Part of the defamation case brought by Dr Goncalo Amaral that he LOST

by **Tony Bennett** 04.09.12 14:37

It was disappointing for us all when we learnt earlier this year that Dr Goncalo Amaral's libel action against Madeira lawyer Marcos Aragao Correia had failed, with Dr Amaral apparently having to pay Correia's costs. We all hope he will do better in next week's trial.

What a monstrous injustice this was can perhaps be seen by the reproduction (below) of Dr Amaral's defamation writ against Correia. I have published this some time ago, elsewhere on this forum, but thought it would be a good moment to re-publish it. I believe that Correia may be a witness against Amaral in the upcoming trial of McCanns -v- Amaral.

It was a serious injustice that Dr Amaral lost his action against Correia, and a recent article by 'Blacksmith' clearly gives the stated reason (by the judge) as to why Dr Amaral lost. Here is an extract from 'Blacksmith's article:

QUOTE

In the most delicious of ironies one of those enemies, the highly unstable Marcos Aragão Correia, has provided up-to-date case law on this requirement. A dedicated worker for the truth in Portugal, a good friend of ours whose explanations of Portuguese law we gratefully acknowledge, has drawn our attention to the judgement in the recent Amaral .v. Aragão Correia libel case.

The judge observed that Aragão Correia “fully believed Leonor Cipriano when she told him Goncalo Amaral had beaten her.” Aragão Correia’s belief in the veracity of her statement to him was enough, irrespective of whether Cipriano had actually told him the truth! In fact the judge stated she had not told him the truth and that Amaral had not taken part in any assault on Cipriano but because Aragão Correia had believed her he was going to acquit him of libel!

UNQUOTE

Basically, the judge in that case said though what Correia said was false, he believed at the time that it was true. Really?

It may be as well to recap on some of the things we know about Correia, and his relationship to the Madeleine McCann case:

November 2007 - Brought a claim against the Portuguese police for allegedly failing to deliver a parcel to the McCanns in Rothley. He lost the case, but it gave him a justification for getting involved in the McCann case

10 December 2007 - Travelled nearly 1,000 miles to the Arade Dam to meet Antonio Gimenez Raso from Metodo 3 (who also travelled nearly 1,000 miles from Barcelona to meet him)

Late January 2008 - Highly publicised search by him and a team of divers for Madeleine's bones at the Arade Dam. He says he's a 'Good Samaritan' doing this out of his own pocket, and says he's acting on underworld information that Madeleine was abducted, raped, killed and her body thrown into a murky lake. This, he later admits, was a comprehensive lie

March 2008 - Seraches the Arade Dam again. Later admits he was paid to do these searches by Metodo 3, who in turn were acting on the instructions of the McCann Team. Later comes up with a new story on how he first became interested in Madeleine's reported disappearance; claims he went to his first-ever Spiritualist meeting and afterwards had a 'vision' of a huge man strangling a young blonde girl

1 April 2008 - Meets the Governor of Odemira Women's Prison, who introduces him to convicted murderesss-of-her-own-child, the wicked Leonor Cipriano. Agrees to represent her in her claim against Dr Amaral and four other detectives whom, she says, beat and tortured her into making a false confession

2 October 2009 - Correia and fellow-thugs attempt to disrupt Dr Amaral's 50th birthday party.

This is the man who may be a witness against Amaral next week...

Goncalo Amaral's libel action against Marcos Correia

In June 2009, Dr Amaral filed the following extraordinary supplementary memorandum in support of his earlier claim against Marcos Correia:

QUOTE

JUDICIAL COURT OF FARO - PUBLIC MINISTRY SERVICES

Process 87/08.8JAFAR - 1ST SECTION

Mr Prosecutor,

Gonçalo Amaral, the offended party and applicant with the capacity to constitute himself as an ‘Assistant’, and who is better identified in the files, comes forward to APPEND the following material to the criminal complaint that was presented against arguido Marcos Aragão Corriea, exercising his rights of petition and of probative intervention:

A. The arguido [Marcos Aragão Corriea] has publicly displayed what seems to be a manifest lack of balance of pathological origin, including episodes of social irresponsibility, which militates in favour of his eventual unfitness to plead and impedes him, if that scenario is confirmed, from being the defendant in any accusation against him.

