How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Portuguese Police Investigation :: McCanns v Dr Gonçalo Amaral + ECHR
Page 1 of 1 • Share
Having read how the Portuguese judicial system has dealt with Amaral, I think they have treated him
How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by Tony Bennett 21.07.15 20:59
How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
Recently on the forum, there has been discussion and debate over the effectiveness of the Portuguese judicial system.
I have criticised it. Textusa reacted to the criticism with a couple of posts here as ‘Portuguese’ and ‘Portuguese2’. My criticisms of the Portuguese judicial system are based on my own observations of it in the Madeleine McCann case, but also widespread condemnation of it by a number of independent and respected agencies (which I list and re-post below). To criticise another country’s judicial performance is not ‘xenophobic’ as Textusa claimed. I spend a great deal more time criticising corruption in my own country, as members here are aware.
In the case of Goncalo Amaral, he obtained two great decisions from the two highest courts in the land: the Portuguese Court of Appeal (October 2010), and the Portuguese Supreme Court (March 2011). At least there is no sign of incompetence or corruption by the judges who took those decisions.
But let’s look at how the Portuguese judicial system has comprehensively failed one of its citizens, Goncalo Amaral:
1. Frustrating Amaral’s investigation. The Portuguese judicial system hampered Amaral’s investigation by restricting his ability to look at the historic ’phone records of the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 7’ friends.
2.The long-running libel trial. After 6 years and 1 month, the Portuguese judicial system still cannot decide (a) whether Amaral libeled the McCanns and/or (b) whether his book ‘The Truth about A Lie’ should be banned.
3. He was denied ‘Legal Aid’ for the trial.
4. It is probably the longest-running libel trial in the history of the earth; even now the appeal probably won’t be heard until October, and almost certainly, it will run for some good time after that.
5. That is fair neither to Amaral nor to the McCanns. Only the lawyers benefit, in terms of vastly increased fees. ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ is a popular saying here. So it is for Amaral. The continuing uncertainty and anxiety. The rising costs. The inability to ‘move on’. And so on.
6. The ex parte proceedings that Amaral never knew about. Three months after the McCanns issued their writ for libel damages, the Portuguese judicial system allowed the McCanns an ‘ex parte’ hearing (that is, the other party (Amaral) is not even told about it). Amaral wrote about it in Chapter 6 of ‘The English Gag’ (see ‘TERRIBLE NEWS’ thread, here: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8856-terrible-news-chapter-6-of-a-mordaca-inglesa-the-english-gag-by-dr-goncalo-amaral-how-he-learnt-on-portuguese-radio-that-his-book-had-been-banned-at-a-secret-court-hearing-that-he-knew-absolutely-nothing-about ). He was in a restaurant when the owner ran out to him and said ‘I’ve just heard about it on the radio – your book’s been banned!’ This was a wholesale denial of natural justice and fairness to Amaral.
7. Not only was this secret hearing grossly unfair (it would be unlawful in such proceedings in the U.K.), but it also took several truly draconian steps:
a. immediate banning of his book
b. impounding all books printed but not sold
c. ordering delivery of the books by Amaral and his publisher to the lawyer acting for the McCanns
d. sequestering many of his property and other assets
e. denying him about one-third of his income
8. The failure of the Lisbon Civil Court to follow the rulings of the Portuguese Appeal and Supreme Courts. Both courts were clear that Article 10 of the European Human Rights Convention: ‘Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression’ favoured Amaral’s righto publish. For whatever reason - corrupt or otherwise – the judge in the recent trial found a way to ignore these two rulings.
9. The removal of Amaral as Investigation Co-ordinator. The Policia Judiciara (PJ) is part of the Portuguese judicial system, run by the Ministry of Justice. It was senior officials in the PJ, certainly influenced by the British Prime Minister at the time, Gordon Brown, who ordered Amaral to be removed from his post.
10. The inadequate Attorney-General’s Report. In July 2008, the Attorney-General’s final report was published. It recommended that the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance merely be archived. It showed every indication of being a politically watered-down report, bearing little relation to the robust, well-evidenced and well-argued interim report of Tavares de Almedia, dated 10 September 2007.
11. Allowing the lying murderess-of-her-own-child to bring a criminal prosecution against Amaral. Leonor Cipriano murdered her daughter in 2005, pretending that she had been abducted. She lied about this and was shown to be a serial liar on many other occasions. Yet the Portuguese judicial system allowed her to bring a state-funded criminal prosecution against Amaral and 4 other detectives, alleging she had been tortured.
12. The prosecution failed to prove that any of the 5 detectives she had named had tortured her.
13. During the proceedings, the lawyer representing Leonor Cipriano, Marcos Aragao Correia - who was paid by the McCann Team - was barred from continuing to represent her any more because of his conduct in court and due to his having been found guilty of professional misconduct by the Lawyer’s Association in his native Madeira. The judicial system miraculously ordered the judge to reinstate him two days later
14. These proceedings lasted 7 months with 7 hearings from October 2008 to May 2009. In the U.K. the trial would have been heard over 7 continuous days. Spreading the hearings over several months significantly increases the lawyers’ costs.
15. At the end of the proceedings, and based solely on the testimony of a serial liar who murdered her own child in cold blood, the court convicted Amaral of the offence of ‘filing a false report’.
16. Those who are utterly opposed to Amaral have ‘milked’ this perverse judicial finding for all that it’s worth, labelling this as ‘perjury’, and constantly referring to him as a ‘convicted perjurer’.
17. Amaral brought a perfectly proper case for ‘criminal libel’ against Marcos Aragao Correia, after he made a series of libelous statements about Amaral. The Portuguese judiciary would not allow him to proceed with this claim.
18. As a result of the way the Portuguese judicial system has treated him, Amaral has at times seemed close to being a ‘broken man’, he and his wife divorced, and he has had to rely on donations for Portuguese, British and other people even to be able to afford to carry on defending himself.
Given the above, and much more, Amaral’s fate has very largely been shaped by the inability of the Portuguese judicial system to give him a fair hearing within a reasonable period of time, and by inflicting on him the simply monstrous injustice of forcing him to defend himself against a lying murderess whom he thankfully put behind bars and then finding him guilty of filing a report on the basis of her worthless testimony.
VARIOUS REPORTS ON THE STATE OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN PORTUGAL
+++++++
A. BUSINESS ANTI-CORRUPTION PORTAL ON THE PORTUGUESE JUDICIAL SYSTEM
One of the organisations that keeps tabs on corruption worldwide is the
Business Anti-Corruption Portal, link here:
http://www.business-anti-corruption.com/country-profiles/europe-central-asia/portugal/judicial-system.aspx
Businessmen need to know, when they are dealing with foreign countries, whether judicial systems are efficient, fair, or corrupt. They take these matters into account.
Below is their summary report on Portugal, headed:
Portuguese Judicial System
The judicial system in Portugal is relatively independent but lacks efficiency. The court system is slow, and the number of years it takes to resolve cases is well above the EU average (ICS 2013, IoEF 2014). The complexity of the judicial system and delays in case-handling are among the most significant obstacles for effective prosecution of corruption in Portugal. Criminal proceedings are often delayed due to inadequate judicial organisation, a lack of judges trained in economic and financial crimes and a lack of specialised courts for corruption crimes (NISA 2012). Most citizens consider the Portuguese judiciary to be highly corrupt, but almost none report paying bribes (GCB 2013).
+++++++
B. PORTUGAL FINED AGAIN FOR JUDICIAL DELAYS
Portugal again fined for slow justice system
28 January 2014
Portugal again has been condemned and fined by the European Court of Human Rights over the country’s lethargic justice system relating to four new cases which had been listed as being particularly poor examples of Portugal’s justice system, cases that have been languishing in the Portuguese courts for years.
The total level of fines was low but the point has been made time and time again that a key aspect of a civilised society is the right of its citizens to have access to a fair and timely system of justice. This is not happening in Portugal and many litigants with sensible claims are deterred from entering into a lifetime of lawyer's fees by actually going to court.
In Portugal the concept of timely justice is still a pipe dream as in one case, judged to be on the slow side, João Aníbal Ratinho had resorted to the court system to collect a commercial debt. His case took 17 years, according to Jorge de Jesus Ferreira Alves, a lawyer specialising in European Law, who brought three of the four actions that today resulted in the Portuguese State receiving conviction and censure.
The lawyer said that currently the European Court of Human Rights itself has 70 cases pending, most of which are for delays in the Portuguese justice system.
The João Aníbal Ratinho case started on March 26, 1997 as he tried to collect a debt of €12,740 from a company. After several procedural delays, the latest information from the court as in June 2013 was that the case was still ‘pending’ in the Portuguese court system.
The European Court found this was a violation of the Human Rights Convention, and ordered the Portuguese State to pay Sr. Ratinho a total of €13,740.
Another case was brought by Duarte José Trigo Saraiva, whose proceedings against the Ministry of Finance in 2004 in a case relating to the calculation of his pension. This action at least has ended, albeit only in May, 2012. The Portuguese State in his case was ordered to pay compensation of €4,900.
The Maria do Sameiro Alves case saw her taking the state to court over a land issue in 2005. The European Court ordered that she be paid compensation of €2,000 for the delay in justice.
For Tomásia Vieira Gomes Bezerra, born in Silves and residing in Bonn, the European Court found a delay in justice but she received no compensation as none had been asked for.
