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 5 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 28.12.13 19:54

Just a thought……

The libel trial was in the making for four years (launched in 2009). Judging by the rubishness of their side of the representation, and the change in stance from them not originally planning on appearing, then belatedly requesting an appearance, coupled with Isabel Duarte's non-appearance on one of the days, it occurs to me that the money must be very low, and full fees are probably being charged, or else they would have made a better job of it. They probably couldn't afford to fly out and pay for the time, of a psychologist or doctor to back up their story. They must be bricking it in case they lose….the costs will be astronomical. Four years, both sides lawyers fees, I reckon they'd be looking at a couple of million. Yikes.

____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Casey5 on 28.12.13 20:08

Many thanks diatribe. roses

Casey5

Posts : 321
Reputation : 18
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Mirage on 28.12.13 20:27

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:Just a thought……

The libel trial was in the making for four years (launched in 2009). Judging by the rubishness of their side of the representation, and the change in stance from them not originally planning on appearing, then belatedly requesting an appearance, coupled with Isabel Duarte's non-appearance on one of the days, it occurs to me that the money must be very low, and full fees are probably being charged, or else they would have made a better job of it. They probably couldn't afford to fly out and pay for the time, of a psychologist or doctor to back up their story. They must be bricking it in case they lose….the costs will be astronomical. Four years, both sides lawyers fees, I reckon they'd be looking at a couple of million. Yikes.

Hi Smoke and Mirrors (I can never abbreviate your name !!!)  I agree with all you've said - as usual!

Their funds were running low in 2010, which was the reason they were interviewed by Channel 4 to broadcast same. They faced a few sticky moments in that interview trying to account for where the money had gone. I seem to recall they were down to around their last 330k, (frighteningly low that, and I stand to be corrected). It is not feasible that the online store and donations button should remain down when if you consider the astronomical amount their legal representation must be racking up. I don't think for one moment it has taken weeks to set up a new payment system . In any case, Paypal or any other card transaction company would offer assistance to a profitable concern in order to get the show back on the road asap because they themselves, are losing transaction money all the time the website is in limbo. So I don't believe this is the reason at all,  IMO, the McCanns need a regular money supply more urgently than ever before. It is not in their nature to leave this in abeyance, particularly when you consider how fast they got the money-making scheme off the ground to start with. As the American lady said: I don't buy it.

____________________
Kate McCann: "It's too 'ot. Give 'im a minute."

Mirage

Posts : 1664
Reputation : 382
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 28.12.13 20:34

I think the update of payment method is a fib too. Of course the McCanns could have ordered someone to sort it, can you imagine it otherwise? I think the money worry re: the libel trial could be why Mrs looks so haggard and aged. She looked marvellous when the cash was flowing in 2007!! Glowing even.

____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by aiyoyo on 28.12.13 22:08

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:Just a thought……

The libel trial was in the making for four years (launched in 2009). Judging by the rubishness of their side of the representation, and the change in stance from them not originally planning on appearing, then belatedly requesting an appearance, coupled with Isabel Duarte's non-appearance on one of the days, it occurs to me that the money must be very low, and full fees are probably being charged, or else they would have made a better job of it. They probably couldn't afford to fly out and pay for the time, of a psychologist or doctor to back up their story. They must be bricking it in case they lose….the costs will be astronomical. Four years, both sides lawyers fees, I reckon they'd be looking at a couple of million. Yikes.

For their depression story to be believed, the entire family listed on the writ would have had to be seen/treated by the medical specialist/s over a sustained period of time, and certified accordingly.  
The existence of such certification would suffice for Court purpose.
I dont believe they were penny wise and pound foolish when they sent a bunch of useless witnesses, family members etc, when they could have sent expert/s as in REAL psychologist or doctor if they'd been treated.