B. Taking into account that, under the provision of law, ‘public and notorious facts’ in the public domain may also constitute valid evidence, it is possible to collect from the press, in a brief search through the internet, the following probative material, which is now presented as part of the present addendum:

1. DIÁRIO DE NOTÍCIAS, 22 Jun 2007: Madeira. Fifty children will launch yellow balloons with a photo of little Madeleine, who disappeared fifty days ago today. Marcos Aragão Correia, one of the organisers, explains why he considers it to be important for Madeira to join this homage. (Cfr. Document No. 1)

2. SOL, 13 Nov 2007: A lawyer from Madeira, Marcos Aragão Correia, has judicially prosecuted the Portuguese postal service for failing to personally deliver a registered letter that was addressed to the McCann couple, in which he indicated leads that he considers could assist the investigation, and which he had already revealed to the Polícia Judiciária in Funchal. “As I didn’t get any feedback from the PJ”, he explains, “I decided to communicate them directly to the child’s parents, in a letter.” (Cfr. document No. 2)

3. SOL, 13 Nov 2007: Lawsuit against the Portuguese postal service. The judge has ruled that the litigation that had been filed by the lawyer [Marcos Aragão Correia] seeking the prosecution of the Portuguese postal service is unfounded, and condemns him to pay a judicial fee of approximately 100 euros, and has postponed the trial sine die. (Cfr. document No. 3)

4. BARLAVENTO, 7 Feb 2008: Lawyer from Madeira claims to know everything. A lawyer from Madeira is the most recent star in the search for Madeleine. Marcos Aragão Correia, who went as far as filing a lawsuit against the Portuguese postal service, has headed a search operation with divers at the reservoir, on Saturday [2 February 2008]. He only found a shutter strap. (Cfr. document No. 4)

5. IOL.DIÁRIO, 12 Mar 2008: Lawyer from Madeira reinforces searches at the Arade Dam. Marcos Aragão Correia is a lawyer, and for the second time within only a few months, he is heading searches at the Arade Dam, in Silves. The searches have started again this Monday and strange objects have been found already: several ropes, a sheet of plastic and a child’s sock. (Cfr. document No. 5)

6. DIÁRIO DE NOTÍCIAS, 15 Mar 2008: Upon conclusion of the searches, Marcos Aragão Correia said his conscience was at peace. “I don’t leave disillusioned, because I’ve done what I could on the basis of information that I consider to be credible.” (Cfr. document No. 6)

7. PORTUGAL DIÁRIO, 12 Mar 2008: And what moves Aragão Correia? The lawyer says that he has received ‘credible leads’ concerning what happened to Maddie. “For the time being, we can’t publicly reveal the leads and who offered them, due to security concerns.” (Cfr. document No. 7)

8. DIÁRIO DE NOTÍCIAS, 13 Mar 2008: Lawyer Marcos Aragão Correia is more and more convinced than ever of the relationship between the possible death of Maddie with that of Mari Luz, from Huelva, whose body was found. “There are no doubts left - he says - that the criminal abducted Madeleine and fled to Spain, where he abducted another girl, Mari Luz.” (Cfr. document No. 9)

9. BARLAVENTO, 17 Oct 2008: Marcos Aragão Correia, lawyer to Leonor Cipriano, is going to request police protection. “We’ve been targeted by threats”, he said, mentioning that one of the arguidos in the process compared him to his dog, saying that when one is playing at an inappropriate time, one should receive a correctional slap on one’s back.” (Cfr. document No. 11)

10. CAMARADECOMUNS.BLOGS.SAPO.PT, 4 Dec 2008: Today, 4 December, I read what I never thought would be possible to read about the Maddie and Joana cases. The illustrious lawyer Dr Marcos Aragão Correia believes that there is an intervention by British secret services and secret societies, namely the ‘Skull and Bones Society’, to which he states that president George Bush belongs, whose purpose it is to create a climate of insecurity to promote the implementation of chips in children. (Cfr. Document No. 10)

11. SOL, 15 Dec 2008: Marcos Aragão Correia states that he is a medium and has had ‘visions’ of Maddie and Joana, asserting that he saw the body of the little English girl at the Arade Dam. Searches were carried out in the area, but revealed to be fruitless. “In that case I committed a serious mistake. I revealed my plans with anticipation and the person responsible for Maddie’s death had time to go there and remove the body.” (Cfr. document No. 8)