In all three cases the European Court held that, in addition to breaching Article 6 of the Convention related to the speed of justice, there had also been violations of Article 13 of the Convention which obliges Portugal and other states to have means and mechanisms available to citizens to complain, fight against and resolve issues relating to the snail-like speed of Portugal’s courts.
+++++++
C. A MORE GENERAL REPORT ON THE DEGREE OF CORRUPTION IN PORTUGAL BY TRANPARENCY INTERNATIONAL
http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/nisarticle/portugal_2012
Corruption is present in the daily life of Portuguese citizens, who are assailed everyday by the media reporting new scandals of corruption, recurring obstacles in pending investigations, crimes that go unpunished and new anti‐corruption policies that have no effect on these issues.
The continuous public exposure of high profile corruption cases involving figures from the state or private sector, combined with extensive media coverage of how successive governments have dealt with this phenomena, has undermined public confidence.
+++++++
D. REPORT IN THE ALGARVE NEWS: CORRUPTION IN PORTUGAL IS ‘DRAMATIC’
Corruption in Portugal is ‘dramatic’
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/736-corruption-in-portugal-is-dramatic
Portugal continues to decline in the Corruption Perceptions Index which for 10 consecutive years has made saddening reading as a widening elite continue to fill their pockets at the expense of others. The country came 33rd of 177 countries in the survey, down one point despite its lip service to anti-corruption laws.
The Vice-president of Transparency and Integrity considers the national score "dramatic" indicating the seriousness of the problem in Portuguese politics and in its public administration.
If the current ranking is rated as serious, the trend is disastrous if Portugal wants to be taken seriously within Europe. The slow decline since 2000 when Portugal was 23rd in the index shows successive governments’ inability or unwillingness to instill in its ranks a moral rigor that it expects of its taxpayers.
The leadership can no longer be taken seriously by an electorate with 8 in 10 believe corruption has increased since the last survey.
"In the last decade the country in the world that has depreciated most in terms of transparency has been Portugal," according to the vice-president of the association who noted that that corruption has been booming in Portugal's government citing the examples of Expo ‘98, Euro 2004, the current submarines case, Portuguese Business Bank (BPN) and Banco Privado Portuguese (BPP). The behaviour of cash rich Angola is clearly encouraged and Portugal "continues to be the preferred laundry" of the Angolan elite.
Portugal’s public administration fosters corruption and the clear inability of the Portuguese justice system to resolving cases of corruption and related crimes, either through lack of means or lack of will, were other aspects that showed Portugal is failing even to bother recovering the money that has been stolen from the state itself.
Portugal is criticised for signing all the anti-corruption conventions (UN, OECD and others), but then ignores them, and fails to create specialised structures to combat corruption, or to protect whistleblowers.
Portugal’s parliament shows no willingness at all to adopt a new version of the Illicit Enrichment Law, the first version of which was rejected by the Constitutional Court. The the state sits on such legislation and remains inactive, like a hen sitting on an egg, warm and happy.
Within the European Union, Portugal is in 14th place, lying above such paragons as Poland, Spain, Italy, Greece and most of the eastern bloc members.
The Danes are number one in Europe for cleanliness, as ever, with an inbred abhorrence of corrupt practices which are seen as anti-social, anti-society and therefore anti-Danish.
Portugal takes the opposite viewpoint and encourages self-enrichment through corrupt practices by leaving unpunished those that are guilty, not recovering assets gained through corrupt practices and generally being unwilling to start at the top where corruption starts.
Portugal expects more from its elected leaders. Corruption starts in the ranks of those who govern and, if they remain unpunished, soon permeates through society and becomes the norm. This is what has happened, the system appears now to be rotten through and through.
+++++++
E. WIKIPEDIA PAGE ON CORRUPTION IN PORTUGAL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Portugal
Recently on the forum, there has been discussion and debate over the effectiveness of the Portuguese judicial system.
I have criticised it. Textusa reacted to the criticism with a couple of posts here as ‘Portuguese’ and ‘Portuguese2’. My criticisms of the Portuguese judicial system are based on my own observations of it in the Madeleine McCann case, but also widespread condemnation of it by a number of independent and respected agencies (which I list and re-post below). To criticise another country’s judicial performance is not ‘xenophobic’ as Textusa claimed. I spend a great deal more time criticising corruption in my own country, as members here are aware.
In the case of Goncalo Amaral, he obtained two great decisions from the two highest courts in the land: the Portuguese Court of Appeal (October 2010), and the Portuguese Supreme Court (March 2011). At least there is no sign of incompetence or corruption by the judges who took those decisions.
But let’s look at how the Portuguese judicial system has comprehensively failed one of its citizens, Goncalo Amaral:
1. Frustrating Amaral’s investigation. The Portuguese judicial system hampered Amaral’s investigation by restricting his ability to look at the historic ’phone records of the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 7’ friends.
2.The long-running libel trial. After 6 years and 1 month, the Portuguese judicial system still cannot decide (a) whether Amaral libeled the McCanns and/or (b) whether his book ‘The Truth about A Lie’ should be banned.
3. He was denied ‘Legal Aid’ for the trial.
4. It is probably the longest-running libel trial in the history of the earth; even now the appeal probably won’t be heard until October, and almost certainly, it will run for some good time after that.
5. That is fair neither to Amaral nor to the McCanns. Only the lawyers benefit, in terms of vastly increased fees. ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ is a popular saying here. So it is for Amaral. The continuing uncertainty and anxiety. The rising costs. The inability to ‘move on’. And so on.
6. The ex parte proceedings that Amaral never knew about. Three months after the McCanns issued their writ for libel damages, the Portuguese judicial system allowed the McCanns an ‘ex parte’ hearing (that is, the other party (Amaral) is not even told about it). Amaral wrote about it in Chapter 6 of ‘The English Gag’ (see ‘TERRIBLE NEWS’ thread, here: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8856-terrible-news-chapter-6-of-a-mordaca-inglesa-the-english-gag-by-dr-goncalo-amaral-how-he-learnt-on-portuguese-radio-that-his-book-had-been-banned-at-a-secret-court-hearing-that-he-knew-absolutely-nothing-about ). He was in a restaurant when the owner ran out to him and said ‘I’ve just heard about it on the radio – your book’s been banned!’ This was a wholesale denial of natural justice and fairness to Amaral.
7. Not only was this secret hearing grossly unfair (it would be unlawful in such proceedings in the U.K.), but it also took several truly draconian steps:
a. immediate banning of his book
b. impounding all books printed but not sold
c. ordering delivery of the books by Amaral and his publisher to the lawyer acting for the McCanns
d. sequestering many of his property and other assets
e. denying him about one-third of his income
8. The failure of the Lisbon Civil Court to follow the rulings of the Portuguese Appeal and Supreme Courts. Both courts were clear that Article 10 of the European Human Rights Convention: ‘Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression’ favoured Amaral’s righto publish. For whatever reason - corrupt or otherwise – the judge in the recent trial found a way to ignore these two rulings.
9. The removal of Amaral as Investigation Co-ordinator. The Policia Judiciara (PJ) is part of the Portuguese judicial system, run by the Ministry of Justice. It was senior officials in the PJ, certainly influenced by the British Prime Minister at the time, Gordon Brown, who ordered Amaral to be removed from his post.
10. The inadequate Attorney-General’s Report. In July 2008, the Attorney-General’s final report was published. It recommended that the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance merely be archived. It showed every indication of being a politically watered-down report, bearing little relation to the robust, well-evidenced and well-argued interim report of Tavares de Almedia, dated 10 September 2007.
11. Allowing the lying murderess-of-her-own-child to bring a criminal prosecution against Amaral. Leonor Cipriano murdered her daughter in 2005, pretending that she had been abducted. She lied about this and was shown to be a serial liar on many other occasions. Yet the Portuguese judicial system allowed her to bring a state-funded criminal prosecution against Amaral and 4 other detectives, alleging she had been tortured.
12. The prosecution failed to prove that any of the 5 detectives she had named had tortured her.
13. During the proceedings, the lawyer representing Leonor Cipriano, Marcos Aragao Correia - who was paid by the McCann Team - was barred from continuing to represent her any more because of his conduct in court and due to his having been found guilty of professional misconduct by the Lawyer’s Association in his native Madeira. The judicial system miraculously ordered the judge to reinstate him two days later
14. These proceedings lasted 7 months with 7 hearings from October 2008 to May 2009. In the U.K. the trial would have been heard over 7 continuous days. Spreading the hearings over several months significantly increases the lawyers’ costs.
15. At the end of the proceedings, and based solely on the testimony of a serial liar who murdered her own child in cold blood, the court convicted Amaral of the offence of ‘filing a false report’.
16. Those who are utterly opposed to Amaral have ‘milked’ this perverse judicial finding for all that it’s worth, labelling this as ‘perjury’, and constantly referring to him as a ‘convicted perjurer’.
17. Amaral brought a perfectly proper case for ‘criminal libel’ against Marcos Aragao Correia, after he made a series of libelous statements about Amaral. The Portuguese judiciary would not allow him to proceed with this claim.
18. As a result of the way the Portuguese judicial system has treated him, Amaral has at times seemed close to being a ‘broken man’, he and his wife divorced, and he has had to rely on donations for Portuguese, British and other people even to be able to afford to carry on defending himself.
Given the above, and much more, Amaral’s fate has very largely been shaped by the inability of the Portuguese judicial system to give him a fair hearing within a reasonable period of time, and by inflicting on him the simply monstrous injustice of forcing him to defend himself against a lying murderess whom he thankfully put behind bars and then finding him guilty of filing a report on the basis of her worthless testimony.
