LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Are there more reasons behind the delay?

Or only to make the McCanns nervous?

 

sweetex wrote:Very interesting PDF file with the cross examining of Susan Hubbard.

Download from this link here http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=npjoo6qqu666dthhqo375lf965&topic=2240.msg73878#msg73878

SH definitely failed the McCanns with her testimony.

e.g.

GP – Did the Fund and the private investigators go on searching for Madeleine?
SH answers yes.
GP – And after the book was published?
SH answers yes.
GP – There's a website with an English version of the book. Do you know to whom this site belongs?
SH answers no.
GP – Do you know the Oprah Winfrey TV program?
SH answers no.

and a lot more :)

Arrrrrggh......I cant open the file in PDF format. Frustrating.

aiyoyo wrote:

sweetex wrote:Very interesting PDF file with the cross examining of Susan Hubbard.

Download from this link here http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=npjoo6qqu666dthhqo375lf965&topic=2240.msg73878#msg73878

SH definitely failed the McCanns with her testimony.

e.g.

GP – Did the Fund and the private investigators go on searching for Madeleine?
SH answers yes.
GP – And after the book was published?
SH answers yes.
GP – There's a website with an English version of the book. Do you know to whom this site belongs?
SH answers no.
GP – Do you know the Oprah Winfrey TV program?
SH answers no.

and a lot more :)

Arrrrrggh......I cant open the file in PDF format.  Frustrating.

I have downloaded it and opened it with Foxit reader without problems. You want me to send it to you, that sometimes helps. I love Foxit reader, it solved a lot of my problems.

@aiyoyo - have pm'd you with the text

bb

aiyoyo wrote:

sweetex wrote:Very interesting PDF file with the cross examining of Susan Hubbard.

Download from this link here http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=npjoo6qqu666dthhqo375lf965&topic=2240.msg73878#msg73878

SH definitely failed the McCanns with her testimony.

e.g.

GP – Did the Fund and the private investigators go on searching for Madeleine?
SH answers yes.
GP – And after the book was published?
SH answers yes.
GP – There's a website with an English version of the book. Do you know to whom this site belongs?
SH answers no.
GP – Do you know the Oprah Winfrey TV program?
SH answers no.

and a lot more :)

Arrrrrggh......I cant open the file in PDF format.  Frustrating.

Could anyone put it up here, please?  For all of us to read?
kindest regards
parapono

I can only imagine that the Judge upon hearing the blah blah's that came from the McCann team must have been enraged that his court room was carrying a case of this magnitude on such a poverty of truth.

Me thinks he might be going higher and asking why these people have not been arrested yet?

aquila wrote:@aiyoyo - have pm'd you with the text

Thanks a mil.

aiyoyo thank you  
parapono

Humanist wrote:I can only imagine that the Judge upon hearing the blah blah's that came from the McCann team must have been enraged that his court room was carrying a case of this magnitude on such a poverty of truth.

Me thinks he might be going higher and asking why these people have not been arrested yet?

Humanist, I am thinking along the same lines.
What's more: how come no impartial party is monitoring what is happening in that courtroom? 
Could not the European Commission send someone over? Well enough paid to do so?
It's about the rights of all of us, about freedom of speech, about justice.
How come Joana Morais, journalist, who has been running/enabling the MCF forum for years now, thus profiling herself big time, is not there at the moment??
How come all the others, Astro/Kazlux fluent in Portuguese and translators of the files, are not present?
Or willing to translate at least?


I fail to understand, it gets me more worried by the hour..


parapono

Portugal is key to hunt for Madeleine,‘ says the McCann family's former detective
KATE and Gerry McCann’s former ­private investigator has told a court the secret of what happened to their missing daughter Madeleine lies in Portugal.
By: James Murray
Published: Sun, September 15, 2013



0Comments

Madeleine McCann disappeared while on a family holiday in the Portuguese resort Praia da Luz in 2007

Retired detective Dave Edgar led the McCanns’ small team of investigators from 2008 until 2011 when Scotland Yard launched its review of the case.

Last week he spoke as a witness for the couple in their £1million libel action against former Portuguese police inspector Goncalo Amaral over his claims that Madeleine is dead.