12. SOL, 22 Jan 2009: Leonor Cipriano’s lawyer is thrown out of court. Before the trial session started, he was notified of the court’s decision. He was suspended from practising by the Lawyers’ Order. But 15 minutes later, he returned to the court room saying that ‘the situation was already solved’. The judge, however, threw him out of the room: “Get yourself out of here”, he ordered. (Cfr. document No. 12)

13. IOL.DIÁRIO, 22 Jan 2009: Marcos Aragão Correia announced that he is going to request the annulment of today’s audience. “I’m filing a complaint with the Magistrates’ Superior Counsel, against the president of the judge’s panel.” (Cfr. document No. 13)

14. DIÁRIO DIGITAL, 22 Jan 2009: Marcos Aragão Correia claims that judge Henrique Pavão is biased. Backing up his claim, the lawyer said that the magistrate had refused no fewer than 40 separate requests from the ‘Assistant’. (Cfr. document No. 14)

15. BARLAVENTO, 20 Feb 2009: Today, presiding judge Henrique Pavão held that the request made by Aragão Correia the previous month should not have been presented at the court of Faro, but, instead, at the Supreme Court of superior hierarchy. But for reasons of efficient administration, the judge had decided on his own authority to send Aragão’s request to the Appeals Court of Évora.” (Cfr. document No. 15)

16. BARLAVENTO, 21 Mar 2009: Appeals Court of Évora denies Marcos Aragão Correia’s motion to removal the presiding judge in the case. (Cfr. document No. 16)

17. DIÁRIO DE NOTÍCIAS, 23 Apr 2009: Leonor Cipriano’s lawyer, Marcos Aragão Correia, accuses the judge of ‘censorship’. Today he presented yet another complaint about the judge to the Magistrates’ Superior Counsel. He claimed that the judge, Henrique Pavão, had - without any legally acceptable justification - abruptly, and on six occasions, interrupted his allegations, causing him ‘manifest disturbance’. (Cfr. document No. 17)

18. SOL, 28 Jan 2009: Leonor Cipriano’s lawyer Marcos Aragão Correia asked the GNR police today to search at ‘an abandoned house up in the hills of Figueira’, where Joana’s mother confessed that her brother João Cipriano had buried the little girl’s body. (Cfr. document No. 18)

19. DIÁRIO DE NOTÍCIAS, 08 Jun 2009: Leonor Cipriano’s lawyer, Marcos Aragão Correia, says that she must be acquitted. She was condemned to 16 years in prison over the joint murder of Joana. The lawyer claimed that he ‘bluffed’ with João Cipriano in order to convince him to sign a confession in which he stated that he tried to sell the little girl. Aragão Correia told Leonor’s sister that he had heard that a convict who had been condemned to over 20 years in prison for homicide, was about to be transferred to Carregueira prison with the purpose of murdering João Cipriano him. (Cfr. document N. 19).

C. If he weren’t the victim of a serious pathology, Marcos Aragão Correia would certainly be determined to be guilty of breaching the public peace and the mental health of the people with his erratic claims of ‘psychic visions’ of missing children, extraterrestrial informants, searches in reservoirs, warnings about the mass implementation of chips in children and teenagers, not forgetting his deliberately comparing himself with a dog in a court of law and thus publicly bringing disgrace on the legal profession. He has also made an endless succession of requests that are rejected by judges due to their absurdity, he has been called to order many times by the judge, he has interrupted the judge on frequent occasions and has had on one occasion to be expelled from the precincts of the court.

D. Two questions arise in view of the foregoing evidence, which suggest, to those who are affected by his conduct, that there has been a history of insanity over a short period of time:

1st - The question of the lack of capability of Marcos Aragão Correia, or rather the question of the increasing probability that the subject suffered, during the practice of the facts under investigation, from a psychiatric illness (permanent or temporary) that may have rendered him incapable of evaluating the unlawfulness of his behaviour and of determining whether he is capable of practising law himself. If confirmed, this would prevent the Public Ministry from accepting any accusation against him, given the fact that the probative indications will then not result in a reasonable probability of him being convicted in any trial.

2nd - The question of whether Marcos Aragão Correia constitutes a danger to the population at large and to the efficient administration of justice. If that is confirmed, the court may insist that he attend for regular psychiatric treatment or, in the last resort, commit him for a period to an institution such as a psychiatric hospital.

