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

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Page 9 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Bishop Brennan on 04.06.14 12:45

@Gillyspot wrote:
How can Dr Amaral be "hindering the search for Madeleine" anyway as the police are searching scrubland?

In fact as SY are now looking for a body, then it could be said that Amaral is actually a hero to the McCanns. He alone was telling the world to look for a body, way back in 2007. If only they had listened to him, then the worry and heartache of the past 7 years could have been avoided - and closure and grieving take their place. Perhaps Gerry will publicly thank GA on the stand on the 16th, and apologise for all the libel nonsense?  big grin 


Bishop Brennan

Posts : 695
Reputation : 217
Join date : 2013-10-27

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by woodforthetrees on 04.06.14 13:53

I'm wondering whether the closing session for the libel case has deliberately been scheduled for the 16th, just as the PDL digs will be coming to an end.

More importantly, the focus on the invite for Gerry to make a speach. My thoughts here are that this too is deliberate, to see if he will dare set foot in the country. If he declines to attend, then it adds more weight to his guilt and the threat of arrest upon arrival, or at least some harsh questions from both the PJ and SY on their findings over the next 10 days.

I suspect their silence at this point is due to them having lengthy talks with their legal defense team and extradition guy.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by bobbin on 04.06.14 13:58

@woodforthetrees wrote:I'm wondering whether the closing session for the libel case has deliberately been scheduled for the 16th, just as the PDL digs will be coming to an end.

More importantly, the focus on the invite for Gerry to make a speach. My thoughts here are that this too is deliberate, to see if he will dare set foot in the country. If he declines to attend, then it adds more weight to his guilt and the threat of arrest upon arrival, or at least some harsh questions from both the PJ and SY on their findings over the next 10 days.

I suspect their silence at this point is due to them having lengthy talks with their legal defense team and extradition guy.
Perhaps they are all concentrating on searching Google Earth, for a place to hide, where they won't be found.

bobbin

Posts : 2030
Reputation : 119
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by lj on 04.06.14 15:38

@woodforthetrees wrote:I'm wondering whether the closing session for the libel case has deliberately been scheduled for the 16th, just as the PDL digs will be coming to an end.

More importantly, the focus on the invite for Gerry to make a speach. My thoughts here are that this too is deliberate, to see if he will dare set foot in the country. If he declines to attend, then it adds more weight to his guilt and the threat of arrest upon arrival, or at least some harsh questions from both the PJ and SY on their findings over the next 10 days.

I suspect their silence at this point is due to them having lengthy talks with their legal defense team and extradition guy.


I wonder if Gerry's speech is not mainly for PR reasons. We know he was sent away when he all at the sudden decided he wanted to talk, that was with good legal reasons (he should have sent in a request much earlier). Maybe the judge wanted to make sure that nobody could say that this heartbroken, suffering couple had not all the chances they wanted to sluice all their complaints.

BTW I have no doubt his speech will be very spontaneous. He will have a ghostwriter who will put in all heartwrenching stuff up until the: cough here, sniff, dry eyes etc. He's used to that and as back up Kate will sit there in case he gets lost with: one cough is wipe eyes, 2 coughs is voice breaks, 1 cough with hand on my eyes is suicidal thoughts, 1 cough with hand for the mouth is loss of appetite etc

____________________
"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: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by j.rob on 26.01.15 19:46

@Watching wrote:
@noddy100 wrote:Why was she made a ward of court?

So that Mr & Mrs could use it to their advantage and did so by obtaining files held by the Leicestershire police.  Justice Hogg ruled against Leicestershire police, and granted Mr & Mrs be given access to a number of police files...all for Maddie's benefit!

All for the Mc's benefit so they could pass on vital information to help their private investigation find cover up what happened to Madeleine.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 225
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Hobs on 26.01.15 21:16

Regarding the ward of court issue and Leicestershire police.
The mccanns wanted access to all the files held by the police in order to se what evidence there was.
They won technically.
They got access to the files.

However, the only files they got access to were the files sent to  LE  from their own attornies containing info sent to them by members of the public probably via their tip line.
Basically the only files they got access to were their own files, all 81 of them out of 11000, not a win at all.

They still don't know what is in the files that have not been released by the PJ which is a lot, nor do they know what Leceistershire police have in their files.

big grin

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.

