Libel Trial Postponement: The Truth about the McCanns' Lie - by Nigel Moore.

tasprin wrote:A very good, straightforward report from the Portugal Resident


McCanns “day in court” collapses in disarray

Portugalpress on June 18, 2014

By NATASHA DONN

It was meant to be their “day in court”, according to the BBC, but Kate and Gerry McCann - pursuing a long-running civil action for defamation against the former detective who led the original hunt for their missing daughter - were out of luck. Half an hour before they turned up to testify at Lisbon’s 1º Vara do Tribunal Cível, the man they are demanding €1.2 million in damages from slipped in unnoticed and presented a document revoking the mandate of his lawyer. Gonçalo Amaral is playing his cards characteristically close to his chest - not even talking to the press about his motivation for sacking lawyer Vítor Santos Oliveira.

This was the fourth time the case opened in 2009 has been stopped in its tracks, but only the first time the cause has come directly from Amaral  .

Previously, hearings were adjourned due to illness of Santos’ son, a break-in at the judge’s home and a legal technicality.

Nonetheless, the McCanns expressed their “utter frustration” on the steps of the court, calling the latest hitch a “blatant and cynical attempt” to wear them down.

Kate McCann said: “Every time we come here, we have to make arrangements for our children to be looked after.“ Every time he postpones the case like this, it brings us more pain and distress.”  

Quizzed over whether she had any sympathy for Amaral’s personal plight - he has had his bank accounts frozen since the McCanns opened their civil case against him - Mrs McCann said: “Mr Amaral is not the victim in this.”

The hearing has now been adjourned until July 8, with closing arguments scheduled for July 10. Sky News reporter Robert Nesbitt explained that despite this week’s delay, the judge’s final decision was always expected to take “a few weeks”. Now, due to the statutory legal holiday in August, it is unlikely that her decision will come before September.

The case hinges on the McCanns’ contention that Dr Amaral’s book, ‘Maddie: The Truth of the Lie’, defames them.

As many are already aware, the book centres on Amaral’s theory that Madeleine died in apartment 5a on that fateful family holiday in Praia da Luz seven years ago, and her body was disposed of. The McCanns vehemently deny this, and say the theory has caused them pain and distress.

They also claim it has hampered the search for Madeleine, which has to date cost millions of euros and involved the police forces of two countries. It has undoubtedly been the most high-profile missing person’s case of all time, with stories relating to possible suspects constantly appearing in the media.

A massive eight-day ground search coordinated by the Metropolitan police in Praia da Luz earlier this month is reported to have cost an estimated £50,000 a day despite having found “no significant clues” as to what happened to the three year old. British police are now understood to be keen to interview eight people of interest, including three suspected drug dealers. PJ police are understood to be considering whether to give the official go ahead to these interviews. By NATASHA DONN news@algarveresident.com
http://portugalresident.com/mccanns-%E2%80%9Cday-in-court%E2%80%9D-collapses-in-disarray

Upsy Daisy wrote:Sorry if this has already been addresses, just scooted to the end...

gerry says 'today is a blatant and cynical attempt to wear us down, we're not going to give up, we'll keep going'...

 yes, you have just admitted it gerry, you are on the brink of being worn down to the point of defeat! Because you are hereby admitting that you are in fact capable of being worn down until the truth comes out. It' s like he just cannot bear to lose at anything. A really bad loser. But now he believes his own lies so much that he is fighting not for Madeleine but for himself, his own ego. more interested in saving his own skin til the bitter end. Madeleine gets a token mention, as usual. They look very exhausted. Kate looks horrendous and has aged very, very much lately.

lj wrote:

tasprin wrote:A very good, straightforward report from the Portugal Resident


McCanns “day in court” collapses in disarray

Portugalpress on June 18, 2014

By NATASHA DONN

It was meant to be their “day in court”, according to the BBC, but Kate and Gerry McCann - pursuing a long-running civil action for defamation against the former detective who led the original hunt for their missing daughter - were out of luck. Half an hour before they turned up to testify at Lisbon’s 1º Vara do Tribunal Cível, the man they are demanding €1.2 million in damages from slipped in unnoticed and presented a document revoking the mandate of his lawyer. Gonçalo Amaral is playing his cards characteristically close to his chest - not even talking to the press about his motivation for sacking lawyer Vítor Santos Oliveira.