E. Apart from what is established in our Mental Health Law, the Penal Code itself clearly determines that anyone who practises a typical kind of illicit action and is considered not to be imputable, shall be committed for cure, treatment or to a place of safety, whenever there is a sustained reason to believe that he may commit further acts of the same kind. And Marcos Aragão Correia does, indeed, seem to constitute a permanent danger to himself and to others.

F. The following actions are considered to be relevant and pertinent to the court being able to make a correct decision in this cause, as well as being apparently necessary for the treatment of arguido Marcos Aragão Correia. These are simple procedures which can be taken without prejudicing the outcome of the trial:

a) The referral by the court of Marcos Aragão Correia for a psychiatric examination, which will evaluate the state of his psychiatric health including any pathological causes that may raise the issue of his lack of capability and the consequent impossibility of convicting him if any offence, and

b) The referral by the court of Marcos Aragão Correia for an examination of the arguido’s personality, which may evaluate his psychological characteristics independently of any pathological causes, in order to determine his personality and level of danger he poses to others. This possible danger may be alleviated through regular psychiatric treatment or, as a last resort, committing him for a period to an institution such as a psychiatric hospital.

Thus Your Excellency is requested to integrate the present ADDENDUM and the appended documents with the original file in this case, as well as to put mechanisms into action, in the sense of ensuring that competent examinations by psychiatric experts as outlined above are carried out.

APPENDED: Addendum and 19 accompanying documents.

Filed by the offended, with the ability to constitute himself in the capacity of an ‘Assistant’:

GONÇALO AMARAL

UNQUOTE

by Woofer 04.09.12 16:04

The Judge came to the conclusion that Marcos `really believed` what he was saying, even though Marcos`s words and actions had exhibited signs of delusion and obsession. I can see why a Judge may come to that conclusion in Marcos`s favour, but to judge against Amaral was totally wrong when Marcos is obviously not of sound mind.

Yes, mentally ill people often `really believe` their distorted thinking. But the law shouldn`t be so hard on the victims of their distorted thinking.

by Newintown 04.09.12 16:20

Late January 2008 - Highly publicised search by him and a team of divers for Madeleine's bones at the Arade Dam. He says he's a 'Good Samaritan' doing this out of his own pocket, and says he's acting on underworld information that Madeleine was abducted, raped, killed and her body thrown into a murky lake. This, he later admits, was a comprehensive lie

March 2008 - Seraches the Arade Dam again. Later admits he was paid to do these searches by Metodo 3, who in turn were acting on the instructions of the McCann Team. Later comes up with a new story on how he first became interested in Madeleine's reported disappearance; claims he went to his first-ever Spiritualist meeting and afterwards had a 'vision' of a huge man strangling a young blonde girl

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I get very confused at times on the forum will all these statements etc and have difficulty getting my head around some of the postings so I may have got this wrong, but if Marcos Correia has publically said those two statements above, i.e. that he was looking for Madeleine's bones in the Arade Dam (late January 2008) - suggesting that she is therefore dead - and later in March 2008 he did another search with Metodo 3 who were acting on instructions from the McCanns, so how can the McCanns sue Goncalo Amaral for stating that Madeleine is dead and he is hindering the search for her. How can Correia's statements be any different to Amaral's?

Have I missed something? Part of the defamation case brought by Dr Goncalo Amaral that he LOST 1287980906

Part of the defamation case brought by Dr Goncalo Amaral that he LOST 1287980906

ETA: If Correia is to give a witness statement for the McCanns on the upcoming trial how can he say anything detrimental towards Goncalo Amaral when he has already stated the same facts himself - that Madeleine is dead as he's been looking for her bones in the Dam. It seems he should be a witness for Amaral against the McCanns seeing as they have come to the same judgement.

I'm even more confused now!

by Guest 04.09.12 16:22

Libel is stating something, which one knows isn't true and such with the purpose of hurting and damaging someone.

Stating something, which one believes to be true can not be libelous. This is in Dr. Amaral's advantage. The book he wrote and the interviews he gave are based on the investigation, which he led and which he genuinely believes to be true.

by Newintown 04.09.12 16:54

Châtelaine wrote:Libel is stating something, which one knows isn't true and such with the purpose of hurting and damaging someone.

Stating something, which one believes to be true can not be libelous. This is in Dr. Amaral's advantage. The book he wrote and the interviews he gave are based on the investigation, which he led and which he genuinely believes to be true.