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 Smokeandmirrors on 28.12.13 22:26

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Smokeandmirrors wrote:Just a thought……

The libel trial was in the making for four years (launched in 2009). Judging by the rubishness of their side of the representation, and the change in stance from them not originally planning on appearing, then belatedly requesting an appearance, coupled with Isabel Duarte's non-appearance on one of the days, it occurs to me that the money must be very low, and full fees are probably being charged, or else they would have made a better job of it. They probably couldn't afford to fly out and pay for the time, of a psychologist or doctor to back up their story. They must be bricking it in case they lose….the costs will be astronomical. Four years, both sides lawyers fees, I reckon they'd be looking at a couple of million. Yikes.

For their depression story to be believed, the entire family listed on the writ would have had to be seen/treated by the medical specialist/s over a sustained period of time, and certified accordingly.  
The existence of such certification would suffice for Court purpose.
I dont believe they were penny wise and pound foolish when they sent a bunch of useless witnesses, family members etc, when they could have sent expert/s as in REAL psychologist or doctor if they'd been treated.

Could they force a busy psychiatrist to go or do you think a written deposition would have been sufficient?

They seem to have a problem with evidence costing the price of a stamp…….


____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by canada12 on 28.12.13 22:37

For what it's worth I think a long time ago GM and KH realized they didn't have a leg to stand on with the trial. They offered to settle out of court, which was the strategy they'd used successfully for all the newspaper lawsuits. But G. Amaral didn't go for it, and insisted on the case going ahead. I think this must have thrown their plans into a spin, and, knowing they would likely lose the case, they've invested very little money in supporting their side of the story. If they lose the court case, I suspect their plans will involve launching an appeal, which they may hope will delay having to pay out any costs.

Just my opinion.

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 aquila on 28.12.13 22:49

@canada12 wrote:For what it's worth I think a long time ago GM and KH realized they didn't have a leg to stand on with the trial. They offered to settle out of court, which was the strategy they'd used successfully for all the newspaper lawsuits. But G. Amaral didn't go for it, and insisted on the case going ahead. I think this must have thrown their plans into a spin, and, knowing they would likely lose the case, they've invested very little money in supporting their side of the story. If they lose the court case, I suspect their plans will involve launching an appeal, which they may hope will delay having to pay out any costs.

Just my opinion.
I agree with you canada12 but should they lose (which is looking likely judging by what has taken place so far imo) then the decision to launch an appeal is a dilemma for TM. It seems they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Supposing the McCanns lose the libel trial then launch an appeal in light of both Portuguese and UK police now involved in an active case which is being funded by the taxpayers of two countries in a time of austerity would potentially do their reputations a great deal of harm. No amount of spin could hide the fact that the money the McCanns are seeking is for personal damages and will be paid directly to them (if my understanding is correct).

To not launch an appeal is an admission of defeat, something imo the McCanns would be loath to do and might be viewed as something quite different.

Just my opinion.

aquila

Posts : 7952
Reputation : 1174
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by aiyoyo on 28.12.13 23:02

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@aiyoyo wrote:
@Smokeandmirrors wrote:Just a thought……

The libel trial was in the making for four years (launched in 2009). Judging by the rubishness of their side of the representation, and the change in stance from them not originally planning on appearing, then belatedly requesting an appearance, coupled with Isabel Duarte's non-appearance on one of the days, it occurs to me that the money must be very low, and full fees are probably being charged, or else they would have made a better job of it. They probably couldn't afford to fly out and pay for the time, of a psychologist or doctor to back up their story. They must be bricking it in case they lose….the costs will be astronomical. Four years, both sides lawyers fees, I reckon they'd be looking at a couple of million. Yikes.

For their depression story to be believed, the entire family listed on the writ would have had to be seen/treated by the medical specialist/s over a sustained period of time, and certified accordingly.  
The existence of such certification would suffice for Court purpose.
I dont believe they were penny wise and pound foolish when they sent a bunch of useless witnesses, family members etc, when they could have sent expert/s as in REAL psychologist or doctor if they'd been treated.