VARIOUS REPORTS ON THE STATE OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN PORTUGAL
+++++++
A. BUSINESS ANTI-CORRUPTION PORTAL ON THE PORTUGUESE JUDICIAL SYSTEM
One of the organisations that keeps tabs on corruption worldwide is the
Business Anti-Corruption Portal, link here:
http://www.business-anti-corruption.com/country-profiles/europe-central-asia/portugal/judicial-system.aspx
Businessmen need to know, when they are dealing with foreign countries, whether judicial systems are efficient, fair, or corrupt. They take these matters into account.
Below is their summary report on Portugal, headed:
Portuguese Judicial System
The judicial system in Portugal is relatively independent but lacks efficiency. The court system is slow, and the number of years it takes to resolve cases is well above the EU average (ICS 2013, IoEF 2014). The complexity of the judicial system and delays in case-handling are among the most significant obstacles for effective prosecution of corruption in Portugal. Criminal proceedings are often delayed due to inadequate judicial organisation, a lack of judges trained in economic and financial crimes and a lack of specialised courts for corruption crimes (NISA 2012). Most citizens consider the Portuguese judiciary to be highly corrupt, but almost none report paying bribes (GCB 2013).
+++++++
B. PORTUGAL FINED AGAIN FOR JUDICIAL DELAYS
Portugal again fined for slow justice system
28 January 2014
Portugal again has been condemned and fined by the European Court of Human Rights over the country’s lethargic justice system relating to four new cases which had been listed as being particularly poor examples of Portugal’s justice system, cases that have been languishing in the Portuguese courts for years.
The total level of fines was low but the point has been made time and time again that a key aspect of a civilised society is the right of its citizens to have access to a fair and timely system of justice. This is not happening in Portugal and many litigants with sensible claims are deterred from entering into a lifetime of lawyer's fees by actually going to court.
In Portugal the concept of timely justice is still a pipe dream as in one case, judged to be on the slow side, João Aníbal Ratinho had resorted to the court system to collect a commercial debt. His case took 17 years, according to Jorge de Jesus Ferreira Alves, a lawyer specialising in European Law, who brought three of the four actions that today resulted in the Portuguese State receiving conviction and censure.
The lawyer said that currently the European Court of Human Rights itself has 70 cases pending, most of which are for delays in the Portuguese justice system.
The João Aníbal Ratinho case started on March 26, 1997 as he tried to collect a debt of €12,740 from a company. After several procedural delays, the latest information from the court as in June 2013 was that the case was still ‘pending’ in the Portuguese court system.
The European Court found this was a violation of the Human Rights Convention, and ordered the Portuguese State to pay Sr. Ratinho a total of €13,740.
Another case was brought by Duarte José Trigo Saraiva, whose proceedings against the Ministry of Finance in 2004 in a case relating to the calculation of his pension. This action at least has ended, albeit only in May, 2012. The Portuguese State in his case was ordered to pay compensation of €4,900.
The Maria do Sameiro Alves case saw her taking the state to court over a land issue in 2005. The European Court ordered that she be paid compensation of €2,000 for the delay in justice.
For Tomásia Vieira Gomes Bezerra, born in Silves and residing in Bonn, the European Court found a delay in justice but she received no compensation as none had been asked for.
In all three cases the European Court held that, in addition to breaching Article 6 of the Convention related to the speed of justice, there had also been violations of Article 13 of the Convention which obliges Portugal and other states to have means and mechanisms available to citizens to complain, fight against and resolve issues relating to the snail-like speed of Portugal’s courts.
+++++++
C. A MORE GENERAL REPORT ON THE DEGREE OF CORRUPTION IN PORTUGAL BY TRANPARENCY INTERNATIONAL
http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/nisarticle/portugal_2012
Corruption is present in the daily life of Portuguese citizens, who are assailed everyday by the media reporting new scandals of corruption, recurring obstacles in pending investigations, crimes that go unpunished and new anti‐corruption policies that have no effect on these issues.
The continuous public exposure of high profile corruption cases involving figures from the state or private sector, combined with extensive media coverage of how successive governments have dealt with this phenomena, has undermined public confidence.
+++++++
D. REPORT IN THE ALGARVE NEWS: CORRUPTION IN PORTUGAL IS ‘DRAMATIC’
Corruption in Portugal is ‘dramatic’
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/736-corruption-in-portugal-is-dramatic
Portugal continues to decline in the Corruption Perceptions Index which for 10 consecutive years has made saddening reading as a widening elite continue to fill their pockets at the expense of others. The country came 33rd of 177 countries in the survey, down one point despite its lip service to anti-corruption laws.
The Vice-president of Transparency and Integrity considers the national score "dramatic" indicating the seriousness of the problem in Portuguese politics and in its public administration.
If the current ranking is rated as serious, the trend is disastrous if Portugal wants to be taken seriously within Europe. The slow decline since 2000 when Portugal was 23rd in the index shows successive governments’ inability or unwillingness to instill in its ranks a moral rigor that it expects of its taxpayers.
The leadership can no longer be taken seriously by an electorate with 8 in 10 believe corruption has increased since the last survey.
"In the last decade the country in the world that has depreciated most in terms of transparency has been Portugal," according to the vice-president of the association who noted that that corruption has been booming in Portugal's government citing the examples of Expo ‘98, Euro 2004, the current submarines case, Portuguese Business Bank (BPN) and Banco Privado Portuguese (BPP). The behaviour of cash rich Angola is clearly encouraged and Portugal "continues to be the preferred laundry" of the Angolan elite.
Portugal’s public administration fosters corruption and the clear inability of the Portuguese justice system to resolving cases of corruption and related crimes, either through lack of means or lack of will, were other aspects that showed Portugal is failing even to bother recovering the money that has been stolen from the state itself.
Portugal is criticised for signing all the anti-corruption conventions (UN, OECD and others), but then ignores them, and fails to create specialised structures to combat corruption, or to protect whistleblowers.
Portugal’s parliament shows no willingness at all to adopt a new version of the Illicit Enrichment Law, the first version of which was rejected by the Constitutional Court. The the state sits on such legislation and remains inactive, like a hen sitting on an egg, warm and happy.
Within the European Union, Portugal is in 14th place, lying above such paragons as Poland, Spain, Italy, Greece and most of the eastern bloc members.
The Danes are number one in Europe for cleanliness, as ever, with an inbred abhorrence of corrupt practices which are seen as anti-social, anti-society and therefore anti-Danish.
Portugal takes the opposite viewpoint and encourages self-enrichment through corrupt practices by leaving unpunished those that are guilty, not recovering assets gained through corrupt practices and generally being unwilling to start at the top where corruption starts.
Portugal expects more from its elected leaders. Corruption starts in the ranks of those who govern and, if they remain unpunished, soon permeates through society and becomes the norm. This is what has happened, the system appears now to be rotten through and through.
+++++++
E. WIKIPEDIA PAGE ON CORRUPTION IN PORTUGAL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Portugal
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Researcher
- Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire
Re: How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by Jill Havern 25.07.15 9:46
Textusa has rebutted Tony's 18 points:
“1. Frustrating Amaral’s investigation. The Portuguese judicial system hampered Amaral’s investigation by restricting his ability to look at the historic ’phone records of the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 7’ friends.”
The law is clear and it states that telephone tapping of any private communication interception can only be made with a court order and it applies only AFTER that decision is taken.
Retroactive intrusion by the state in private communications is illegal. The judge allowed a record of telephone traffic ie, numbers called and numbers dialled but not any its contents which is what the law states.
Mr Bennett’s expectations are that the judge should have gone against the law of the Portuguese Republic.
This was decided by the judge in Portimão and further validated by the Évora Appeal Court.
Not seeing any form of corruption and incompetence here.
“2. The long-running libel trial. After 6 years and 1 month, the Portuguese judicial system still cannot decide (a) whether Amaral libeled the McCanns and/or (b) whether his book ‘The Truth about A Lie’ should be banned.”
It is not a libel trial.
Libel is the equivalent of defamation and is a criminal offence and hence the competence of a criminal court. Mr Bennett should kindly check the verdict and court details.
About the time the process is taking we have already addressed and will address again.
Fail to see corruption and/or incompetence.
“3. He was denied ‘Legal Aid’ for the trial.”
Mr Amaral does not fulfil the criteria for legal aid. In a country where the minimum monthly wage is now 500 €uros it would be insulting to those in need, to those for whom legal aid was conceived to give such legal aid to Mr Amaral.
The criteria is determined by law and the law was simply followed. No corruption or incompetence.
“4. It is probably the longest-running libel trial in the history of the earth; even now the appeal probably won’t be heard until October, and almost certainly, it will run for some good time after that.”
Again not libel. It is fascinating how persistent Mr Bennett uses the term even after Mr Amaral coming out publicly to clarify that it is not libel.
The civil law suit for damages was filed by plaintiffs who live outside Portugal (who have complained how bothersome it is to go to Portugal) and who have convened witnesses who also live outside the country.
This fact alone implies a complex logistic operation on notification and confirmation of presence.
It also requires translation services that are time consuming.
The appeal will probably take time, and rightfully so, as it means it is being properly studied and analysed in legal terms by a collective of Judges.
Like it or not, there are far more urgent cases than this in Portugal that need to be decided.
The world does not revolve around Kate and Gerry McCann or this case. Although it does make the news that is mostly due to media marketing than of priority given in legal terms. In fact when there was the computer glitch last year, the process was given a low priority.