Yes, but how can the McCanns bring a £1.5m (or Euro 1.5m) case against Amaral knowing that his book is based on the PJ files. Sorry if I appear thick, but it doesn't make sense to me. Are they hoping that the Judge hasn't actually read the files and doesn't know what's going on and because they tell "untruths" to whoever will listen i.e. in their interviews to Lorraine Kelly et al, that what they actually say will be believed by judges.

When I went through my litigation Court case, I must say the judge was on the ball, and knew everything, even minor details, of the case so he'd obviously been doing his homework for a very long time before we went to Court.

by aiyoyo 04.09.12 17:06

Marinho to testify Correio da Manhã

By M.A.G.
28 Janauary 2012 1:00 am

The president of the bar [Order of Lawyers], Marinho Pinto, will be a witness for the McCanns against Gonçalo Amaral, in the civil case that Madeleine's parents have brought against the former coordinator of the Directorate of Judicial Police of Portimão, Correio da Manhã has learned.

Marinho Pinto has made himself available to testify, in person, against the former coordinator at the trial that was scheduled to start next week but was postponed by the judge, who granted the request of the McCanns to hear several English witnesses by videoconference. Gonçalo Amaral was successful, in the Appeals Court, against the injunction which prevented publication of his book "The Truth of the Lie," where he defended the thesis that Maddie had died in the Algarve. The judges held that the prohibition of publication of the book violated the Constitution.

All witnesses have to be pre-notified to Court and accepted, so, nope, mad marcos won't be last minute surprise.
The introduction of Marinho PInto at late stage can only mean ID has changed strategy after her defeat at the appeal court has dent her chances considerably.

Marcos acquittal is also bad news for ID. She will have an extremely hard time proving defamation. Think about it.

by Guest 04.09.12 17:14

ID will have difficulty in proving anything in this case ...
IMO defamation is indeed out of the window.
The bogus sightings of the past week/months, probably meant to reinforce the chances of Madeleine still being alive, have only proven that people no way have stopped looking for her.
And their physical and mental destruction is contradicted by the newly appointed ambassador for missing people being photographed with a member of the Royal family, their flurry of television appearances in all corners of the world, promoting the first and second version of the bewk, to name a few, as well as their own words, e.g. Kate [non verbatim] that the articles about her ill-health and mental instability are bogus ;-)

by Newintown 04.09.12 17:18

aiyoyo wrote:

Marinho to testify Correio da Manhã

By M.A.G.
28 Janauary 2012 1:00 am

The president of the bar [Order of Lawyers], Marinho Pinto, will be a witness for the McCanns against Gonçalo Amaral, in the civil case that Madeleine's parents have brought against the former coordinator of the Directorate of Judicial Police of Portimão, Correio da Manhã has learned.

Marinho Pinto has made himself available to testify, in person, against the former coordinator at the trial that was scheduled to start next week but was postponed by the judge, who granted the request of the McCanns to hear several English witnesses by videoconference. Gonçalo Amaral was successful, in the Appeals Court, against the injunction which prevented publication of his book "The Truth of the Lie," where he defended the thesis that Maddie had died in the Algarve. The judges held that the prohibition of publication of the book violated the Constitution.

All witnesses have to be pre-notified to Court and accepted, so, nope, mad marcos won't be last minute surprise.
The introduction of Marinho PInto at late stage can only mean ID has changed strategy after her defeat at the appeal court has dent her chances considerably.

Marcos acquittal is also bad news for ID. She will have an extremely hard time proving defamation. Think about it.

Thank you for clearing that up. I was getting a headache trying to work it all out. I'm keeping my fingers crossed and everything else crossed for Goncalo. Hopefully this will be the downfall of the McCanns.

by aiyoyo 04.09.12 17:41

Court will not take kate words just on her say so.
Onus is on her to substantiate everything she claimed.
so Kate will have to prove hers, Gerry's and the twins (all named plaintiffs) ill health, depression, mental state of health yada yada by producing evidence to support her claims. Being able to go to work and living a celebrity life style rubbing shoulder with Royal, travelling to the Continent to promote her bewk are all contra indications to her claims

ID stands no hell of a chance to prove anything especially when there are photo proof of the smiling and happy mccanns.

by **Tony Bennett** 04.09.12 17:47

Châtelaine wrote:Libel is stating something, which one knows isn't true and such with the purpose of hurting and damaging someone.

