Re: McCanns vs Amaral verdict nearing.

by Richard IV 14.04.15 10:40

HelenMeg wrote:I read yesterday in an old Daily Wail article that the verdict will be read out in Court before being sent in written format to both parties. Therefore, we should get to hear as soon as a date is set for the Court to read out the verdict.

It seems to be taking so long - why?

Everyday now I come here to see if there is a verdict and everyday I feel like I`m watching the kettle waiting for it to boil.

Yesterday I thought something similar HelenMeg - I even thought `can`t someone just phone the Court and see when the verdict is scheduled for`.

by plebgate 14.04.15 10:46

Yep it is taking ages especially as there was an article in the Portugese paper which said that we might even get to hear the verdict earlier than first thought.

I am even wondering if it has something to do with OG and what is going on in that investigation. ALL FRONTS seem very quiet.

by HelenMeg 14.04.15 11:16

After all the 'leaks' from Andy Redwood and other activity in 2014 , we are just not used to such long silences.....

by HelenMeg 14.04.15 12:05

Yes - here is an article which anticipated a verdict sooner rather than later
http://portuguese-american-journal.com/civil-action-mccanns-vs-amaral-verdict-coming-soon-by-len-port/

WRONG!! tease

by Guest 14.04.15 12:07

HelenMeg wrote:After all the 'leaks' from Andy Redwood and other activity in 2014 , we are just not used to such long silences.....

My bet is election week.

There will be some much flack about that it might get buried.

by HelenMeg 14.04.15 12:08

BlueBag wrote:
HelenMeg wrote:After all the 'leaks' from Andy Redwood and other activity in 2014 , we are just not used to such long silences.....
My bet is election week.

There will be some much flack about that it might get buried.

Yes, but that would suggest the Portugese courts are IN CAHOOTS ... are they?

by plebgate 14.04.15 12:41

I wonder if Len Port has any updates he could post here.

Yep, could be that something will be announced after the election.

by Verdi 15.04.15 19:39

HelenMeg wrote:I read yesterday in an old Daily Wail article that the verdict will be read out in Court before being sent in written format to both parties. Therefore, we should get to hear as soon as a date is set for the Court to read out the verdict.

It seems to be taking so long - why?

According to Anne Guedes trial report on gerrymccannsblog "This note is obviously my last contribution to the trial reports, as the sentence will be notified to each lawyer by mail."

I believe Anne Guedes was in attendance at the court on 21st January so she is a good a source as any, at least more reliable than the British press. Is it possible the sentence has already been notified but not made public for some reason? It does seem to be very drawn out.

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 11:06

Verdi wrote:
HelenMeg wrote:I read yesterday in an old Daily Wail article that the verdict will be read out in Court before being sent in written format to both parties. Therefore, we should get to hear as soon as a date is set for the Court to read out the verdict.

It seems to be taking so long - why?

According to Anne Guedes trial report on gerrymccannsblog "This note is obviously my last contribution to the trial reports, as the sentence will be notified to each lawyer by mail."

I believe Anne Guedes was in attendance at the court on 21st January so she is a good a source as any, at least more reliable than the British press. Is it possible the sentence has already been notified but not made public for some reason? It does seem to be very drawn out.

That may well be correct Verdi. Anne is likely to know more than the Daily Wail.. let me check the article I found....here it is - but it doesnt mean that it is correct of course.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2925419/Kate-Gerry-McCann-hurt-former-police-chief-s-book-missing-Madeleine-judge-finds.html

The rulings left Mr Amaral confident of court victory next month when the judge is expected to announce her final verdict in open court before releasing her sentence in writing.

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 11:09

Everyone quiet. DCI Wall / Portugal / Court / Amaral / Mc Canns

by Carrry On Doctor 16.04.15 11:52

Courts back on Monday ?

by Verdi 16.04.15 12:12

HelenMag today @ 12:06pm

In a way I hope the Wail is correct, at least a court sitting would give some indication of when news might be forthcoming. As it stands it's a case of waiting indefinitely, I'm not very good at patience.

The attitude adopted by the Mccanns, Kate in particular, does nothing for their public image, even less for their position before the Lisbon court:

"I was devastated. It made me feel quite desperate because of the injustice I felt towards my daughter and our family as a whole" Kate McCann

　

Following their line of thought, no crime would ever be solved. I can just see them cuffed at the foot of the steps of the Old Bailey demanding to speak with the Prime Minister because their human rights have been violated and all because they, whichever way you care to look at it, are totally responsible for Maddies disappearance.

　

I remember at some stage Gerry was reported to have said 'they had to create evidence', or words to that effect. Well they certainly created something didn't they?