Mr Edgar, 56, who spent 30 years with the Cheshire force and lives in Warrington, said: “My job was to lead the investigation to find Madeleine McCann and find out what happened to her.

“I discovered evidence and passed it to the British and Portuguese police. The answer to what happened to Madeleine lies in Portugal, so it is important to get information from the Portuguese public.”

Although the investigation was shelved by the Portuguese authorities in 2008 without the case being solved, Mr Edgar told the court at the Palace of Justice in Lisbon that he continued to work closely with Portuguese officers for several years after the case was closed.

Madeleine McCann's mother Kate with her mother outside a court in Lisbon, Portugal

The answer to what happened to Madeleine lies in Portugal, so it is important to get information from the Portuguese public
Dave Edgar

Soon after the authorities shelved the case, and lifted the arguido – or suspect – status from the McCanns, Mr Amaral published his controversial book, The Truth Of The Lie. He was moved off the investigation in October 2007 after criticising British police officers.

In the book he alleged Madeleine died in apartment 5a of the Ocean Club complex at the Algarve resort town of Praia da Luz on the evening of May 3, 2007.

He also alleged Kate and Gerry were suspected of hiding her corpse and ­covering up her death with a fake abduction. There were also indications of ­negligence in the way they treated their children, he claimed.

The couple, 45, of Rothley, Leicestershire, say the claims are deeply damaging to their search to find Madeleine and state there is no evidence to show she is dead. They are suing Mr Amaral for libel over claims made in the book and in a Portuguese TV documentary.

Earlier film-maker Emma Loach, 40, told the court the book was “a tidal wave of lies” that had devastated the family. She became friends with them after making two films about the case. “If people believed Madeleine was dead they wouldn’t look for her,” she said.

The hearing ended abruptly on Friday when the judge, Maria Emilia Melo Castro, said she had to deal with a personal matter. It meant Kate’s mother Susan Healey was unable to give evidence. She will return to court this week. The case continues.

Thanks  HiDeHo, and a big thank you to the Jill Havern forum, to Jill herself and to all it's moderators researchers .... to all in fact for enabling us to find out the truth about Madeleine McCann, whom none of us knew before her disappearance was so broadly advertised as an abduction by the parents on May 3rd 2007.

Loving caring people; Amaral, Tony Bennett put their safe future at risk to find out what happened to her!
I am proud to be part of this forum, proud to have met Mr B.

parapono wrote:bb

aiyoyo wrote:

sweetex wrote:Very interesting PDF file with the cross examining of Susan Hubbard.

Download from this link here http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=npjoo6qqu666dthhqo375lf965&topic=2240.msg73878#msg73878

SH definitely failed the McCanns with her testimony.

e.g.

GP – Did the Fund and the private investigators go on searching for Madeleine?
SH answers yes.
GP – And after the book was published?
SH answers yes.
GP – There's a website with an English version of the book. Do you know to whom this site belongs?
SH answers no.
GP – Do you know the Oprah Winfrey TV program?
SH answers no.

and a lot more :)

Arrrrrggh......I cant open the file in PDF format.  Frustrating.

Could anyone put it up here, please?  For all of us to read?
kindest regards
parapono

Here it is:


Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 1
The testimony as it happened...
(12.09.2013, 11am) Susan Hubbard Occupation mid-wife. She speaks in a combination of Portuguese (more) and English (less). Mrs Hubbard admits her friendship with Kate McCann can influence her evidence.
1) McCann family lawyer is the first to question the witness.
ID – In this trial we're discussing the effects on the McCann family of the publication of GA's book and the documentary inspired by this book. As a close friend of KMC, can you tell how this family reacted to the thesis of the book?
SH answers that they are very strong persons, but any claims that their daughter is dead is terrible for them because it means she isn't looked for any more. She says the book finishes like it starts, not offering an alternative theory.
One of the defence lawyers asks precise questions and answers. The judge overrules.
ID – What impact had the book on their life, on their personal life, health, relationships?
SH answers that they were angry in having to spend a lot of energy due to the allegations in the book instead expelling their energies looking for Madeleine. She stated that everybody in Portugal believed the book.
Defence lawyer protests and this time the judge admits the question is too vague.
ID – How did they find out about the book ? What did they feel when they saw the book and the documentary?
SH doesn't know how they found out about the book, but says the people who saw the documentary believed a man who stated he said the truth. She says it made the McCanns angry, sad, scared and destroyed their hope.
ID – What have you observed in relation to the McCanns and the twins?
SH states they are good parents, the twins are happy, they have a normal life. She wonders, if in the future they read the book, what they will think about their parents.
ID – The book is published on the Internet, in English.
SH remarks the access to the book is very easy.
ID – This book and the documentary arouse suspicions? Could the twins have doubts about what happened ?
SH thinks so.
ID reads an extract from GA's book (p.193)
Burla ou abuso de confiança?
Num momento de relaxe de uma destas reuniões, terei cometido um deslize ou, quiçá, terei sido inoportuno e pouco diplomático. Preocupado com a possibilidade de o casal McCann estar, de
alguma forma, envolvido no desaparecimento de sua filha, e quando raciocinava quanto aos tipos de crime que os mesmos pudessem ter praticado, apercebi-me de um facto. Se, realmente, se viesse a confirmar qualquer tipo de responsabilidade do casal McCann, então poderia estar em causa, relativamente ao fundo criado para as buscas por Madeleine, que atingia mais de 2 milhões de
libras, um crime de burla ou abuso de confiança. Abriu-se então o debate e, de facto, com as
premissas indicadas, os crimes de burla qualificada ou abuso de confiança poderiam existir, mas
Portugal não teria jurisdição para investigar e julgar por tal crime. Esta pertenceria ao Reino
Unido, por o fundo se encontrar registado naquele país. Os colegas ingleses aperceberam-se então
de uma dura realidade: a forte possibilidade de terem um crime para investigar no seu país, tendo
como eventuais suspeitos o casal McCann, coisa que parecia não lhes agradar muito.
Translates as >
Fraud or abuse of trust ?
During a moment of relaxation at one of these meetings, I did a side step or I might have been
inopportune and rather undiplomatic. Worried with the possibility that the McCann couple were
somehow involved in their daughter's disappearance and reflecting about the kind of crime they
might have committed, something occurred to me. If, really, any type of responsibility of the
McCann couple was confirmed, then the fund set up to finance the search for Madeleine that had
reached nearly €3 million could be a crime of fraud or abuse of trust. This question was debated
and, in fact, with such premises the crimes of qualified fraud or abuse of trust could exist, but
Portugal would have no jurisdiction to investigate and judge it. The fund being legally registered in
England, it would be our English colleagues who would deal with the case. Our English colleagues
then realised a hard reality: the strong possibility that they would have a crime to investigate in their
own country, with the McCann couple as the main suspects: a prospect that left them rather
reluctant.
ID – Did they react badly to this extract ?
The judge criticizes the suggestion of the answer in the question.
SH doesn't know. She doesn't think they concluded anything from this paragraph. She thinks the
McCanns didn't fear a UK investigation and hoped their truth would be spoken about in Portugal.
