Libel trial summing up

by Sceptic 10.12.14 19:42

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

by Guest 10.12.14 19:43

Pathetic.

by tiny 10.12.14 19:52

BlueBag wrote:Pathetic.

That's the mail for you

by **sharonl** 10.12.14 20:16

The Daily Mail, one of Britains many papers that have made a fortune in spinning tales & mis-information whilst misleading their readers on the McCann case and no doubt many other cases.

by aiyoyo 10.12.14 20:38

How will the DM spin when the Mcs lost their damage-claim case?

Can't blame that on Amaral after a Court of Law arrived at the verdict.

by Doug D 10.12.14 20:45

Fuller report posted here. It’s a bit ‘google translatey’, but the gist is there! Thanks to Johanna.

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

Action for damages against McCanns Amaral 12/10/2014

A summary of today's court day after the report of astro - maddiecasefiles.com

The hearing was held today in another room. On the wall above the judge - which was not replaced by the way - were the words written "A Injustica feita to a ameaça é para todos" - An injustice that is done to a person who is a threat to anyone.

A fact that was not so well known today was clear: Isabel Duarte is the lawyer for the parents while Ricardo Afonso, the lawyer representing the three children of the McCanns. Each of these lawyers were now 90 minutes available for a kind of closing speech. However, Isabel Duarte did not attend the hearing (possibly the reason is still unknown) and thus had to be overcome during which Ricardo Afonso gave his speech in "Fidel Castro manner" "only" 1.5 hours. Nevertheless, it was probably at an estimated third of its allegations, since then interrupted the judge.

Nevertheless, he spoke almost 2 hours about numbers, compared the book with selected parts of the police files and tried Goncalo Amaral, to discredit PJ and the dogs, while at the same time insisted that the British police disagreed with the conclusions of the PJ, which led to making the McCanns to Arguidos.

An example of his argument: the book begins with the mention of hunters that hunt hares, which supposedly would not the season / fit hunting season. Therefore, everything else would be wrong in the book.

He tried to challenge the dogs that DNA tests, Mark Harrison's report, which he said he had been directed solely to the possibility of her death. He claimed that the PJ would come hell out of the McCanns were to blame and to adapt the evidence the allegations.

To make it short, he discussed things that had no place in this process; large parts of his allegations were aimed at the police investigation and the status of the McCanns Arguido to explain with some mentions of Alipio Ribeiro and his testimony, it would be "premature" to tell the parents to Arguidos.

He also attacked the credibility of the Smith family and questioned why they were seen as credible witnesses of the study was discredited during Jane Tanner. He said that the Tanner sighting the Smith sighting by a basis and support but that the coordinator - Amaral - and his team simply wanted to study nothing but the death hypothesis and the parents.

The defendant wanted to "Blood, Swet and Tears" sell.

He added that the investigation lost all objectivity and that the British police, Martin Grime and Mark Harrison realized this and feared that the McCanns victim of an impulsive and unjustified "Arguidisierung" were. (Yes then would Kate must answer the 48 questions without a lawyer - Note from me)

He went on to say that Stuart Prior "very worried" was when he met with the PJ on 4 September, just days before the McCanns were declared Arguidos. And that he was grieved because he knew that it was wrong to accuse them because there was no evidence and the DNA reports have been misinterpreted for convenience / for the benefit of the PJ.

Then, as he was interrupted by the judge. He spent TWO MINUTES thus not to mention the testimony of its witnesses. For good reason, as we can imagine.

Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer, Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, stressed that this court action only serves the purpose of the couple of fault acquit. Have to blame the children unattended in the night of the disappearance, and guilt not to have cooperated with the police investigation.

The lack of cooperation of parents and their friends led them to submit the case to the files, something that they have never resisted although it would have been possible.

He said also that it would be very strange if they were not depressed, anxious, and sad. If they had not had a loss of appetite and insomnia. But where is the causal relationship to the book? Has not been proven. Your symptoms could have any other cause, such as the debt they have to feel for violation of their duty of supervision and for its actions during the course of the investigation.

In summary: Vague allegations from parents but no evidence of any connection with the publication of the book.

Fatima Esteves, attorney for Guerra e Paz, today introduced the more emotional assertions. She highlighted a few key points:

- The almost complete absence of journalists in the courtroom today, in contrast to the packed room whenever the parents participate in the process, which proves that the McCanns the engine behind the media and they define the agenda of the media.

- Parents should have said from the beginning to Arguidos what would be usual in the case of missing children.