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 14:52

Yes, I'm also very impatient -it seems that everyone is waiting for this verdict....

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 15:02

This is the last we heard:

14/03/2015 16:10

PGR receives the English

A working meeting with the Portuguese authorities to strengthen cooperation in searches.

By Tânia Laranjo

An hour and a half meeting. The stage was the Attorney General's Office; the protagonists, the British and Portuguese authorities. The goal was the same that has led to other such meetings. Strengthen the link between the authorities of both countries, cementing bonds that allow a joint investigation to clarify the Maddie case.

The leader of the British police team, Nicola Wall, was one of those attending the meeting. On the other side the Judicial Police represented by magistrate Pedro do Carmo, National Deputy Director. Also the District Attorney General and the leader of the investigation which remains open in the region of Faro were present. Also requested to participate was a representative of the English Attorney-General in the Republic, as well as the British Ambassador.

This was the second meeting of Nicola Wall with the most senior representatives of the process. Late last year, the English Inspector succeeded Andy Redwood who retired from the Metropolitan Police Service. Nicola Wall transferred from the Homicide and Serious Crimes division to Operation Grange, which is investigating the disappearance of the British child on May 3, 2007, from the room where she slept with younger twin siblings, in an apartment of a tourist village, in Praia da Luz in the Algarve. The case was closed and then reopened, but nothing new was found. All scenarios remain open.

Read more at: http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/nacional/portugal/detalhe/pgr_recebe_ingleses.html

by Guest 16.04.15 17:20

For the last news about the trial in Lisbon try www.pjga.blogspot.nl
It's the site of the Projecto Justiça Gonçalo Amaral.

All the court trancripts from Anne Guedes you can find on Pamalam's site.

I'm still patiently waiting for Justice to be done.

parapono

by Angelique 16.04.15 17:37

parapono

Thank you for the link.

I too am waiting for justice.

by **PeterMac** 16.04.15 17:55

Angelique wrote:
I too am waiting for justice.

As is Madeleine Beth McCann, Tony Bennett, Gonçalo Amaral, Brenda Leyland, the ex-employees of MW PdL, hoteliers and B&B owners in PdL, shopkeepers in PdL
various Portuguese police who have been traduced and had their reputations besmirched, dog handlers, professional Police advisors from various places,
and even the Pope ?

by aiyoyo 16.04.15 18:02

PeterMac wrote:
Angelique wrote:
I too am waiting for justice.
As is Madeleine Beth McCann, Tony Bennett, Gonçalo Amaral, Brenda Leyland, the ex-employees of MW PdL, hoteliers and B&B owners in PdL, shopkeepers in PdL
various Portuguese police who have been traduced and had their reputations besmirched, dog handlers, professional Police advisors from various places,
and even the Pope ?

Don't forget to include Keela and Eddie. They were unfairly dismissed as incompetent.

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 19:13

An interesting viewpoint and appraisal of the current quietness...
good reading

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/trickling-into-sand.html

by Knitted 16.04.15 20:16

HelenMeg wrote:An interesting viewpoint and appraisal of the current quietness...
good reading

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/trickling-into-sand.html

Hi HM,

It is a good read. The last paragraph is very true in that [part quote] "...Not one of us – and that clearly includes the McCanns – has any confirmed knowledge of their thinking or their intentions. All we have is inference..."

However, using Blacksmith's own logic I don't see how the statement can be made that the McCanns have no confirmed knowledge of Grange's thinking. Surely we can all only guess whether or not the McCanns/T7 are just as in the dark as the rest of us?

That's why I consider it appropriate to still challenge the remit. If Grange is above board and simply saying, as Blacksmith (and logic!) suggests, that unambiguous statements that the (statistically most) likely suspects are not persons of interest because of a need to avoid a media circus, then there's no harm done. We'll be knocked back (as your letter was) and that's to be expected.

However, if Grange is not above board, then such challenges may lead to appropriate questions being asked and a corrupt investigation appropriately exposed... or someone may lose their bottle... or at the least an audit trail will be present, in years to come, of who may have been complicit in any cover up.

Logic tells me that Grange is above board and legit. However, bearing in mind what, IMO, seems to have happened back in 2007/08... and bearing in mind the published remit and the comments from DCI Redwood... I consider that a real risk exists that it is not. As a consequence, although Blacksmith (& others) make a good logical case for Grange (& of course the PJ's current work) being a bona fide investigation I'm still drafting a challenge to the letter I received from the Met following my IPCC complaint, (n.b. the same letter as TB received and posted to the forum last week).

by aiyoyo 16.04.15 20:39

Knitted wrote:
Logic tells me that Grange is above board and legit. However, bearing in mind what, IMO, seems to have happened back in 2007/08... and bearing in mind the published remit and the comments from DCI Redwood... I consider that a real risk exists that it is not. As a consequence, although Blacksmith (& others) make a good logical case for Grange (& of course the PJ's current work) being a bona fide investigation I'm still drafting a challenge to the letter I received from the Met following my IPCC complaint, (n.b. the same letter as TB received and posted to the forum last week).

