The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Page 3 of 40 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 21 ... 40  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by aiyoyo on 17.09.13 4:34

@lj wrote:
5. There are clues about the parents’ negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.

DT says the idea that the parents aren't able to keep the children safe is terrifying for the children.
Yep, so now is it Dr Amaral's fault that the kids will be terrified when they discover their parents were very seriously negligent?

Wait until they read Kate's book

or her diary.
OR better still wait till they read their parents' excuse that their action was within reasonable  parenting!

You have to hand it to the Defence lawyers - they are good, and it's only just warm up rounds!

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by aiyoyo on 17.09.13 4:51


Defence Lawyer: Do you know if the book hampered the investigation?
Hubbard: I can't answer that
.


VC - What is the difference between the crime files and the book?
EL - says the book is easier to read.
SO – Have they some idea that their parents were arguidos?
DT doesn't know. They (the McCanns and DT) never spoke about that.

SO – Are your preoccupations projections?
DT says yes.
This bit of the psychologist's testimony is at par with the other two, so I am lumping them together.

aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Angelique on 17.09.13 7:22

It seems to me that they are just trying to keep the Truth from the twins?

It's not that the book is different from the files, it's just going cause trauma for the children when they read it or the files.

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem

Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 35
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by PeterMac on 17.09.13 7:40

Edgar is a STAR.
Proof, from a Professional ex-police officer that the FUND was a Fraud.

Where do they get these 'witnesses' ?

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 17.09.13 7:59

@aiyoyo wrote:
VC – The investigation Report was spread in the media, translated into English and put on the internet. Does this worry you?
DT says that anything, any information that undermines the trust of the children worries him.


VC – Are you worried by the transcripts that are on the internet?
DT says he doesn't know what they are about and can't answer.

VC – What if the facts are similar to what the investigation Report states?
DT says the book is a clear statement that presents a unique conclusion.

VC – Is the death hypothesis the only thing that worries you?
DT says no. The issue is the involvement of the parents.


 Bingo isnt it.
It's not about the claim that Madeleine is dead.  The parents could not care less about it one way or another.
It's about her parents concerns at how the public view them - reputation management in other words.


VC asks permission to read an extract from the book.
Translates as >
The results my team and I have arrived at are the following:
1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of 3rd May 2007;

2. There was simulation of abduction.

3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann are suspects of involvement in the concealment of their daughter's body.

4. The death could have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;

5. There are clues about the parents’ negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.

DT says the idea that the parents aren't able to keep the children safe is terrifying for the children. Then there's the issue of the parents simulating abduction. The problem is that it isn't a suggestion but a conclusion.

VC now asks for a reading of the Conclusion to the Investigation Report dated 10th September 2007 which is also on the internet.

Isabel Duarte objects to this reading, but the judge overrules, saying it's within the files that were released (Vol X, p. 2587-2602)

Translates as >

From all the elements that have been exposed, it results that:

A) The minor Madeleine McCann died in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort, on the night of 3rd May 2007;

B) There was a simulation of abduction;

C) In order to make it appear impossible that the death of the minor occurred before 22.00hr, a system of checks on the McCann children while they slept was created;

D) Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the concealment of the cadaver of their child Madeleine McCann;

E) At this moment, there is no evidence that the death of the minor didn't happen due to a tragic accident;

F) From what has been established until now, everything indicates that the McCanns, by virtue of self preservation, don't want to deliver immediately and voluntarily the cadaver, even though there is a strong possibility that the same was transported from the initial place of deposition. This situation consequently raises questions about the circumstances under which the death of the minor occurred.

DT says his concern is that the book is more accessible and easier to read.
On hearing the two extracts in the public domain all this witness (a psychologist at that) is concerned about is that the book being easier to read.  WHAT!!
Another one promoting the book - as being easier to access and read. Where has he been for the past decades?  
Does he not know internet has taken over the old fashion method of access to info?  
Does he think the twins are going to be kept away from PC forever?
Hello, how difficult can it be to read translated files in English from online?
Besides, it's a la mode for children/teenagers to access info from internet -- google and youtube -- and literally everything you want to know is online.  

Boy, the witnesses are all so ill prepared ....
Wait till the Defence Lawyers sink their teeth in properly.....
No use waiting: the witnesses have been dismissed.

