The strange case of Robert Murat

IIRC there is more on that in the Leveson inquiry, I think the journalist says it is actually translated as suspect.  In fact I think IIRC and don't quote me, even Kate McCann says they were made 'suspects' in her book.  I don't have the book, but have I am almost sure seen that quote - if someone has it can they
put up the relevant bit for me please.

Tristar wrote:

Burst wrote:

Mimi wrote:

wlbts wrote:

Mimi wrote:Would it be better to interview, say RM, as a witness or as an arguido ?

He has to be given arguido status in order to be asked direct accusatory questions.  But he would also have the right to have a lawyer present, and have the right to remain silent.  Weirdly, arguido status also gives you the right to lie without legal action being taken.

My guess is that the questions will fall somewhere in between, and this might be the cause of some friction between the two police forces.

Thanks wlbts.  Fascinating how it differs from UK.

Actually, these mentioned rights that fall into an arguido's or suspect's basket, don't differ much. For instance, the right to lie to the police is just a consequence of the right to not incriminate yourself,  a right that in some way or another exists in every western legal system.
Another thing I'd like to add, while I am not absolutely sure about this, is that here it's the British enquiring by the hands of the Portuguese, and I think that as an implication a change of legal status would not be called arguido, but (British) suspect. So I don't think that here's any difference at play.

Btw I don't expect Murat to be a suspect, just guessing. He'd been framed, wrongly pointed out in the past, and I expect he'll be a witness. I speculate.

Spot on - my understanding (gained from a BBC radio programme in 2007) is that an arguido is a person of interest rather than a suspect - the latter term invoking finger pointing at guilt - arguido state means
protecting the person of interest from self incriminating.

When the BBC programme went out - the Portuguese solicitors on it stated that 10% of the Portuguese population were in the arguido state. It's kind of a holding position.

Anyroad, that's how I understood it.

ETA: exchange between Levenson and Gerry McCann:

Q. One key event in this narrative is you becoming, if
18 I pronounce it right, arguido, under Portuguese law,
19 which occurred on 7 September 2007, and this is
20 paragraph 34 of your witness statement. To be clear
21 about it, and you'll correct me if I'm wrong because you
22 know more about this than me, arguido does not mean
23 "suspect", it means "person of interest"; is that
24 correct?
25 A. That's what we were advised was the closest correlation or translation within UK law at the time,

Thank you Tristar, made the term "arguido" more clear to me. Ten procent btw if they were right! That's an Arguido Nation.

Quickly found this......

1. 4:39 pm, Wed 02 Oct 2013
   

McCann book claims 'worse than being made suspects'

The effects of a book that made allegations about Madeleine McCann's disappearance were worse than when her parents were made arguidos, or formal suspects, Gerry McCann's sister told a court in Portugal.
In her evidence at the libel trial of former police chief Goncalo Amaral, who wrote the book, Trish Cameron said: "This was a different thing. It was much more conclusive and demonising them, dehumanising them, saying they did not care for their children, that they were responsible.

 
Gerry McCann's sister, Trish Cameron, spoke at the libel trial of former police chief Goncalo Amaral. Credit: Jason Skarratt/PA Archive
"It makes it out that they weren't truthful and they have been vilified and it's very hard to turn round opinion about them that has been so widely spread."
Mrs Cameron told the court that the Portuguese people had "turned against" the family, adding: "They were fed up with the McCanns, they wanted them to go away, but they weren't going away. They still had a missing child."

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-10-02/madeleine-mccann-portugal-libel-case/

candyfloss wrote:IIRC there is more on that in the Leveson inquiry, I think the journalist says it is actually translated as suspect.  In fact I think even Kate McCann says they were made 'suspects' in her book.  I don't have the book, but have I am almost sure seen that quote - if someone has it can they
put up the relevant bit for me please.

Virtually all MSM articles translated arguido as suspects

Sorry I can't help you out with the book - I binned that when I read the infamous bit about Madeleine's genitalia.