Hobs

Posts : 715
Reputation : 288
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 52
Location : uk

View user profile http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by j.rob on 26.01.15 21:32

Guest wrote:
@Markus 2 wrote:By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter
6:27PM BST 20 Jun 2008
The Telegraph can also disclose that Madeleine was made a ward of court last summer at the request of the McCanns, to empower judges to act in her best interests in any legal dispute such as the case which is about to be heard.
So she was made a ward in 2007

[color:5aa0=000000]During the Hearing it is revealed that Madeleine became a Ward of Court, on 02 April 2008, as the result of proceedings which started on 17 May 2007.

How ironic that the stated reason for making Madeleine a woc is the very one that has tripped them up at the libel trial.

Ha! Yes, they have tried to have it all ways. But they can't. They didn't, imo, make Madeleine a Ward of Court for the reasons stated above. It was for other reasons that were to do with their own interests. From this point onwards, I would think that the Mcs, on one level or another, were digging their own graves. Especially given the audacity of claiming that Detective Amaral's book hindered the search for Madeleine.

Oh dear. What twerps.

IMO

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 225
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by j.rob on 26.01.15 21:39

He said 11,000 pieces of information were being held as part of the investigation and just one could provide the clue to her whereabouts.


---------


Bet he (GM) wants to get his hands on that once piece of information that could provide the clue to Madeleine's whereabouts.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 225
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by woodforthetrees on 27.01.15 9:24

@Hobs wrote:Regarding the ward of court issue and Leicestershire police.
The mccanns wanted access to all the files held by the police in order to se what evidence there was.
They won technically.
They got access to the files.

However, the only files they got access to were the files sent to  LE  from their own attornies containing info sent to them by members of the public probably via their tip line.
Basically the only files they got access to were their own files, all 81 of them out of 11000, not a win at all.

They still don't know what is in the files that have not been released by the PJ which is a lot, nor do they know what Leceistershire police have in their files.

big grin

Relatives of the missing would never be allowed full access to any police files, only active police force employees would be allowed access.

However, based on their close friendship with people like Jim Gamble and others, i have no doubt they are getting 'detailed summaries' passed to them.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Loving Mom on 28.01.15 8:10

@j.rob wrote:
Guest wrote:
@Markus 2 wrote:By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter
6:27PM BST 20 Jun 2008
The Telegraph can also disclose that Madeleine was made a ward of court last summer at the request of the McCanns, to empower judges to act in her best interests in any legal dispute such as the case which is about to be heard.
So she was made a ward in 2007

[color:1857=000000]During the Hearing it is revealed that Madeleine became a Ward of Court, on 02 April 2008, as the result of proceedings which started on 17 May 2007.

How ironic that the stated reason for making Madeleine a woc is the very one that has tripped them up at the libel trial.

Ha! Yes, they have tried to have it all ways. But they can't. They didn't, imo, make Madeleine a Ward of Court for the reasons stated above. It was for other reasons that were to do with their own interests. From this point onwards, I would think that the Mcs, on one level or another, were digging their own graves. Especially given the audacity of claiming that Detective Amaral's book hindered the search for Madeleine.

Oh dear. What twerps.

IMO
Who does that? Why would anyone who has a child missing about two weeks start proceedings to make their child a Ward of Court? It is mind boggling. All I'm my opinion, ugh, of course.

Loving Mom

Posts : 85
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-12-11
Location : USA

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Joss on 28.01.15 9:10

@Loving Mom wrote:
@j.rob wrote:
Guest wrote:
@Markus 2 wrote:By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter
6:27PM BST 20 Jun 2008
The Telegraph can also disclose that Madeleine was made a ward of court last summer at the request of the McCanns, to empower judges to act in her best interests in any legal dispute such as the case which is about to be heard.
So she was made a ward in 2007

[color:2299=000000]During the Hearing it is revealed that Madeleine became a Ward of Court, on 02 April 2008, as the result of proceedings which started on 17 May 2007.

How ironic that the stated reason for making Madeleine a woc is the very one that has tripped them up at the libel trial.