The cross examination of them seen so far is the only one that's going to happen (this time)

When the criminal case is heard in the UK (after Team AR-SY hits the deck) probably the T-7 will be quite happy to fess up in their stead

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 17.09.13 8:00

@Portia wrote:I suggest we pay attention to one of the Judges last questions (viz notes ms Guedes, almost at the end):

"The fact that they (=the McCs) are innocents didn't surpress..." etc

This is a clear indication of the assesment of the Court of the McCs legal position: innocent untill proven otherwise. 

It also strikes me that the Judge keeps stressing the 'shame' factor. 

The McCs were ashamed, that much has surfaced during her questioning of mss Hubbard and Loach.

So: what were they ashamed of? Of leaving their infants defenseless in a dark room 5 nights in a row? No sign of THAT sort of shame for the past six years, correct me if I'm wrong!

And is undefined unproven and unfathomed 'shame' enough to warrant a bonus of a million $$ ?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by aiyoyo on 17.09.13 8:14

@Portia wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
VC – The investigation Report was spread in the media, translated into English and put on the internet. Does this worry you?
DT says that anything, any information that undermines the trust of the children worries him.


VC – Are you worried by the transcripts that are on the internet?
DT says he doesn't know what they are about and can't answer.

VC – What if the facts are similar to what the investigation Report states?
DT says the book is a clear statement that presents a unique conclusion.

VC – Is the death hypothesis the only thing that worries you?
DT says no. The issue is the involvement of the parents.


 Bingo isnt it.
It's not about the claim that Madeleine is dead.  The parents could not care less about it one way or another.
It's about her parents concerns at how the public view them - reputation management in other words.


VC asks permission to read an extract from the book.
Translates as >
The results my team and I have arrived at are the following:
1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of 3rd May 2007;

2. There was simulation of abduction.

3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann are suspects of involvement in the concealment of their daughter's body.

4. The death could have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;

5. There are clues about the parents’ negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.

DT says the idea that the parents aren't able to keep the children safe is terrifying for the children. Then there's the issue of the parents simulating abduction. The problem is that it isn't a suggestion but a conclusion.

VC now asks for a reading of the Conclusion to the Investigation Report dated 10th September 2007 which is also on the internet.

Isabel Duarte objects to this reading, but the judge overrules, saying it's within the files that were released (Vol X, p. 2587-2602)

Translates as >

From all the elements that have been exposed, it results that:

A) The minor Madeleine McCann died in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort, on the night of 3rd May 2007;

B) There was a simulation of abduction;

C) In order to make it appear impossible that the death of the minor occurred before 22.00hr, a system of checks on the McCann children while they slept was created;

D) Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the concealment of the cadaver of their child Madeleine McCann;

E) At this moment, there is no evidence that the death of the minor didn't happen due to a tragic accident;

F) From what has been established until now, everything indicates that the McCanns, by virtue of self preservation, don't want to deliver immediately and voluntarily the cadaver, even though there is a strong possibility that the same was transported from the initial place of deposition. This situation consequently raises questions about the circumstances under which the death of the minor occurred.

DT says his concern is that the book is more accessible and easier to read.
On hearing the two extracts in the public domain all this witness (a psychologist at that) is concerned about is that the book being easier to read.  WHAT!!
Another one promoting the book - as being easier to access and read. Where has he been for the past decades?  
Does he not know internet has taken over the old fashion method of access to info?  
Does he think the twins are going to be kept away from PC forever?
Hello, how difficult can it be to read translated files in English from online?
Besides, it's a la mode for children/teenagers to access info from internet -- google and youtube -- and literally everything you want to know is online.  

Boy, the witnesses are all so ill prepared ....
Wait till the Defence Lawyers sink their teeth in properly.....
No use waiting: the witnesses have been dismissed.

The cross examination of them seen so far is the only one that's going to happen (this time)

When the criminal case is heard in the UK (after Team AR-SY hits the deck) probably the T-7 will be quite happy to fess up in their stead


That round may be finished, over, but the circus is not over.....

They's going to wheel out some coached tiger, cheetah, panther in the form of grandma Healy, Cousin, Madeleine's Godpa etc..all waiting their turn in line to be led to jump through hoops over fire.


aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 318
Join date : 2009-11-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by PeterMac on 17.09.13 8:19

ID – Did the Polícia Judiciária (PJ) go on investigating after the case was filed?
DE says yes.
So the McCanns were totally wrong to pretend that they needed money into the Fund because no police force was doing anything. They in fact lied to obtain money.  Is that correct Mr Edgar ?

GP – How did you manage to conduct an investigation without analysing all the process?  Whom did you contact in Portugal?
DE says he contacted an informant who passed information to both the UK and Portuguese authorities. He doesn't want to say to whom he spoke, but says he spoke to someone from the PJ.
Ah, yes. The Mystery “informant”  Always a good stand-by when you have no evidence.

