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

tiny wrote:

Versailles wrote:

MrsC wrote:

tiny wrote:Looks to me like Madeleine( the cash cow) is not working any more and they are using one of the twins to take her place. 

It's just surprising they didn't use the little girl, because in terms of a good marketing ploy the girl is better/sweeter looking (IMO) than the boy and would have garnered more sympathy for them.

Yes, I have also wondered this. Amelie is a beautiful child.
Sean looks so much like Gerry, maybe thats why they use him?
I dont think that Madeleine and Amelie looked like sisters at all, M looked like Kate, and Amelie looks nothing like either.

I have no doubt her turn will be next,after they see how much £$£$£££ this boy brings in.

PeterMac wrote:

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Where is Amelie in this? Is she mute? Inconsequential? Seemingly transparent like Maddie?

Whooshed !

PeterMac wrote:

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Where is Amelie in this? Is she mute? Inconsequential? Seemingly transparent like Maddie?

Whooshed !

canada12 wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

rainbow-fairy wrote:
Where is Amelie in this? Is she mute? Inconsequential? Seemingly transparent like Maddie?

Whooshed !

Twins tend to share everything - they're usually a lot closer than ordinary siblings. I would suggest that whatever Sean says to his parents has likely been discussed with his sister beforehand, and the two of them are likely a lot more savvy about what's "out there" than Kate and Gerry may know or want to admit to themselves. Perhaps Sean is more forthcoming with their parents than Amelie is. Perhaps he's the "spokesman" for the two of them.

Or perhaps, Kate is just being very selective about the details.

Or perhaps, like the "crying" episode in PDL, what Kate said happened isn't quite the way it actually happened.

Speculation only.

shabba wrote:If I recall,wasn't Mr.Amaral's lawyers given an ultimatum to produce fiscal reports from book sales some time ago at a previous hearing?It just seems to me that everything keeps going round in circles,and any new request brings about an adjournment! Surely this can't continue,why can't a decision be made as of now?

onehand wrote:The source always matters, because without it, no body knows what you talk about or what you did read, internet is full of stuff, who knows, she could have read a parody, just posted for fun. So they need of a verification from an accredited translator, that the used text equals the exact text of the book, or the author’s claim that it is indeed a correct translation of his text. Without sources or authorization any text has less value then toilet paper.
 
There is more weakness in the answers.
 
First the use of the term hypothesis, very nice, because it stated exactly what this is about, just a difference of opinions. Hardly worth a million quid!
 
But also that they present themselves as parents of a missing child, well if the pj is right this is not a fact, madeleine is missing to the world, but from the conclusion of the investigation of the pj, it is not to her parents. So it is only by their own opinion that they are the parents of a missing child,. It is certainly not a fact.
No missing child means no damages from this book. I am very curious in what way the judge takes this down in her verdict.
 
Using her maiden name is also a mystery, unless, that is the name also stated as hers on the original complaint form, if not she done herself no favor.
Under dutch law you only are known under your maiden name, because using the name of the partner by marriage is not obligated, but a free choice. So here we would use healy or mccann-healy. Only mccann would make the complaint invalid to process. If this is the same in portuguese law or brittish law this could bring some unexpected pleasures for the defendants.
 
Lots of cases are lost because of details, or form errors. That would be a true nightmare for the legal team of the mccann’s.

PeterMac wrote:

jozi wrote:Has Gerry just called Kate a liar ? (Note to u both....get the damned story straight)!!!

The Judge asks whether there is a coordination with the school upon that issue.
GMC says that the school provided a big support and is in contact with Kate, but there hasn't been specific incidents.

Oh no Gerry !!! what about the School Bus incident that Kate say's Sean heard it mentioned on the radio ???

Was Gerry in the courtroom whilst Katie was giving her statement ?
One can understand Gerry changing the Front door + Key to Patio door when he became aware that Kate had gone off script and told the truth
but this is most strange, particularly when he involved in the same scam and trying to get at the same money.

plebgate wrote:Snipped from Joana's transcript - judge questions Mr.

"Judge - Did you suffer from insomnia?

Gerald McCann - Yes, we didn't sleep well for many nights because of the anxiety caused by the book.


I wonder exactly how many nights?   Was it more than when Maddie went missing? - we have read that they could sleep after 5 nights then.