Could they force a busy psychiatrist to go or do you think a written deposition would have been sufficient?

They seem to have a problem with evidence costing the price of a stamp…….


One would have thought a wrtten certified deposition listing details should suffice.
If the psychiatrist  presence is needed in Court to further support the certification, without doubt the Mccanns' lawyer would ensure that the Court accommodates a date convenient to the psychiatrist.   It would be unreasonable of Court to refuse to accede to request to accommodate such an IMPORTANT witness.
It would be unreasonable of the psychiatrist to refuse if the date was specifically catered to his/her schedule especially if the travel costs and fees too are borne by the requester-client.

If they'd such an important witness no cost will stop them flying this witness out, as the make-or-break of their case depends heavily on this witness.

Oh, the cost of the stamp is a completely different issue. Chalk and cheese comparison.

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 Smokeandmirrors on 28.12.13 23:07

On the other hand they are probably quite scared of what a psychologist/psychiatrist might have to say.

____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 28.12.13 23:47

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:On the other hand they are probably quite scared of what a psychologist/psychiatrist might have to say.
Hi, I posted on another page about this I think - there is footage online (Cabrera sobre McCanns - 3 parts), filmed in 2007, admittedly just after they had been made arguidos, in which Spanish forensic psychologist Jose Cabrera gives his view of the McCanns (Obviously that they're very suspicious) It's all the usual stuff about Kate hiding a secret, and Gerry leading her like they are actors in a play - he says that they seem like they have made a pact to do the same things, act in the same way etc. All his subjective opinion of course, but he did have 25 years experience at the time and had given and been called as expert in court many times. Anyhoo the thing that floored me was that he stated that KM had a profound psychological affective disorder, something much more serious than depression or neurosis, more along the lines of bipolar, and that she had been treated for it in England before Madeleine's disappearance. He spoke as though this was fact rather than conjecture and McCanns immediately threatened to sue, though the reference to a pre-existing condition was not referred to again (afaik) but often hinted at by Portuguese reports that the PJ thought Kate had some kind of mental illness. All very cruel if it's not true of course. It seems impossible to find a translated transcript of this interview - the ones I have seen just refer to Cabrera's opinion on the notorious interview they did with Antena 3.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by aiyoyo on 28.12.13 23:54

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:On the other hand they are probably quite scared of what a psychologist/psychiatrist might have to say.

Why would that be ?  

They most certainly wouldn't send one who hadn't treated them or didn't support their position.

If they'd been treated and obtained certification for their depression then the expert certifying such can't or won't go against her/his own certification in Court surely?

Even say if they were to persuade a medical expert they know to go just to give a one-off impromptu statements, then this person won't stand up to scrutiny in Court under cross examinations - no chance.
Look what happened to all those witnesses associated to them in the past professionally - how they were caught off guard - the flaws in their statements from hearsay or not having done their homework were brought to bear on them.


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 Smokeandmirrors on 29.12.13 8:51

@aiyoyo wrote:
@Smokeandmirrors wrote:On the other hand they are probably quite scared of what a psychologist/psychiatrist might have to say.

Why would that be ?  

They most certainly wouldn't send one who hadn't treated them or didn't support their position.

If they'd been treated and obtained certification for their depression then the expert certifying such can't or won't go against her/his own certification in Court surely?

Even say if they were to persuade a medical expert they know to go just to give a one-off impromptu statements, then this person won't stand up to scrutiny in Court under cross examinations - no chance.
 Look what happened to all those witnesses associated to them in the past professionally -  how they were  caught off guard -  the flaws in their statements from hearsay or not having done their homework were brought to bear on them.


Because I don't think their fervour in travelling around, running marathons and doing interviews quite adds up to the level of depression and anxiety required under the circumstances. Also, I was being sarcastic, because a psychiatrist or psychologist might recognise the narcissism!