Stating something, which one believes to be true cannot be libellous. This is in Dr. Amaral's advantage. The book he wrote and the interviews he gave are based on the investigation, which he led and which he genuinely believes to be true.

I think one would have to qualify that, Chatelaine, by adding the words in bold below:

Stating something, which one has reasonable grounds for believing to be true cannot be libellous.

It is still not IMO a completely accurate sumamry of this aspect of libel law, but reasonably close to the law as it stands in most countries I believe

by jd 04.09.12 17:50

Who would make an individual who is suffering from ill health, depression, mental state of health, lack of appetite, irritability, an indefinable fear, totally destroyed morally socially ethically and emotionally, irreparably damaged....... as their Ambassador for missing children!

by Guest 04.09.12 17:50

Tony Bennett wrote:[...]
Stating something, which one has reasonable grounds for believing to be true cannot be libellous.
[...]

***
Makes one wonder what reasonable grounds Marcos had to believe a convicted murderess ....

by **Tony Bennett** 04.09.12 18:07

Newintown wrote:Late January 2008 - Highly publicised search by him and a team of divers for Madeleine's bones at the Arade Dam. He says he's a 'Good Samaritan' doing this out of his own pocket, and says he's acting on underworld information that Madeleine was abducted, raped, killed and her body thrown into a murky lake. This, he later admits, was a comprehensive lie

March 2008 - Seraches the Arade Dam again. Later admits he was paid to do these searches by Metodo 3, who in turn were acting on the instructions of the McCann Team. Later comes up with a new story on how he first became interested in Madeleine's reported disappearance; claims he went to his first-ever Spiritualist meeting and afterwards had a 'vision' of a huge man strangling a young blonde girl

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I get very confused at times on the forum with all these statements etc and have difficulty getting my head around some of the postings so I may have got this wrong, but if Marcos Correia has publicly said those two statements above, i.e. that he was looking for Madeleine's bones in the Arade Dam (late January 2008) - suggesting that she is therefore dead - and later in March 2008 he did another search with Metodo 3 who were acting on instructions from the McCanns, so how can the McCanns sue Goncalo Amaral for stating that Madeleine is dead and he is hindering the search for her. How can Correia's statements be any different to Amaral's?

Have I missed something?

Thank you for raising questions about this very significant issue; up to now IMO insuffiicient attention has been paid to this matter.

First of all, let us go back to that meeting on 10 December, when Marcos Aragao Correia and Antonio Gimenez Raso met at the Arade Dam. They each travelled nearly 1,000 miles to get there. Antonio Gimenez Raso was not only employed by Metodo 3, he was their 'lead investigator' on the case, as various news reports reveal. Then bear in mind that Gimenez Raso was employed by Metodo 3 on behalf of the McCann Team, via Brian Kennedy who appointed them, and who worked closely with Metodo 3 and with Gimenez Rso in particular.

Bear in mind also that for the two men to meet at the Arade Dam on 10 December, the meeting had to be planned, arranged and funded by someone. Some of you may see by now where I might be going with this. But rather than go there myself, I will let people work out for themselves who might have planned, arranged and funded this strange, dam-side meeting.

Now let's very briefly turn to the TWO searches of the Arade Dam - in late January and early March 2008. These were explicitly a search for Madeleine's remains. The McCann Team have never for obvious reasons admitted any connection with these two searches, but Marcos Aragao Correia, amongst his many faults, likes the sound of his own voice and his own thoughts on paper (he has written a very strange book). It is he who has stated on the record that Metodo 3 paid him 'expenses' for his two searches. It could well have been more than expenses, of course.

Now there IS a difference - and an extremely important one - between what Marcos Aragao Correia and Goncalo Amaral are saying about Madeleine McCann's fate.

Marcos Aragao Correia says: "Wicked abductors stole Madeleine, then killed her, and according to my hunch/detective work, they threw her into this dammed lake".

By contrast, Goncalo Amaral says something very different: "The evidence from the dogs, other forensic evidence and from contradictions and changes of story etc., lead me to believe that Madeleine died in Apartment G5A in the Ocean Club".

iWhy Metodo 3 met with Marcos Aragao Correia at the Arade Dam in December, and then a month later FUNDED him to carry out TWO WEEK-LONG SEARCHES for Madeleine's bones IN THE FULL GLARE OF WORLD-WIDE PUBLICITY is something I'm afraid I'll have to leave to others to work out.