2) Defence lawyers.
a) TVI lawyers’ questions.
TVI – You said that "everybody in Portugal believes the book". What makes you think this?
SH says that in PDL some people believe Kate and Gerald, but outside they don't.
TVI – Do you suppose so? Have you any objective basis to think so?
SH says she has knows a Portuguese nurse, in the hospital where she works in Canada, who
believes what the book says.
TVI – Do you know if this book and the documentary were broadcast at the same moment ?
SH says when one and the other were launched.
TVI – Are the thesis identical?
SH notes that in the documentary the actors representing Kate and Gerald were depicted drinking a
lot, but the underlying theories are similar. She adds one must pay for the book whereas the access
to the documentary is free.
TVI – Have you seen "Madeleine was here"?
SH did, as many people.
TVI – Then why should one believe more a documentary than the other?
SH argues the Amaral documentary had more audience.
TVI – Why?
SH doesn't know. She hasn't watched all the programs.
TVI – Then why do you think that one is more watched than the other?
The judge overrules : the issue is "what kind of effect ?"
b) Valentim de Carvalho (DVD production/distribution) lawyer's questions
VC : You don't know if Madeleine died. Your conviction is she's alive. The idea that something happened to her other than abduction is also a possibility. Do you think the McCanns are angry because such a theory exists that is different from theirs?
SH hesitates, then says she doesn't think so, refers to the loss of hope.
VC – Have you seen the TVI documentary, have you read the final conclusion?
The judge overrules.
c) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions
GP first asks if SH knows GA and when she met the McCanns for the first time.
SH answers she once saw GA somewhere in PDL and met the McCanns a few days after her arrival in PDL (3 days after Madeleine disappeared).
GP – How did the couple react when they were made arguidos?
SH says the McCanns didn't fear the arguido status because they knew they were innocent.
GP – We could then expect the same reaction after the book was published.
You, as a close friend who saw them almost every day, must know better than anyone. How did they react when they were made arguidos?
SH answers they wanted to protect the twins and didn't know what to do. They thought of taking them to Spain. They reacted with sadness (GMC with anger) because the police wouldn't be looking for their daughter.
GP – Did the Fund and the private investigators go on searching for Madeleine?
SH answers yes.
GP – And after the book was published?
SH answers yes.
GP – There's a website with an English version of the book. Do you know to whom this site belongs?
SH answers no.
GP – Do you know the Oprah Winfrey TV program?
SH answers no.
d) Santos Oliveira (GA lawyer) questions
SO – How many times a week did the McCanns come to your place?
SH says about once a week. She adds she saw mainly Kate and that Kate cried when she was with her.
SO – Was there a difference between the sorrow due to the disappearance and the sorrow due to the loss?
The judge reacts, the lawyer argues the feelings can be the same and the motives different. The
judge agrees but warns that the question shouldn't imply the conclusion.
SO – Do you recall the interview they gave in October to the Expresso ?
SH doesn't.
SO – Do you know who Clarence Mitchell is?
SH does.
SO – Do you know if they spoke about the possibility that their daughter had died ?
SH says they did.
SO – Then why were they angry with the book?
SH says they don't fear what the book says.
SO – Do you know if the book hampered the investigation?
SH says she can't answer.
SO – Have you talked with the McCanns about the book?
SH says yes, 3 months later.
SO – What did they say about the book?
SH answers they were worried about what the people would think and, if they did nothing, the people would think the book was telling the truth. They spoke of the effect on the search for Madeleine, the public attention diverted. They didn't want to waste energy on this issue. They spoke about the way to protect the twins from what was in the book.
SO – Did they feel indicted by the book?
SH apparently doesn't understand.
The judge (Maria Emília de Melo e Castro) is now asking
MC – Did they feel ashamed, anxious?
SH doesn't (doesn't want to?) answer.
MC – Did they feel offended?
SH sighs then says they were surprised by the book.
MC – Did the documentary change something?
SH says it increased the damage. She says that, after the book was published, some people turned their back on them. And some people wanted the tragedy to stop there.