GP – Was there private investigators before you?
DE says yes but adds he was the first professional one.
Which rather stuffs the Directors’ of the Fund’s insistence that they did “due diligence”. And the Lawyers and the Auditors.   Nice answer though.

VC – The investigation Report was spread in the media, translated into English and put on the internet. Does this worry you?
DT says that anything, any information that undermines the trust of the children worries him.
Such as the admission by the parents that they abandoned the children every night of the holiday. "Why didn't you come when Sean and me cried last night "

VC – Are you worried by the transcripts that are on the internet?
DT says he doesn't know what they are about and can't answer.

VC – What if the facts are similar to what the investigation Report states?
DT says the book is a clear statement that presents a unique conclusion.
Which surely is good, in that it can be specifically refuted by analysis of the known facts - or not, as the case may be.

GP – Shouldn't we expect that sooner or later the twins will read what's on the internet?
DT says "possibly".
On which planet do you live, Sir?

Defence Lawyer: Do you know if the book hampered the investigation?
Hubbard: I can't answer that.
Excellent answer. Do you know what day it is.  Who is the Prime Minister ?   Sit up, Dear.  it’s time for your tablets.

VC - What is the difference between the crime files and the book?
EL - says the book is easier to read.
This is the book in English on sale in bookshops throughout the UK ?   The one Carter-Ruck have so obviously failed to keep under wraps. Did Carter-Ruck know it was on sale ?

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by plebgate on 17.09.13 8:28

Somebody posted earlier that they would be surprised if any further witnesses would appear in person. I would be also, as surely their lawyer would not want any more witnesses talking nonsense like that.

Snipped from PeterM's post above

"
Defence Lawyer: Do you know if the book hampered the investigation?
Hubbard: I can't answer that.
Excellent answer. Do you know what day it is. Who is the Prime Minister ? Sit up, Dear. it’s time for your tablets"





plebgate

Posts : 5444
Reputation : 1157
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by PeterMac on 17.09.13 8:29

@aiyoyo wrote:
They's going to wheel out some coached tiger, cheetah, panther in the form of grandma Healy, Cousin, Madeleine's Godpa etc..all waiting their turn in line to be led to jump through hoops over fire.
I think you may mean INTO fire.

It is going to be fascinating to see who GA calls.
Paiva ?
Tavares de Almeida  - author of the interim report -    Quick reminder
Conclusions:
From everything that we have discovered, our files result in the following conclusions:
A. the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007
B. a simulation - a staged hoax - of an abduction took place
C. in order to render the child’s death impossible before 10.00pm, a situation of checking of the McCann couple’s children while they slept was concocted
D. Dr Gerald McCann and Dr Kate McCann are involved in the concealment of the corpse of their daughter, Madeleine McCann
E. at this moment, there seems to be no strong indications that the child’s death was other than the result of a tragic accident, yet;
From what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, did not want to deliver up Madeleine’s corpse immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility therefore that it was moved from the initial place where she died. This situation may raise questions concerning the circumstances in which the death of the child took place.
The Republic's Prosecutor -  José de Magalhaes e Menezes
and
The Joint General Prosecutor - Joao Melchior Gomes
authors of the archiving report.   Quick Reminder
viii - Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow a reasonable man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction) nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
It will be a joy to watch.   Sadly !

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by PeterMac on 17.09.13 8:42

@plebgate wrote:Somebody posted earlier that they would be surprised if any further witnesses would appear in person.   I would be also, as surely their lawyer would not want any more witnesses talking nonsense like that.
I sometimes wonder if ID realises that the witnesses are talking nonsense, and have virtually destroyed their case even before GA's lawyers have started, with their unique combination of spectacular irrelevance - speaking about things BEFORE the publication of the book - their frank admissions that they either knew nothing, or had only spoken to the twins once, 5 years ago - and their cutting, or hacking into the McCanns' case for continuing to plead for further funds on the grounds that no police force was doing anything, when in fact that was simply not true.
Add to that the risible and very simple untruth about the book being on sale in a bookshop in England from a person who made a documentary in which she deliberately altered several material facts ( details from the Smith sighting in particular) to make it look better - and the simple fact that the film WILL be traumatic for the children as they begin to realise how they had been abandoned in an unlocked apartment out of sight of the parents for several nights in a row - - -
And one begins to wonder about ID's strategy. Or professional competence. Or sanity.