From a linguistic point of view - some words don't have a literal translation

Think the German: Heimat or Gemütlichkeit

or the Spanish: Duende

That's just the way it is and google-translate will never change that either

Tristar wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Tristar wrote:

Don't Forget Madeleine wrote:

Anne wrote:Yes it does Justformaddiemccann,

Thanks for that vote of "no confidence" Anne.  

 the danger of quotes

That reply wasn't meant for me, I got confused with my "forum name", I forgot who I was.  Duh!!

still funny - and the world needs a chuckle now and again

So very true Tristar

Tristar wrote:

candyfloss wrote:IIRC there is more on that in the Leveson inquiry, I think the journalist says it is actually translated as suspect.  In fact I think even Kate McCann says they were made 'suspects' in her book.  I don't have the book, but have I am almost sure seen that quote - if someone has it can they
put up the relevant bit for me please.

Virtually all MSM articles translated arguido as suspects

Sorry I can't help you out with the book - I binned that when I read the infamous bit about Madeleine's genitalia.

From a linguistic point of view - some words don't have a literal translation

Think the German: Heimat or Gemütlichkeit

or the Spanish: Duende

That's just the way it is and google-translate will never change that either

 

I think you had better read this from a Portuguese law expert and I'm sure the Guardian would research this properly.....

What is an arguido?

An "arguido" - normally translated as "named suspect" or "formal suspect" - is someone who is treated by Portuguese police as more than a witness, but has not been arrested or charged.
Under Portuguese law, a person declared an arguido - "arguida" in the case of a woman - has legal protection that is not extended to a witness, including the right to remain silent during questioning and the right to legal representation.
Detectives invoke arguido status on someone as a preliminary to an arrest being made or charges brought, a Portuguese law expert, Lita Gale, told Guardian Unlimited today.
"If you are an arguido they have to have suspicion that a crime has been committed by that person," she said.
She added that when someone's status moves from that of a witness to an arguido, the police interview technique changes.
"Depending on the answers they may be moving towards a prosecution. If you cannot provide an alibi or the right answers they may move to prosecute. This is a serious moment. The suspect may be close to being charged," Ms Gale said.
Technically, police should treat someone as an arguido as soon as they have sufficient evidence. However, in some circumstances they may hold back to give somebody "a false sense of security", she added.
In practical terms, a person has to be declared an arguido before he or she can be arrested. Police may also ask a local court to place restrictions on a person's movement and oblige them to not leave the country.
Once a case file is completed, the police pass it to the public ministry, the equivalent of the crown prosecution service, which decides whether an "acusacao" or indictment is brought.
Portuguese authorities express caution against expecting that arrests or charges will automatically follow.
It is not uncommon for people caught up in criminal investigations in Portugal to declare themselves arguidos in order to receive more legal protection, particularly if they feel the line of questioning implies they are a suspect.
The ex-pat Briton, Robert Murat, was declared an arguido in the Madeleine case in May but has not been charged or formally arrested.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/sep/07/ukcrime.madeleinemccann2

candyfloss wrote:Quickly found this......

1. 4:39 pm, Wed 02 Oct 2013
   

McCann book claims 'worse than being made suspects'

The effects of a book that made allegations about Madeleine McCann's disappearance were worse than when her parents were made arguidos, or formal suspects, Gerry McCann's sister told a court in Portugal.
In her evidence at the libel trial of former police chief Goncalo Amaral, who wrote the book, Trish Cameron said: "This was a different thing. It was much more conclusive and demonising them, dehumanising them, saying they did not care for their children, that they were responsible.

 
Gerry McCann's sister, Trish Cameron, spoke at the libel trial of former police chief Goncalo Amaral. Credit: Jason Skarratt/PA Archive
"It makes it out that they weren't truthful and they have been vilified and it's very hard to turn round opinion about them that has been so widely spread."Mrs Cameron told the court that the Portuguese people had "turned against" the family, adding: "They were fed up with the McCanns, they wanted them to go away, but they weren't going away. They still had a missing child."

http://www.itv.com/news/story/2013-10-02/madeleine-mccann-portugal-libel-case/

Trish Cameron can spout anything but it doesn't take away the fact that close family members can lie through their teeth if they need to save their own skins.

