Jump to content

Court 'vindicates' McCann suspect -Beeb


Rob W
 Share

Recommended Posts

Court 'vindicates' McCann suspect 

 

Robert Murat was in London to reach the damages settlement

Madeleine McCann suspect Robert Murat says he feels "vindicated" after reaching a £600,000 settlement from 11 British newspapers in a libel claim.

 

Mr Murat said the more than 100 articles and sensational headlines about him had caused the "total and utter destruction" of his life.

 

He said an apology from the papers allowed him to "rebuild his life".

 

Mr Murat is still an official suspect - or arguido - in the three-year-old's disappearance in Portugal in May 2007.

 

The 34-year-old had travelled from his home in the Algarve to accept the settlement at London's High Court.

 

  The behaviour of the tabloid journalists and their editors has been grossly irresponsible demonstrating a reckless disregard for truth

 

Louis Charalambous

Mr Murat's lawyer

 

 

Profile: Robert Murat

 

His then girlfriend Michaela Walczuch and IT consultant Sergey Malinka also brought proceedings against Associated Newspapers, Express Newspapers, MGN Limited and News Group Newspapers and were awarded "substantial six figure settlements".

 

Mr Murat's solicitor, Louis Charalambous, said they had taken the action over "baseless inaccurate media coverage".

 

He said the newspapers had accepted that they had not been involved in Madeleine's disappearance.

 

 

 

Robert Murat: 'Complete devastation'

"They accept that Mr Murat's actions after the abduction were entirely proper and were motivated by a desire to help find Madeleine McCann," Mr Charalambous said.

 

"Until now Robert Murat has had to watch silently as the worst elements of the British media have gone about destroying his good name and reputation.

 

"The behaviour of the tabloid journalists and their editors has been grossly irresponsible demonstrating a reckless disregard for truth."

 

The settlement, he said, would allow all three to "bury the lies published about them".

 

  £600,000 between several very rich papers is pocket change

 

Andrew Neil

Former newspaper editor

 

Unreserved apology

 

The 11 papers involved are the Daily Mail, Evening Standard, Metro, Daily Express, Daily Star, Sunday Express, Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror, Daily Record (Scotland), Sun and News of the World.

 

All the papers have agreed to publish reports of the statement to recognise the immense distress and damage which they have caused.

 

"The defendants apologise to each of the claimants for publishing false allegations about them", Keith Mathieson the papers' solicitor said. "They very much regret the distress these publications caused".

 

Outside the court Mr Murat said: "I am pleased that the publications concerned have today admitted the falsity of all their allegations and I can now start to rebuild my life.

 

"Today's statement of full apology in open court means I can emerge from this action vindicated and with the recognition and acknowledgement that what was said against me was wholly untrue."

 

In March, Madeleine's parents Kate and Gerry McCann reached a libel settlement and got an apology from Express Newspapers for suggesting they were responsible for her death.

 

Former Sunday Times editor Andrew Neil said the pay-out to Mr Murat would not stop a similar barrage of stories happening again because the damages were too low.

 

"The papers have not been hurt enough," he said.

 

"£600,000 between several very rich papers is pocket change."

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So have I got this right?

 

Murat is still a formal suspect.

 

Papers have paid out on slurs based on Murat being a suspect (later leading to him becoming a formal suspect).

 

What happens if he is convicted (unlikely I know)?

 

Surely this payout (which assuming he is innocent is all right and proper imo) should have been withheld until he is formally dropped as a suspect?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So have I got this right?

 

Murat is still a formal suspect.

 

Papers have paid out on slurs based on Murat being a suspect (later leading to him becoming a formal suspect).

 

What happens if he is convicted (unlikely I know)?

 

Surely this payout (which assuming he is innocent is all right and proper imo) should have been withheld until he is formally dropped as a suspect?

 

I assume they'd just do him on perjury like they did to Archer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So have I got this right?

 

Murat is still a formal suspect.

 

Papers have paid out on slurs based on Murat being a suspect (later leading to him becoming a formal suspect).

 

What happens if he is convicted (unlikely I know)?

 

Surely this payout (which assuming he is innocent is all right and proper imo) should have been withheld until he is formally dropped as a suspect?

No. This payout isn't based on that they accused him of doing it. It's based on the fact they printed that Portuguese police had found DNA evidence showing she had been at his house when this evidence did not exist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So have I got this right?

 

Murat is still a formal suspect.

 

Papers have paid out on slurs based on Murat being a suspect (later leading to him becoming a formal suspect).

 

What happens if he is convicted (unlikely I know)?

 

Surely this payout (which assuming he is innocent is all right and proper imo) should have been withheld until he is formally dropped as a suspect?

No. This payout isn't based on that they accused him of doing it. It's based on the fact they printed that Portuguese police had found DNA evidence showing she had been at his house when this evidence did not exist.

 

And also accusations of child porn being on his computer. Even if he was guilty, he'd still be able to keep the money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So have I got this right?

 

Murat is still a formal suspect.

 

Papers have paid out on slurs based on Murat being a suspect (later leading to him becoming a formal suspect).

 

What happens if he is convicted (unlikely I know)?

 

Surely this payout (which assuming he is innocent is all right and proper imo) should have been withheld until he is formally dropped as a suspect?

No. This payout isn't based on that they accused him of doing it. It's based on the fact they printed that Portuguese police had found DNA evidence showing she had been at his house when this evidence did not exist.

 

you want to be careful mate - he might add to his £ 600k

 

you have no evidence for what you said - only what was in the same papers that have just apologised and forked out for tellinglies

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...