Why on earth did the McCanns employ her ?
Why when she has lost all their previous cases do they continue to employ her ?

Or is she the only one who would do it ? In the sense that one of the roles of a Solicitor is to negotiate, mediate and reach accord, rather than blunder into a court room.
Did they approach other lawyers, only to be told that they had no case ?

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 143
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Angelique on 17.09.13 9:00

Adding further to my previous comment that it seems the problem is that the twins may read what is, at the moment, the Truth. It is a very fine point that TM are trying prove, that the twins will be traumatised in reading the Book because it's this Book that they will mostly understand and have easy access to. This is the point. The fact that at this time, this is the Truth as the case stands. It may change in the future, but who can say. Can you bring a case to Court because things may change in the future? Would this mean nothing would be allowed to be printed if this was the rule of law in case of defamation.

DE says that he was only given extracts from the Files, why would he not see all that was available. How could he proceed with limited information. Why would he not be given all information?

____________________
Things aren't always what they seem

Angelique

Posts : 1396
Reputation : 35
Join date : 2010-10-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by tiny on 17.09.13 9:05

@Angelique wrote:Adding further to my previous comment that it seems the problem is that the twins may read what is, at the moment, the Truth. It is a very fine point that TM are trying prove, that the twins will be traumatised in reading the Book because it's this Book that they will mostly understand and have easy access to. This is the point. The fact that at this time, this is the Truth as the case stands. It may change in the future, but who can say. Can you bring a case to Court because things may change in the future? Would this mean nothing would be allowed to be printed if this was the rule of law in case of defamation.

DE says that he was only given extracts from the Files, why would he not see all that was available. How could he proceed with limited information. Why would he not be given all information?
surely edgar would have read the whole files,whats the point of only reading what the McCann give you to read,mind boggling

tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2010-02-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by sweetex on 17.09.13 9:12

The first word that comes to mind when reading the files from the witnesses is "UNPREPARED"

Not sure what type of questions they were expecting, or what their impression was before they went into the court, but its very clear they had no idea what type of questions were coming their side.

This is so NOT what I expected. McCanns always getting away somehow with everything, this must be really hard for them to accept. The fact that the witnesses totally FAILED them.

It just shows you they have absolutely NO leg to stand on. Nothing. Zero. Zilch.

Talk about scraping the barrel.

spin

____________________
"Today, the only person prosecuted in the case of the disappearance of little Madeleine McCann is the officer who conducted the investigation. "

sweetex

Posts : 281
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-04-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by russiandoll on 17.09.13 9:16

There has been a post by Ms Guedes on Justice Forum that the suspension on Friday was allegedly to do with unauthorised mobile phone use by a Portuguese journalist, Ms G expressed surprise because there were many mobiles on view in the courtroom.  Maybe trying to use a phone as a camera, who knows?

 It would not surprise me to find that the judge had told a certain lawyer to get organised for her clients, because if the standard of witness evidence was going to follow what she had so far heard, she would dismiss the case as it was a waste of court time.
 
 As people have stated here, the witnesses for the plaintiffs are helping the respondent. What is the point of much counter-argument and cross-examination?

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 17.09.13 9:24

This court case must be a diplomatic nightmare for both governments. Hypothetically:

1. What if Mrs Hubbard, Dave Edgar & Emma Loach were employed by the government/secret services to "manage" the McCanns? Kate needed someone to stop her unravelling, a detective was needed to search for Madeleine without actually looking and the documentary was needed to manage their reputations. If the McCanns win, it would be a disaster for Anglo-Portuguese relations as the UK press would go back to their sardine-munching xenophobia so these three are sent in as witnesses to subtly undermine the case while appearing to support it. 


2. From the Portuguese perspective, they know Gordon Brown was hugely supportive of the McCanns and Portugal doesn't want to upset the UK. A "friend" has a quiet word with the judge suggesting a verdict supporting the McCanns would be the best outcome. Unfortunately, the McCanns insist on an open court and, well, we know what happened. From the evidence so far, the judge cannot possibly rule in their favour so she suspends the trial, goes back to her "friend" and says, "Now what?"

This is just me brainstorming but, as nothing about the Madeleine case has ever been what it seems, why should this trial be straightforward?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by russiandoll on 17.09.13 9:31

latest from Chelsea Hoffman, 17. 9.2013.