In terms of visibility the case has much more relevance in the UK then it does in Portugal.
There is a limited number of judges responsible for both criminal and civil cases in first instance courts as well as the number of courts which has been reduced due to the economic crisis. Time consuming, yes, but with good reason.
The process is taking the time any other process in similar circumstances takes. No corruption or incompetence.
“5. That is fair neither to Amaral nor to the McCanns. Only the lawyers benefit, in terms of vastly increased fees. ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ is a popular saying here. So too for Amaral. The continuing uncertainty and anxiety. The rising costs. The inability to ‘move on’. And on.”
Judicial costs in Portugal are a mere fraction of those in many other countries.
Mr Bennett shouldn’t judge, as I think he is doing, the costs based on his experience in the UK.
I’ll compare the British popular saying quoted with a Portuguese one: “to rush is the enemy of perfection”.
In the ideal world each country would have an abundance of judges and courts, such is not the case in Portugal or anywhere in the world.
As mentioned above the trial has been delayed by both sides of the fence on several occasions, requires translation and availability from witnesses and plaintiffs to go to Portugal.
Is it fair? No, it is not but it can’t be done faster and one either follows what the law states or then uses google translate in court and a Star Trek “beam me up Scottie” system for all those convened.
The uncertainty, anxiety, costs and inability to move on are the consequences of the way the system is designed and not because of corruption and incompetence as stated by Mr Bennett.
Mr Amaral is not being treated any different than any other person would be.
“6. The ex parte proceedings that Amaral never knew about. Three months after the McCanns issued their writ for libel damages, the Portuguese judicial system allowed the McCanns an ‘ex parte’ hearing (that is, the other party (Amaral) is not even told about it). Amaral wrote about it in Chapter 6 of ‘The English Gag’ (see ‘TERRIBLE NEWS’ thread, here: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8856-terrible-news... ). He was in a restaurant when the owner ran out to him and said ‘I’ve just heard about it on the radio – your book’s been banned!’ This was a wholesale denial of natural justice and fairness to Amaral.”
Mr Bennett should please not confuse trials. This was a "Providência Cautelar" or an Injunction as it has been called, nothing to do with libel again.
I should clarify the term injunction that is being used when describing what happened in 2009/2010.
The procedural term in Portuguese is Providência Cautelar. Would translate it into Cautionary Action.
A Cautionary Action is requested by individuals and the other individual notified afterwards in several cases. It is a temporary measure until a full audience decides the case.
Unfortunately as reality shows that processes do go on for a significant period in time, it is a legal procedure used very often.
The system basically recognises it’s slow and provides the parties the possibility to request an “anticipation of the decision” to ensure that the effects desired are those that are achieved when the decision is finally taken.
To exemplify, 2 examples from Mr Amaral:
- banning of book, in case it is decided it is to be banned, then to do it only when final decision made then meanwhile the book would have been sold and read and the effect of banning would be nil in terms of dissemination of the information it contain;
- seizure of assets, same logic, if one was to wait until the end then the defendant upon realising he would lose the case would have time to change the property of his personal assets.
The procedure for the application of a Cautionary Action is a simplified one and is of an urgent nature, so much so that in many cases it does not require the presence of the person(s) to whom the injunction is against, should the judge decide that would risk the object or efficiency of the Cautionary Action.
Mr Amaral was not singled out by Cautionary Actions. As said, it’s a procedure commonly used.
What happened with the book ban Cautionary Action was that the 1st Instance court decided to implement it and so the book was banned, the Appeal Court decided against that decision and allowed the book to be put on the stands again.
The McCanns appealed to the Supreme Court. After the appreciation of the Appeal Court’s decision the higher court decided that the Appeal Court’s decision was correct and that there were no grounds for appealing its decision, so refused the appeal.
The fact that Mr Amaral first heard of the decision from the media is because as experience has shown it seems that the connection to the media seems to work really fast when it comes to decisions that don’t favour Mr Amaral. It has nothing to do with corruption or incompetence but with the way “sound waves” travel.
“7. Not only was this secret hearing grossly unfair (it would be unlawful in such proceedings in the U.K.), but it also took several truly draconian steps:”
a. immediate banning of his book
b. impounding all books printed but not sold
c. ordering delivery of the books by Amaral and his publisher to the lawyer acting for the McCanns
d. sequestering many of his property and other assets
e. denying him about one-third of his income”
Please see reply to 6. I stress by the appeal court decision. Some of the items listed above are part of the current Civil law suit (d. and e.) and not of the Cautionary Action.
The draconian steps are but what is stated in the law states and Mr Amaral was not singled out. No corruption and no incompetence.
There are no such things as “secret hearings” in Portugal. Not only would they have no legal value as they are absolutely illegal.
To make such a statement is to show ignorance about how the Portuguese judicial system works and about its limitations set by the Portuguese Constitution.
“8. The failure of the Lisbon Civil Court to follow the rulings of the Portuguese Appeal and Supreme Courts. Both courts were clear that Article 10 of the European Human Rights Convention: ‘Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression’ favoured Amaral’s right to publish. For whatever reason - corrupt or otherwise – the judge in the recent trial found a way to ignore these two rulings.”
The constant decisions of the Appeal Court and Supreme Court are jurisprudence and a source of law or law.
However, since we are talking about a case of a conflict of rights the judge decided totally within the law, although I personally don't agree with her decision.
That does not make it illegal, much less corrupt or incompetent. She applied the law as per her legal duties and boundaries and did not in any way circumvent this.
There are cases where what is being analysed that not everything is predicted in the written law and the judge has a margin for interpretation.
The fact is that here is a case of two conflicting rights. Freedom of expression and the right to a good name.
It’s on this point that the judge deemed necessary, which she was legitimately entitled to do, to source other jurisprudence to decide which right should prevail, in her legitimate opinion.
If law was simply black or white there would be no need for courts, judges or lawyers. It isn’t.
Disagree as I do, the judge acted within the law.
Especially since the matter being analysed, damages inflicted to individuals, is a very subjective one.
Moreover, one must not forget that on all other points the judge ruled in favour of Mr Amaral.
The damages awarded are in my opinion excessive and the decision is subject to disagreement but I STRESS, a legal one. Neither corrupt nor incompetent.
This is now a matter for the appeals court to decide with its collective of Judges.
“9. The removal of Amaral as Investigation Co-ordinator. The Policia Judiciara (PJ) is part of the Portuguese judicial system, run by the Ministry of Justice. It was senior officials in the PJ, certainly influenced by the British Prime Minister at the time, Gordon Brown, who ordered Amaral to be removed from his post.”
Here Mr Bennett is right. I totally agree, although I do not know who the participants were, it was a clear manoeuvre to avoid a diplomatic clash.
However it must be said that when Mr Amaral gave his interview while heading the investigation he was aware that he would suffer some sort of consequence.
“10. The inadequate Attorney-General’s Report. In July 2008, the Attorney-General’s final report was published. It recommended that the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance merely be archived. It showed every indication of being a politically watered-down report, bearing little relation to the robust, well-evidenced and well-argued interim report of Tavares de Almeida, dated 10 September 2007.”
Firstly, it was not the Attorney General, it was the District / Local Prosecutor. And it’s not a report but a dispatch.
Everyone knows my opinion about this but here I must play the devil’s advocate.
The prosecutor considers that as it stands, there is no evidence to bring the case to a court of law and I must agree with him.
There are leads that were not fully investigated and uncertainties left that could easily have become certainties. But they were left as uncertainty.
The Maddie case is too peculiar and specific so I don’t think corruption and incompetence are adjectives befitting enough to qualify the interference it has suffered from outside the judicial system.
It is much more serious than that and cannot be extrapolated to the rest of the Portuguese judicial system as Mr Bennett does.
So as it stands, or how it was made to stand, there isn’t enough evidence to charge, that’s a fact.
Portuguese courts do not allow cases to be brought based on circumstantial evidence alone. And rightly so. "In dubio pro reo ".
What precisely did Mr Bennett expect the prosecutor to do when there is not even any knowledge of what crime it really was?
Was it manslaughter, was it homicide, with or without intention, was it the couple, were theT9 collectively responsible, was a third party responsible, what was the cause of death, where is the body, was there an abduction or did the child wander off and have an accident?
Tavares de Almeida says that all points to, but doesn’t say it is enough for the prosecutor to deem not enough evidence. The final report basically does not alter anything but in pure terms of analysis if Tavares de Almeida had figured it all out with certainty then why did the investigation continue?
It continued because there were things that needed to be clarified. If they weren’t clarified in July, then the correct interpretation to make is that what was uncertain in September 2007 remained so in July 2008.
This is where the prosecutor can always allege that evidence for this kind of crime needs either forensic corroboration, a body, a witness or a confession. At the moment we have none, sadly.
The decision is not dodgy. What was dodgy was the way the process was prepared for such a decision and that was the doing of both the Portuguese and British judicial systems.
To say that it was just the Portuguese one is wrong. But again must stress that the Maddie investigation doesn’t serve as an example for anything.
However, one thing must be said clearly, the prosecutor failed when not charging them with abandonment and exposure, something I don’t believe happened but it’s a fact that they claimed publicly to have done on more than one occasion.
On this aspect I must subscribe that the decision (or non-decision) on the part of the Portuguese judicial system was highly irregular to say the least.
