Re: LAST DAY OF LIBEL TRIAL 8th July 2014 DISCUSSION AND NEWS

by joel27 08.07.14 13:22

sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Why is the first thought, what brought out the need to raise it, is there something new that suggests or adds to the previous findings.

Edit Why just mention blood ?

by Montclair 08.07.14 13:23

stillsloppingout wrote:
Brian Griffin wrote:
candyfloss wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Libel trial now adjourned for a while. Court still demanding Amaral reveal earnings from his book.
Ah, now we're getting to what this is really all about!
Correct . That is the key point .if that information is given to the court .you can bet he will be wiped out by the said amount .
His failing to speak is not good either , he may have been grilled but you DO NOT LIE when speaking the truth .
He now has to talk outside the court to the press .

The court is not asking for this information, it is Isabel Duarte in order delay proceedings.

Also, the judge refused the requests of Kate, Gerry and Gonçalo to make statements. The McCanns appealed and the appeals court accepted it. You can always ask GA's former lawyer why no appeal was made on his behalf.

by Guest 08.07.14 13:23

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This confirms that the twins started school in September 2009.

It's possible that the school has its own bus service for pupils living at a distance but their website is down and I can't check that.

by Brian Griffin 08.07.14 13:24

Seek truth wrote:
Brian Griffin wrote:
candyfloss wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Libel trial now adjourned for a while. Court still demanding Amaral reveal earnings from his book.
Ah, now we're getting to what this is really all about!
Exact figure?

Why would they want that if the mccanns are going to lose anyway?
Oh yes they always win

Yep.

by Guest 08.07.14 13:24

sallypelt wrote:Joana Morais ‏@xklamation · 13 hrs
#mccann hearing session of 10th postponed due to mccanns request for confidential fiscal documentation - "dilatory manouvers" indeed

See, that's what I meant.

Providing some such legally binding document could only harm him if the Mecs were vindicated, which they won't be

Perhaps Mr Mec will not address the Court until he knows what's in the kitty, or am I wrong?

by Tangled Web 08.07.14 13:25

Portia wrote:
beijos wrote:
candyfloss wrote:OMG LOOK!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Amaral refused permission to speak in trial. He and McCanns blocked at first, but McCanns appealed. He didn't, now too late.

Would him speaking actually add anything to his defence?

No

And not being in the dock also prevents his being grilled on behalf of the Mecs

Which is just as well, as it provides for a very less stressful occasion

Also, this clearly demonstrates the astuteness of the trial judge, Dona Melo y Castro, and her respect for the formalities of the litigation

Wonderful!

I hope this is the case but does it not look suspicious that GA didn't want to 'defend' himself? He's only speaking the truth so he has nothing to worry about. I just think it'll give the press over here more ammunition against him. Also, as the MSM seem to be less fearful in their reporting, GA appears to have missed a chance to get some actual facts out.

Tangled Web.

by Guest 08.07.14 13:26

Montclair wrote:
stillsloppingout wrote:
Brian Griffin wrote:
candyfloss wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] martinbrunt @skymartinbrunt · [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Libel trial now adjourned for a while. Court still demanding Amaral reveal earnings from his book.
Ah, now we're getting to what this is really all about!
Correct . That is the key point .if that information is given to the court .you can bet he will be wiped out by the said amount .
His failing to speak is not good either , he may have been grilled but you DO NOT LIE when speaking the truth .
He now has to talk outside the court to the press .

The court is not asking for this information, it is Isabel Duarte in order delay proceedings.

Also, the judge refused the requests of Kate, Gerry and Gonçalo to make statements. The McCanns appealed and the appeals court accepted it. You can always ask GA's former lawyer why no appeal was made on his behalf.

Is this the reason he was sacked Montclair? Did he not appeal and Mr Amaral found out too late?

by View-from-Ireland 08.07.14 13:27

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This confirms that the twins started school in September 2009.

It's possible that the school has its own bus service for pupils living at a distance but their website is down and I can't check that.

My point was would parents not arrange for somebody to wait with the children for the bus? Tony's comment that somebody claimed the twins used to wait alone, unsupervised, at a young age is what struck me.