- The prosecution witnesses had made vague statements and two of them had even filed subsequently written reports (rejected by the judge, but were approved by a higher authority) to be interviewed without the prosecution.

- It was not proved that the alleged damage resulted by the book.

- Scotland Yard appears random, always when there is a court session in Lisbon.

- The McCanns sue Gonçalo Amaral to the twins to protect against a book that can not read it because it is Portuguese, but not sue the websites that publish the English translation that can read the twins.

- The McCanns have never sought the reopening of the case in Portugal.

- Copies of the books of the Fund have been requested by the defense but rejected by the parents.

Miguel Coroadinha, the lawyer of TVI, began with a copy of the current edition of the Correio da Manha and to make an article about the surveys in Faro significantly by the following points:

- Visits by Scotland Yard focus attention on the process from repeated and exact fit.

- The case has already become the basis for studies of its exceptional media presence

- The McCanns have brought the case into the focus of the media and do anything to keep him there

- The media's attention has never waned and the book had no influence on the media or the investigation

- Witness for the McCanns have testified that media coverage had increased with the publication of the book

- TVI was the documentation of the McCanns not sent because the McCanns withdrew their consent after it was already in negotiations about it.

- Concerns which alleged damage, it is impossible to prove a causal relationship to the book

- This courtroom is not the place to discuss errors of the investigation (as Ricardo Afonso), but if there was an error, then it was not to have not made the McCanns to Arguidos the day after the disappearance. If this were to happen, we might not be here today.

- The witnesses of the McCanns were emotionally involved and to related parties to be believable.

- The two "expert" opinion (I assume the writing subsequently submitted) were used by the authors in order to evade the survey to these reports

- The couple tries to rewrite history to convince everyone that the only theory is their own, but the book is already part of the case history.

The procedure is as follows:

The next day of the trial is January 21, 2015. Then the judge will perform what is called "materia de facto" during the negotiations could be determined by the court. This should give a first impression of the possible sentence.

Then run for 30 days from when the McCanns must provide a document of the High Court judge in London, which proves that they are entitled to represent Madeleine, for she is a ward of the court. We'll see how long they will ausreizen this period.

If the parents do not submit the document, only the portion of the transaction is canceled, relating to Madeleine. Everything else goes on.

Then all the lawyers have 10 days their "alegações de direito" submit. A judgment is then the earliest expected in March.

Posted by Johanna at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

eta:
I think this is actually Astro's report as she has added to the original posted on:

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

with more to come tomorrow, so more thanks to Astro & Anne.

by plebgate 10.12.14 20:53

There is nothing in the above report which seems balanced to me that says that some of Rocky's book in parts were made up, words to that effect.

Interesting to read that the defence asked to see the Funds books but they were declined.

Did the Daily Mail not hear any of that then?

by tiny 10.12.14 20:59

plebgate wrote:There is nothing in the above report which seems balanced to me that says that some of Rocky's book in parts were made up, words to that effect.

Interesting to read that the defence asked to see the Funds books but they were declined.

Did the Daily Mail not hear any of that then?

The mail,see no evil ,hear no evil,speak no evil......of the mccann

by stillsloppingout 10.12.14 21:10

Note how they have picked up on the fact SY are always there when the trial is on !!!!.

more fuel to the whitewash camp

by plebgate 10.12.14 21:22

Another thing the Daily Mail seem to have missed is that Mr. &n Mrs. could have requested the re-opening of the Pt. investigation at any time.

I remember reading in one of the papers a few years back one of the reporters telling the gen. public to start buying the daily newspapers again because they only cost a meagre 50p or similar.

The price is immaterial to me, because going on the above report we have not had full reporting about today's proceedings, so I will not be buying them until we do.

by String 10.12.14 22:50

tiny wrote:
plebgate wrote:There is nothing in the above report which seems balanced to me that says that some of Rocky's book in parts were made up, words to that effect.

Interesting to read that the defence asked to see the Funds books but they were declined.