I've had that experience over the past 6 or 7 years, in the end you find out you've been played like a fiddle and it won't wash any more!   Liars always get found out in the end, usually by themselves getting twisted in knots and forgetting what they've said previously.  They may not have a good memory but the person(s) being lied to do.

candyfloss wrote:

Tristar wrote:

candyfloss wrote:IIRC there is more on that in the Leveson inquiry, I think the journalist says it is actually translated as suspect.  In fact I think even Kate McCann says they were made 'suspects' in her book.  I don't have the book, but have I am almost sure seen that quote - if someone has it can they
put up the relevant bit for me please.

Virtually all MSM articles translated arguido as suspects

Sorry I can't help you out with the book - I binned that when I read the infamous bit about Madeleine's genitalia.

From a linguistic point of view - some words don't have a literal translation

Think the German: Heimat or Gemütlichkeit

or the Spanish: Duende

That's just the way it is and google-translate will never change that either

 

I think you had better read this from a Portuguese law expert and I'm sure The Guardian would research this properly.....

What is an arguido?

An "arguido" - normally translated as "named suspect" or "formal suspect" - is someone who is treated by Portuguese police as more than a witness, but has not been arrested or charged.
Under Portuguese law, a person declared an arguido - "arguida" in the case of a woman - has legal protection that is not extended to a witness, including the right to remain silent during questioning and the right to legal representation.
Detectives invoke arguido status on someone as a preliminary to an arrest being made or charges brought, a Portuguese law expert, Lita Gale, told Guardian Unlimited today.
"If you are an arguido they have to have suspicion that a crime has been committed by that person," she said.
She added that when someone's status moves from that of a witness to an arguido, the police interview technique changes.
"Depending on the answers they may be moving towards a prosecution. If you cannot provide an alibi or the right answers they may move to prosecute. This is a serious moment. The suspect may be close to being charged," Ms Gale said.
Technically, police should treat someone as an arguido as soon as they have sufficient evidence. However, in some circumstances they may hold back to give somebody "a false sense of security", she added.
In practical terms, a person has to be declared an arguido before he or she can be arrested. Police may also ask a local court to place restrictions on a person's movement and oblige them to not leave the country.
Once a case file is completed, the police pass it to the public ministry, the equivalent of the crown prosecution service, which decides whether an "acusacao" or indictment is brought.
Portuguese authorities express caution against expecting that arrests or charges will automatically follow.
It is not uncommon for people caught up in criminal investigations in Portugal to declare themselves arguidos in order to receive more legal protection, particularly if they feel the line of questioning implies they are a suspect.
The ex-pat Briton, Robert Murat, was declared an arguido in the Madeleine case in May but has not been charged or formally arrested.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/sep/07/ukcrime.madeleinemccann2

What is it now, Guardian or Telegraph?

Ok so you know what I meant Tristar, will alter it.    Still the right info though.

candyfloss wrote:Ok so you know what I meant Tristar, will alter it.    Still the right info though.

Is it? The right info?

Neither you or I have been an arguido/arguida - I wager

Gerry has been and Gerry told Levenson - that the term means 'person of interest'

So who holds he facts?

Tristar wrote:

candyfloss wrote:Ok so you know what I meant Tristar, will alter it.    Still the right info though.

Is it? The right info?

Neither you or I have been an arguido/arguida - I wager

Gerry has been and Gerry told Levenson - that the term means 'person of interest'

So who holds he facts?

I don't know but I listen to experts, not what a layman says.  As I said KM also stated it was 'suspect' in her book IIRC. 

Anyway we are way off topic and Murat.

candyfloss wrote:

Tristar wrote:

candyfloss wrote:Ok so you know what I meant Tristar, will alter it.    Still the right info though.

Is it? The right info?

Neither you or I have been an arguido/arguida - I wager

Gerry has been and Gerry told Levenson - that the term means 'person of interest'

So who holds he facts?

I don't know but I listen to experts, not what a layman says.  As I said KM also stated it was 'suspect' in her book IIRC. 

Anyway we are way off topic and Murat.

still a worthwhile exchange

just like the authorities - we should aim to get the basics right before moving on to the big panorama IMO

Lots of interesting articles here re Robert Murat......