I wouldn't let them out of sight until much older. You often see parents waiting with their children for the bus.

by Miraflores 08.07.14 13:27

And I can't think of any 4 -5 year old traveling by bus without their parents...oh wait its the McCanns we're dealing with.

That's not so: children can and do travel on school buses without parents, especially in rural areas or ones being sent to Catholic schools, which aren't so abundant as C of E village schools. The driver has to have a CRB/DBD check.

I don't think that Sean could possibly have been on a school bus prior to September 2009; nursery schooling isn't compulsory, therefore there would be no entitlement to access the school transport buses.

I don't suppose the Portuguese judge knows this though - it's all a bit complicated, even for those of us who live in the UK.

by Guest 08.07.14 13:29

sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Which dog, Gerry?

Or, to be precise, which one of TWO dogs did not smell blood?

And if not blood, what DID it detect and signal to its experienced handler on camera, for all to see?

Any other bodily fluids, perhaps?

Oh, sorry, Mrs has already ruled those out of the equation as well, long ago

So, nothing left to smell really, is there?

Problem solved!

BTW: how did Gerry come to the conclusion 'the (?) dog did not smell blood'
Did the Mecs have counter-expertise?
No, thought not!

by ChippyM 08.07.14 13:30

joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Why is the first thought, what brought out the need to raise it, is there something new that suggests or adds to the previous findings.

Edit Why just mention blood ?

Yes I would like to see the video of this, did Gerry just blurt it out at the end?

by sallypelt 08.07.14 13:33

ChippyM wrote:
joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Why is the first thought, what brought out the need to raise it, is there something new that suggests or adds to the previous findings.

Edit Why just mention blood ?

Yes I would like to see the video of this, did Gerry just blurt it out at the end?

Gerry McCann is trying to discredit the very thing that stands in his way........the dogs. But this is one thing that cannot be explained away, so when he was on the public platform, today, he took the decision to bring the dogs up, when no one had asked him about them, but, thankfully, the judge told him to SHUT UP, or words to the effect.

by Guest 08.07.14 13:34

binarybox ‏@whatsupdoc2007 [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Finished for today but Thursday has been put back by [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] s for fiscal info on GA book sales.

by Daryl Dixon 08.07.14 13:36

Montclair wrote:
Correct . That is the key point .if that information is given to the court .you can bet he will be wiped out by the said amount .
His failing to speak is not good either , he may have been grilled but you DO NOT LIE when speaking the truth .
He now has to talk outside the court to the press .

The court is not asking for this information, it is Isabel Duarte in order delay proceedings.

Also, the judge refused the requests of Kate, Gerry and Gonçalo to make statements. The McCanns appealed and the appeals court accepted it. You can always ask GA's former lawyer why no appeal was made on his behalf.

There is surely no need to ask GA's former lawyer anything. A lawyer works on the instructions of his clients therefore the decision not to appeal would have been GA's.

Personally, I think it is the court, and not Isabel Duarte, asking for full disclosure of GA's assets.

by Woofer 08.07.14 13:36

It`s not as if Goncalo has benefited by any sales of his book as the McCanns had all his assets frozen IIRC.

by sallypelt 08.07.14 13:36

candyfloss wrote:binarybox ‏@whatsupdoc2007 [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Finished for today but Thursday has been put back by [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] s for fiscal info on GA book sales.

The McCann's have asked for "confidentiality documents" from what I read on Twitter

by Hicks 08.07.14 13:37

sallypelt wrote:
ChippyM wrote:
joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Why is the first thought, what brought out the need to raise it, is there something new that suggests or adds to the previous findings.

Edit Why just mention blood ?

Yes I would like to see the video of this, did Gerry just blurt it out at the end?

Gerry McCann is trying to discredit the very thing that stands in his way........the dogs. But this is one thing that cannot be explained away, so when he was on the public platform, today, he took the decision to bring the dogs up, when no one had asked him about them, but, thankfully, the judge told him to SHUT UP, or words to the effect.