Did the Daily Mail not hear any of that then?
The mail,see no evil ,hear no evil,speak no evil......of the mccann

This article enables jounalists to hint at the truth whilst superficially supporting the MCcanns. Mrs

by Rogue-a-Tory 11.12.14 0:03

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

Odd, usually fairy stories begin with 'once upon a time'

by jeanmonroe 11.12.14 0:27

Former Madeleine McCann police chief ‘earned hundreds of thousands from writing distortions and conspiracy theories’ in book about case
Ex officer 'earned £344k' from book and TV show about the Madeleine case
Goncalo Amaral, 56, wrote 'lies' about the case, a Lisbon court heard
McCanns are suing Mr Amaral for £1m over his book The Truth Of The Lie

ByTom Worden for MailOnline

Published: 17:25, 10 December 2014 | Updated: 18:23, 10 December 2014

The ex-police officer who bungled the Madeleine McCann investigation made a fortune by spinning a web of lies about the case, a court heard today.
Goncalo Amaral, 56, earned at least £344,000 from his book and TV documentary about Madeleine's disappearance, it was said.
Amaral wrote 'distortions', 'fallacies', 'supposition' and 'a web of conspiracy theories' about the investigation, a libel trial in Lisbon was told.
Ricardo Correia Afonso, representing Kate and Gerry McCann, told the court: 'What he published distorted the facts, and as a result the parents were judged and sentenced by public opinion.
'His book is written like a novel and that's exactly what it is. The book and the DVD were produced to convince whoever saw or read them that the parents are guilty.'
Mr Correia Afonso said the ex-detective made £270,000 from sales of his book in Portugal and £18,000 from sales abroad.
He earned £26,000 from the broadcasting of the documentary, watched by 2.2m viewers in April 2009, and another £28,000 from sales of a DVD.
The book is still on sale in some Portuguese bookshops despite being out of print, he said.
And Mr Amaral has continued to publicly repeat the central claims in the book - that Madeleine died in the family's rented holiday apartment in the Algarve in May 2007 and that her parents covered up her death.
The former head of the Madeleine investigation gave an interview in June this year in which he 'had no problem stating that the parents of the child are the only guilty parties', the lawyer said.
Mr Amaral even told a Portuguese newspaper a theory that Madeleine had been buried in a coffin alongside a dead women in a church in the resort of Praia da Luz, the court was told.
Mr Amaral's discredited theories on Madeleine's disappearance have been widely repeated in newspapers in Portugal and around the world including Brazil and Spain, he said.
The McCanns are suing Mr Amaral for £1m over his book The Truth Of The Lie and the accompanying documentary.
He was thrown off the investigation in 2007 after criticising British police officers involved in the search for Madeleine.
In July the McCanns, both 46-year-old doctors from Rothley, Leicsestershire, told the court at the Palace of Justice in Lisbon that they had been 'devastated and crushed' by the book about their daughter, who was days short of her fourth birthday when she disappeared.
But Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, for Mr Amaral, said the McCanns were suing 'to rid themselves of guilt for their negligent conduct and their conduct in relation to the investigation.
He added: 'There was a lack of cooperation with the police authorities.
'That lack of cooperation led to the archiving of the investigation.'
Responding to claims the book had caused the McCanns insomnia, lack of appetite and depression, he said: 'The crux of this case is these were not caused by Goncalo Amaral's book, but rather they were caused by the fact the McCanns will feel guilty all their lives for not looking after their children.'
Fatima de Oliveira Esteves, representing publisher Guerra e Paz, admitted that Mr Amaral 'appeared to have invented' much of the book.
But she added: 'The fact is those children were left alone and because of that fact one of them disappeared.
'Anxiety and depression were caused by the disappearance of the child, not because of the book.'
And Miguel Coroadinha, representing TVI, which broadcast the documentary, said the McCanns 'want us to hear only a single version of the facts, which is their version'.
He added: 'Freedom of expression and thought is one of our fundamental rights.'
Judge Maria de Melo e Castro said the court will convene on January 21 to discuss which facts have been proved. She is expected to defer judgment until February.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ricardo Correia Afonso, representing Kate and Gerry McCann, told the court: 'What he published distorted the facts, and as a result the parents were judged and sentenced by public opinion.
------------------------------------------------------------------

HOW does one 'DISTORT'.............FACTS?
----------------------------------------
'His book is written like a novel and that's exactly what it is. The book and the DVD were produced to convince whoever saw or read them that the parents are guilty.'
---------------------------------------

"The parents", presumeably the McCanns, are supposedly seen, by whoever, of convincingly being seen as "GUILTY" of 'WHAT' exactly, Mr Ricardo Correia Afonso?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
"thanks" to Daily Fail for the FREE 'publicity' for GA's book!

"Cost" to GA for 'publicity'?

PRICELESS!

by Bishop Brennan 11.12.14 4:18

It would appear that McCanns are now using the trial simply as an opportunity to present their "we are innocent, the dogs were wrong" story - even though they know it has zero bearing on the case itself. Let's just hope the judge kicks them well and truly into the long grass in the New Year. The good news is that by making out like the dogs are on trial, a loss will make the dogs look ever better!