Ha! Yes, they have tried to have it all ways. But they can't. They didn't, imo, make Madeleine a Ward of Court for the reasons stated above. It was for other reasons that were to do with their own interests. From this point onwards, I would think that the Mcs, on one level or another, were digging their own graves. Especially given the audacity of claiming that Detective Amaral's book hindered the search for Madeleine.

Oh dear. What twerps.

IMO
Who does that? Why would anyone who has a child missing about two weeks start proceedings to make their child a Ward of Court? It is mind boggling. All I'm my opinion, ugh, of course.
Exactly, which IMO means they knew she wasn't going to be found.

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by woodforthetrees on 28.01.15 9:37

@Joss wrote:
@Loving Mom wrote:
@j.rob wrote:
Guest wrote:
@Markus 2 wrote:By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter
6:27PM BST 20 Jun 2008
The Telegraph can also disclose that Madeleine was made a ward of court last summer at the request of the McCanns, to empower judges to act in her best interests in any legal dispute such as the case which is about to be heard.
So she was made a ward in 2007

[color:b5e4=000000]During the Hearing it is revealed that Madeleine became a Ward of Court, on 02 April 2008, as the result of proceedings which started on 17 May 2007.

How ironic that the stated reason for making Madeleine a woc is the very one that has tripped them up at the libel trial.

Ha! Yes, they have tried to have it all ways. But they can't. They didn't, imo, make Madeleine a Ward of Court for the reasons stated above. It was for other reasons that were to do with their own interests. From this point onwards, I would think that the Mcs, on one level or another, were digging their own graves. Especially given the audacity of claiming that Detective Amaral's book hindered the search for Madeleine.

Oh dear. What twerps.

IMO
Who does that? Why would anyone who has a child missing about two weeks start proceedings to make their child a Ward of Court? It is mind boggling. All I'm my opinion, ugh, of course.
Exactly, which IMO means they knew she wasn't going to be found.
 They knew within days that she wasn't going to be found because they were told by various law enforcement people that she would not be found as she is either abducted and in a different country, or she has been killed.

The rest of the charade has IMO all been about maintaining the pretense that she is alive to keep the McCanns and the tapas group out of hot water for neglect (or death by neglect).

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Question

Post by Guest on 28.01.15 10:07

Do we know who asked for Maddie to be made a WOC?

Do we have any evidence it was requested by or on behalf of  her parents?

Or did some child-care organization in the UK do that, in the best interests of the child, and it was spun, making it look it was an act of free will of the Mecs, in order to conceal that?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Montclair on 28.01.15 10:08

 They knew within days that she wasn't going to be found because they were told by various law enforcement people that she would not be found as she is either abducted and in a different country, or she has been killed.

The rest of the charade has IMO all been about maintaining the pretense that she is alive to keep the McCanns and the tapas group out of hot water for neglect (or death by neglect).







Or most likely they knew she wasn't going to be found because the parents knew what happened to her.

Montclair

Posts : 156
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2013-01-26
Age : 70
Location : Algarve

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Joss on 28.01.15 10:50

@Montclair wrote: They knew within days that she wasn't going to be found because they were told by various law enforcement people that she would not be found as she is either abducted and in a different country, or she has been killed.

The rest of the charade has IMO all been about maintaining the pretense that she is alive to keep the McCanns and the tapas group out of hot water for neglect (or death by neglect).







Or most likely they knew she wasn't going to be found because the parents knew what happened to her.
Yes, my thoughts too.

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Joss on 28.01.15 11:04

@Portia wrote:Do we know who asked for Maddie to be made a WOC?

Do we have any evidence it was requested by or on behalf of  her parents?

Or did some child-care organization in the UK do that, in the best interests of the child, and it was spun, making it look it was an act of free will of the Mecs, in order to conceal that?
 