“11. Allowing the lying murderess-of-her-own-child to bring a criminal prosecution against Amaral. Leonor Cipriano murdered her daughter in 2005, pretending that she had been abducted. She lied about this and was shown to be a serial liar on many other occasions. Yet the Portuguese judicial system allowed her to bring a state-funded criminal prosecution against Amaral and 4 other detectives, alleging she had been tortured.”
Even a murderess has a right to bring a judicial action against another.
The decision of the court was that there was no torture and Leonor Cipriano had more time added to her sentencing due to perjury in court. Justice was done.
“12. The prosecution failed to prove that any of the 5 detectives she had named had tortured her.”
The Court decided that there was no torture. Justice was done.
If the system was corrupt and set its cross-hairs on Mr Amaral, wouldn’t this be easily “proved”?
“13. During the proceedings, the lawyer representing Leonor Cipriano, Marcos Aragao Correia - who was paid by the McCann Team - was barred from continuing to represent her any more because of his conduct in court and due to his having been found guilty of professional misconduct by the Lawyer’s Association in his native Madeira. The judicial system miraculously ordered the judge to reinstate him two days later.”
The lawyer represented Leonor Cipriano till the end. Marcos Aragão Correia was suspended by the order of lawyers but this did not reflect on his representation of Leonor Cipriano.
Mr Correia was suspended in January 2009 preventatively and provisionally by the Lawyer’s Order.
This had nothing to do with the judge, it was a decision applied by and lifted by the Lawyer’s Order.
This Order represents the lawyers but is not part of the Portuguese judicial system. His suspension was a professional problem, not a legal one.
While he was provisionally suspended the judge denied his presence in the trial. As the names states the preventative provisional measure was lifted and he represented Ms Cipriano till the end. Kindly see a translation posted several times:
“Leonor Cipriano was defended by João Grade dos Santos up until her trial. She dismissed him before the trial started and hired Marcos Aragão Correia . According to both Lawyers they were contacted by Método 3 (The McCanns PI agency) in order to represent Leonor Cipriano in the torture case: I quote from the publico article below in the link available in the Portuguese version:
João Grade dos Santos “ At this stage Método 3 stated their availability and communicated me that money for expenses would not be a problem and mentioned the Gonçalo Amaral issue. Only month slater , after I refused to work for the Spanish company did he realise that Método 3 had an agenda.”
According to SIC this agenda was to get a lawyer that would put Gonçalo Amaral out of the picture once they thought that in both cases the detective seemed to want the same, the culpability of the parents”
Faced with Grade dos Santos refusal, Método 3 approached another lawyer, young Marcos Aragão Correia . This lawyer had participated in the search for Madeleine as a medium and later got involved in the Joana case investigation, accepted the mission of defending Joana Cipriano in Trial against the 5 PJ inspectors.
“ The Metodo 3 detectives came to meet me and told me - we are very worried since there is a common element (individual) in both cases - Gonçalo Amaral – who is not interested in looking for the children, he is only interested in incriminating the parents” It happened in the Maddie case and also in Joana case”, explained Aragão Correia to SIC.
The young lawyer accepted the Método 3 proposal immediately to do what João Grade dos Santos had refused to do. “I was shocked – I thought that Mr Gonçalo Amaral had a hidden motive to systematically incriminate the mothers, without having prove against them. “
Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, former PJ inspector and one of the 5 arguidos in the Faro Court, accuses Marcos Aragão Correia of trying to make an arrangement with the Inspectors , that deal was “accuse Gonçalo Amaral and I will make sure that Leonor Cipriano states that none of you are involved in this matter”
Marcos Aragão Correia, in an interview with journalist Pedro Coelho, does not deny the existence of this proposal, but said it was related to an email sent by one of the arguidos to a friend of mine where he pointed that gonçalo Amaral was to blame”
Shielding himself behind a secrecy agreement with Método 3, Marcos Aragão Correia does not give the reporters any more information, but he still stated that: “ If I am taking sides for one of the intervenients , it is obvious that that intervenient is morally supporting me”
Both Método 3 and the McCanns spokesperson were contacted by SIC and refused to issue any statement. “
To quote Marcos Aragão Ferreira outside court after trial “Target was hit, Gonçalo Amaral was convicted'... Marcos Aragão Correia, Leonor Cipriano's Lawyer"
As can be seen, there is no relationship between the Portuguese judicial system being corrupt or incompetent and the McCanns using a lawyer without scruples to pursue their intent against Mr Amaral.
“14. These proceedings lasted 7 months with 7 hearings from October 2008 to May 2009. In the U.K. the trial would have been heard over 7 continuous days. Spreading the hearings over several months significantly increases the lawyers’ costs.”
Mr Bennett says In the UK these proceedings would last 7 days...
Looking at current murder cases, many months elapsed before one has a trial date or the trial date is set for months in the future, lawyers are engaged from the beginning.
Where is the difference? Portuguese lawyers are not paid by the time a trial lasts, it is the fees for their legal work they are paid for.
For example, Mr Amaral’s lawyer after having submitted the appeal is not getting paid. If the decision is taken tomorrow or in 6 months, his fees between submission and decision will be exactly the same.
“15. At the end of the proceedings, and based solely on the testimony of a serial liar who murdered her own child in cold blood, the court convicted Amaral of the offence of ‘filing a false report’.”
Already answered. Mr Amaral was made accountable for what he did wrong. Justice was done.
Does that tarnish his reputation? He who has never made mistake please pick up the first stone…
“16. Those who are utterly opposed to Amaral have ‘milked’ this perverse judicial finding for all that it’s worth, labelling this as ‘perjury’and constantly referring to him as a ‘convicted perjurer’.”
Is the Portuguese Judicial system now to be considered corrupt and incompetent because of the manipulation of information done by third parties? Mr Amaral was not convicted of perjury.
“17. Amaral brought a perfectly proper case for ‘criminal libel’ against Marcos Aragao Correia, after he made a series of libelous statements about Amaral. The Portuguese judiciary would not allow him to proceed with this claim.”
Yes, this was a libel case, defamation and with the trial in a criminal court.
Amaral did go to court and lost. He lost his case on the 17 July 2012 in Faro Court.
So he did go to court and the judicial system did not deny him to proceed with his claim. He simply lost in court.
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/…/amaral-perde--e-paga-custas.html
An unfavourable decision, not a corrupt or incompetent one.
“18. As a result of the way the Portuguese judicial system has treated him, Amaral has at times seemed close to being a ‘broken man’, he and his wife divorced, and he has had to rely on donations for Portuguese, British and other people even to be able to afford to carry on defending himself.”
Maybe more as a result of how the McCann machine has treated him. Also by using the Portuguese judicial system in a perfectly legal and legitimate manner.
It’s called legal games and the harsh reality is that he who has more money gets better legal help. Nothing to do with corruption or incompetence. Just the way it is.
I agree that he appears to be a broken man (although I really do think he still has a lot of fight in him and doesn’t seem to be wavering in his resolution).
Mr Amaral has unquestionably suffered enough, more than any man ever should. But not due to corruption and incompetence of the Portuguese judicial system but rather because of an efficient mean legal machine he has working against him.
The evil is not in the system that Mr Bennett accuses without any basis to be corrupt and incompetent but the use evil people make of it using its known and public rules.
Mr Bennett himself has been a victim of the exact same thing in the UK.
I, like Mr Amaral, trust in the judicial system to deal with this in the appeal. I also trust that in the future evidence will surface that will allow charging those responsible for the demise of a helpless child.
Then that same judicial system Mr Bennett now criticises will be blind as it must be and apply a severe sentence to those responsible, in a criminal court.
It will be then up to UK courts to deal with them for financial fraud. In justice I trust. Dura lex , sed lex.
To end, just two corrections to what Mr Bennett has stated also regarding this issue.
Mr Bennett claims were that the former Prime Minister José Sócrates (who Mr Bennett calls “country's former President” in another instance) is in a high security prison and charged with crimes: “Does he not know for example that the country's former President, Jose Socrates, who met Gordon Brown, our Prime Minister, twice, and personally discussed the Madeleine McCann case with him, is now remanded in a top security Portuguese jail charged with all manner of corruption?”
Besides finding it natural for 2 Prime-Ministers of 2 European nations to meet and to discuss a very hot topic at the time, Sócrates has not been charged with anything nor is he in a high security prison. In fact he is in preventative prison and has NOT been charged to date.
He was given the opportunity to have his coercive measure changed to house arrest with electronic monitoring and he has refused. He preferred to stay under preventative prison in Évora.
The prison in Évora is not a high security prison but one for the police forces, military and people with special status, such as being a former Prime-Minister. That’s why he’s in Évora and not in Lisbon.
He will remain there until it is legally decided for him to be released.
Must add that the preventative prison is one of the most arguable coercive measures the Portuguese judicial system use. But however one may or may not agree with it, one has to accept it. It is the law.
Second correction is to say as Mr Bennett has said, that the British government has let down Mr Amaral. That is as correct as saying the Portuguese government lets down any British citizen in the UK under a judicial process in his country.
“1. Frustrating Amaral’s investigation. The Portuguese judicial system hampered Amaral’s investigation by restricting his ability to look at the historic ’phone records of the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 7’ friends.”
The law is clear and it states that telephone tapping of any private communication interception can only be made with a court order and it applies only AFTER that decision is taken.
Retroactive intrusion by the state in private communications is illegal. The judge allowed a record of telephone traffic ie, numbers called and numbers dialled but not any its contents which is what the law states.
Mr Bennett’s expectations are that the judge should have gone against the law of the Portuguese Republic.