Mans best friend..........and hopefully Goncalo Amaral's too!

by Guest 08.07.14 13:37

So there was another hearing on the 10th??? Now postponed because of the McCanns?? dontgetit

Joana Morais ‏@xklamation [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] hearing session of 10th postponed due to mccanns request for confidential fiscal documentation - "dilatory manouvers" indeed

Siobhan Feely ‏@SiobhanFeely [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
so postponed cause [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] want to know fiscal info on book sales ??

by Guest 08.07.14 13:38

Daryl Dixon wrote:
Montclair wrote:
Correct . That is the key point .if that information is given to the court .you can bet he will be wiped out by the said amount .
His failing to speak is not good either , he may have been grilled but you DO NOT LIE when speaking the truth .
He now has to talk outside the court to the press .

The court is not asking for this information, it is Isabel Duarte in order delay proceedings.

Also, the judge refused the requests of Kate, Gerry and Gonçalo to make statements. The McCanns appealed and the appeals court accepted it. You can always ask GA's former lawyer why no appeal was made on his behalf.
There is surely no need to ask GA's former lawyer anything. A lawyer works on the instructions of his clients therefore the decision not to appeal would have been GA's.

Personally, I think it is the court, and not Isabel Duarte, asking for full disclosure of GA's assets.

Good

Shows the Judge is not leaving any loose ends available for the appeal case

Good Judge!

by sallypelt 08.07.14 13:38

Joana Morais ‏@xklamation · 13 hrs
#mccann hearing session of 10th postponed due to mccanns request for confidential fiscal documentation - "dilatory manouvers" indeed

by tasprin 08.07.14 13:38

candyfloss wrote:Kay Burley has issued a correction!!

Kay Burley ‏@KayBurley [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
PA correction on Kate [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]: "Sean asked me in October 'Mr Amaral said you HID Madeleine'. substituting 'hid' for 'killed'!!

Sean sat quietly with a bus-load of school kids, all listening to the news, and when he got home he questioned his mother about "Mr Amaral's" comment that she "Hid Madeleine". About as likely as pigs flying, OR maybe Sean is a sceptic too.

by ChippyM 08.07.14 13:39

Woofer wrote:It`s not as if Goncalo has benefited by any sales of his book as the McCanns had all his assets frozen IIRC.

maybe that's what the judge will see. If the sales were meagre, it means it didn't actually reach many people (for one reason or another), so how could it have the effect the McCann's claim?

by Seek truth 08.07.14 13:39

ChippyM wrote:
joel27 wrote:
sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Why is the first thought, what brought out the need to raise it, is there something new that suggests or adds to the previous findings.

Edit Why just mention blood ?

Yes I would like to see the video of this, did Gerry just blurt it out at the end?

Oh so he did ASK THE DOGS! (From his favourite speech)

15/19 markers ?.

by Guest 08.07.14 13:41

ChippyM wrote:
Woofer wrote:It`s not as if Goncalo has benefited by any sales of his book as the McCanns had all his assets frozen IIRC.

maybe that's what the judge will see. If the sales were meagre, it means it didn't actually reach many people (for one reason or another), so how could it have the effect the McCann's claim?

Good thinking

by worriedmum 08.07.14 13:41

Portia wrote:
sallypelt wrote:David Wuffler ‏@Heavy_Dave · 1m
In Lisbon, Gerry #mccann answers a question that hadn't been asked : "I just want to say that the dog did not smell blood."

Which dog, Gerry?

Or, to be precise, which one of TWO dogs did not smell blood?

And if not blood, what DID it detect and signal to its experiences handler on camera, for all to see?

Any other bodily fluids, perhaps?

Oh, sorry, Mrs has already ruled those out of the equation as well, long ago

So, nothing left to smell really, is there?

Problem solved!

Just thought of a story I was told about a child with its first bike. Eager to try it out on the street, the child's mother agreed as long as the child didn't go 'around the corner'-ie out of sight..... 'So make sure you do as you are told-because the birds in the trees will tell me if you go around the corner...'
The child cycled off. A while later, the child returned.