 
[size=52]IN THE MATTER OF MADELEINE BETH MCCANN[/size]
[size=68]Judgement of Mrs Justice Hogg at the High Court, Family Division, RCJ, London,7[/size]
[size=45]th[/size]
[size=68]July 2008, in open courtMadeleine went missing on 3 May 2007 just a few days before her 4[/size]
[size=45]th[/size]
birthday, while she washolidaying with her family in the Algarve in Portugal.On 17 May 2007 Madeleine’s parents invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under the InherentJurisdiction of the Court, and The Child Abduction and Custody Act, and the Hague Convention. Theysought various orders and directions aimed at ascertaining the whereabouts and recovery of Madeleine.I became involved with the proceedings shortly afterwards.On 2 April 2008 Madeleine became a Ward of this Court, and since that date has remained a Ward.At all times jurisdiction was assumed by the Court because, there being no evidence to the contrary, itis presumed Madeleine is alive.She is a British Citizen, and like her parents habitually resident here.The current application was made on 2 April 2008 by the parents seeking disclosure of information anddocuments from the Chief Constable of Leicestershire to assist them and their own investigations intheir search for Madeleine. Such are the complexities of the issues involved other interested partieswere invited and joined to the application, and directions given for the hearing today.The parties have reached an accommodation whereby the Chief Constable will provide to Madeleine’s parents contact details of members of the public who had themselves contacted the parents or their solicitors, and which on receipt were immediately passed to the Chief Constable, together with a brief resume of the information given.The parents do not wish to pursue other aspects of the application, and save for the draft consent order  being approved by this Court wish to withdraw their application and seek leave to do so.
I have no criticism of the parents in making this application. They have behaved responsibly andreasonably throughout.I have considered the documents provided to this Court by the various parties, and have concluded thatthe agreement reached by the parties is entirely appropriate, and that the parents should be permitted towithdraw the balance of their application.I will make the Order by Consent as sought. In particular paragraph 1 of the Order made on the 22May 2007 shall be varied with the words:
[size=69]“The terms of this paragraph shall not apply to the Chief Constable of Leicestershire or anyother United Kingdom law enforcement agency. And for the avoidance of doubt all theevidence submitted to the Court and the Case Summaries and Skeleton Arguments remainconfidential to the Court save that the Chief Constable may use his discretion to disclose hisevidence, case summary and skeleton arguments filed in this Court and the Orders of 22 May2007, 2 April 2008 and this Order. Any other documents and their contents are not to bedisclosed to any person or published save in accordance with Orders already made by theCourt or further Order of the Court”.[/size]
[size=68]It may be noted that neither of the Parents is present today. I let it be known last week that providingtheir legal team was fully instructed neither parent need be present, and I would not criticise or bear any ill-feeling towards them if they chose to stay away. It was my decision as they have sufferedenough, and I wished to ease their burden.I know the police authorities and other official law enforcement agencies in this country, in Portugaland elsewhere have striven and will continue to strive to trace Madeleine.
[/size]
 
 
I urge anyone who has any information however small or tenuous to come forward now so that further enquiries can be made.There is, of course, as least one person who knows what has happened to Madeleine, and where shemay be found.I ponder about that person: whether that person has a heart and can understand what it must be like for Madeleine to have been torn and secreted from her parents and siblings whom she loves and felt securewith, and whom no doubt misses and grieves for. Whether that person has a conscience or any feelingof guilt, remorse or even cares about the hurt which has been caused to an innocent little girl: whether that person has a faith and belief, and what explanation or justification that person will give to God.I entreat that person whoever and wherever you may be to show mercy and compassion, and comeforward now to tell us where Madeleine is to be found.I hope and pray that Madeleine will be found very soon alive and well.I confirm the Wardship and Madeleine will remain a Ward of Court until further Order of the Court.The case will be reserved to myself subject to my availability[size=68]http://www.scribd.com/doc/25027454/Judgment-Madeleine-McCann-Ward-of-Court
[/size]

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by woodforthetrees on 28.01.15 11:31

@Joss wrote:
@Montclair wrote: They knew within days that she wasn't going to be found because they were told by various law enforcement people that she would not be found as she is either abducted and in a different country, or she has been killed.

The rest of the charade has IMO all been about maintaining the pretense that she is alive to keep the McCanns and the tapas group out of hot water for neglect (or death by neglect).







Or most likely they knew she wasn't going to be found because the parents knew what happened to her.
Yes, my thoughts too.
Correct, because they were told.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Joss on 28.01.15 12:28

@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Montclair wrote: They knew within days that she wasn't going to be found because they were told by various law enforcement people that she would not be found as she is either abducted and in a different country, or she has been killed.

The rest of the charade has IMO all been about maintaining the pretense that she is alive to keep the McCanns and the tapas group out of hot water for neglect (or death by neglect).