But the above are the facts

ETA: If Correia is to give a witness statement for the McCanns on the upcoming trial how can he say anything detrimental towards Goncalo Amaral when he has already stated the same facts himself - that Madeleine is dead as he's been looking for her bones in the Dam. It seems he should be a witness for Amaral against the McCanns seeing as they have come to the same judgement.

I'm even more confused now!

by Woofer 04.09.12 19:12

No doubt they can drum up a statement from another doctor they know confirming KM was depressed etc. But how are they going to differentiate (or prove) which bit of the depression was due to the book and which bit of depression was due to her daughter disappearing?

Impossible.

by **PeterMac** 04.09.12 22:43

Woofer wrote:No doubt they can drum up a statement from another doctor they know confirming KM was depressed etc. But how are they going to differentiate (or prove) which bit of the depression was due to the book and which bit of depression was due to her daughter disappearing?
Impossible.

Not to a good lawyer !
English barristers are routinely given the problem of arguing that "Black is White". It is part of their training. Highly entertaining, and the good ones are most persuasive.
One of my good drinking partners at Durham was reading law, became a barrister and now is among the highest 10 earners at the Criminal Legally Aided Bar. (*TB by initials, - spookily !) He makes over £ 750,000 a year defending the indefensible. Except that he is good, and wins. The prosecution cannot afford people like him.

by Woofer 04.09.12 22:50

PeterMac wrote:
Woofer wrote:No doubt they can drum up a statement from another doctor they know confirming KM was depressed etc. But how are they going to differentiate (or prove) which bit of the depression was due to the book and which bit of depression was due to her daughter disappearing?
Impossible.
Not to a good lawyer !
English barristers are routinely given the problem of arguing that "Black is White". It is part of their training. Highly entertaining, and the good ones are most persuasive.
One of my good drinking partners at Durham was reading law, became a barrister and now is among the highest 10 earners at the Criminal Legally Aided Bar. (*TB by initials, - spookily !) He makes over £ 750,000 a year defending the indefensible. Except that he is good, and wins. The prosecution cannot afford people like him.

Now I`m the one who`s depressed Part of the defamation case brought by Dr Goncalo Amaral that he LOST 173510

by ShuBob 05.09.12 0:00

Châtelaine wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:[...]
Stating something, which one has reasonable grounds for believing to be true cannot be libellous.
[...]
***
Makes one wonder what reasonable grounds Marcos had to believe a convicted murderess ....

Isn't it in his interest as her lawyer to appear to believe her every word given that he's apparently seeking compensation on her behalf from the State claiming wrongful conviction?

by listener 05.09.12 1:04

[/quote]
Not to a good lawyer !
English barristers are routinely given the problem of arguing that "Black is White". It is part of their training. Highly entertaining, and the good ones are most persuasive.
One of my good drinking partners at Durham was reading law, became a barrister and now is among the highest 10 earners at the Criminal Legally Aided Bar. (*TB by initials, - spookily !) He makes over £ 750,000 a year defending the indefensible. Except that he is good, and wins. The prosecution cannot afford people like him.[/quote]

And, when he 'retires' with his multi millions, will he ever ponder over his great wealth?

He might think "I took advantage Part of the defamation case brought by Dr Goncalo Amaral that he LOST 609562

Part of the defamation case brought by Dr Goncalo Amaral that he LOST 609562

"

Others might think "He took advantage Part of the defamation case brought by Dr Goncalo Amaral that he LOST 173510

"

by aiyoyo 05.09.12 3:10

Woofer wrote:No doubt they can drum up a statement from another doctor they know confirming KM was depressed etc. But how are they going to differentiate (or prove) which bit of the depression was due to the book and which bit of depression was due to her daughter disappearing?

Impossible.

Since Kate displays no sign of depression (remember the Amsterdam bewk promo pic, Chelsea football match etc) no sane doctor (even doctor is a friend) who is true to the profession will issue a false statement at the risk of licence penalisation.
Especially when the statement is to be used as document for judiciary purposes.

Personally I doubt Kate can obtain such a certification.
Even if she does manage to wrangle one for herself, what about Gerry and the twins?
How are they going to obtain a certification of depression for Gerry - what about his work?