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id218.html

Tristar wrote:

candyfloss wrote:Ok so you know what I meant Tristar, will alter it.    Still the right info though.

Is it? The right info?

Neither you or I have been an arguido/arguida - I wager

Gerry has been and Gerry told Levenson - that the term means 'person of interest'

So who holds he facts?

Both are right, Gerry has just stated part of the definition.

Would you trust the word of GM, British cardiologist and former arguido ( no vested interest there, then, in playing down the status) over a Portuguese legal expert's explanation of a legal term used in her native country?

In any way, Robert Murat as well as the McCanns have at some point, while being legal arguidoes, in fact been suspects. I wonder if SY, if it questions Robert Murat, views him as a suspect or a witness. I gamble witness.

candyfloss wrote:Lots of interesting articles here re Robert Murat......

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id218.html

Thanks for link Candyfloss, it's good to read articals again to jog our memories.

candyfloss wrote:Lots of interesting articles here re Robert Murat......

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id218.html

From the top:

He has always insisted he was at home all night at the villa he shares with his elderly mother in Praia da Luz, near the Mark Warner holiday complex.

A friend of Kate and her husband Gerry said: "Kate has always felt there are questions concerning Murat and a body of evidence contrary to what he is saying.

"Gerry doesn't know whether he is involved but Kate has always been suspicious."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That directly contradicts the Daily Mail article from 2007 I posted above AND the Channel5 programme from 2014

Both of which tried to put miles of clear, blue water between the doctors and Robert Murat

I know there are masses of media fog in between, but I never bought Gerry's answer on the beach

To the question: 'Do you know Robert Murat?'

Answer was: 'No comment'

Your solicitor would advise you to answer 'no comment' - and the doctors were lawyered up to the hilt at that point.

Why not answer (truthfully) yes or no to that question??

That's why Murat's renewed questioning is of importance and the right questioner (if I had a choice, Paxman) might just get him to spell them beans

Interesting. Could Gerry have known him previously but Kate have been ignorant of that fact?

There is no way that Gerry, Kate and the rest of the Tapas group could dispose a body on holiday without it ever being found imo.

They would needed 'outside' help from somewhere imo.

Someone who knew the area and knew it well.

Question is -  who was that person ?

If this is the line of thought of the police that would definitely make him a suspect rather than a witness.

Andrew wrote:There is no way that Gerry, Kate and the rest of the Tapas group could dispose a body on holiday without it ever being found. imo

They would have needed 'outside' help from somewhere imo.

Someone who knew the area and knew it well.

Question is -  who was that person ?

John Stalker - top cop who was involved in some of the most prolific cases in the UK - said just the same

You had to have local knowledge to spirit away a body in a foreign land

That still holds true

As for connections - that local knowledge is most useful when it speaks your tongue - and due to it's profession (at the time in question) holds dozens of sets of keys to properties in the area.

But would you frame, wrongly point the finger to, your accomplice? It would be pointing close to home.

Burst wrote:But would you frame, wrongly point the finger to, your accomplice? It would be pointing close to home.

Calmly sitting here in my drawing room in the Home Counties - and not being accused of involvement in a crime

No, I wouldn't

But facing a battery of cameras/reporters (as was their design - remember)

I might just slip up

And slip up - they did - time and time again

(suppose that's why we are here/right now)

Did Amaral mention Murat in the truth book.

Tristar wrote:

Burst wrote:But would you frame, wrongly point the finger to, your accomplice? It would be pointing close to home.

Calmly sitting here in my drawing room in the Home Counties - and not being accused of involvement in a crime

No, I wouldn't

But facing a battery of cameras/reporters (as was their design - remember)

I might just slip up

And slip up - they did - time and time again

(suppose that's why we are here/right now)

Were the McCanns being accused already, when the Tapas people, in hindsight very actively, started to put Robert Murat in the spotlights? Not that you literally say so, but if that's what you mean, I beg to differ.
I think you're right about them slipping up and that therefor every connection is possible.
That's why I'm very curious as to what will happen next.