica, another former colleague from ‘Remax’
96366xxxx, ’phone number of Delphim, Representative of ‘Remax’ in Lagos whom he knows professionally
969852xxxx. ’phone number of Larysa, another ex-colleague from ‘Remax’
96452xxxx, ’phone number of Luis S, another former colleague from ‘Remax’
96985xxxx, ’phone number of Marisa, another former colleague from ‘Remax’
28278xxxx, the ’phone number of the ‘Remax’ store in Lagos
96712xxxx, ’phone number of Sandra, another former colleague from ‘Remax’, with whom he has occasional contact
91680xxxx, ’phone number of James, another former ‘Remax’ colleague.

The name ‘Romigen’ was on the list of contacts on his mobile ’phone but without a number; Murat said he’d put the name there as part of his plans for the company and was going to add the ’phone number later.

Site Design: SH Design