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 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Page 23 of 26 Previous  1 ... 13 ... 22, 23, 24, 25, 26  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Guest on 14.04.14 23:20

@ Candyfloss
Châpeau  howdy 
I've years ago for quite a while moderated another forum and do recognise how you're steering this one.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by AndyB on 14.04.14 23:28

Châtelaine wrote:
@AndyB wrote: [...] You seem to have no problem with people describing the McCanns as liars (libellous)  [...]
***
You woke me up, Andy. As you can see, I deleted some of your post and only comment to the above part: the McCanns ARE proven liars. It's documented in their police statements and in the wealth of their newspaper and television interviews. It doesn't need too much of intellect to see that. If contradicting themselves is not lying,I don't know what else it would take ...
Sorry for waking you although I'm at a loss to understand how. I agree that a lot of things that the McCanns have said appear to be less than the truth but they are most emphatically NOT proven liars. They may be to your mind (as they are to mine) but CR have made a lot of money for their clients on far less. Look at what happened to TB. The moderators allow these libels, and the ones that accuse the McCanns of being narcissists and even psychopaths but other libels are not allowed. I don't understand why

AndyB

Posts : 692
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-03
Age : 53
Location : Consett, County Durham

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Guest on 14.04.14 23:41

@AndyB wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@AndyB wrote: [...] You seem to have no problem with people describing the McCanns as liars (libellous)  [...]
***
You woke me up, Andy. As you can see, I deleted some of your post and only comment to the above part: the McCanns ARE proven liars. It's documented in their police statements and in the wealth of their newspaper and television interviews. It doesn't need too much of intellect to see that. If contradicting themselves is not lying,I don't know what else it would take ...
Sorry for waking you although I'm at a loss to understand how. I agree that a lot of things that the McCanns have said appear to be less than the truth but they are most emphatically NOT proven liars. They may be to your mind (as they are to mine) but CR have made a lot of money for their clients on far less. Look at what happened to TB. The moderators allow these libels, and the ones that accuse the McCanns of being narcissists and even psychopaths but other libels are not allowed. I don't understand why

Moderators are not lawyers, and do their best.  Can you understand that.........good.  Now  shutup

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Guest on 14.04.14 23:43

A moderator's lot is not a happy one at times!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Guest on 14.04.14 23:48

You're appreciated Candyfloss,a difficult(unpaid) job you have to do.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by AndyB on 15.04.14 0:24

candyfloss wrote:
@AndyB wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@AndyB wrote: [...] You seem to have no problem with people describing the McCanns as liars (libellous)  [...]
***
You woke me up, Andy. As you can see, I deleted some of your post and only comment to the above part: the McCanns ARE proven liars. It's documented in their police statements and in the wealth of their newspaper and television interviews. It doesn't need too much of intellect to see that. If contradicting themselves is not lying,I don't know what else it would take ...
Sorry for waking you although I'm at a loss to understand how. I agree that a lot of things that the McCanns have said appear to be less than the truth but they are most emphatically NOT proven liars. They may be to your mind (as they are to mine) but CR have made a lot of money for their clients on far less. Look at what happened to TB. The moderators allow these libels, and the ones that accuse the McCanns of being narcissists and even psychopaths but other libels are not allowed. I don't understand why

Moderators are not lawyers, and do their best.  Can you understand that.........good.  Now  shutup
Yes, I do understand but why should I shut up just because I disagree with you? Why should I allow you to bully me into silence just because you're a moderator? Are we not all allowed an opinion? Please explain why accusations of lying, narcissism and psychopathy are acceptable but other libellous comments aren't

AndyB

Posts : 692
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-03
Age : 53
Location : Consett, County Durham

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by justthinking on 15.04.14 0:26

well said AndyB. Good question

justthinking

Posts : 20
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-09-13

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Guest on 15.04.14 0:37

Andyb there are certain things that cannot be said on.plenty of forums about this case so imo we should respect the rules and the modeeators decision,this is a very valuable forum and I for one would be very upset to see it shut down due to certain things being said.
As a member there are certain things we have to accept and respect(Like it or not)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Guest on 15.04.14 0:38

apologies for all the certains!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by AndyB on 15.04.14 0:39

Bellisa wrote:Andyb there are certain things that cannot be said on.plenty of forums about this case so imo we should respect the rules and the modeeators decision,this is a very valuable forum and I for one would be very upset to see it shut down due to certain things being said.
As a member there are certain things we have to accept and respect(Like it or not)
I totally agree. Do you think my request for clarification about which libellous comments we can make and which we can't is unreasonable?

