Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

by tasprin 08.10.13 20:56

Tony Bennett wrote:
ultimaThule wrote:http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CFEQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itv.com%2Fnews%2F2013-10-08%2Fkate-mccann-asks-to-give-evidence-in-court-during-in-libel-trial%2F&ei=815UUuiKD6a60QWt9YD4Cw&usg=AFQjCNHIfg6MXsd0c9KXYKjwvZ8vpPnQlA&bvm=bv.53537100,d.d2k&cad=rja
From the above link:

"Kate McCann has said she wants to defend herself in open court ..."

It says on the court record that the defendants are:

1 Goncalo Amaral
2 TVi
3 Guerra e Paz
4 Valentim de Carvalho

Yes, exactly. Kate McCann is the plaintiff not the defendant.

by Guest 08.10.13 21:15

ultimaThule wrote:
plebgate wrote:Thank you Marconi for explanation.

Waiting to hear why ID not in court today. Someone posted earlier whether she has been banned from the court because of her reported tirade last week?
That was me wondering with tongue in cheek, plebgate.

It would be ironic if ID had to unexpectedly have a day off to care for child Perhaps the reason for her absence will be revealed when Anne Guedes posts the transcripts of today's proceedings.

According to 'some' on twitter she was only away in the morning and there for afternoon session, don't know how true this is.

by plebgate 08.10.13 21:56

Yes Tony - the mail pointed out that Maddie's mother attended court the first day then left her relatives and friends to tell the court how Mr. A. had damaged the search and how awful Mrs. felt (not exact wording). They then reported that Mrs. asked the court to appear to defend herself after Mr. A's witnesses had given evidence.

by sallypelt 08.10.13 22:05

by stillsloppingout 08.10.13 22:21

sallypelt wrote:

Front page of Express as well . as nothing went well for them today , they have gone with this angle . [ note the word BEGS ]

by stillsloppingout 08.10.13 22:23

BTW on another note . Has Peter Mac or anybody else received any reply's from the BBC or ofcom as yet .?

by sallypelt 08.10.13 22:23

And this one

by sallypelt 08.10.13 22:25

A plaintiff turning defendant? SPEECHLESS!

by Truthandjustice 08.10.13 22:25

There are ways easily available for KMc to clear her name. Participate in the reconstruction asked by the PJ, answer the 48 questions and possibly take a lie detector test. This would be more convincing to me than just her words in the court.

by Guest 08.10.13 22:28

sallypelt wrote:

HATCHET JOB

by Woofer 08.10.13 22:28

Tony Bennett wrote:
ultimaThule wrote:http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CFEQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.itv.com%2Fnews%2F2013-10-08%2Fkate-mccann-asks-to-give-evidence-in-court-during-in-libel-trial%2F&ei=815UUuiKD6a60QWt9YD4Cw&usg=AFQjCNHIfg6MXsd0c9KXYKjwvZ8vpPnQlA&bvm=bv.53537100,d.d2k&cad=rja
From the above link:

"Kate McCann has said she wants to defend herself in open court ..."

It says on the court record that the defendants are:

1 Goncalo Amaral
2 TVi
3 Guerra e Paz
4 Valentim de Carvalho

Yes, well spotted. Kate McCann begs to clear her name .... oh really .... well she`s the one that brought the flippin` case.

by Shrike 08.10.13 22:34

sallypelt wrote:

And this one

As I thought, the MSM seems to be taking their opportunity without risk of being CR'ed.

Express are at it again "Essential Guide to beat the Fraudsters!

Truly hope the other one in blue has no hidden meaning.

by russiandoll 08.10.13 22:34

sallypelt wrote:

And this one

evidence against Portuguese detectives ? I thought only one was on trial

by Guest 08.10.13 22:36

sallypelt wrote:

And this one

Dear Des, I hope to meet you;

How COULD you:

Essental guide to beat the fraudsters

Oh well, until we meet at the final farewell party, where -after all the gloves have come off- I'll take off my Portia mask, and you admit to being Blacksmith

Kissy kissy!

by Guest 08.10.13 22:37

Mirror has the story too

LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE - Page 17 BWFaXJNIgAAXTuH

Last sentence reads........I think, if my eyes are good enough.........