Will an unpleasant truth come out in the search for Madeleine McCann? It seems that this is something that her parents may fear, judging by their reaction to a book containing claims made by Goncalo Amaral. Amaral famously led the original investigation into Maddie's mysterious disappearance the better half of a decade ago. They are reportedly doing their best to "shield their twins" from the things that are said within this book. Could that be because they don't want the children to be subject to what might be the truth? Certainly these two children have been groomed throughout the years to believe their parents' shaky version of the events that took place.
The truth of what happened to Maddie may never be known, but the evidence as it's known only indicates guilt when it comes to the child's parents. The mother has refused to answer questions since the night the girl vanished, and both of the parents have refused polygraph tests. Cadaver dogs have long incriminated this family as well. Nonetheless, the UK has protected them since they pretty much fled Portugal as suspects in the disappearance of their own little girl.
Hopefully SY investigators in Portugal uncover the actual truth in this case -- and hopefully they have the honesty and common decency to do the right thing when that time comes instead of the thing that saves face after flubbing up this case for so many years.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Woburn_exile on 17.09.13 9:39

ID – What are the preoccupations concerning this family in particular?
DT says it's difficult to answer. The twins have done very well so far because their parents managed
to protect them. He worries about the future however, when the twins become independent. Some impact is unavoidable. It is difficult to predict which one it will be. He thinks the book leaves a feeling that the world isn't secure and that the parents are somehow dangerous. If they find that the book damaged the search for Madeleine, they'll be angry or depressed.

When they find out that the very first release about the shutters being jemmied open is an irrefutable lie, proven by forensic even the most controlled or brainwashed teenager is going to be angry at their parents. Why not just spill the beans now Kate McCann, at least go down with your children behind you or are you planning to sedate them with ADHD drugs when they hit their teens to prolong the agony?
shark shark shark shark shark shark shark shark 

Mom, I love you really but what do you see when you think of madeleine?

Woburn_exile

Posts : 239
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-05-30
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by russiandoll on 17.09.13 9:56

The book, " madeleine " the " account of the truth", which was written with the twins in mind, is in their native English and available in bookshops, libraries and online, much more accessible in fact, and so more likely to be read first and colour their opinions before they read GA's book....... that book is not going to damage them in the long term?

 I would never take a risk with any of my children  [ but did, repeatedly, and let's be clear, this was neither an error of judgment nor a mistake ]
 We were looking [as well as listening during checks]
 [Their father is on record telling MO that until Thurday 3rd he had not popped his head in the children's bedroom.]
 Their mother is on the same video demonstrating clearly that she closed the door over without looking inside the room at the children, only after the slam was the door reopened for her to try to distinguish Maddie from  blankets  [ how she thought a smooth bed held the shape of her child God alone knows, it is the files not GAs book which will confuse the twins....the bed was neat with the top corner turned back]

 If the door[ which strangely only slammed after she took hold of the handle.at that second the wind got up enough to cause a slam] had not slammed shut, it can be reasonably presumed that Kate would have left as she had put in place the first step to exiting 5a, closing the door over the way they did before leaving for the tapas meal].

 So if I were Tricky I would be bothered more by the other book, their brains will be addled after reading it and the files.

 Both factual, allegedly. Yet they conflict. The twins will need to use their logic and reason to decide which is more credible and reliable, because there is only one TRUTH.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by sweetex on 17.09.13 10:07

We are used to close friends and even acquaintances of McCanns to lie with them/for them. Or rather their loyalty is with the McCanns.

It’s a different story when you are under oath in a court. None of these witnesses were prepared to lie for them? Instead they preferred to speak what they know. Protecting their own reputation in the end is more important.
All questions that required some kind of evidence were answered with their own truth, or not answered at all… such as:

To only name a few:

Defence Lawyer: Do you know if the book hampered the investigation?

Hubbard: I can’t answer that (Which is probably the truth? She doesn’t know for sure, can’t provide evidence?”)


MC: Did they feel ashamed, anxious?

SH doesn’t answer


SO – Did they feel indicted by the book?
SH apparently doesn't understand.



ID – What are the preoccupations concerning this family in particular?
DT says it's difficult to answer.


Chances are good they were the only people that were prepared to assist McCanns. That’s why the T7 or other close friends and family are not there.

____________________
"Today, the only person prosecuted in the case of the disappearance of little Madeleine McCann is the officer who conducted the investigation. "

sweetex

Posts : 281
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-04-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by jeanmonroe on 17.09.13 10:11

TRICKSY
"If they find that the book damaged the search for Madeleine, they'll be angry or depressed."
________________________________________________

WHEN they find that their own mother diliberately jeopardised the investigation set up to find out what happened to their elder sister Madeleine, they'll be angry and angrier!