PeterMac wrote:

jozi wrote:Has Gerry just called Kate a liar ? (Note to u both....get the damned story straight)!!!

The Judge asks whether there is a coordination with the school upon that issue.
GMC says that the school provided a big support and is in contact with Kate, but there hasn't been specific incidents.

Oh no Gerry !!! what about the School Bus incident that Kate say's Sean heard it mentioned on the radio ???

Was Gerry in the courtroom whilst Katie was giving her statement ?
One can understand Gerry changing the Front door + Key to Patio door when he became aware that Kate had gone off script and told the truth
but this is most strange, particularly when he involved in the same scam and trying to get at the same money.

Praiaaa wrote:Interesting that it is the judge asking those questions.
Give me hope.

PeterMac wrote:This was an interesting exchange

Judge - Have you ever heard about a book written by Paulo Pereira Cristovão? ['A Estrela de Madeleine' (Madeleine's Star) pub. 2008]
Gerald McCann - Vaguely...

Judge - Have you ever heard about a book written by Manuel Catarino? ['A Culpa dos McCann' (The McCann's Guilt) pub. 2007]
Gerald McCann - I can't say I have no. I don't remember that name.

Judge - Have you ever heard about a book written by Hernâni Carvalho? ['Maddie 129' pub. 2007]
Gerald McCann - I know about Mr. Carvalho's comments in the press about Mr. Amaral's book.

Judge - But you never read the book?
Gerald McCann - No, I haven't.

Surely each of those books would be worth another million euros to them
Just as all the other thousands of people across the world who agree with TB's analysis - and say so - would be worth a third of each of their pensions.
So what is going on ?

Woofer wrote:Just catching up.  I agree with another couple of posters who`ve said this is not a libel trial as in
 
"GMC – But the book mentions facts that aren't true.
The judge – The point isn't to establish whether things are true or not, this is not the issue. We want to know whether we are in the juridical remit of offence to persons. For this it's not necessary to know what the truth is. As a judge I'm not supposed to stand in for a criminal investigation.
 
The Judge says it is not necessary to know what the truth is. So we can all give up with that aspect.
 
I must admit I could never understand how this could be a libel trial without knowing the truth.
 
 So the charge is `offence to persons`.  Is there such a thing ?  Any legal whizz-kids here?
 
As another poster said - expecting to get £1.2 million just because someone has offended you is a bit rich.
 
Also,
 
From what the McCanns both stated it seems the TV programme caused them more offence than GA`s book and I`m sure the Judge registered this - so perhaps its the TVI that are going to pay the price.

PS - Have checked and in the UK (don`t know about Portugal) Offence Against a Person entails physical harm.

jozi wrote:"GMC – But the book mentions facts that aren't true. 

Woofer wrote:

Praiaaa wrote:Interesting that it is the judge asking those questions.
Give me hope.

So obvious the Judge is wondering why they picked on Goncalo`s book.

PeterMac wrote:

jeanmonroe wrote:

Woofer wrote:
So obvious the Judge is wondering why they picked on Goncalo`s book.

So obviously the Judge is WONDERING WHY they ONLY picked on GA's book.

And also obvious by extension, is that the judge has prepared herself, with evidence, and a very full consideration of the background
and is not merely relying on what the lawyers tell her.
We tend in the UK to think that our Accusatorial system is the way the rest of the world works.
It isn't.
She is demonstrating par excellence, the inquisitorial system, where she needs to know everything,
She knows about books of which Gerry, probably correctly, says he had no knowledge.

Well done.  Clever Judge.  

PeterMac wrote:

jeanmonroe wrote:

Woofer wrote:
So obvious the Judge is wondering why they picked on Goncalo`s book.

So obviously the Judge is WONDERING WHY they ONLY picked on GA's book.

And also obvious by extension, is that the judge has prepared herself, with evidence, and a very full consideration of the background
and is not merely relying on what the lawyers tell her.
We tend in the UK to think that our Accusatorial system is the way the rest of the world works.
It isn't.
She is demonstrating par excellence, the inquisitorial system, where she needs to know everything,
She knows about books of which Gerry, probably correctly, says he had no knowledge.

Well done.  Clever Judge.  

ShuBob wrote:Neither do I, Smokeandmirrors.

At least 2 of those books were published BEFORE Amaral's and then one after. There's no justification for not knowing about them in detail IMO.