New " Rumour" being purported by anti Amaral brigade ???

by Greycatofoxford 29.11.13 5:14

I was looking @ Twitter, always a difficult task ! last night the McCann supporters were all agog over what they CLAIM is a breaking story. The gist is that GA is now in trouble as Sargento and remaining witnesses have refused to back him up ? and secondly that new info has emerged that ensure GA will lose.
I realise that this is a form of spin and disinformation, I double checked and can find nothing to support this, so I am just asking here in case there ARE some new facts that would give GA problems.
I have found zilch, so either they have some insight ( doubtful) or it is one more idiotic ploy. any thoughts

by ultimaThule 29.11.13 5:58

Last week the ~~morons~~ pros were all agog over what they claimed was the judge giving GA 10 days to provide evidence of the income he's received from his book or somesuch, Greycat.

The transcript of last week's hearing (day 9 of the trial) showed that the judge had not made any such order against GA and, IMO, we're best advised to wait until day 10's transcript is available when it can be ascertained whether the twitterers have got their knickers in a twist again.

I was looking forward to reading Paulo Sargento's testimony and will be disappointed if he's no longer on the witness list, but until we see that transcript there's little to be gained from speculating as to why he, and/or others, haven't appeared - for all we know, he may have been rescheduled to take the stand when the trial resumes early next year.

by Smokeandmirrors 29.11.13 7:48

A bit of a guess really, but what if Sargento has been removed from the civil hearing because he is now involved with the criminal investigation re-opened by PJ in conjunction with SY. I would have thought it might amount to a conflict of interests.

by Guest 29.11.13 9:46

Interesting thought ...

by aiyoyo 29.11.13 10:14

Did the rabid pros say anything about why Marinho Pinto back out?
Did they say the Mccanns are in trouble because he withdrew his support? Thought NOT.

by Greycatofoxford 29.11.13 10:24

No they didn't, but one will never get any sense from most of them, they were just saying " oh GA is in trouble now, witnesses are pulling out on him" I can find nothing, so it is obviously their usual drivel

by Cristobell 29.11.13 11:12

The trolls on twitter are clueless, they make things up to support the McCanns. Its obvious where their nonsense comes from, I read yesterday that the McCanns are VERY pleased with the way the trial in Portugual is going, another prime example of their public persona being completely at odds with what is going on behind the scenes.

by aiyoyo 29.11.13 11:53

Greycatofoxford wrote:No they didn't, but one will never get any sense from most of them, they were just saying " oh GA is in trouble now, witnesses are pulling out on him" I can find nothing, so it is obviously their usual drivel

The witnesses list has gone tits up for both sides so who's to know the reasons behind?

We certainly know why Grandma Healy was dropped by ID and upheld by the Judge, and pussy footed PInto was in two minds from the outset.
Their witnesses performance was a farcical to say the least.
Would have been entertaining to watch Pinto in the finale of Mccanns circles troupe had he not chickened out.
I was actually disappointed. He would have put his foot in good and proper and helped the Pair nail their coffins.

Who knows, they may be the finales in their circles show if the Judge grants them permission to address the Court!
Say, if Redwood is preparing the Nation ......
then let's hope the UK media give their virgin-court-address full coverage in all its full glory as naturally it is in the Public Interest to know ....as there's more to follow.....

by **PeterMac** 29.11.13 12:06

Sargento is a psychologist and Journalist ?no?
Perhaps the judge has had enough of people who were not there, played no part in the investigation, and know nothing of the actual facts of the case nor of the progress of the enquiry
and has decided they cannot "assist' the court any further.
The question is whether the book Libelled the McCanns. Not how they felt about it.
Just a thought, you know.

by Guest 29.11.13 12:07

PeterMac wrote:Sargento is a psychologist and Journalist ?no?
Perhaps the judge has had enough of people who were not there, played no part in the investigation, and know nothing of the actual facts of the case nor of the progress of the enquiry
and has decided they cannot "assist' the court any further.
The question is whether the book Libelled the McCanns. Not how they felt about it.
Just a thought, you know.

by Guest 29.11.13 13:02

PeterMac wrote:Sargento is a psychologist and Journalist ?no?
Perhaps the judge has had enough of people who were not there, played no part in the investigation, and know nothing of the actual facts of the case nor of the progress of the enquiry
and has decided they cannot "assist' the court any further.
The question is whether the book Libelled the McCanns. Not how they felt about it.
Just a thought, you know.