VC - What is the difference between the crime files and the book?
ME, MYSELF & I - says the crime files cost the generous 'donators' £100,000 to 'translate', according to KM, although there is absolutely no evidence of this having been done,,..................and GA's book  costs a few pounds.

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5132
Reputation : 885
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by sar on 17.09.13 10:15

Poe wrote:This court case must be a diplomatic nightmare for both governments. Hypothetically:

1. What if Mrs Hubbard, Dave Edgar & Emma Loach were employed by the government/secret services to "manage" the McCanns? Kate needed someone to stop her unravelling, a detective was needed to search for Madeleine without actually looking and the documentary was needed to manage their reputations. If the McCanns win, it would be a disaster for Anglo-Portuguese relations as the UK press would go back to their sardine-munching xenophobia so these three are sent in as witnesses to subtly undermine the case while appearing to support it. 


2. From the Portuguese perspective, they know Gordon Brown was hugely supportive of the McCanns and Portugal doesn't want to upset the UK. A "friend" has a quiet word with the judge suggesting a verdict supporting the McCanns would be the best outcome. Unfortunately, the McCanns insist on an open court and, well, we know what happened. From the evidence so far, the judge cannot possibly rule in their favour so she suspends the trial, goes back to her "friend" and says, "Now what?"

This is just me brainstorming but, as nothing about the Madeleine case has ever been what it seems, why should this trial be straightforward?
Hi Poe,

Interesting post, sometimes the first thing that comes into your head is right, it's easy to over intellectualise.  There is def something awry.  The adjournment didn't just happen for no reason.  "Personal Reasons" is pretty unlikely after so many delays and the glare of the (alternative) media.

sar

Posts : 460
Reputation : 139
Join date : 2013-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Woburn_exile on 17.09.13 10:29

1. What if Mrs Hubbard, Dave Edgar & Emma Loach were employed by the government/secret services to "manage" the McCanns? Kate needed someone to stop her unravelling, a detective was needed to search for Madeleine without actually looking and the documentary was needed to manage their reputations. If the McCanns win, it would be a disaster for Anglo-Portuguese relations as the UK press would go back to their sardine-munching xenophobia so these three are sent in as witnesses to subtly undermine the case while appearing to support it.

The government would employ someone like CM to handle the McCann management. Think about it, if they had not pursued this libel action then the McCann affair would be dead in the water. They have heaped this on themselves and deserve to be ridiculed at their own expense, not that of the taxpayer.shark shark shark shark shark

Woburn_exile

Posts : 239
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-05-30
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by jeanmonroe on 17.09.13 10:37

The sychophantic McCann supporters must have woken up this morning an felt like having been "slapped around the face with a wet fish"!
All the BS they have been telling the world that the McCanns were employing the very BEST of the BEST, the ELITIST of the ELITE, PI 'firms' when they now discover, to their shame, that their idol;s were, in fact, employing con men and a now convicted fraudster with THEIR 'donations' and amateurs to boot!

If this 'revelation' by the only 'professional' person that was employed by their 'idols' dosen't stop 'donations' in their tracks then, imo, the supporters are even more simple than i thought.

Will the McCanns be suing Edgar anytime soon for jeopardising the search by way of donations 'drying up' due to his statement, and them not being able to afford another elite team of big boys to continue their 'search'

jeanmonroe

Posts : 5132
Reputation : 885
Join date : 2013-02-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by susible on 17.09.13 10:41

@Woburn_exile wrote:ID – What are the preoccupations concerning this family in particular?
DT says it's difficult to answer. The twins have done very well so far because their parents managed
to protect them. He worries about the future however, when the twins become independent. Some impact is unavoidable. It is difficult to predict which one it will be. He thinks the book leaves a feeling that the world isn't secure and that the parents are somehow dangerous. If they find that the book damaged the search for Madeleine, they'll be angry or depressed.

When they find out that the very first release about the shutters being jemmied open is an irrefutable lie, proven by forensic even the most controlled or brainwashed teenager is going to be angry at their parents. Why not just spill the beans now Kate McCann, at least go down with your children behind you or are you planning to sedate them with ADHD drugs when they hit their teens to prolong the agony?
shark shark shark shark shark shark shark shark 

Mom, I love you really but what do you see when you think of madeleine?
Sorry to go off-topic Woburn Exile, but whilst I understand you're using the emoticons to press your point, it's actually so distracting when you use so many of them, that it's difficult to read your posts and the one that follows...

susible

Posts : 330
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-07-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 40 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 21 ... 40  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum