Re: LAST DAY OF LIBEL TRIAL 8th July 2014 DISCUSSION AND NEWS

by Tangled Web 08.07.14 12:56

Brian Griffin wrote:
Cristobell wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:
Brian Griffin wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:ALL HEARSAY, HEARSAY, HEARSAY! I'M AFRAID!
Yup!

They should worry more about what the twins will find online when they are old enough to search the Internet!

All very convenient too. One twin asked in October. While last October the trial was going on. Mrs Cameron reckoned the twins' fellow pupils said such and such.
Do 9 year kids discuss libel trials and current affairs in the playground?
Reminds me of a scene in 'About A Boy' when Hugh Grant is attending a single parents meeting to try and get a shag, and tells them his 2-year-old said 'You hang in there, dad' to the amazement of the others in the group, i.e. the ones who actually had children!

Thing is, wouldn't Sean have had to have said this at age four for the McCann's to justify starting legal proceedings against Amaral? Surely, anything said afterwards shouldn't come into it. It's surely about reasons they were suing him in the first place huh

by Rasputin 08.07.14 12:58

HelenMeg wrote:
Cristobell wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:
Brian Griffin wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:ALL HEARSAY, HEARSAY, HEARSAY! I'M AFRAID!
Yup!

They should worry more about what the twins will find online when they are old enough to search the Internet!

All very convenient too. One twin asked in October. While last October the trial was going on. Mrs Cameron reckoned the twins' fellow pupils said such and such.
Do 9 year kids discuss libel trials and current affairs in the playground?
NO1 my 10 year and friends plays tig / football. Doesn't have current affairs discussions.

No Christobel , round here its loom bands and Minecraft !

by Guest 08.07.14 12:59

OMG LOOK!

LAST DAY OF LIBEL TRIAL 8th July 2014 DISCUSSION AND NEWS - Page 8 Bit48xx6bd1tktx0409c_normal

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 8s
#Madeleine Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

by jeanmonroe 08.07.14 13:01

GA, IF he was 'pinickity' COULD SUE Sean, IF KM 'said' HE (Sean) said 'Mr A said you killed Madeleine'

Is that WHY KM, 'rapidly' corrected herself, and changed to he (Sean) said 'hid' not 'killed'?

(too late, it's 'out there')

Just for the record, GA has NEVER, EVER said the McCanns 'killed' Madeleine.

He truly 'believes' Madeleine died in their apartment 5A, albeit by 'accident'

And that her parents 'simulated' an 'abduction'

And 'hid' the body.

by Truthandjustice 08.07.14 13:01

The MCs entire case appears to be based on hearsay. All their mates told the court stuff that k and g told them. No facts at all whereas Amarals nook is entirely based on the facts of the files

by jozi 08.07.14 13:02

Hicks wrote:Surely what ever is said by the twins to the parents is hearsay and cannot be used as evidence in this trial?

That is my understanding, to be used in evidence Sean would have to be questioned !!!

Carry on regardless Kate you are doing a Great job....foot in mouth !!! She is just out to shock and get sympathy ( they know no different) if this is all they have then I am afraid it worthless.....

We just had this with Oscar Trial......

by beijos 08.07.14 13:03

candyfloss wrote:OMG LOOK!

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 8s
#Madeleine Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

Would him speaking actually add anything to his defence?

by Guest 08.07.14 13:03

candyfloss wrote:OMG LOOK!

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 8s
#Madeleine Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

So Goncalo not allowed to speak today.

by Smokeandmirrors 08.07.14 13:03

candyfloss wrote:OMG LOOK!

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 8s
#Madeleine Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

Let's hope he didn't appeal it because he deemed it unnecessary - perhaps with the McCanns bull$h!t and their dire witnesses, it was better to let their rubbish and lies stand alone Wink

The blatant nonsense and contradictions they have made public over the years will hopefully not escaped the notice of the judge

by View-from-Ireland 08.07.14 13:03

Tony Bennett wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:That link doesn't work, Claire25.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2684287/Kate-Gerry-McCann-return-Portugal-deliver-personal-statements-libel-trial-against-former-police-chief.html

Sean supposedly heard the comment on the school bus radio!
We had a poster on here a year or so back claiming to be from Rothley and saying that she'd seen the twins near the bus stop in the mornings on their own, on the main road outside the McCanns' home, waiting for the bus.