This was the fourth time the case opened in 2009 has been stopped in its tracks, but only the first time the cause has come directly from Amaral  .

Previously, hearings were adjourned due to illness of Santos’ son, a break-in at the judge’s home and a legal technicality.

Nonetheless, the McCanns expressed their “utter frustration” on the steps of the court, calling the latest hitch a “blatant and cynical attempt” to wear them down.

Kate McCann said: “Every time we come here, we have to make arrangements for our children to be looked after.“ Every time he postpones the case like this, it brings us more pain and distress.”  

Quizzed over whether she had any sympathy for Amaral’s personal plight - he has had his bank accounts frozen since the McCanns opened their civil case against him - Mrs McCann said: “Mr Amaral is not the victim in this.”

The hearing has now been adjourned until July 8, with closing arguments scheduled for July 10. Sky News reporter Robert Nesbitt explained that despite this week’s delay, the judge’s final decision was always expected to take “a few weeks”. Now, due to the statutory legal holiday in August, it is unlikely that her decision will come before September.

The case hinges on the McCanns’ contention that Dr Amaral’s book, ‘Maddie: The Truth of the Lie’, defames them.

As many are already aware, the book centres on Amaral’s theory that Madeleine died in apartment 5a on that fateful family holiday in Praia da Luz seven years ago, and her body was disposed of. The McCanns vehemently deny this, and say the theory has caused them pain and distress.

They also claim it has hampered the search for Madeleine, which has to date cost millions of euros and involved the police forces of two countries. It has undoubtedly been the most high-profile missing person’s case of all time, with stories relating to possible suspects constantly appearing in the media.

A massive eight-day ground search coordinated by the Metropolitan police in Praia da Luz earlier this month is reported to have cost an estimated £50,000 a day despite having found “no significant clues” as to what happened to the three year old. British police are now understood to be keen to interview eight people of interest, including three suspected drug dealers. PJ police are understood to be considering whether to give the official go ahead to these interviews. By NATASHA DONN news@algarveresident.com
http://portugalresident.com/mccanns-%E2%80%9Cday-in-court%E2%80%9D-collapses-in-disarray

Not a bad article, considering they clearly state it was only the first time it was because of Dr. Amaral the proceedings had to be postponed.  IE if the red part was in the article, is that correct tasprin?  It would have been so nice if any of the reporters had asked: "what were the other 3?"

That's one (only one of the many) reasons why Tony's contributions here are so important: he's a kind of encyclopedia of facts of this case and a stckler for completeness.

PeterMac wrote:

missmar1 wrote:
Just a thought Cordelia.....wouldn't the Mccann's lawyer have known what papers ( court woc ) the Mccann's would need when they first set out on this libel trial ?     She has had YEARS to prepare for the final stage !   
 If it turns out she didn't know about the need for those papers then, as their lawyer, imo she should have done her homework better.

But we also remember the finest Libel Lawyers in the world, who had also had YEARS to prepare, and had gone to the trouble and expense of preparing a sworn affidavit . .  had NO EVIDENCE to put before the Court of Abduction.

However good the lawyer, however mendacious the spokesman, however hard they may try, they cannot create Facts where there are none.

missmar1 wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

missmar1 wrote:
Just a thought Cordelia.....wouldn't the Mccann's lawyer have known what papers ( court woc ) the Mccann's would need when they first set out on this libel trial ?     She has had YEARS to prepare for the final stage !   
 If it turns out she didn't know about the need for those papers then, as their lawyer, imo she should have done her homework better.