This was decided by the judge in Portimão and further validated by the Évora Appeal Court.
Not seeing any form of corruption and incompetence here.
“2. The long-running libel trial. After 6 years and 1 month, the Portuguese judicial system still cannot decide (a) whether Amaral libeled the McCanns and/or (b) whether his book ‘The Truth about A Lie’ should be banned.”
It is not a libel trial.
Libel is the equivalent of defamation and is a criminal offence and hence the competence of a criminal court. Mr Bennett should kindly check the verdict and court details.
About the time the process is taking we have already addressed and will address again.
Fail to see corruption and/or incompetence.
“3. He was denied ‘Legal Aid’ for the trial.”
Mr Amaral does not fulfil the criteria for legal aid. In a country where the minimum monthly wage is now 500 €uros it would be insulting to those in need, to those for whom legal aid was conceived to give such legal aid to Mr Amaral.
The criteria is determined by law and the law was simply followed. No corruption or incompetence.
“4. It is probably the longest-running libel trial in the history of the earth; even now the appeal probably won’t be heard until October, and almost certainly, it will run for some good time after that.”
Again not libel. It is fascinating how persistent Mr Bennett uses the term even after Mr Amaral coming out publicly to clarify that it is not libel.
The civil law suit for damages was filed by plaintiffs who live outside Portugal (who have complained how bothersome it is to go to Portugal) and who have convened witnesses who also live outside the country.
This fact alone implies a complex logistic operation on notification and confirmation of presence.
It also requires translation services that are time consuming.
The appeal will probably take time, and rightfully so, as it means it is being properly studied and analysed in legal terms by a collective of Judges.
Like it or not, there are far more urgent cases than this in Portugal that need to be decided.
The world does not revolve around Kate and Gerry McCann or this case. Although it does make the news that is mostly due to media marketing than of priority given in legal terms. In fact when there was the computer glitch last year, the process was given a low priority.
In terms of visibility the case has much more relevance in the UK then it does in Portugal.
There is a limited number of judges responsible for both criminal and civil cases in first instance courts as well as the number of courts which has been reduced due to the economic crisis. Time consuming, yes, but with good reason.
The process is taking the time any other process in similar circumstances takes. No corruption or incompetence.
“5. That is fair neither to Amaral nor to the McCanns. Only the lawyers benefit, in terms of vastly increased fees. ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ is a popular saying here. So too for Amaral. The continuing uncertainty and anxiety. The rising costs. The inability to ‘move on’. And on.”
Judicial costs in Portugal are a mere fraction of those in many other countries.
Mr Bennett shouldn’t judge, as I think he is doing, the costs based on his experience in the UK.
I’ll compare the British popular saying quoted with a Portuguese one: “to rush is the enemy of perfection”.
In the ideal world each country would have an abundance of judges and courts, such is not the case in Portugal or anywhere in the world.
As mentioned above the trial has been delayed by both sides of the fence on several occasions, requires translation and availability from witnesses and plaintiffs to go to Portugal.
Is it fair? No, it is not but it can’t be done faster and one either follows what the law states or then uses google translate in court and a Star Trek “beam me up Scottie” system for all those convened.
The uncertainty, anxiety, costs and inability to move on are the consequences of the way the system is designed and not because of corruption and incompetence as stated by Mr Bennett.
Mr Amaral is not being treated any different than any other person would be.
“6. The ex parte proceedings that Amaral never knew about. Three months after the McCanns issued their writ for libel damages, the Portuguese judicial system allowed the McCanns an ‘ex parte’ hearing (that is, the other party (Amaral) is not even told about it). Amaral wrote about it in Chapter 6 of ‘The English Gag’ (see ‘TERRIBLE NEWS’ thread, here: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8856-terrible-news... ). He was in a restaurant when the owner ran out to him and said ‘I’ve just heard about it on the radio – your book’s been banned!’ This was a wholesale denial of natural justice and fairness to Amaral.”
Mr Bennett should please not confuse trials. This was a "Providência Cautelar" or an Injunction as it has been called, nothing to do with libel again.
I should clarify the term injunction that is being used when describing what happened in 2009/2010.
The procedural term in Portuguese is Providência Cautelar. Would translate it into Cautionary Action.
A Cautionary Action is requested by individuals and the other individual notified afterwards in several cases. It is a temporary measure until a full audience decides the case.
Unfortunately as reality shows that processes do go on for a significant period in time, it is a legal procedure used very often.
The system basically recognises it’s slow and provides the parties the possibility to request an “anticipation of the decision” to ensure that the effects desired are those that are achieved when the decision is finally taken.
To exemplify, 2 examples from Mr Amaral:
- banning of book, in case it is decided it is to be banned, then to do it only when final decision made then meanwhile the book would have been sold and read and the effect of banning would be nil in terms of dissemination of the information it contain;
- seizure of assets, same logic, if one was to wait until the end then the defendant upon realising he would lose the case would have time to change the property of his personal assets.
The procedure for the application of a Cautionary Action is a simplified one and is of an urgent nature, so much so that in many cases it does not require the presence of the person(s) to whom the injunction is against, should the judge decide that would risk the object or efficiency of the Cautionary Action.
Mr Amaral was not singled out by Cautionary Actions. As said, it’s a procedure commonly used.
What happened with the book ban Cautionary Action was that the 1st Instance court decided to implement it and so the book was banned, the Appeal Court decided against that decision and allowed the book to be put on the stands again.
The McCanns appealed to the Supreme Court. After the appreciation of the Appeal Court’s decision the higher court decided that the Appeal Court’s decision was correct and that there were no grounds for appealing its decision, so refused the appeal.
The fact that Mr Amaral first heard of the decision from the media is because as experience has shown it seems that the connection to the media seems to work really fast when it comes to decisions that don’t favour Mr Amaral. It has nothing to do with corruption or incompetence but with the way “sound waves” travel.
“7. Not only was this secret hearing grossly unfair (it would be unlawful in such proceedings in the U.K.), but it also took several truly draconian steps:”
a. immediate banning of his book
b. impounding all books printed but not sold
c. ordering delivery of the books by Amaral and his publisher to the lawyer acting for the McCanns
d. sequestering many of his property and other assets
e. denying him about one-third of his income”
Please see reply to 6. I stress by the appeal court decision. Some of the items listed above are part of the current Civil law suit (d. and e.) and not of the Cautionary Action.
The draconian steps are but what is stated in the law states and Mr Amaral was not singled out. No corruption and no incompetence.
There are no such things as “secret hearings” in Portugal. Not only would they have no legal value as they are absolutely illegal.
To make such a statement is to show ignorance about how the Portuguese judicial system works and about its limitations set by the Portuguese Constitution.
“8. The failure of the Lisbon Civil Court to follow the rulings of the Portuguese Appeal and Supreme Courts. Both courts were clear that Article 10 of the European Human Rights Convention: ‘Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression’ favoured Amaral’s right to publish. For whatever reason - corrupt or otherwise – the judge in the recent trial found a way to ignore these two rulings.”
The constant decisions of the Appeal Court and Supreme Court are jurisprudence and a source of law or law.
However, since we are talking about a case of a conflict of rights the judge decided totally within the law, although I personally don't agree with her decision.
That does not make it illegal, much less corrupt or incompetent. She applied the law as per her legal duties and boundaries and did not in any way circumvent this.
There are cases where what is being analysed that not everything is predicted in the written law and the judge has a margin for interpretation.
The fact is that here is a case of two conflicting rights. Freedom of expression and the right to a good name.
It’s on this point that the judge deemed necessary, which she was legitimately entitled to do, to source other jurisprudence to decide which right should prevail, in her legitimate opinion.
If law was simply black or white there would be no need for courts, judges or lawyers. It isn’t.
Disagree as I do, the judge acted within the law.
Especially since the matter being analysed, damages inflicted to individuals, is a very subjective one.
Moreover, one must not forget that on all other points the judge ruled in favour of Mr Amaral.
The damages awarded are in my opinion excessive and the decision is subject to disagreement but I STRESS, a legal one. Neither corrupt nor incompetent.
This is now a matter for the appeals court to decide with its collective of Judges.
“9. The removal of Amaral as Investigation Co-ordinator. The Policia Judiciara (PJ) is part of the Portuguese judicial system, run by the Ministry of Justice. It was senior officials in the PJ, certainly influenced by the British Prime Minister at the time, Gordon Brown, who ordered Amaral to be removed from his post.”
Here Mr Bennett is right. I totally agree, although I do not know who the participants were, it was a clear manoeuvre to avoid a diplomatic clash.
However it must be said that when Mr Amaral gave his interview while heading the investigation he was aware that he would suffer some sort of consequence.
“10. The inadequate Attorney-General’s Report. In July 2008, the Attorney-General’s final report was published. It recommended that the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance merely be archived. It showed every indication of being a politically watered-down report, bearing little relation to the robust, well-evidenced and well-argued interim report of Tavares de Almeida, dated 10 September 2007.”
Firstly, it was not the Attorney General, it was the District / Local Prosecutor. And it’s not a report but a dispatch.
Everyone knows my opinion about this but here I must play the devil’s advocate.
The prosecutor considers that as it stands, there is no evidence to bring the case to a court of law and I must agree with him.
There are leads that were not fully investigated and uncertainties left that could easily have become certainties. But they were left as uncertainty.
The Maddie case is too peculiar and specific so I don’t think corruption and incompetence are adjectives befitting enough to qualify the interference it has suffered from outside the judicial system.