Quite a few posters thought she was making it up

As we say in Ireland 'Jaysus'!

If true this suggests they are one of:

a) confident abductions don't really happen that often
b) are somewhat negligent

I grew up in a safe rural environment but I was about 13 before I was waiting for buses on my own. And that was the 90s, a more innocent time.

The above of course in the context of them, according to themselves, already having had a child 'abducted' and imo.

by Joey Deacon 08.07.14 13:04

candyfloss wrote:OMG LOOK!

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 8s
#Madeleine Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

He should have appealed then.

Seems like a bit of an oversight to be told that you wouldn't be allowed to speak, not appeal it, and then ask to speak.

Or is this just more inaccurate reporting?

by sallypelt 08.07.14 13:05

Joana Morais ‏@xklamation · 1m
#mccann gave statements, gerry tried to make allegations about sniffer dogs and book veracity but judge shut him

Doesn't it speak volumes about G McCann, that the very thing that the McCann's cannot explain away, is the dogs, yet he has to try his best to discredit them in court, today, until he was more or less, told to SHUT UP.

by Guest 08.07.14 13:05

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 10s
#Madeleine Libel trial now adjourned for a while. Court still demanding Amaral reveal earnings from his book.

by Tangled Web 08.07.14 13:05

Smokeandmirrors wrote:
candyfloss wrote:OMG LOOK!

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 8s
#Madeleine Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

Let's hope he didn't appeal it because he deemed it unnecessary - perhaps with the McCanns bull$h!t and their dire witnesses, it was better to let their rubbish and lies stand alone The blatant nonsense and contradictions they have made public over the years will hopefully not escaped the notice of the judge

I wish he had been able to speak, as it would've been reported here. Maybe this is why he sacked his previous lawyer?

by Miraflores 08.07.14 13:05

So let me get this clear:
The twins were born in February 2005, so the earliest they would start school would be in September 2009 as 4 1/2 year olds going into the Reception class. If they are going to a Catholic school, there isn't one in Rothley, I think, so it's possible that they are being bused to the nearest one. So far, so good.

The McCanns started action against Dr Amaral in 2009. So are they really trying to claim that Sean McCann heard this comment on a bus radio as a 4 year old, which prompted them to take action? I'm sorry, but I just don't believe that. I think they had already decided to take action before the twins started school. I hope the judge asked when this conversation took place. If it post - dates the start of the legal action, then what Sean heard or didn't hear is of no consequence.

I further don't believe it because after 2008 there was a complete embargo on anything negative said in the mainstream media, and this would just not have been said. I am happy to be corrected on this statement if anyone can find any proof that this was on the radio.

by Dr What 08.07.14 13:05

It would appear that the McCann world is imploding.
However, they are only reaping what they have previously sown.They know, and everyone else must know by now, that the only person to have hindered the search for Maddie is Kate McCann herself.She openly admitted as such when she answered only one of the questions put to her during her formal Police interview.

They can never refute that, never deny that, never blame anyone else for that.It is there for all to read.

by Seek truth 08.07.14 13:08

sallypelt wrote:Joana Morais ‏@xklamation · 1m
#mccann gave statements, gerry tried to make allegations about sniffer dogs and book veracity but judge shut him

Now why would the judge do that!!!

Let him lie, go ahead, the more said the better.
Mrs

And I wonder why Amaral didn't appeal, what time did the mccanns appeal

by SixMillionQuid 08.07.14 13:08

Joey Deacon wrote:
candyfloss wrote:OMG LOOK!

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 8s
#Madeleine Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

He should have appealed then.

Seems like a bit of an oversight to be told that you wouldn't be allowed to speak, not appeal it, and then ask to speak.

Or is this just more inaccurate reporting?

My understanding was that he wasn't going to give evidence in the first instance, then the McCanns saw an opportunity which was scuppered a few weeks ago big grin

but now they've been given that chance. Hasn't done them any favours though -not a shred of evidence to back up their claim.

by Guest 08.07.14 13:08

beijos wrote:
candyfloss wrote:OMG LOOK!

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 8s
#Madeleine Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

Would him speaking actually add anything to his defence?