I

by joyce1938 05.09.12 10:48

In fact looking at all the oast goings on and so many believe them, seems to me that they can prove almost anything they want to ,and if so many have been behind some conspirecty over 5 years ,why will it change now ,its highly depressing ,if indeed they have so many willing to fight their corner,can this court case make any difference to poor mr amaral,its sickening .joyce1938

by Guest 05.09.12 12:35

Joyce, IMO if they could turn back the clock, they wouldn't sue Dr. Amaral anymore. Also IMO they never thought he would fight his corner into the courtroom, as all others [e.g. newspapers] have settled out of court. And if they would pull out now, that would give as much doubt on their honesty and innocence as we have recently seen in the case of Lance Armstrong ... It seems to me that the only thing they could do, as they have done, is to delay procedures with YEARS in the hope that he would be worn out and give up ...

by Cristobell 05.09.12 14:02

aiyoyo wrote:
Woofer wrote:No doubt they can drum up a statement from another doctor they know confirming KM was depressed etc. But how are they going to differentiate (or prove) which bit of the depression was due to the book and which bit of depression was due to her daughter disappearing?

Impossible.

Since Kate displays no sign of depression (remember the Amsterdam bewk promo pic, Chelsea football match etc) no sane doctor (even doctor is a friend) who is true to the profession will issue a false statement at the risk of licence penalisation.
Especially when the statement is to be used as document for judiciary purposes.

Personally I doubt Kate can obtain such a certification.
Even if she does manage to wrangle one for herself, what about Gerry and the twins?
How are they going to obtain a certification of depression for Gerry - what about his work?

I

Having myself gone through a trial where mental health was a key issue (see my book), I can confirm that I underwent intensive psychological evaluation by an expert psychiatrist acting on my behalf and by an expert psychiatrist acting on behalf of the Defendants. Both were called to give evidence.

by aiyoyo 05.09.12 14:27

Cristobell wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
Woofer wrote:No doubt they can drum up a statement from another doctor they know confirming KM was depressed etc. But how are they going to differentiate (or prove) which bit of the depression was due to the book and which bit of depression was due to her daughter disappearing?

Impossible.

Since Kate displays no sign of depression (remember the Amsterdam bewk promo pic, Chelsea football match etc) no sane doctor (even doctor is a friend) who is true to the profession will issue a false statement at the risk of licence penalisation.
Especially when the statement is to be used as document for judiciary purposes.

Personally I doubt Kate can obtain such a certification.
Even if she does manage to wrangle one for herself, what about Gerry and the twins?
How are they going to obtain a certification of depression for Gerry - what about his work?

I

Having myself gone through a trial where mental health was a key issue (see my book), I can confirm that I underwent intensive psychological evaluation by an expert psychiatrist acting on my behalf and by an expert psychiatrist acting on behalf of the Defendants. Both were called to give evidence.

Quite correct.

by jozi 05.09.12 14:45

Cristobell wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
Woofer wrote:No doubt they can drum up a statement from another doctor they know confirming KM was depressed etc. But how are they going to differentiate (or prove) which bit of the depression was due to the book and which bit of depression was due to her daughter disappearing?

Impossible.

Since Kate displays no sign of depression (remember the Amsterdam bewk promo pic, Chelsea football match etc) no sane doctor (even doctor is a friend) who is true to the profession will issue a false statement at the risk of licence penalisation.
Especially when the statement is to be used as document for judiciary purposes.

Personally I doubt Kate can obtain such a certification.
Even if she does manage to wrangle one for herself, what about Gerry and the twins?
How are they going to obtain a certification of depression for Gerry - what about his work?

I

Having myself gone through a trial where mental health was a key issue (see my book), I can confirm that I underwent intensive psychological evaluation by an expert psychiatrist acting on my behalf and by an expert psychiatrist acting on behalf of the Defendants. Both were called to give evidence.

Gerry has not been in the limelight for a while now, all the book promotions were done mainly by Kate ?
Could Gerry not put his absence is due to depression ?

by Cristobell 05.09.12 15:28

Not sure he could Jozi. He has very responsible and stressful job as a consultant cardiologist, would he be able to do this if he were as damaged as claimed? It would also put the patients and the Health Authority that employs him in a very precarious position.

It would be interesting to know if they are claiming loss of earnings. In the UK, this usually makes up the bulk of any damages awarded. However, it must be proved. Gerry returned to work of course, and Kate has said in many interviews that she works on the campaign. Whether she is paid by the Fund, is something that would have to be disclosed to the Court.