''Mummy......er....have the birds said anything to you?''

by **Tony Bennett** 08.07.14 13:43

Apologies if already posted - from the Daily Mail just now:

Speaking to reporters after the hearing today, Mr McCann said that Mr Amaral's claims had caused a 'tremendous amount of damage' but he hoped that people would now see that all he and his wife wanted was a conclusion to the case.

'We want to make clear that it is a very complex investigation, it is a huge dossier and we just want as much as possible to be worked through,' he said.

He hoped continuing investigations would catch whoever snatched his daughter. He said: 'Whoever took Madeleine is still out there and whoever the person is they must have been laughing these past six years at what was told in the book, that there was no predator out there.

'There was and he or she may strike again.'

Read more: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by jeanmonroe 08.07.14 13:47

GM said (verbatim) "whoever took Madeleine is still out there, whoever that person is, or, or persons, they must have been laughing during these last 6 years at what's been told in the book, that there was no abduction that, that, y'know there's no predator out there, there is and he may str, he or SHE or THEY might strike again"

SHE? SHE? WHO the fcuk is SHE?

Guess that BLOWS 'Tanner MAN' right off their website then!

Unless, of course, Tannerman could have been a 'drag' artist!

But i reckon 'eagle eyed' Jane would have seen through that 'disguise', in an instant, even FROM the 50 (FIFTY) METRES as BOTH the McCanns in sworn, written, SIGNED, statements have said THAT was the 'distance' JT 'SAW' the 'abductor/predator' carrying Madeleine off, FROM!

Can't wait for their 'new' FEMALE 'suspect' to take her place, on their website!

Probably KM, (K Middlleton).............they wish!

Would add a nice touch of 'class' though, wouldn't it?

"Our Maddie WAS 'abducted' by royalty, we'd expect nothing less really, to be honest, as she was the most 'beautiful child that was ever born, Ask Jon'

Strangely though, NO 'predator' had 'abducted' any child in PDL in the 7 YEARS 'before' they went there, and NO 'predator' has 'abducted' any child in PDL 'since' they left there!

That's NOT a good 'strike' rate is it?

by sallypelt 08.07.14 13:47

Love Don't Live Here ‏@PoveySarah · 13 hrs
GM was ordained to the highest 33° Sovereign Inspector rank, at 1330 on Friday 13 July 2007, at Freemasons Hall, London .#mccann

Avril ‏@Harebell22 · 13 hrs
@PoveySarah Thought it was 31st July? You're probably right! Regardless, G #mccann was raised to the same rank as "friends" Tony and Gordon.

Make of that what you will

by Guest 08.07.14 13:48

Tony Bennett wrote:Apologies if already posted - from the Daily Mail just now:

Speaking to reporters after the hearing today, Mr McCann said that Mr Amaral's claims had caused a 'tremendous amount of damage' but he hoped that people would now see that all he and his wife wanted was a conclusion to the case.

'We want to make clear that it is a very complex investigation, it is a huge dossier and we just want as much as possible to be worked through,' he said.

He hoped continuing investigations would catch whoever snatched his daughter. He said: 'Whoever took Madeleine is still out there and whoever the person is they must have been laughing these past six years at what was told in the book, that there was no predator out there.

'There was and he or she may strike again.'

Read more: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

SHE ???

So, having ~~wasted~~ spent the past seven years hunting for TannerMAN cum assorted suis, we are now gingerly prepared for the investigation turning towards the other 51 50 % of Mankind?

by tasprin 08.07.14 13:48

Tony Bennett wrote:Apologies if already posted - from the Daily Mail just now:

Speaking to reporters after the hearing today, Mr McCann said that Mr Amaral's claims had caused a 'tremendous amount of damage' but he hoped that people would now see that all he and his wife wanted was a conclusion to the case.

'We want to make clear that it is a very complex investigation, it is a huge dossier and we just want as much as possible to be worked through,' he said.

He hoped continuing investigations would catch whoever snatched his daughter. He said: 'Whoever took Madeleine is still out there and whoever the person is they must have been laughing these past six years at what was told in the book, that there was no predator out there.

'There was and he or she may strike again.'

Read more: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]