It is much more serious than that and cannot be extrapolated to the rest of the Portuguese judicial system as Mr Bennett does.
So as it stands, or how it was made to stand, there isn’t enough evidence to charge, that’s a fact.
Portuguese courts do not allow cases to be brought based on circumstantial evidence alone. And rightly so. "In dubio pro reo ".
What precisely did Mr Bennett expect the prosecutor to do when there is not even any knowledge of what crime it really was?
Was it manslaughter, was it homicide, with or without intention, was it the couple, were theT9 collectively responsible, was a third party responsible, what was the cause of death, where is the body, was there an abduction or did the child wander off and have an accident?
Tavares de Almeida says that all points to, but doesn’t say it is enough for the prosecutor to deem not enough evidence. The final report basically does not alter anything but in pure terms of analysis if Tavares de Almeida had figured it all out with certainty then why did the investigation continue?
It continued because there were things that needed to be clarified. If they weren’t clarified in July, then the correct interpretation to make is that what was uncertain in September 2007 remained so in July 2008.
This is where the prosecutor can always allege that evidence for this kind of crime needs either forensic corroboration, a body, a witness or a confession. At the moment we have none, sadly.
The decision is not dodgy. What was dodgy was the way the process was prepared for such a decision and that was the doing of both the Portuguese and British judicial systems.
To say that it was just the Portuguese one is wrong. But again must stress that the Maddie investigation doesn’t serve as an example for anything.
However, one thing must be said clearly, the prosecutor failed when not charging them with abandonment and exposure, something I don’t believe happened but it’s a fact that they claimed publicly to have done on more than one occasion.
On this aspect I must subscribe that the decision (or non-decision) on the part of the Portuguese judicial system was highly irregular to say the least.
“11. Allowing the lying murderess-of-her-own-child to bring a criminal prosecution against Amaral. Leonor Cipriano murdered her daughter in 2005, pretending that she had been abducted. She lied about this and was shown to be a serial liar on many other occasions. Yet the Portuguese judicial system allowed her to bring a state-funded criminal prosecution against Amaral and 4 other detectives, alleging she had been tortured.”
Even a murderess has a right to bring a judicial action against another.
The decision of the court was that there was no torture and Leonor Cipriano had more time added to her sentencing due to perjury in court. Justice was done.
“12. The prosecution failed to prove that any of the 5 detectives she had named had tortured her.”
The Court decided that there was no torture. Justice was done.
If the system was corrupt and set its cross-hairs on Mr Amaral, wouldn’t this be easily “proved”?
“13. During the proceedings, the lawyer representing Leonor Cipriano, Marcos Aragao Correia - who was paid by the McCann Team - was barred from continuing to represent her any more because of his conduct in court and due to his having been found guilty of professional misconduct by the Lawyer’s Association in his native Madeira. The judicial system miraculously ordered the judge to reinstate him two days later.”
The lawyer represented Leonor Cipriano till the end. Marcos Aragão Correia was suspended by the order of lawyers but this did not reflect on his representation of Leonor Cipriano.
Mr Correia was suspended in January 2009 preventatively and provisionally by the Lawyer’s Order.
This had nothing to do with the judge, it was a decision applied by and lifted by the Lawyer’s Order.
This Order represents the lawyers but is not part of the Portuguese judicial system. His suspension was a professional problem, not a legal one.
While he was provisionally suspended the judge denied his presence in the trial. As the names states the preventative provisional measure was lifted and he represented Ms Cipriano till the end. Kindly see a translation posted several times:
“Leonor Cipriano was defended by João Grade dos Santos up until her trial. She dismissed him before the trial started and hired Marcos Aragão Correia . According to both Lawyers they were contacted by Método 3 (The McCanns PI agency) in order to represent Leonor Cipriano in the torture case: I quote from the publico article below in the link available in the Portuguese version:
João Grade dos Santos “ At this stage Método 3 stated their availability and communicated me that money for expenses would not be a problem and mentioned the Gonçalo Amaral issue. Only month slater , after I refused to work for the Spanish company did he realise that Método 3 had an agenda.”
According to SIC this agenda was to get a lawyer that would put Gonçalo Amaral out of the picture once they thought that in both cases the detective seemed to want the same, the culpability of the parents”
Faced with Grade dos Santos refusal, Método 3 approached another lawyer, young Marcos Aragão Correia . This lawyer had participated in the search for Madeleine as a medium and later got involved in the Joana case investigation, accepted the mission of defending Joana Cipriano in Trial against the 5 PJ inspectors.
“ The Metodo 3 detectives came to meet me and told me - we are very worried since there is a common element (individual) in both cases - Gonçalo Amaral – who is not interested in looking for the children, he is only interested in incriminating the parents” It happened in the Maddie case and also in Joana case”, explained Aragão Correia to SIC.
The young lawyer accepted the Método 3 proposal immediately to do what João Grade dos Santos had refused to do. “I was shocked – I thought that Mr Gonçalo Amaral had a hidden motive to systematically incriminate the mothers, without having prove against them. “
Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, former PJ inspector and one of the 5 arguidos in the Faro Court, accuses Marcos Aragão Correia of trying to make an arrangement with the Inspectors , that deal was “accuse Gonçalo Amaral and I will make sure that Leonor Cipriano states that none of you are involved in this matter”
Marcos Aragão Correia, in an interview with journalist Pedro Coelho, does not deny the existence of this proposal, but said it was related to an email sent by one of the arguidos to a friend of mine where he pointed that gonçalo Amaral was to blame”
Shielding himself behind a secrecy agreement with Método 3, Marcos Aragão Correia does not give the reporters any more information, but he still stated that: “ If I am taking sides for one of the intervenients , it is obvious that that intervenient is morally supporting me”
Both Método 3 and the McCanns spokesperson were contacted by SIC and refused to issue any statement. “
To quote Marcos Aragão Ferreira outside court after trial “Target was hit, Gonçalo Amaral was convicted'... Marcos Aragão Correia, Leonor Cipriano's Lawyer"
As can be seen, there is no relationship between the Portuguese judicial system being corrupt or incompetent and the McCanns using a lawyer without scruples to pursue their intent against Mr Amaral.
“14. These proceedings lasted 7 months with 7 hearings from October 2008 to May 2009. In the U.K. the trial would have been heard over 7 continuous days. Spreading the hearings over several months significantly increases the lawyers’ costs.”
Mr Bennett says In the UK these proceedings would last 7 days...
Looking at current murder cases, many months elapsed before one has a trial date or the trial date is set for months in the future, lawyers are engaged from the beginning.
Where is the difference? Portuguese lawyers are not paid by the time a trial lasts, it is the fees for their legal work they are paid for.
For example, Mr Amaral’s lawyer after having submitted the appeal is not getting paid. If the decision is taken tomorrow or in 6 months, his fees between submission and decision will be exactly the same.
“15. At the end of the proceedings, and based solely on the testimony of a serial liar who murdered her own child in cold blood, the court convicted Amaral of the offence of ‘filing a false report’.”
Already answered. Mr Amaral was made accountable for what he did wrong. Justice was done.
Does that tarnish his reputation? He who has never made mistake please pick up the first stone…
“16. Those who are utterly opposed to Amaral have ‘milked’ this perverse judicial finding for all that it’s worth, labelling this as ‘perjury’and constantly referring to him as a ‘convicted perjurer’.”
Is the Portuguese Judicial system now to be considered corrupt and incompetent because of the manipulation of information done by third parties? Mr Amaral was not convicted of perjury.
“17. Amaral brought a perfectly proper case for ‘criminal libel’ against Marcos Aragao Correia, after he made a series of libelous statements about Amaral. The Portuguese judiciary would not allow him to proceed with this claim.”
Yes, this was a libel case, defamation and with the trial in a criminal court.
Amaral did go to court and lost. He lost his case on the 17 July 2012 in Faro Court.
So he did go to court and the judicial system did not deny him to proceed with his claim. He simply lost in court.
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/…/amaral-perde--e-paga-custas.html
An unfavourable decision, not a corrupt or incompetent one.
“18. As a result of the way the Portuguese judicial system has treated him, Amaral has at times seemed close to being a ‘broken man’, he and his wife divorced, and he has had to rely on donations for Portuguese, British and other people even to be able to afford to carry on defending himself.”
Maybe more as a result of how the McCann machine has treated him. Also by using the Portuguese judicial system in a perfectly legal and legitimate manner.
It’s called legal games and the harsh reality is that he who has more money gets better legal help. Nothing to do with corruption or incompetence. Just the way it is.
I agree that he appears to be a broken man (although I really do think he still has a lot of fight in him and doesn’t seem to be wavering in his resolution).
Mr Amaral has unquestionably suffered enough, more than any man ever should. But not due to corruption and incompetence of the Portuguese judicial system but rather because of an efficient mean legal machine he has working against him.
The evil is not in the system that Mr Bennett accuses without any basis to be corrupt and incompetent but the use evil people make of it using its known and public rules.
Mr Bennett himself has been a victim of the exact same thing in the UK.
I, like Mr Amaral, trust in the judicial system to deal with this in the appeal. I also trust that in the future evidence will surface that will allow charging those responsible for the demise of a helpless child.
Then that same judicial system Mr Bennett now criticises will be blind as it must be and apply a severe sentence to those responsible, in a criminal court.
It will be then up to UK courts to deal with them for financial fraud. In justice I trust. Dura lex , sed lex.
To end, just two corrections to what Mr Bennett has stated also regarding this issue.