Or most likely they knew she wasn't going to be found because the parents knew what happened to her.
Yes, my thoughts too.
Correct, because they were told.
Because they already knew, IMO.

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by woodforthetrees on 28.01.15 13:23

@Joss wrote:
@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Montclair wrote: They knew within days that she wasn't going to be found because they were told by various law enforcement people that she would not be found as she is either abducted and in a different country, or she has been killed.

The rest of the charade has IMO all been about maintaining the pretense that she is alive to keep the McCanns and the tapas group out of hot water for neglect (or death by neglect).







Or most likely they knew she wasn't going to be found because the parents knew what happened to her.
Yes, my thoughts too.
Correct, because they were told.
Because they already knew, IMO.

That is the golden question to be answered Joss, but as we have discussed, until the guilty party is found accountable or the DNA in/on Madeleine's poor body reveals the 'who' and 'when', it's all unfortunately speculation and discussion.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Joss on 28.01.15 14:02

@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Montclair wrote: They knew within days that she wasn't going to be found because they were told by various law enforcement people that she would not be found as she is either abducted and in a different country, or she has been killed.

The rest of the charade has IMO all been about maintaining the pretense that she is alive to keep the McCanns and the tapas group out of hot water for neglect (or death by neglect).







Or most likely they knew she wasn't going to be found because the parents knew what happened to her.
Yes, my thoughts too.
Correct, because they were told.
Because they already knew, IMO.

That is the golden question to be answered Joss, but as we have discussed, until the guilty party is found accountable or the DNA in/on Madeleine's poor body reveals the 'who' and 'when', it's all unfortunately speculation and discussion.
Then i think we will be speculating & discussing until the stars fall out of the sky IMO. There are some, actually a lot of missing child cases where the children are never found, but sometimes someone in some of those cases gets charged and convicted without a body if enough circumstantial evidence can be gathered to make a case. Although i am not sure if that happens in the U.K.?

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by woodforthetrees on 28.01.15 16:00

@Joss wrote:
@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@Montclair wrote: They knew within days that she wasn't going to be found because they were told by various law enforcement people that she would not be found as she is either abducted and in a different country, or she has been killed.

The rest of the charade has IMO all been about maintaining the pretense that she is alive to keep the McCanns and the tapas group out of hot water for neglect (or death by neglect).







Or most likely they knew she wasn't going to be found because the parents knew what happened to her.
Yes, my thoughts too.
Correct, because they were told.
Because they already knew, IMO.

That is the golden question to be answered Joss, but as we have discussed, until the guilty party is found accountable or the DNA in/on Madeleine's poor body reveals the 'who' and 'when', it's all unfortunately speculation and discussion.
Then i think we will be speculating & discussing until the stars fall out of the sky IMO. There are some, actually a lot of missing child cases where the children are never found, but sometimes someone in some of those cases gets charged and convicted without a body if enough circumstantial evidence can be gathered to make a case. Although i am not sure if that happens in the U.K.?
Yes, that's exactly what i think will happen. The chances of finding the guilty party now and/or discovering the body are practically zero, especially with so many people being involved in the investigation and so much media attention around the world. I suspect that this will fizzle out when everybody stops making money and jobs off the back of it. Sad state of affairs really.

Unfortunately, if there was enough evidence to charge someone without a body, it would have been done by now, either in Portugal or the UK, but there is obviously still not enough collective pieces to stand up in court, so the search for that final piece of evidence (the body of the killer) continues..

If the SY theory is to be believed and they are searching for a paedo, then for me, the only glimmer of hope is that they match some existing DNA evidence they could currently have on their files to a suspect who has up until now not been on police DNA records but then comes on for another offence.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by woodforthetrees on 28.01.15 16:09

No body, but....

"A forensic breakthrough in the case is announced after items found and sent for forensic testing."

which could be e.g DNA on a murder weapon of the perp and the victim, of an item of the victims clothing with the perps Semen on. Put that with alibi statements of the suspects, witness statements, circumstantial evidence and if the case is strong enough it'll stand up.

Especially if the perp/s are racked with guilt and subsequently confess when faced with the long list of evidence before trial.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by LombardySkeptik on 28.01.15 20:47

@Joss wrote:
@Portia wrote:Do we know who asked for Maddie to be made a WOC?

Do we have any evidence it was requested by or on behalf of  her parents?

Or did some child-care organization in the UK do that, in the best interests of the child, and it was spun, making it look it was an act of free will of the Mecs, in order to conceal that?
 
 

IN THE MATTER OF MADELEINE BETH MCCANN 



Judgement of Mrs Justice Hogg at the High Court, Family Division, RCJ, London,7th July 2008,

in open court Madeleine went missing on 3 May 2007 just a few days before her 4th



birthday, while she was holidaying with her family in the Algarve in Portugal.On 17 May 2007 Madeleine’s parents invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under the InherentJurisdiction of the Court, and The Child Abduction and Custody Act, and the Hague Convention. Theysought various orders and directions aimed at ascertaining the whereabouts and recovery of Madeleine.I became involved with the proceedings shortly afterwards.On 2 April 2008 Madeleine became a Ward of this Court, and since that date has remained a Ward.At all times jurisdiction was assumed by the Court because, there being no evidence to the contrary, itis presumed Madeleine is alive.She is a British Citizen, and like her parents habitually resident here.The current application was made on 2 April 2008 by the parents seeking disclosure of information anddocuments from the Chief Constable of Leicestershire to assist them and their own investigations intheir search for Madeleine. Such are the complexities of the issues involved other interested partieswere invited and joined to the application, and directions given for the hearing today.The parties have reached an accommodation whereby the Chief Constable will provide to Madeleine’s parents contact details of members of the public who had themselves contacted the parents or their solicitors, and which on receipt were immediately passed to the Chief Constable, together with a brief resume of the information given.The parents do not wish to pursue other aspects of the application, and save for the draft consent order  being approved by this Court wish to withdraw their application and seek leave to do so.
I have no criticism of the parents in making this application. They have behaved responsibly and reasonably throughout.I have considered the documents provided to this Court by the various parties, and have concluded thatthe agreement reached by the parties is entirely appropriate, and that the parents should be permitted to withdraw the balance of their application.I will make the Order by Consent as sought. In particular paragraph 1 of the Order made on the 22May 2007 shall be varied with the words:
[size=69]“The terms of this paragraph shall not apply to the Chief Constable of Leicestershire or anyother United Kingdom law enforcement agency. And for the avoidance of doubt all theevidence submitted to the Court and the Case Summaries and Skeleton Arguments remainconfidential to the Court save that the Chief Constable may use his discretion to disclose hisevidence, case summary and skeleton arguments filed in this Court and the Orders of 22 May2007, 2 April 2008 and this Order. Any other documents and their contents are not to bedisclosed to any person or published save in accordance with Orders already made by theCourt or further Order of the Court”.[/size]
[size=68]It may be noted that neither of the Parents is present today. I let it be known last week that providingtheir legal team was fully instructed neither parent need be present, and I would not criticise or bear any ill-feeling towards them if they chose to stay away. It was my decision as they have sufferedenough, and I wished to ease their burden.I know the police authorities and other official law enforcement agencies in this country, in Portugaland elsewhere have striven and will continue to strive to trace Madeleine.
[/size]
 
 
I urge anyone who has any information however small or tenuous to come forward now so that further enquiries can be made.There is, of course, as least one person who knows what has happened to Madeleine, and where shemay be found.I ponder about that person: whether that person has a heart and can understand what it must be like for Madeleine to have been torn and secreted from her parents and siblings whom she loves and felt securewith, and whom no doubt misses and grieves for. Whether that person has a conscience or any feelingof guilt, remorse or even cares about the hurt which has been caused to an innocent little girl: whether that person has a faith and belief, and what explanation or justification that person will give to God.I entreat that person whoever and wherever you may be to show mercy and compassion, and comeforward now to tell us where Madeleine is to be found.I hope and pray that Madeleine will be found very soon alive and well.I confirm the Wardship and Madeleine will remain a Ward of Court until further Order of the Court.The case will be reserved to myself subject to my availability[size=68]http://www.scribd.com/doc/25027454/Judgment-Madeleine-McCann-Ward-of-Court
[/size]

i think this is other interesting aspect - what else were they seeking

LombardySkeptik

Posts : 80
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 9 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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