But we also remember the finest Libel Lawyers in the world, who had also had YEARS to prepare, and had gone to the trouble and expense of preparing a sworn affidavit . .  had NO EVIDENCE to put before the Court of Abduction.

However good the lawyer, however mendacious the spokesman, however hard they may try, they cannot create Facts where there are none.

Hi PeterMac,

Yes, the oh so mighty lawyer firm  - had to admit in court they had no actual evidence of abduction.....  wait for it :

Their clients TOLD them that it was an abduction !

missmar1 wrote:
Just a thought Cordelia.....wouldn't the Mccann's lawyer have known what papers ( court woc ) the Mccann's would need when they first set out on this libel trial ?     She has had YEARS to prepare for the final stage !   
 If it turns out she didn't know about the need for those papers then, as their lawyer, imo she should have done her homework better.

aiyoyo wrote:
It is patently clear (to me anyway) that the Mccanns were not aware they need authorisation.
Else why would they deliberately file on behalf to represent Madeleine knowing false representation is a crime.  I suspect since WOC is an issue unclear to them whether they need permission or not, I'm inclined to think they'd not informed ID about it.  Hence it is not a question of ID not doing her duty; rather it is a question of Mccs themselves being unclear of the limitation or otherwise of the woc.  
. . .

aiyoyo wrote:

missmar1 wrote:
Just a thought Cordelia.....wouldn't the Mccann's lawyer have known what papers ( court woc ) the Mccann's would need when they first set out on this libel trial ?     She has had YEARS to prepare for the final stage !  
If it turns out she didn't know about the need for those papers then, as their lawyer, imo she should have done her homework better.

It is patently clear (to me anyway) that the Mccanns were not aware they need authorisation.
Else why would they deliberately file on behalf to represent Madeleine knowing false representation is a crime.  I suspect since WOC is an issue unclear to them whether they need permission or not, I'm inclined to think they'd not informed ID about it.  Hence it is not a question of ID not doing her duty; rather it is a question of Mccs themselves being unclear of the limitation or otherwise of the woc.  

They were given 30-days (since two weeks ago I think, off hand I can't remember date of Judge's latest ruling)  to produce the documentation.  This document is useful only if they win the case. Otherwise it will be a worthless piece of paper since the Judge already ruled that in the absence of said documentation then Madeleine as plaintiff will be removed and Madeleine's claims against the defendants will be deemed nullified since the Judge already ruled the McCanns had no authorisation to represent her.

tasprin wrote:

lj wrote:

tasprin wrote:A very good, straightforward report from the Portugal Resident


McCanns “day in court” collapses in disarray

Portugalpress on June 18, 2014

By NATASHA DONN

It was meant to be their “day in court”, according to the BBC, but Kate and Gerry McCann - pursuing a long-running civil action for defamation against the former detective who led the original hunt for their missing daughter - were out of luck. Half an hour before they turned up to testify at Lisbon’s 1º Vara do Tribunal Cível, the man they are demanding €1.2 million in damages from slipped in unnoticed and presented a document revoking the mandate of his lawyer. Gonçalo Amaral is playing his cards characteristically close to his chest - not even talking to the press about his motivation for sacking lawyer Vítor Santos Oliveira.

This was the fourth time the case opened in 2009 has been stopped in its tracks, but only the first time the cause has come directly from Amaral  .

Previously, hearings were adjourned due to illness of Santos’ son, a break-in at the judge’s home and a legal technicality.

Nonetheless, the McCanns expressed their “utter frustration” on the steps of the court, calling the latest hitch a “blatant and cynical attempt” to wear them down.

Kate McCann said: “Every time we come here, we have to make arrangements for our children to be looked after.“ Every time he postpones the case like this, it brings us more pain and distress.”  

Quizzed over whether she had any sympathy for Amaral’s personal plight - he has had his bank accounts frozen since the McCanns opened their civil case against him - Mrs McCann said: “Mr Amaral is not the victim in this.”