AndyB

Posts : 692
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-03
Age : 53
Location : Consett, County Durham

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Guest on 15.04.14 0:42

No i don't at all but i think a pm would be a better way to ask? There has been enough de-railing of threads lately without this one too focusing on something other than the libel trial.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by AndyB on 15.04.14 1:07

Bellisa wrote:No i don't at all but i think a pm would be a better way to ask? There has been enough de-railing of threads lately without this one too focusing on something other than the libel trial.
I promise I'm not trying to derail this thread (I'm actually desperate for a development in the libel trail in Portugal) but the subject has been brought up and both you and I are discussing it. Surely a clarification of the rules is best in the open where everyone can know what they are is the best way forward. Why keep it between the moderators and I? The very fact that there aren't clear rules about which libellous comments are allowed and which aren't should give you cause for concern shouldn't it? Unless its clear to you what the rules are how can you avoid the wrath of the moderators and the ban that I'm heading for just because my opinion is different from theirs?

AndyB

Posts : 692
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2013-06-03
Age : 53
Location : Consett, County Durham

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Guest on 15.04.14 1:18

I do understand where you are coming from however having been on here and on.Facebook pages there is one word that should never be used.
Sorry for being vague but perhaps you have seen it elsewhere tonight.
I pretty much accept that if I step over the line my post will be removed and its enough for me if a moderator deems it as libelous,I trust the Mods and am sure things are only whooshed if its in dangerous territory.
Anyway,wasn't accusing you of de-railing,but do notice some posters get rattled when some subjects are brought up and like to try stir things with other posters.

Its getting late,time to hit the hay:-)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by tigger on 15.04.14 6:51

AndyB wrote:

Yes, I do understand but why should I shut up just because I disagree with you? Why should I allow you to bully me into silence just because you're a moderator? Are we not all allowed an opinion? Please explain why accusations of lying, narcissism and psychopathy are acceptable but other libellous comments aren't
Unquote

About two years ago whole files were taken off the forum. A detailed list of comments in various topics sent to the forum owner also had to be removed under threat of prosecution. Including one of mine.

Strangely, NONE of the members whose posts were removed complained, but asked instead how to avoid a repeat of the threat.
Calling the McCanns narcissists and adding 'imo' to a post defines it as an individual observation.
What was deleted was a statement of fact of a criminal offence.

This thread is my fault, because I should simply have alerted the mods via PM. Which I shall do next time, so apologies for the disruption.
Btw I do think that being 'bullied into silence' as you put it, is a little over the top?  CF doesn't even have a whip afaik.  winkwink

____________________
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 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by canada12 on 15.04.14 7:41

@Cristobell wrote:Judicial Secrecy must be in operation as the case has been reopened and the investigation is live.  We are not getting any announcements from the PJ. How far Judicial Secrecy extends I'm not sure, but I remember the McCanns in early interviews prior to their being made arguidos saying they were restricted in what they said because of Judicial Secrecy.  In fact wasn't this the reason that Team McCann emerged, friends and relatives speaking on their behalf?

Bumping this to get the conversation back on track. I tend to think that the McCanns have been made Arguidos and / or their legal reps have told them not to say anything that could be used against them. And the fact that we've heard nothing about the libel trial for months is very telling. The lack of comment from friends and relatives and even that famous "friend of the family" who pops up with suitable quotes for the papers is very telling also.

canada12

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by plebgate on 15.04.14 8:40

Just wanted to say (once again) what a great job CF does here.

For those who want to be able to post what they like without thought for how it might affect the owner of the site, why not open up a blog of their own and allow potentially libelous comments to be posted on that.   I would hazard a guess that a letter from a solicitor would see them withdraw any offending posts PDQ.

plebgate

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by ultimaThule on 15.04.14 10:10

As this thread in particular is evidence that some post on this forum without any consideration for how it may be perceived by others, I second your proposal plebgate,

However, in view of what tigger has written, any such blogs should not be promoted or otherwise advertised here as such an act will not only undermine the credibility of this forum but will also place it at risk of closure and expose the site owner to possible financial loss.

ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Cristobell on 15.04.14 11:12

We do of course have to be careful about using the 'M' word, but there is a sense of absurdity about it, given that the case is being investigated by 37 homicide detectives.  But there you go.

Cristobell

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Cristobell on 15.04.14 11:18

@canada12 wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:Judicial Secrecy must be in operation as the case has been reopened and the investigation is live.  We are not getting any announcements from the PJ. How far Judicial Secrecy extends I'm not sure, but I remember the McCanns in early interviews prior to their being made arguidos saying they were restricted in what they said because of Judicial Secrecy.  In fact wasn't this the reason that Team McCann emerged, friends and relatives speaking on their behalf?

Bumping this to get the conversation back on track. I tend to think that the McCanns have been made Arguidos and / or their legal reps have told them not to say anything that could be used against them. And the fact that we've heard nothing about the libel trial for months is very telling. The lack of comment from friends and relatives and even that famous "friend of the family" who pops up with suitable quotes for the papers is very telling also.
Agree Canada, they have never been this quiet before, they have always felt the need to steer public opinion, yet we are getting nothing at all.  No sightings, no burglars or tractormen, not even criticism of the PJ, in fact for the first time ever, the parents are keeping a low profile.

Cristobell

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by ultimaThule on 15.04.14 11:28

@canada12 wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:Judicial Secrecy must be in operation as the case has been reopened and the investigation is live.  We are not getting any announcements from the PJ. How far Judicial Secrecy extends I'm not sure, but I remember the McCanns in early interviews prior to their being made arguidos saying they were restricted in what they said because of Judicial Secrecy.  In fact wasn't this the reason that Team McCann emerged, friends and relatives speaking on their behalf?

Bumping this to get the conversation back on track. I tend to think that the McCanns have been made Arguidos and / or their legal reps have told them not to say anything that could be used against them. And the fact that we've heard nothing about the libel trial for months is very telling. The lack of comment from friends and relatives and even that famous "friend of the family" who pops up with suitable quotes for the papers is very telling also.
It seems to me unlikely that the McCanns' have again been made arguidos (persons of interest) for the simple reason that such status would not enable the PJ to compel them to return to Portugal to further the investigation, which is being conducted in accordance with Portugal's Penal Code.

In the event that such status has been conferred on them, it may be the McCanns have co-operated with the PJ but, as the rule of judicial secrecy which has been imposed on the investigation does not extend further than the borders of Portugal, it again seems to me they would not lose opportunity to make such a development public in the UK, particularly as the 'family' or other source close to them has been in evidence throughout the various accounts which have appeared in the MSM to date.

With regard to the libel trial which is being conducted in accordance with Portugal's Civil Code, the last information which was made available is that prior to the 7 January, the date set for the hearing of closing arguments, counsel for the McCanns' requested an adjournment for a period which was not specified and the defence asked the Court to evaulate the Wardship.

Since that time it appears a number of motions have been put to the judge, either in chambers or in camera, which we are not privy to and it would be reasonable to suppose that these have to do with the Wardship as, should error have been made in the particulars of claim, its potential implications on the trial are far-reaching and cannot be attributed to a typist's error, nor resolved with a bottle of Tippex.

Fwiw, if the delay in setting a further date for the hearing of closing arguments is due to incapacity on the part of one or other of the parties to the proceedings, or their respective counsels, or if it is due to either side attempting to negotiate a settlement at this late stage, there would seem to be no impediment to this being announced.  The fact that no such announcement has been made gives further credence to the issue of Wardship being the most probable cause of delay.

I have no doubt that numerous of the McCanns' many legal representatives have counselled them to keep a low profile, as it were, but, it appears to me that Gerry behaves as if he is a law unto himself and both of them appear to regard themselves as being above the law, I suspect that any such advice has fallen on deaf ears.

ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Doug D on 15.04.14 12:19

Unfortunately there has been no response by Anne Guides on the UK Justice forum to a direct request for comment regarding the trial and similarly astro & Joana Morais have both remained quiet.
 
Looking back at astro’s initial statement on 7th January I notice that after the statement she goes to the trouble of pointing out:
 
‘This information is not covered by judicial secrecy and can be freely shared’.
 
She then goes:
 
‘Important notice from astro
 
This did NOT happen in a court session,
Nobody went to court on Tuesday. There was no session at all.

We heard about the postponement on Monday. The filing of documents took place between Friday afternoon and Monday, as far as I know’.
 
so these first two lines must have come from some sort of informal briefing.
 
As it seems that they have been silenced one way or another, as surely we would have expected at least some sort of comment from one of them by now, I wonder whether they have an agreement that they will be kept in the loop as regards new dates etc, but only as long as they don’t speculate or report anything other than what actually goes on in Court.
 
I cannot accept the ‘this is how it goes in Portugal’ and we must just be patient, because ‘judicial secrecy’ surely cannot include a comment such as ‘…(WOC or Pike?)……. is still being looked at and as yet no new date has been set’  or something similar.
 
At least before there was a time limit set for the parties to try and agree a settlement, but this time, just nothing. Even GA in his recent appearance said nothing, yet the question ‘when are you next back in court’ must have been brought up off camera.
 
UT comments:
 
‘Since that time it appears a number of motions have been put to the judge, either in chambers or in camera, which we are not privy to’
 
but is there any actual evidence that this is the case or is this again just speculation to try and justify the delay?

Doug D

Posts : 2146
Reputation : 635
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by Cristobell on 15.04.14 12:23

@ultimaThule wrote:
@canada12 wrote:
@Cristobell wrote:Judicial Secrecy must be in operation as the case has been reopened and the investigation is live.  We are not getting any announcements from the PJ. How far Judicial Secrecy extends I'm not sure, but I remember the McCanns in early interviews prior to their being made arguidos saying they were restricted in what they said because of Judicial Secrecy.  In fact wasn't this the reason that Team McCann emerged, friends and relatives speaking on their behalf?

Bumping this to get the conversation back on track. I tend to think that the McCanns have been made Arguidos and / or their legal reps have told them not to say anything that could be used against them. And the fact that we've heard nothing about the libel trial for months is very telling. The lack of comment from friends and relatives and even that famous "friend of the family" who pops up with suitable quotes for the papers is very telling also.
It seems to me unlikely that the McCanns' have again been made arguidos (persons of interest) for the simple reason that such status would not enable the PJ to compel them to return to Portugal to further the investigation, which is being conducted in accordance with Portugal's Penal Code.

When the question of the McCanns returning to Portugal for the reconstruction in May 2008 arose, the McCanns said in several interviews that as arguidos they would have to return.

In the event that such status has been conferred on them, it may be the McCanns have co-operated with the PJ but, as the rule of judicial secrecy which has been imposed on the investigation does not extend further than the borders of Portugal, it again seems to me they would not lose opportunity to make such a development public in the UK, particularly as the 'family' or other source close to them has been in evidence throughout the various accounts which have appeared in the MSM to date.

The McCanns were still arguidoes when they return to the UK from Portugal in September 2007, and in many interviews they stated they were not allowed to speak about the case because of judicial secrecy.  

With regard to the libel trial which is being conducted in accordance with Portugal's Civil Code, the last information which was made available is that prior to the 7 January, the date set for the hearing of closing arguments, counsel for the McCanns' requested an adjournment for a period which was not specified and the defence asked the Court to evaluate the Wardship.

Since that time it appears a number of motions have been put to the judge, either in chambers or in camera, which we are not privy to and it would be reasonable to suppose that these have to do with the Wardship as, should error have been made in the particulars of claim, its potential implications on the trial are far-reaching and cannot be attributed to a typist's error, nor resolved with a bottle of Tippex.

Particulars of Claim are used in County Court actions, that is claims with a value up to £10k or whatever it is these days, but they deal with the minutiae, the 'he owes me 50quid stuff'.  In High Court actions - the BIG claims, the document is a Statement of Claim and it would take a bit more than tippex if a lawyer made an error like that. 


Fwiw, if the delay in setting a further date for the hearing of closing arguments is due to incapacity on the part of one or other of the parties to the proceedings, or their respective counsels, or if it is due to either side attempting to negotiate a settlement at this late stage, there would seem to be no impediment to this being announced.  The fact that no such announcement has been made gives further credence to the issue of Wardship being the most probable cause of delay.

Not if the investigations have had a direct impact on the evidence presented during the trial, I would imagine.  This case is unique.  At this stage we can only speculate. My feeling is the trial has collapsed.