This was it 

TVI – You said that "everybody in Portugal believes the book". What makes you think this?

SH says that in PDL some people believe Kate and Gerald, but outside they don't.

TVI – Do you suppose so? Have you any objective basis to think so?

SH says she has knows a Portuguese nurse, in the hospital where she works in Canada, who
believes what the book says.

A Portuguese nurse - in Canada !  And this is "evidence " for Everybody believing . . .
Priceless
Mother Hubbard - you are a gem. A diamond, which has just cut through the glass. 

There are a lot of interesting comments on Textusa's blog re., the McCann vs Amaral Libel Trial

 http://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-vs-amaral-libel-trial.html

AnonymousSep 13, 2013, 1:43:00 PM

My personal opinion regarding that trial:

1- there is no way for Mr Amaral to loose it.
2- The only way for ID to win that batle is with a Pré- agreement with the Judge( ganhar na secretaria), which is not new on that saga because was what happen on the first injuction of the book. That's why on that case, I don't like trials with a single judge.
3- Being in court that time was the worsest scenary for the Mccann's, no matter all the effort the British media + Lusa do to try to convince the public that were the Mccann's who brought GA to court. In fact was the other way around: Mccann's tried to intimidate Amaral in many ways trough the media, trough silencing other people like TB, convinced that by doing that, the Lion inside Mr Amaral will be transformed into a cat with him seating quite and silent. His courage was a reverse on their plan. The single man decide to battle the monster by refusing an extra- judicial agreement which could be used by the Mccann's as trophy. Then, contrary to what the media is spreading, was GA who brought the Mccann's to court and not the contrary. The Media is going to pay the collateral damages after that saga- almost all the british became no reliable and Lusa has a bunch of idiots who follow instructions instead of giving to the portuguese public independent news
4- Team Mccann by being forced by GA to attend the trial were left without any other choice then playing the roll they know so well- the victims. For that, a team of experts must have advised them to show up like that- mainly ladies- the poor mother without her husband, supported by the granny( her mother) and a friend, who apparently enter the saga based on a painful solidarity( Hubbard). That friendship has many ingredients/ suspitions that need to be investigated, specially because Kate fooled the world with the idea of being a devoted catholic and that lady is the wife of the anglican priest. What they have shared? The same church, for what the Mccann's had the key. For me the church was the office were many issues were discussed and planned disrespecting both, God and their religions.
5- the book prevented the search? What a joke.
- was not published in Uk, then the brain of the british public was not affected by the facts reported by Amaral on his book. How many sights or suspects were reported in UK? None. One, have to wonder why that country was so meticulously kept out of that saga, no matter all the crime as reported by PJ " was in full english".
- The rest of the world were blessed by Amaral book, translated in many languages. Did the book prevented the search there? No, there was sights of Madeleine in so different countries, as India, NZ, Morroccos or Brazil.
6- Contrary to the Mccann's propaganda, PJ said neverthless the case been shelved, the investigation never stopped and all new leads that arrived to PJ were investigated in deep to the point of being Maddie case the most expensive investigation Portugal ever had.
7- SY, with their shameful interviews show the same- the investigation never stopped.
8- the only team who wants the investigation to remain closed, are the Mccann's and their helpers. They innundate the media with a fake reopenning while never filled the forms which could lead to an official reopen.

Well done Mr Amaral. I wish you a good luck in name of all portuguese.
Only a manipulated judge could not see the truth. That has nothing to do with Maddie since the beguinning. It is a business, a way to earn money without having to work.

N
aughty girl ID and good on the judge for pulling you up on asking a leading question, a common courtroom tactic


ID – Did they react badly to this extract ?
The judge criticizes the suggestion of the answer in the question.
SH doesn't know. She doesn't think they concluded anything from this paragraph. She thinks the
McCanns didn't fear a UK investigation and hoped their truth would be spoken about in Portugal.


 Q   should have been  " how did they react ? "

 note the answer : SH does not KNOW. She thinks or does not think.... not strong evidence to present. Did SH really say " THEIR truth" as opposed to THE truth
 or is that a mistranslation?  If not it is very damning !

russiandoll wrote:N
 note the answer : SH does not KNOW. She thinks or does not think.... not strong evidence to present. Did SH really say " THEIR truth" as opposed to THE truth
 or is that a mistranslation?  If not it is very damning !

But Kate's book - on her own admission - was a "version of the truth".
So THEIR truth sounds about right

CPeterMac wrote:

TVI – You said that "everybody in Portugal believes the book". What makes you think this?

SH says that in PDL some people believe Kate and Gerald, but outside they don't.

TVI – Do you suppose so? Have you any objective basis to think so?

SH says she has knows a Portuguese nurse, in the hospital where she works in Canada, who
believes what the book says.

A Portuguese nurse - in Canada !  And this is "evidence " for Everybody believing . . .
Priceless
Mother Hubbard - you are a gem. A diamond, which has just cut through the glass. 

I genuinely don't understand what they thought the burden of proof was going to be!

gbwales wrote:
I genuinely don't understand what they thought the burden of proof was going to be!

"Just the place for a Snark!" the Bellman cried,
  As he landed his crew with care;
Supporting each man on the top of the tide
  By a finger entwined in his hair.

"Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
  That alone should encourage the crew.
Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
  What I tell you three times is true."

How many witnesses do they have.
Mother Hubbard,
film maker girl
Edgar
THREE - what a coincidence !
that should be enough on the Snark test.

Perhaps Madeleine did meet a boojum

"'But oh, beamish nephew, beware of the day,
  If your Snark be a Boojum! For then
You will softly and suddenly vanish away,
  And never be met with again!'

Quite apart from the obvious fact that the witnesses are giving second hand evidence o the effect of the book on them.
Which is entirely irrelevant to the question of whether it is libellous or not.
That issue does not yet seem to have been addressed.

They've certainly had long enough to prepare their 'witnesses' -if SH is an example it's a pretty poor show isn't it?
[ Whatever meaning you choose to attribute to 'prepare'   ]

parapono wrote:

Humanist wrote:I can only imagine that the Judge upon hearing the blah blah's that came from the McCann team must have been enraged that his court room was carrying a case of this magnitude on such a poverty of truth.

Me thinks he might be going higher and asking why these people have not been arrested yet?

Humanist, I am thinking along the same lines.
What's more: how come no impartial party is monitoring what is happening in that courtroom? 
Could not the European Commission send someone over? Well enough paid to do so?
It's about the rights of all of us, about freedom of speech, about justice.
How come Joana Morais, journalist, who has been running/enabling the MCF forum for years now, thus profiling herself big time, is not there at the moment??
How come all the others, Astro/Kazlux fluent in Portuguese and translators of the files, are not present?
Or willing to translate at least?


I fail to understand, it gets me more worried by the hour..


parapono

Humanist and Parapono
 

It does seem as though reporting has been banned. comes to sumat when we are all scrubbing round trying to find out from one internet site what happened those two days.

Trial of the century and if it weren't for the internet and the lady who is reporting on that one site we would all be in the dark (ages). Thanks to her.

Hacked Off - you bet I am.

re- Kate , from the Guardian January 2010 [bold mine ] :

 
As she arrived at court in Lisbon she admitted that listening to claims that she faked Madeleine's abduction was difficult, but said nothing could be as bad as losing her child.
It is the third day of the trial in Portugal, where the McCanns are seeking permanently to ban a book written by former policeman Goncalo Amaral and £1.1m in compensation for defamation.
Entering the court, Mrs McCann said: "If I'm honest, our daughter's been taken and nothing's ever going to be as bad as that. It's still been difficult, it's been emotive, because I know what's in the case files, I know what the conclusions are. So it's difficult to hear something that's incorrect and inaccurate. At the bottom of all this is a little girl and I think it's important that we don't forget that."


So, how does the above tally with the claim made in recent days, that the couple were FORCED to spend energy which should have been used in the search for their daughter, on defending themselves?
 
1. It was a choice. They had to prioritise one over the other and it is on record from a friend what that choice was.

2. Given what is in bold , how could they have made that choice ?

I hope GA's lawyer quotes the above.

Especially the last bit....at the bottom of it all this is a little girl. Not  THE TOP PRIORITY IS OUR DAUGHTER /MADELEINE ?

And then quotes SY  :   Madeleine McCann is at the heart of everything we do.

"If I'm honest...."


That one does keep turning up doesn't it! 

suzyjohnson wrote:

JackieL wrote:

Woofer wrote:Apparently GA won`t be testifying either - how weird. I wonder if GA has submitted a written statement?

JackieL, possibly. Does GA have to make a statement at all? Isn't it up to the McCanns to show that anything he has said either in his book or documentary is libellous? If they cannot prove that then GA doesn't have to defend anything?

I suppose everything GA has to say has already been said in the book. And as the trial is about how the book supposedly upset the McCanns and changed public opinion, consequently reducing the number of people in the world that would search for Maddie, that`s all that has to be proved. So it`s merely up to GA`s lawyer to cross examine the McCann`s assertions, that`s all. (I`ve always thought it really arrogant of the McCanns to EXPECT everyone in the world to be looking for THEIR daughter).

Emma Loach says there was a tidal wave of lies - was she on that holiday then?

@PeterM laugh my backside off about the Portugese Nurse in Canada.