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 40 of 40 Previous  1 ... 21 ... 38, 39, 40

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by J4MM on 27.11.13 23:02

@ultimaThule wrote:
@J4MM wrote:My ex lies when he opens his mouth. sad
huh  Is he related to the McCanns?
I'd say he was more likely to be related to the McCan'ts. winkwink

J4MM

Posts : 59
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2013-10-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 27.11.13 23:04

@J4MM wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:
@J4MM wrote:My ex lies when he opens his mouth. sad
huh  Is he related to the McCanns?
I'd say he was more likely to be related to the McCan'ts. winkwink
***
spit coffee 

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by aquila on 27.11.13 23:48

@ultimaThule wrote:
@aquila wrote:@ ultimaThule

Please forgive this little digression but you mentioned today that the judge in the current libel trial is the same judge that banned GA's book. It isn't.
In which case I must apologise for implying or stating that the current judge is one and the same who saw fit to ban the sale of Dr Amaral book and order that all copies should be given to the plaintiffs.  

Do you happen to have the name of the judge who made that order, aquila?
Amelia Puna Loupo

aquila

Posts : 7953
Reputation : 1174
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by lj on 28.11.13 6:19

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Off topic - so please excuse me! - but there was a lot of talk in the 1970s that pyramids had healing qualities and if you put fruit inside one, it wouldn't go bad.
 
My ex who was as mad as the March hare proceeded to build a giant pyramid in the back garden! 
 
Thankfully both he and it are long gone.
It's bad NFWTD, but I had to laugh so hard!!

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3275
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by lj on 28.11.13 6:37

@Tony Bennett wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Off topic - so please excuse me! - but there was a lot of talk in the 1970s that pyramids had healing qualities and if you put fruit inside one, it wouldn't go bad.
 
My ex who was as mad as the March hare proceeded to build a giant pyramid in the back garden! 
I have a confession to make - indeed NFWTD I wonder if we read the same book, was it 'Mysterious Britain'? or something like that. I would have read it early 1970s.

Anyway, there was a chapter that said that if you preserved a razor blade at a certain angle - 30 degrees or so IIRC - it would always remain sharp. Due to the pranic forces, the ley lines of energy, something like that.  It might have been about pyramids as well.

So convincing was that book (I believed a lot of strange things in those days, and no doubt some will say I still do) that I gave it a try.

It didn't work.

I often wondered if I'd got the angle slightly wrong - or may be it should have faced east instead of north
I have to say that it is with a lot of nostalgia that I think back of (to??) those years of the 60 ties and seventies. The naivety we all, ok maybe just a few, demonstrated believing we could make it a better world, starting with razor blades. Unwarranted optimism that the youngsters nowadays miss.

OK grammy goes back to knitting ..........

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3275
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by tigger on 28.11.13 6:47

@lj wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Off topic - so please excuse me! - but there was a lot of talk in the 1970s that pyramids had healing qualities and if you put fruit inside one, it wouldn't go bad.
 
My ex who was as mad as the March hare proceeded to build a giant pyramid in the back garden! 
 
Thankfully both he and it are long gone.
It's NFWTD, but I had to laugh so hard!!
Sorry to derail this further but that is such a striking example of a conviction held against all evidence to the contrary.  I.e. mummies. That a pyramid outlives many other buildings is simply because it's not in the nature of a pyramid to fall down.  

As for convictions held by the plaintiffs in this libel case, it seems to me that these are undergoing changes to escape  having to face  overwhelming evidence disproving their complaint.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8112
Reputation : 24
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 28.11.13 9:18

@ultimaThule wrote:
@diatribe wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:


As I understand it, should their application to appear as witnesses to their plaint be granted, any questions put to them by the defence must be directed to the judge who will determine whether they are pertinent to the matter in hand before putting them to the McCanns who are unlikely, therefore, to undergo any rigorous cross-examination of the type they may expect should they take the stand in a criminal court of law.
Do you mean giving evidence on the same sort of basis as the Levenson enquiry? As previously stated, I know little about libel law and by default the rules of evidence etc.