The hearing has now been adjourned until July 8, with closing arguments scheduled for July 10. Sky News reporter Robert Nesbitt explained that despite this week’s delay, the judge’s final decision was always expected to take “a few weeks”. Now, due to the statutory legal holiday in August, it is unlikely that her decision will come before September.

The case hinges on the McCanns’ contention that Dr Amaral’s book, ‘Maddie: The Truth of the Lie’, defames them.

As many are already aware, the book centres on Amaral’s theory that Madeleine died in apartment 5a on that fateful family holiday in Praia da Luz seven years ago, and her body was disposed of. The McCanns vehemently deny this, and say the theory has caused them pain and distress.

They also claim it has hampered the search for Madeleine, which has to date cost millions of euros and involved the police forces of two countries. It has undoubtedly been the most high-profile missing person’s case of all time, with stories relating to possible suspects constantly appearing in the media.

A massive eight-day ground search coordinated by the Metropolitan police in Praia da Luz earlier this month is reported to have cost an estimated £50,000 a day despite having found “no significant clues” as to what happened to the three year old. British police are now understood to be keen to interview eight people of interest, including three suspected drug dealers. PJ police are understood to be considering whether to give the official go ahead to these interviews. By NATASHA DONN news@algarveresident.com
http://portugalresident.com/mccanns-%E2%80%9Cday-in-court%E2%80%9D-collapses-in-disarray

Not a bad article, considering they clearly state it was only the first time it was because of Dr. Amaral the proceedings had to be postponed.  IE if the red part was in the article, is that correct tasprin?  It would have been so nice if any of the reporters had asked: "what were the other 3?"

That's one (only one of the many) reasons why Tony's contributions here are so important: he's a kind of encyclopedia of facts of this case and a stckler for completeness.

lj, it's copied in full as it appears on the Portugal Resident. I've not added anything apart from highlighting. It gives the reasons for the three other postponements as, 'Previously, hearings were adjourned due to illness of Santos’ son, a break-in at the judge’s home and a legal technicality"

Poe wrote:

missmar1 wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

missmar1 wrote:
Just a thought Cordelia.....wouldn't the Mccann's lawyer have known what papers ( court woc ) the Mccann's would need when they first set out on this libel trial ?     She has had YEARS to prepare for the final stage !   
 If it turns out she didn't know about the need for those papers then, as their lawyer, imo she should have done her homework better.

But we also remember the finest Libel Lawyers in the world, who had also had YEARS to prepare, and had gone to the trouble and expense of preparing a sworn affidavit . .  had NO EVIDENCE to put before the Court of Abduction.

However good the lawyer, however mendacious the spokesman, however hard they may try, they cannot create Facts where there are none.

Hi PeterMac,

Yes, the oh so mighty lawyer firm  - had to admit in court they had no actual evidence of abduction.....  wait for it :

Their clients TOLD them that it was an abduction !

I have no legal expertise but I would have thought that all lawyers would insist on some kind of full disclosure indemnity.

So, if Isabel Duarte had been told by the McCanns about the woc she would have a legal duty to advise them of the full implications but been instructed by her clients to ignore it. However, if the McCanns failed to informed ID about the woc, she was under no obligation to investigate.

Isabel Duarte may be the best lawyer in the world (possibly not) but she can only follow her clients' instructions and work with the information she is given.

ultimaThule wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:

missmar1 wrote:
Just a thought Cordelia.....wouldn't the Mccann's lawyer have known what papers ( court woc ) the Mccann's would need when they first set out on this libel trial ?     She has had YEARS to prepare for the final stage !  
If it turns out she didn't know about the need for those papers then, as their lawyer, imo she should have done her homework better.

It is patently clear (to me anyway) that the Mccanns were not aware they need authorisation.
Else why would they deliberately file on behalf to represent Madeleine knowing false representation is a crime.  I suspect since WOC is an issue unclear to them whether they need permission or not, I'm inclined to think they'd not informed ID about it.  Hence it is not a question of ID not doing her duty; rather it is a question of Mccs themselves being unclear of the limitation or otherwise of the woc.  