I have no doubt that numerous of the McCanns' many legal representatives have counselled them to keep a low profile, as it were, but, it appears to me that Gerry behaves as if he is a law unto himself and both of them appear to regard themselves as being above the law, I suspect that any such advice has fallen on deaf ears.

Cristobell

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by ultimaThule on 15.04.14 14:34

Cristobell wrote:

1
. When the question of the McCanns returning to Portugal for the reconstruction in May 2008 arose, the McCanns said in several interviews that as arguidos they would have to return.

What the McCanns' say and what they do rarely bear any correlation to each other and, as far as I'm aware, they did not return to Portugal despite requests from the PJ that they do so. 

The fact of the matter is that persons of interest cannot be compelled to return to Portugal by means of EAWs.

2. The McCanns were still arguidoes when they return to the UK from Portugal in September 2007, and in many interviews they stated they were not allowed to speak about the case because of judicial secrecy. 

Again, the difference between what the McCanns' say and do is apparent as, during the time they were allegedly bound by Portugal's rule of judicial secrecy, they gave numerous interviews and it seems to me they used the rule to avoid questions they didn't want to answer.

3. Particulars of Claim are used in County Court actions, that is claims with a value up to £10k or whatever it is these days, but they deal with the minutiae, the 'he owes me 50quid stuff'.  In High Court actions - the BIG claims, the document is a Statement of Claim and it would take a bit more than tippex if a lawyer made an error like that.

It appears to have escaped your attention that the libel trial is taking place in Lisbon in accordance with Portugal's Civil Code which cannot be directly compared with the civil law of England/Wales and the wider UK. 

As the pleadings, the particulars of claim, the statement of claim, the plaint, the petition, and other such descriptions of legal documents which contain details of the matter(s) to be adjudicated are commonly known, I see no reason why you should remark on my use of them and, more especially, as I have made clear that I am reliant on rusty Latin and internet translation services
when attempting to translate Portuguese into English in my efforts to become acquainted with Portugal's Civil Code in order to inform myself as opposed to guessing what may apply in the libel trial.

For the record, when alluding to my view that archaic language more adequately expresses the majesty of the law than its modern-day equivalent, I was referring to words such as 'seisin' which tigger found in their conveyancing documents - to my mind, 'freehold' seems entirely mundane in comparison. 

4. Not if the investigations have had a direct impact on the evidence presented during the trial, I would imagine.  This case is unique.  At this stage we can only speculate. My feeling is the trial has collapsed.

On the basis of the information which is in the public domain to date, as I see no reason to suppose that either Operation Grange or the PJ's investigation has produced evidence which may have a direct impact on the trial, my preference is to avoid speculation of this nature.  While this case may be unique, it's my belief that the underlying story is commonplace.   You are of course entitled to hold and express your 'feeling' that the trial has 'collapsed', Cristobell, but, if this were the case, due process dictates that the Court would formally discharge it and announce the fact that it had done so.

ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by ultimaThule on 15.04.14 14:45

@Cristobell wrote:We do of course have to be careful about using the 'M' word, but there is a sense of absurdity about it, given that the case is being investigated by 37 homicide detectives.  But there you go.
As I understand it, some 37 Metropolitan Police personnel comprise the MIT that is Operation Grange and as the team is compromised of support staff and police constables seconded from various divisions in addition to full and part-time detectives, it cannot be said that 'the case is being investigated by 37 homicide detectives'.

ultimaThule

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

Post by tigger on 15.04.14 14:57

From the post above:
Cristobell wrote:
2. The McCanns were still arguidoes when they return to the UK from Portugal in September 2007, and in many interviews they stated they were not allowed to speak about the case because of judicial secrecy.  
ultimaThule wrote:
Again, the difference between what the McCanns' say and do is apparent as, during the time they were allegedly bound by Portugal's rule of judicial secrecy, they gave numerous interviews and it seems to me they used the rule to avoid questions they didn't want to answer.
Unquote

The end of September 2007 Gerry gave a lengyhy interview with much detail about the case to Vanity Fair. this interview was published the end of January 2008.
In it, Gerry revealed that he/they could get two years for hiding a body. So not exactly keeping quiet.
There's a complete transcript of it in a separate topiv here on JH.

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

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

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 23 of 26 Previous  1 ... 13 ... 22, 23, 24, 25, 26  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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