A source said: "Kate wants the former officer to see the pain he caused"

by russiandoll 08.10.13 22:37

by Guest 08.10.13 22:39

russiandoll wrote:

GAG THE PRESS ????

by russiandoll 08.10.13 22:43

And this is the couple working in tandem with the Met, there is a close trusting relationship with SY, who allegedly asked them to avoid the court and in so doing to avoid a media circus?

unbloodybelievable

by russiandoll 08.10.13 22:44

Portia wrote:
russiandoll wrote:
GAG THE PRESS ????

WHY NOW? THEY KNEW WHAT GA'S WITNESSES WOULD SAY.....

by Guest 08.10.13 22:46

candyfloss wrote:Mirror has the story too

Last sentence reads........I think, if my eyes are good enough.........

A source said: "Kate wants the former officer to see the pain he caused"

She disemboweled him, destroyed his family, drove his wife to perdition;

Did not prevent his dog being slaughtered;

Took his money;

Tried to take his professional honor;

Lost him his job;

Wasted his state pension;

Wasted his attempts to have a life outside of the judiciary;

Can anyone on the face of planet Earth explain to me why the unnamed source would even dare to mouth the vomit: "Kate wants him to see the pain he caused"

Ok guys, the vomit-mouth -Barf-Mouth- is running for office, attempting to be elected by a constituency in the UK

Good people of the UK: how COULD you

Where is my England?

by russiandoll 08.10.13 22:50

Maybe Kate will take her book with her as her aide -memoire.

by tasprin 08.10.13 22:53

stillsloppingout wrote:
sallypelt wrote:

Front page of Express as well . as nothing went well for them today , they have gone with this angle . [ note the word BEGS ]

Yes, why didn't she "beg" to be heard at the beginning? Before the trial began the McCanns said they were not going to attend the court hearing in Portugal. Isabel Duarte said they were confident of winning and were not needed there. The McCanns said Scotland Yard asked them not to set foot in Portugal because a media circus might damage their sensitive inquiries but they went anyway. Their witnesses were a big fail so last week Gerry McCann asked to be heard. Today GA's testified that the book was true to the investigation so Kate McCann has now "begged" to be heard. It is all coordinated spin to "control what comes out in the media", as their spokesman Clarence Mitchell would say.
When the case was shelved in 2008 the final report stated that the McCanns missed the opportunity to prove their innocence when they failed to take part in a reconstruction. Now they're supposedly cooperating with Scotland Yard but again refused to take part in a reconstruction - a reconstruction which had to take place in Spain because the McCanns banned it from being filmed in Portugal.

by ShuBob 08.10.13 22:57

If the SY investigation is really going the McCanns' way, will they really request now to be heard at their libel trial? I somehow think not nah

by nobodythereeither 08.10.13 23:00

Portia wrote:
sallypelt wrote:

HATCHET JOB

Christ almighty. Sorry for blaspheming.

I'm open-mouthed at what's going on at the moment.

by JackieL 08.10.13 23:04

Looking at the red top pages......WTF?????!!!!!!

Just who the Hell ARE these people? What is the stranglehold they've got over the traditional British press? Where does their power come from to have all this propaganda printed on their behalf? Since when has factual court reporting made a newspaper run the risk of libel?

For all you cowardly editors out there - from Carter Ruck's own website - excerpt about law regarding libel:

"3) Privilege

The law recognises that there are circumstances in which it is in the public interest to permit greater freedom of speech. Publication on a matter which is privileged is protected from a libel action either by absolute privilege, which is a complete bar to libel actions, or qualified privilege, which protects the statement so long as it was published without malice. In the case of qualified privilege, malice may consist in either:

awareness of or recklessness as to the untruth of the statement (as above);
a dominant improper motive in making a statement believed to be true; or
misuse on the occasion for which privilege exists.

3a Absolute privilege

Examples of situations covered by absolute privilege include:

fair, accurate and contemporaneous reports of proceedings in public before UK courts, the European Court of Justice, European Court of Human Rights and certain international tribunals;
statements made in Parliament and official reports of parliamentary proceedings (includes select committee proceedings but not statements made by MPs outside Parliament); or
statements or complaints of criminal behaviour made to the police.

This defence gives complete protection to fair, accurate and contemporaneous reports of court proceedings. It cannot be defeated by proof of malice. Generally a newspaper or magazine article is treated as being contemporaneous if it is published as soon as possible after the statements are made. This will normally be in the next available issue following the proceedings. "

OK, the court action is taking place in an EU country rather than here, but do UK editors really think they run the risk of libel for factual reporting of what's happening in the Lisbon court, during a case BROUGHT by the McCanns???

Log in for more topics