____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

For what it worth - which probably isn't much, since it is on Twitter

Post by PeterMac on 03.01.14 11:35

Kate and Gerry #McCann refused permission to give evidence next week in Lisbon libel trial over ex-cop Goncalo Amaral's book. via #Brunty

____________________


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 sallypelt on 03.01.14 11:36

@PeterMac wrote:
Kate and Gerry #McCann refused permission to give evidence next week in Lisbon libel trial over ex-cop Goncalo Amaral's book. via #Brunty

I just posted it on Twitter thread, Peter. Martin Brunt has tweeted this information, so it is a credible source.

sallypelt

Posts : 3298
Reputation : 518
Join date : 2012-11-10

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 03.01.14 11:47

@sallypelt wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:
Kate and Gerry #McCann refused permission to give evidence next week in Lisbon libel trial over ex-cop Goncalo Amaral's book. via #Brunty

I just posted it on Twitter thread, Peter. Martin Brunt has tweeted this information, so it is a credible source.

A thread has been opened so best to discuss this there, for future reference.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by plebgate on 03.01.14 11:50

refused permission so they will appeal.    Why didn't they just do it at the start of this hearing?    Do they know that the hearing has gone against them? or is it delaying tactics or both things?

She sat in court for the first 2/3 days, she was available to have given any evidence then.   Why didn't she and why didn't he?

plebgate

Posts : 5440
Reputation : 1155
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by aquila on 03.01.14 11:54

candyfloss wrote:
@sallypelt wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:
Kate and Gerry #McCann refused permission to give evidence next week in Lisbon libel trial over ex-cop Goncalo Amaral's book. via #Brunty

I just posted it on Twitter thread, Peter. Martin Brunt has tweeted this information, so it is a credible source.

A thread has been opened so best to discuss this there, for future reference.
What difference does it make to the process if indeed Martin Brunt's tweet is correct?

Is this tweet from Brunty helpful? I notice there is no mention of Dr Amaral's appearance.

I'm all for waiting until Tuesday and will probably have to wait a few days longer to find out what happens in the court and I'm not holding my breath that this will be the final day. The ruling will be made at a later date.

Will Brunt report on the proceedings on Tuesday? Will he report in the MSM? I doubt it.

aquila

Posts : 7952
Reputation : 1174
Join date : 2011-09-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by PeterMac on 03.01.14 12:28

@aquila wrote:
I'm all for waiting until Tuesday and will probably have to wait a few days longer to find out what happens in the court and I'm not holding my breath that this will be the final day. The ruling will be made at a later date.
Will Brunt report on the proceedings on Tuesday? Will he report in the MSM? I doubt it.

I believe a long standing member of this forum is intending to be there, and hoping to understand enough to be able to report back with the result, though probably not the transcript.

____________________


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 ultimaThule on 03.01.14 12:31

@plebgate wrote:refused permission so they will appeal.    Why didn't they just do it at the start of this hearing?    Do they know that the hearing has gone against them? or is it delaying tactics or both things?

She sat in court for the first 2/3 days, she was available to have given any evidence then.   Why didn't she and why didn't he?
The Judge's decision in the matter of whether or not to grant the McCanns' applications, and that of Dr Amaral's, to take the stand is final and, as far I can ascertain from the Portuguese legal code, cannot be appealed at this stage of the proceedings.  

Dr Amaral's application was, in effect, made in response to that of the McCanns.  If the McCanns had serious intention of giving evidence in support of their claim(s), they would have ensured their names apppeared on the list of witnesses for the Plaintfifs prior to the commencement of the trial.

As it is, the McCanns late application was little more than grandstanding, as demonstrated by Gerry's much publicised arrival outside a Court which he knew full well he would not be admitted to, in order to sow the seeds of unjustness and unfairness if/when judgement is found against him and his equally deceptive spouse. 

The McCanns have often resorted to posing as victims of a cruel world and, insodoing, expect others to overlook the fact their world is entirely of their making.