***
Tongue in cheek JATYK2?

by aiyoyo 29.11.13 13:17

PeterMac wrote:Sargento is a psychologist and Journalist ?no?
Perhaps the judge has had enough of people who were not there, played no part in the investigation, and know nothing of the actual facts of the case nor of the progress of the enquiry
and has decided they cannot "assist' the court any further.
The question is whether the book Libelled the McCanns. Not how they felt about it.
Just a thought, you know.

You made a good valid point.
That said, to be fair, the reason for his non-appearance is not known.
Possibly it could well be that unfolding developments came to the stage where it was deemed by team Amaral (or by the Judge) another witness statement wont make a difference, hence wasn't needed.

by **PeterMac** 29.11.13 13:45

aiyoyo wrote:
You made a good valid point.
That said, to be fair, the reason for his non-appearance is not known.
Possibly it could well be that unfolding developments came to the stage where it was deemed by team Amaral (or by the Judge) another witness statement wont make a difference, hence wasn't needed.

I as lined up to give evidence at a trial in Malaga, but after the judge had heard the first three he asked Counsel if the others - including me - were simply going to say the same thing.
Counsel confirmed that we were, and the judge declined to hear any more, and moved on.
And remember that this is Portugal, not England. It is a system based on Roman law and is judge driven and Inquisitorial, not Accusatorial.

by Mirage 29.11.13 14:03

PeterMac wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
You made a good valid point.
That said, to be fair, the reason for his non-appearance is not known.
Possibly it could well be that unfolding developments came to the stage where it was deemed by team Amaral (or by the Judge) another witness statement wont make a difference, hence wasn't needed.
I as lined up to give evidence at a trial in Malaga, but after the judge had heard the first three he asked Counsel if the others - including me - were simply going to say the same thing.
Counsel confirmed that we were, and the judge declined to hear any more, and moved on.
And remember that this is Portugal, not England. It is a system based on Roman law and is judge driven and Inquisitorial, not Accusatorial.

Hence Kate's gladiator sandals. big grin

by ultimaThule 29.11.13 17:03

@Mirage... and there was me thinking she wears those sandals to walk the stations of the cross and show her devout adherence to the pilgrim's path big grin

by Penfold 29.11.13 17:29

Mirage wrote:Hence Kate's gladiator sandals.

There was I about to say "send in the lions".

by Mirage 29.11.13 18:00

ultimaThule wrote: @Mirage... and there was me thinking she wears those sandals to walk the stations of the cross and show her devout adherence to the pilgrim's path

She hedges her bets. One day it's thumbs down for Constantine and the next, thumbs down for Nero. violin

Had a practice run with Roman Catholicism v Anglo-catholicism.

Whichever way, it will all end in a Via Dolorosa.

by ultimaThule 30.11.13 1:55

The via Dolorosa? Isn't that the road that leads to the closed order of St Holloway of the Penitents?

I seem to recall the monastery of St Belmarsh is also located in London and both of these estabishments provide retreats of varying lengths for all faiths, although I have heard that the spiritual direction on offer can be somewhat haphazard yes

by ultimaThule 30.11.13 2:16

I've lifted this from the ukjusticeforum: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3023.msg109072#msg109072
McCann v Gonçalo Amaral Libel Trial witness Luís Froes,
« on: November 28, 2013, 10:39:38 PM »

It started with the rest of the evidence by witness Luís Froes, about contracts and numbers. Then we saw the documentary, followed by a short break.

After the break we saw a segment from a Portuguese talk show dated May 27, 2009.
It featured Gonçalo Amaral, Paulo Sargento and Duarte Levy (by phone).
Both videos were appended to the case by the plaintiffs.

The judge set the next court session for January 7, as it was not possible to find a date that would fit all six parties before the Christmas holidays.

The decision concerning the intervention of Kate and/or Gerry and/or Gonçalo will be made by the judge before the 7th of January (well before that date, she said, for obvious logistical reasons on the UK side, if granted) and the lawyers will be informed directly.

On the 7th, we will hear the parties' statements - if granted - and closing arguments. The judge does not foresee that this is not possible to be done in just one day. Hopefully the 7th of January will be the last trial session

From the above, it appears there's no cause for TM and their ~~rabid~~ avid fans to crack open the bubbly and when Anne Gueddes's transcript is posted we may discover why any remaining witnesses for the defence won't be called.

Given that the judge has allowed this trial to proceed in a somewhat leisurely fashion I have little confidence that 7 January will be the last day, particularly if she grants the McCanns' application to appear as witnesses - although it's encouraging that her intention would seem to be for both of them to appear on the same day.

by **tigger** 30.11.13 5:31

Irrc the video mentioned might be one where Dr. Sargento is also present. I have seen GA in several videos and in all cases he has been moderate in his statements.

In one instance he reminded the interviewer that this concerns a mother who has lost her child.