They were given 30-days (since two weeks ago I think, off hand I can't remember date of Judge's latest ruling)  to produce the documentation.  This document is useful only if they win the case. Otherwise it will be a worthless piece of paper since the Judge already ruled that in the absence of said documentation then Madeleine as plaintiff will be removed and Madeleine's claims against the defendants will be deemed nullified since the Judge already ruled the McCanns had no authorisation to represent her.

Without having seen the order for Wardship in the case of MBM, I am assuming that care and control of the minor was given to her parents.  

I find it hard to believe that prior to applying for Wardship in May 2007 and throughout the subsequent proceedings which spanned the best part of a year, the McCanns were at no time informed of the provisions and restrictions inherent in Wardship and, in particular, of the need to obtain the consent of the Court before they took any 'important step in the child's life', aiyoyo.

I also find it hard to believe that the McCanns were unaware that instituting legal proceedings on the Ward's behalf constituted an 'important step' for which the consent of the Court was required.and, if this should be the case, it would seem that their UK lawyers have been exceedingly remiss in not appraising their clients of the full terms of Wardship and how it may impact on any future actions they were minded to take in respect of the Ward.

As there is no equivalent to Ward of Court in the Portuguese justice system, I would not expect its lawyers to be aware of how this status may affect any proceedings instituted in Portugal on behalf of a British minor and in such cases it is, imo, incumbent on the client to disclose all relevant information to their lawyer(s) before decisions are made.  

That said, when the PJ re-opened their investigation in October last year much was made in the Portuguese and British MSM of the McCanns intention to appy for assistente status which would enable them to work alongside the prosecutor and the police.   When this did not come to pass, I reviewed the press reports from that time and found that their Portuguese criminal lawyer had said only that his clients 'may' apply for this status.

When reading the relevant part of the Portuguese Penal Code, I learned that only those parents and guardians who hold full parental responsibility for their child/ren can apply for this status and it seems to me that the probable reason why no more was heard about the McCanns applying to become assistentes is that either they disclosed the Wardship to Mr Alves or he discovered it, and its implication for any such application, for himself.  

With regard to possible 'false representation', I intend to give this matter further consideration and come back to this thread in due course.

Doug D wrote:
That can’t be the case as the judge, having seen the WOC provided by GA has given the Mc’s 30 days to come up with any authorization they had to issue proceedings in M’s name.

jeanmonroe wrote:Here's a 'poser'

As all the 'pros' scream that GA is a 'bent, corrupt, and stitcher upper of innocent people' etc.,

He would surely KNOW the 'signs' of a 'corrupt investigation' wouldn't he?

He would KNOW the modus operadi, of such a 'cover up', wouldn't he?

So the Met KNOW, he KNOWS, what is 'going on' don't they?

But they still plough on, with a perceived 'cover up/ whitewash' regardless.

Although a 'corrupt' cop, as the pros say, has said, iho, that is what the Met 'investigation', ARE trying to do.

He just dosen't KNOW, as yet, the 'WHY'

Plebgate police officers 'lied' (backed 100% by the Met Chief Commissioner, BHH) their way all the way to the doors of a high court room, THEN, and only then, did they 'fess up' resulting in a 30 year 'career' cop being JAILED for 'perverting the course of justice'

GA 'knows' exactly what the UK 'protectionists' are up to and is saying so loud and clear in Portugal.

Good on him, i say.

The McCanns, and the Met Police's 'problem' is, that even if a child's 'body' were found, all that would prove is that somebody died.

NOT who DID that 'crime', if that is what it was.

And the very LAST, admitted on record, person to have SEEN a LIVE, now 'missing' child, was that 'missing' child's OWN father!

Should of course have been Jane Tanner, but Met Police have PUBLICLY 'ruled' her 'sighting' out,  so hey ho, it wasn't her, the LAST person to have SEEN a LIVE Madeleine WAS Gerry McCann!