I however do tend to remember Jonathan Aitken having to withdraw his libel suit after intense cross examination by the late George Carmen QC and subsequently being sentenced to 18 months imp. for attempting to pervert the course of justice. Surely a judge cannot restrict a particular counsel to what questions can or cannot be put to a witness, with the proviso that they are relevant to the case, or maybe portugese law works differently.
Jonathan Aitken! That was a good one!  big grin  As was the case of a certain Jeffrey Archer who, unaccountably, continues to wear ermine despite having been a guest of Her Maj at one of her public establishments for the detention of offenders.

It appears that in this particuar libel trial, should the McCanns appear as witnesses all questions from the defence will be put to the judge who will decide whether to put all/any of them to the plaintiffs, and vice versa should Dr Amaral be allowed to take the stand.  

There was some talk of the McCanns applying to give their testimony in writing, presumably in their absence, but from what little I have gleaned of Portuguese libel law it would appear this won't be allowed unless there are particulary pressing extenuating circumstances.  However, any decision rests with the judge and what she says goes - until such time as it's appealed.

From reading the transcripts to date, it appears the judge is intent on restricting questions to the matter before her and, as she is the arbiter of what either side is allowed to ask, it's unlikely any questions of the type we'd like answered will slip through her net, albeit I'm happy to report that the McCanns' witnesses have scored more than a few own goals and the defence continue to get the ball past the plaintiff's goalkeeper.    Poor Izzy.  I wonder if she had any idea what she was letting herself in for winkwink
'Course she did: free publicity and $$$$

Good morning!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by jozi on 28.11.13 12:29

Does anybody know what went off yesterday in the Libel trial, been waiting all day for some feed back but cannot find anything at all ?

jozi

Posts : 710
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2012-05-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 28.11.13 12:32

@PeterMac wrote:on the McCanngate facebook
David Steel
Day 10 over in Lisbon. Next date Jan 7th. No news whether McCann or Amaral will take stand. Thanks to @JillyCL
There wasn't much to report Jozi.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by lj on 28.11.13 12:43

@ultimaThule wrote:
@diatribe wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:


As I understand it, should their application to appear as witnesses to their plaint be granted, any questions put to them by the defence must be directed to the judge who will determine whether they are pertinent to the matter in hand before putting them to the McCanns who are unlikely, therefore, to undergo any rigorous cross-examination of the type they may expect should they take the stand in a criminal court of law.
Do you mean giving evidence on the same sort of basis as the Levenson enquiry? As previously stated, I know little about libel law and by default the rules of evidence etc.

I however do tend to remember Jonathan Aitken having to withdraw his libel suit after intense cross examination by the late George Carmen QC and subsequently being sentenced to 18 months imp. for attempting to pervert the course of justice. Surely a judge cannot restrict a particular counsel to what questions can or cannot be put to a witness, with the proviso that they are relevant to the case, or maybe portugese law works differently.
Jonathan Aitken! That was a good one!  big grin  As was the case of a certain Jeffrey Archer who, unaccountably, continues to wear ermine despite having been a guest of Her Maj at one of her public establishments for the detention of offenders.

It appears that in this particuar libel trial, should the McCanns appear as witnesses all questions from the defence will be put to the judge who will decide whether to put all/any of them to the plaintiffs, and vice versa should Dr Amaral be allowed to take the stand.  

There was some talk of the McCanns applying to give their testimony in writing, presumably in their absence, but from what little I have gleaned of Portuguese libel law it would appear this won't be allowed unless there are particulary pressing extenuating circumstances.  However, any decision rests with the judge and what she says goes - until such time as it's appealed.

From reading the transcripts to date, it appears the judge is intent on restricting questions to the matter before her and, as she is the arbiter of what either side is allowed to ask, it's unlikely any questions of the type we'd like answered will slip through her net, albeit I'm happy to report that the McCanns' witnesses have scored more than a few own goals and the defence continue to get the ball past the plaintiff's goalkeeper.    Poor Izzy.  I wonder if she had any idea what she was letting herself in for winkwink

If she did not, she still gets everything what she deserves. If we could figure it out, she should have been able to do that, with direct access to the McCanns. Nah, she was just as the rest: free publicity. Imagine how much money for advertising she has saved with all the face time she got.