Mr Bennett claims were that the former Prime Minister José Sócrates (who Mr Bennett calls “country's former President” in another instance) is in a high security prison and charged with crimes: “Does he not know for example that the country's former President, Jose Socrates, who met Gordon Brown, our Prime Minister, twice, and personally discussed the Madeleine McCann case with him, is now remanded in a top security Portuguese jail charged with all manner of corruption?”
Besides finding it natural for 2 Prime-Ministers of 2 European nations to meet and to discuss a very hot topic at the time, Sócrates has not been charged with anything nor is he in a high security prison. In fact he is in preventative prison and has NOT been charged to date.
He was given the opportunity to have his coercive measure changed to house arrest with electronic monitoring and he has refused. He preferred to stay under preventative prison in Évora.
The prison in Évora is not a high security prison but one for the police forces, military and people with special status, such as being a former Prime-Minister. That’s why he’s in Évora and not in Lisbon.
He will remain there until it is legally decided for him to be released.
Must add that the preventative prison is one of the most arguable coercive measures the Portuguese judicial system use. But however one may or may not agree with it, one has to accept it. It is the law.
Second correction is to say as Mr Bennett has said, that the British government has let down Mr Amaral. That is as correct as saying the Portuguese government lets down any British citizen in the UK under a judicial process in his country.
____________________
PeterMac's FREE e-book
Gonçalo Amaral: The truth of the lie
CMOMM & MMRG Blog
Jill Havern- Forum Owner & Chief Faffer
- Posts : 28672
Activity : 41394
Likes received : 7710
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe
Guest- Guest
Re: How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by Joss 25.07.15 11:57
Well if Goncalo Amaral is ok. with the judicial system in Portugal, and it appears he is, then who are we to say i guess. I certainly don't have any idea how they run their country and am not familiar with the way they do things, only from what TB has posted and what i have read on the net., and from what it says their judicial system leaves a lot to be desired, but i dunno i don't live there.
____________________
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by Joss 25.07.15 12:11
I agree this last Trial was not a Libel but a Damages Trial. But then IMO one has to consider without the Libel involved initially from GA's book, there would not have been any Damages Trial. So that to me says they are intertwined with each other, the damages stemming from the libel. There is nothing else. And if it was not a libel trial then why did the judge introduce about the book in the damages trial?
____________________
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by tigger 27.07.15 11:20
Seems to me that Textusa got a real expert to answer the questions. The style of answer isn't remotely like the usual Textusa style.
Jolly good though - getting things clear.
Jolly good though - getting things clear.
____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
tigger- Posts : 8116
Activity : 8532
Likes received : 82
Join date : 2011-07-20 -
Re: How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by Jill Havern 27.07.15 11:28
Yes, Isabel Oliveira helped her.tigger wrote:Seems to me that Textusa got a real expert to answer the questions. The style of answer isn't remotely like the usual Textusa style.
Jolly good though - getting things clear.
____________________
PeterMac's FREE e-book
Gonçalo Amaral: The truth of the lie
CMOMM & MMRG Blog
Jill Havern- Forum Owner & Chief Faffer
- Posts : 28672
Activity : 41394
Likes received : 7710
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe
Re: How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by Liz Eagles 27.07.15 11:40
A 'real expert'. That would have to be qualified wouldn't it?tigger wrote:Seems to me that Textusa got a real expert to answer the questions. The style of answer isn't remotely like the usual Textusa style.
Jolly good though - getting things clear.
Textusa and Blacksmith are the most dreadful blogs that beat a person into submission before they can make sense of their posts. The former deals in obfuscative pomp and the latter is a pratt who writes nonsense (with big words now and then) depending on what and who takes his fancy at the current time.
Textusa's blog is bonkers. If you don't believe it's all about swinging then forget it.
What next? 'experts' from CMoMM have assisted in Sonia Poulton's documentary (the one that's produced sod all)....I can imagine there are a few 'experts' who have consulted with Sonia Poulton and are now feeling a bit silly.
Tigger, do you remember Cristobell enthusing how she was so glad there were so many experts on CMoMM? I questioned this immediately. There are no experts on CMoMM. There are well educated, humane folk alongside slightly educated people, so on and so on. Cristobell went on to try destroy CMoMM. You yourself left CMoMM and wrote a really bad blog about Tony Bennett and yet now you are back posting on CMoMM.
What is the point of backing the likes of Textusa's opinion against anyone else's?
PeterMac has gone awol from CMoMM. On the other hand Tony Bennett is genuinely on holiday.
I'm sick to the back teeth of forum personality shite.
Liz Eagles- Posts : 10944
Activity : 13351
Likes received : 2216
Join date : 2011-09-03
Re: How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by Jill Havern 27.07.15 12:08
PeterMac still logs on here several times a day.
____________________
PeterMac's FREE e-book
Gonçalo Amaral: The truth of the lie
CMOMM & MMRG Blog
Jill Havern- Forum Owner & Chief Faffer
- Posts : 28672
Activity : 41394
Likes received : 7710
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe
Re: How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by Joss 27.07.15 14:04
Of all the so called "experts" in the Madeleine case, i really enjoy reading Lazzeri- Lies- In- the- Sun blog, who btw doesn't claim to be an expert or come across as trying to be one, but puts forth an interesting read. And IMO there are no "experts" in this case only different theories being purported from what we have from the files. The swinging theory sounds silly to me, and i don't agree with it at all, but that's just my opinion, lol.aquila wrote:A 'real expert'. That would have to be qualified wouldn't it?tigger wrote:Seems to me that Textusa got a real expert to answer the questions. The style of answer isn't remotely like the usual Textusa style.
Jolly good though - getting things clear.
Textusa and Blacksmith are the most dreadful blogs that beat a person into submission before they can make sense of their posts. The former deals in obfuscative pomp and the latter is a pratt who writes nonsense (with big words now and then) depending on what and who takes his fancy at the current time.
Textusa's blog is bonkers. If you don't believe it's all about swinging then forget it.
What next? 'experts' from CMoMM have assisted in Sonia Poulton's documentary (the one that's produced sod all)....I can imagine there are a few 'experts' who have consulted with Sonia Poulton and are now feeling a bit silly.
Tigger, do you remember Cristobell enthusing how she was so glad there were so many experts on CMoMM? I questioned this immediately. There are no experts on CMoMM. There are well educated, humane folk alongside slightly educated people, so on and so on. Cristobell went on to try destroy CMoMM. You yourself left CMoMM and wrote a really bad blog about Tony Bennett and yet now you are back posting on CMoMM.
What is the point of backing the likes of Textusa's opinion against anyone else's?
PeterMac has gone awol from CMoMM. On the other hand Tony Bennett is genuinely on holiday.
I'm sick to the back teeth of forum personality shite.
____________________
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: How the Portuguese Judicial System has failed Goncalo Amaral
by tigger 27.07.15 14:28
@ Aquila - re my presence please refer to Jill's posts in the member's lounge.
Re: Textusa has given very detailed, neatly documented information this time. It's not al all their own style, therefore I infer an expert or at least someone who has read up extensively on Portuguese Law.
I don't remember Cristobell enthusing about experts, but then she herself is apparently an expert in psychology and various other disciplines. Her entry level for the qualification of expert might be a bit low for most.
I'm not backing Textusa or anyone else at all and haven't a clue against whom I'd be defending the blog. I gave my opinion that this was a well-reasoned post.
I am at a loss to think of any experts on the forum. Some people know a lot about some subjects and they usually back it up or are prepared to discuss it.
Leaving no stone unturned revealed hordes of wannabees who are looking for their 15 minutes of fame with the most idiotic theories.
Others use it as a platform to tell the world all about themselves. You know what, I try to stick to the facts. If I'm wrong it only means that we get a bit nearer to the truth when a theory is disproved.
Re: Textusa has given very detailed, neatly documented information this time. It's not al all their own style, therefore I infer an expert or at least someone who has read up extensively on Portuguese Law.
I don't remember Cristobell enthusing about experts, but then she herself is apparently an expert in psychology and various other disciplines. Her entry level for the qualification of expert might be a bit low for most.
I'm not backing Textusa or anyone else at all and haven't a clue against whom I'd be defending the blog. I gave my opinion that this was a well-reasoned post.
I am at a loss to think of any experts on the forum. Some people know a lot about some subjects and they usually back it up or are prepared to discuss it.
Leaving no stone unturned revealed hordes of wannabees who are looking for their 15 minutes of fame with the most idiotic theories.
Others use it as a platform to tell the world all about themselves. You know what, I try to stick to the facts. If I'm wrong it only means that we get a bit nearer to the truth when a theory is disproved.
____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.
tigger- Posts : 8116
Activity : 8532
Likes received : 82
Join date : 2011-07-20 -
Similar topics» United Nations called in to sort out Portugal's snail-like judicial system
» 13 July - McCanns respond to Goncalo Amaral's appeal against Lisbon Court judgment
» Portuguese Legal system in total meltdown.
» Former Portuguese cop Goncalo Amaral whinges the McCanns have ruined HIS life
» Amaral to appeal as Portuguese start reacting to McCanns’ “libel win”
» 13 July - McCanns respond to Goncalo Amaral's appeal against Lisbon Court judgment
» Portuguese Legal system in total meltdown.
» Former Portuguese cop Goncalo Amaral whinges the McCanns have ruined HIS life
» Amaral to appeal as Portuguese start reacting to McCanns’ “libel win”
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Portuguese Police Investigation :: McCanns v Dr Gonçalo Amaral + ECHR
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