No

And not being in the dock also prevents his being grilled on behalf of the Mecs

Which is just as well, as it provides for a very less stressful occasion

Also, this clearly demonstrates the astuteness of the trial judge, Dona Melo y Castro, and her respect for the formalities of the litigation

Wonderful!

by Brian Griffin 08.07.14 13:08

candyfloss wrote: martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 10s
#Madeleine Libel trial now adjourned for a while. Court still demanding Amaral reveal earnings from his book.

Ah, now we're getting to what this is really all about!

by Guest 08.07.14 13:09

SixMillionQuid wrote:
Joey Deacon wrote:
candyfloss wrote:OMG LOOK!

martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 8s
#Madeleine Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

He should have appealed then.

Seems like a bit of an oversight to be told that you wouldn't be allowed to speak, not appeal it, and then ask to speak.

Or is this just more inaccurate reporting?
My understanding was that he wasn't going to give evidence in the first instance, then the McCanns saw an opportunity which was scuppered a few weeks ago but now they've been given that chance. Hasn't done them any favours though -not a shred of evidence to back up their claim.

Agreed

Mrs looks very silly to me, judging from the excerpts we are treated to so far

by TheTruthWillOut 08.07.14 13:11

View-from-Ireland wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:That link doesn't work, Claire25.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2684287/Kate-Gerry-McCann-return-Portugal-deliver-personal-statements-libel-trial-against-former-police-chief.html

Sean supposedly heard the comment on the school bus radio!
We had a poster on here a year or so back claiming to be from Rothley and saying that she'd seen the twins near the bus stop in the mornings on their own, on the main road outside the McCanns' home, waiting for the bus.

Quite a few posters thought she was making it up

As we say in Ireland 'Jaysus'!

If true that proves they are one of:

a) confident abductions don't really happen that often
b) are somewhat negligent

I grew up in a safe rural environment but I was about 13 before I was waiting for buses on my own. And that was the 90s, a more innocent time.

My commute takes me along a route to and past Bishop Ellis school in Leicester and I see lone boys/girls walking to school daily as well as the school bus presumably with a lot of under 11 yo on it.

by Guest 08.07.14 13:12

Brian Griffin wrote:
candyfloss wrote: martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · 10s
#Madeleine Libel trial now adjourned for a while. Court still demanding Amaral reveal earnings from his book.
Ah, now we're getting to what this is really all about!

Bit late at this stage: so is he or isn't he allowed to speak?

This issue first came up a longtime ago, so why hasn't he put his cards on the table till date? In writing, stamped, sealed and verifiable. As in: tax returns or something like that. He could then have pointed out how their attachment(s) of his all & sundry made and makes him and his family suffer. Would have made things easier for him. On the other hand, I don't believe the Portuguese people in general and Dr Amaral in particular are given to histrionics, as some we have come to know and rely on

So who wanted to know? The Judge or the Mecs? That's a big difference! Information anyone?

by Guest 08.07.14 13:12

Joana Morais ‏@xklamation 18 mins
Goncalo Amaral new lawyer is great, Miguel Rodrigues it's his name. #McCann

Babalou ‏@B_balou 11 mins
@xklamation & listed with the Ordem dos Advogados with email & telephone details - contrary to reports in the press.

by SixMillionQuid 08.07.14 13:12

Miraflores wrote:So let me get this clear:
The twins were born in February 2005, so the earliest they would start school would be in September 2009 as 4 1/2 year olds going into the Reception class. If they are going to a Catholic school, there isn't one in Rothley, I think, so it's possible that they are being bused to the nearest one. So far, so good.

The McCanns started action against Dr Amaral in 2009. So are they really trying to claim that Sean McCann heard this comment on a bus radio as a 4 year old, which prompted them to take action? I'm sorry, but I just don't believe that. I think they had already decided to take action before the twins started school. I hope the judge asked when this conversation took place. If it post - dates the start of the legal action, then what Sean heard or didn't hear is of no consequence.

I further don't believe it because after 2008 there was a complete embargo on anything negative said in the mainstream media, and this would just not have been said. I am happy to be corrected on this statement if anyone can find any proof that this was on the radio.

It's what I pointed out earlier - no UK radio station would broadcast this as they were on lockdown. And I can't think of any 4 -5 year old traveling by bus without their parents...oh wait its the McCanns we're dealing with.

Log in for more topics