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3275
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by jozi on 28.11.13 12:46

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:on the McCanngate facebook
David Steel
Day 10 over in Lisbon. Next date Jan 7th. No news whether McCann or Amaral will take stand. Thanks to @JillyCL
There wasn't much to report Jozi.
Thanks, NFWTD .

jozi

Posts : 710
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2012-05-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by lj on 28.11.13 12:46

@Portia wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:
@diatribe wrote:
@ultimaThule wrote:


As I understand it, should their application to appear as witnesses to their plaint be granted, any questions put to them by the defence must be directed to the judge who will determine whether they are pertinent to the matter in hand before putting them to the McCanns who are unlikely, therefore, to undergo any rigorous cross-examination of the type they may expect should they take the stand in a criminal court of law.
Do you mean giving evidence on the same sort of basis as the Levenson enquiry? As previously stated, I know little about libel law and by default the rules of evidence etc.

I however do tend to remember Jonathan Aitken having to withdraw his libel suit after intense cross examination by the late George Carmen QC and subsequently being sentenced to 18 months imp. for attempting to pervert the course of justice. Surely a judge cannot restrict a particular counsel to what questions can or cannot be put to a witness, with the proviso that they are relevant to the case, or maybe portugese law works differently.
Jonathan Aitken! That was a good one!  big grin  As was the case of a certain Jeffrey Archer who, unaccountably, continues to wear ermine despite having been a guest of Her Maj at one of her public establishments for the detention of offenders.

It appears that in this particuar libel trial, should the McCanns appear as witnesses all questions from the defence will be put to the judge who will decide whether to put all/any of them to the plaintiffs, and vice versa should Dr Amaral be allowed to take the stand.  

There was some talk of the McCanns applying to give their testimony in writing, presumably in their absence, but from what little I have gleaned of Portuguese libel law it would appear this won't be allowed unless there are particulary pressing extenuating circumstances.  However, any decision rests with the judge and what she says goes - until such time as it's appealed.

From reading the transcripts to date, it appears the judge is intent on restricting questions to the matter before her and, as she is the arbiter of what either side is allowed to ask, it's unlikely any questions of the type we'd like answered will slip through her net, albeit I'm happy to report that the McCanns' witnesses have scored more than a few own goals and the defence continue to get the ball past the plaintiff's goalkeeper.    Poor Izzy.  I wonder if she had any idea what she was letting herself in for winkwink
'Course she did: free publicity and $$$$

Good morning!
Good Morning, Portia. I see we have the same mindframe.

____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?"  Gerry

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/?m=0

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

lj

Posts : 3275
Reputation : 148
Join date : 2009-12-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by PeterMac on 28.11.13 13:12

[quote="lj"]
@Tony Bennett wrote:
Anyway, there was a chapter that said that if you preserved a razor blade at a certain angle - 30 degrees or so IIRC - it would always remain sharp. Due to the pranic forces, the ley lines of energy, something like that.  It might have been about pyramids as well.
So convincing was that book (I believed a lot of strange things in those days, and no doubt some will say I still do) that I gave it a try.
It didn't work.
It is called the Scientific method. Try it and see if it works.
If it does the theory stands, and is ready to be tested again in a different way.
If it doesn't, it falls.

____________________


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 comperedna on 28.11.13 14:54

The next session will be on January 7th. Nothing much happened on Nov 27th, and they knock off over Christmas.

comperedna

Posts : 695
Reputation : 47
Join date : 2012-10-29

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by canada12 on 28.11.13 15:35

One could be forgiven for thinking a certain amount of stalling and delaying was taking place with this trial, perhaps waiting for further "developments" in the overall case. On the other hand, apparently this stopping and starting over a period of time is quite common with trials of this sort in Portugal.

I await January.

canada12

Posts : 1457
Reputation : 185
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by ultimaThule on 28.11.13 19:09

@canada12 wrote:One could be forgiven for thinking a certain amount of stalling and delaying was taking place with this trial, perhaps waiting for further "developments" in the overall case. On the other hand, apparently this stopping and starting over a period of time is quite common with trials of this sort in Portugal.

I await January.
As I understand it, it's also commonplace for criminal proceedings to be much delayed with some defendants languishing in jail for c2-3 years before their cases come to trial in Portugal

Given the complexity of the McCann case, I suspect the length of time which expires between arrest and trial will set a new record and maybe it would take as much as 4-5 years before those apprehended appear in court.  big grin

-------

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/viewtopic.forum?t=8818

ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 40 of 40 Previous  1 ... 21 ... 38, 39, 40

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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