This tactic may have served them well so far, but it won't wash in front of a jury.

ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 03.01.14 12:32

@ultimaThule wrote:
@plebgate wrote:refused permission so they will appeal.    Why didn't they just do it at the start of this hearing?    Do they know that the hearing has gone against them? or is it delaying tactics or both things?

She sat in court for the first 2/3 days, she was available to have given any evidence then.   Why didn't she and why didn't he?
The Judge's decision in the matter of whether or not to grant the McCanns' applications, and that of Dr Amaral's, to take the stand is final and, as far I can ascertain from the Portuguese legal code, cannot be appealed at this stage of the proceedings.  

Dr Amaral's application was, in effect, made in response to that of the McCanns.  If the McCanns had serious intention of giving evidence in support of their claim(s), they would have ensured their names apppeared on the list of witnesses for the Plaintfifs prior to the commencement of the trial.

As it is, the McCanns late application was little more than grandstanding, as demonstrated by Gerry's much publicised arrival outside a Court which he knew full well he would not be admitted to, in order to sow the seeds of unjustness and unfairness if/when judgement is found against him and his equally deceptive spouse. 

The McCanns have often resorted to posing as victims of a cruel world and, insodoing, expect others to overlook the fact their world is entirely of their making.

This tactic may have served them well so far, but it won't wash in front of a jury.

I agree with your analysis. But which jury do you have in mind?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Cristobell on 03.01.14 12:56

@ultimaThule wrote:
@plebgate wrote:refused permission so they will appeal.    Why didn't they just do it at the start of this hearing?    Do they know that the hearing has gone against them? or is it delaying tactics or both things?

She sat in court for the first 2/3 days, she was available to have given any evidence then.   Why didn't she and why didn't he?
The Judge's decision in the matter of whether or not to grant the McCanns' applications, and that of Dr Amaral's, to take the stand is final and, as far I can ascertain from the Portuguese legal code, cannot be appealed at this stage of the proceedings.  

Dr Amaral's application was, in effect, made in response to that of the McCanns.  If the McCanns had serious intention of giving evidence in support of their claim(s), they would have ensured their names apppeared on the list of witnesses for the Plaintfifs prior to the commencement of the trial.

As it is, the McCanns late application was little more than grandstanding, as demonstrated by Gerry's much publicised arrival outside a Court which he knew full well he would not be admitted to, in order to sow the seeds of unjustness and unfairness if/when judgement is found against him and his equally deceptive spouse. 

The McCanns have often resorted to posing as victims of a cruel world and, insodoing, expect others to overlook the fact their world is entirely of their making.

This tactic may have served them well so far, but it won't wash in front of a jury.







I am sure you are right that they will use the Judge's refusal to hear them as proof the trial was fixed in Goncalo's favour, when it all goes horribly wrong.

I'm not sure if this was a bluff on their part - they are so slippery it might well have been. They do take unbelievable risks, eg. pressing for a review, but this could have gone either way - the Judge has left it quite late in the day to make her decision. The risk factor may well be a sign of their desperation at this stage, imo they are probably near broke - we can only imagine the lawyers fees they have run up over the years, and who knows how many salaries the Fund has been paying.

I suppose it all depends on exactly how insane they are, especially as the net closes in.

Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Reputation : 3
Join date : 2011-10-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by plebgate on 03.01.14 14:32

if they are broke, how will they pay for an appeal I wonder?

plebgate

Posts : 5440
Reputation : 1155
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by Guest on 03.01.14 14:41

@plebgate wrote:if they are broke, how will they pay for an appeal I wonder?

Doubbleglazer-BK will take care of all their needs ad infinitum, it was reported some time ago

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

Post by plebgate on 03.01.14 14:46

Will he Portia?    Talk is cheap, especially as their witnesses performed so poorly (imo)?

We shall see.

plebgate

Posts : 5440
Reputation : 1155
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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