Well done Knitted. It's always better to have all sides covered for just in case.
No harm in putting pressure on OG to let them know they are being watched.
I'd think the authorities that received letters to review or investigate OG, namely IPCC and London Mayor's Policing Commitee, would inform OG at a need to know stage that they were in receipt of letter requests to audit them.
Also, since you are the only one given an open avenue for follow up complaint, not using it would be waste of opportunity. The others were given fob off or cop out excuses and cut off from taking it further.
I also happen to believe OG is a bona fide investigation but if they should come up empty handed because no evidence to proceed to Court, it would be of interest to find out what they had done so exhaustively before they came to the nothing more can be done conclusion.

by Liz Eagles 16.04.15 20:45

aiyoyo wrote:
Knitted wrote:
Logic tells me that Grange is above board and legit. However, bearing in mind what, IMO, seems to have happened back in 2007/08... and bearing in mind the published remit and the comments from DCI Redwood... I consider that a real risk exists that it is not. As a consequence, although Blacksmith (& others) make a good logical case for Grange (& of course the PJ's current work) being a bona fide investigation I'm still drafting a challenge to the letter I received from the Met following my IPCC complaint, (n.b. the same letter as TB received and posted to the forum last week).

Well done Knitted. It's always better to have all sides covered for just in case.
No harm in putting pressure on OG to let them know they are being watched.
I'd think the authorities that received letters to review or investigate OG, namely IPCC and London Mayor's Policing Commitee, would inform OG at a need to know stage that they were in receipt of letter requests to audit them.
Also, since you are the only one given an open avenue for follow up complaint, not using it would be waste of opportunity. The others were given fob off or cop out excuses and cut off from taking it further.
I also happen to believe OG is a bona fide investigation but if they should come up empty handed because no evidence to proceed to Court, it would be of interest to find out what they had done so exhaustively before they came to the nothing more can be done conclusion.

I agree and in light of all the stuff Scotland Yard has covered up in the past, I feel it appropriate.

by **PeterMac** 16.04.15 21:26

aquila wrote:
I agree and in light of all the stuff Scotland Yard has covered up in the past, I feel it appropriate.

As do I.
If Grange is above board and has nothing to fear, nor questions to answer, then no harm can be done.
Innocence demands the right to speak.
Guilt demands the right to silence.

"And so shall it be with Grangia"

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 22:00

Knitted wrote:
HelenMeg wrote:An interesting viewpoint and appraisal of the current quietness...
good reading

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/trickling-into-sand.html
Hi HM,

It is a good read. The last paragraph is very true in that [part quote] "...Not one of us – and that clearly includes the McCanns – has any confirmed knowledge of their thinking or their intentions. All we have is inference..."

However, using Blacksmith's own logic I don't see how the statement can be made that the McCanns have no confirmed knowledge of Grange's thinking. Surely we can all only guess whether or not the McCanns/T7 are just as in the dark as the rest of us?

That's why I consider it appropriate to still challenge the remit. If Grange is above board and simply saying, as Blacksmith (and logic!) suggests, that unambiguous statements that the (statistically most) likely suspects are not persons of interest because of a need to avoid a media circus, then there's no harm done. We'll be knocked back (as your letter was) and that's to be expected.

However, if Grange is not above board, then such challenges may lead to appropriate questions being asked and a corrupt investigation appropriately exposed... or someone may lose their bottle... or at the least an audit trail will be present, in years to come, of who may have been complicit in any cover up.

Logic tells me that Grange is above board and legit. However, bearing in mind what, IMO, seems to have happened back in 2007/08... and bearing in mind the published remit and the comments from DCI Redwood... I consider that a real risk exists that it is not. As a consequence, although Blacksmith (& others) make a good logical case for Grange (& of course the PJ's current work) being a bona fide investigation I'm still drafting a challenge to the letter I received from the Met following my IPCC complaint, (n.b. the same letter as TB received and posted to the forum last week).

and I would agree with you ..
especially as I am of the opinion that if a whitewash had been feasible and easy, this option would have been taken..in fact I think a number of attempts were made before 'they' realised that whitewashing was not going to be simple or in any way the remotest bit credible..

by Guest 16.04.15 22:01

Lord whatsisname hiding behind insanity and getting away with what?

Watch out, he could be doing a Pinochetty!

Log in for more topics