Will the McCanns appeal if they lose? Hard to say - if they do, the the OG fiasco will continue until the appeal is heard, so it may well be that their handlers will tell them to take a loss on the chin and let OG tidy things up with a resounding "McCanns are Innocent but we don't know who did it" finale.

But with court cases nothing can be predicted. Next stage (and presumably next SY visit to Portugal) now scheduled for January.

by aiyoyo 11.12.14 8:29

Dr Ricardo spent almost two hours talking about numbers, comparing the book with selected bits of the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and trying to discredit Goncalo Amaral, the PJ and the dogs, while insisting that the British police didn't agree with the PJ's conclusions that led to the McCanns being made arguidos.

One example of his reasoning: the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] starts with a mention of hunters hunting rabbits, which allegedly is out of season. So if the reference to the rabbit hunting season is wrong, everything else in the book is wrong, too.

It just went on and on and downwards fast.

He tried to dispute the dogs, the DNA tests, Mark Harrison's report which he said was only focused on the death possibility. The PJ, he alleged, was hell bent on accusing the McCanns and made the evidence fit the accusations [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

In short, he was discussing stuff that was never subject to discussion; large parts of his allegations were focused on discussing the investigation and the McCanns' arguido status, with several references to Alipio Ribeiro and his "precipitation" quote.
He also attacked the Smiths' credibility and questioned why they were seen as credible by the investigation while Jane Tanner was discredited. He said that Tanner's sighting corroborated the Smiths' sighting, but the coordinator, Amaral, and his team simply wouldn't investigate anything except the death thesis and the McCanns.
The defendant, he said, just wanted to "sell blood, sweat and tears".
He added that the investigation deviated from any objectivity and that the British police, Martin Grime and Mark Harrison realised this and feared that the McCanns were going to be subject to an impulsive, unfounded making of arguidos.

He also recalled that Stuart Prior was "very worried" when he met with the PJ on the fourth of September, just days before the McCanns were made arguidos. And that he was worried because he knew it was wrong to accuse them of anything because there was no evidence and the DNA reports were being misread, for the PJ's convenience.
This is roughly where he was interrupted by the judge. He didn't spend two minutes addressing his own witnesses' testimonies.

----------------

Isabel Duarte (lawyer for the McCanns) was busy today, presumably another trial. She tried to get the session postponed but did not succeed. She missed her chance but will be allowed to present written allegations (alegações de direito, like all of the other lawyers) after the 30-day suspension runs out. The judge cannot interrupt allegations based on relevance, it's the lawyer's problem - and choice.
--------------------
Goncalo Amaral's lawyer, Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, stressed that this court case was nothing but an exercise to try to rid the couple from guilt. Guilt of being neglectful on the night of the disappearance, and then guilt of not having cooperated with the investigation.
The lack of cooperation from the couple and their friends led to the shelving of the case, a shelving that they never opposed, as they could have done.

He added that it would be very strange if they didn't feel depressed, anxious, sad; if they didn't feel a lack of appetite and sleep deprivation. But where is the causal link to the book? It was not proved. Their anxiety could be due to any other cause, like for example the guilt that they must feel about their lack of surveillance of their children and their behaviour during the investigation.
In summary: vague allegations from the couple and no evidence of any effect being caused by the book.

Fatima Esteves, lawyer for Guerra e Paz, made the more emotional allegations today. She stressed a few relevant (side?) points:

the almost absence of journalists in the room today, in contrast with full audiences whenever the couple attended the trial, proving that the McCanns are the motor behind the media movements and that they define the media agenda

the parents should have been made arguidos since the start, as is customary in cases of missing minors

the their witnesses made vague depositions, and two of them even added reports afterwards, without being subject to questions from the defence (she was referring to reports that were handed in by Pike and Trickey long after their witness statements; these reports were correctly refused by the judge because this is highly irregular; the accusation appealed to a higher court which overturned the judge's decision and allowed both reports to be included in the case; the judge is free to value said reports or not, of course, but we also need to keep in mind that this case is certainly going to be appealed so the reports may be valued differently later on - or not)

the alleged damages were not proved to result from the book

SY appears, coincidentally, whenever there is a trial session in Lisbon

the McCanns sued Goncalo Amaral to protect the twins from a book which they cannot read (because it is in Portuguese) but failed to sue the websites that published the English translation, which the twins can read

the McCanns never requested the case to be reopened in Portugal

copies of the fund's accounts were requested by the defence but refused by the couple

Fatima Esteves became quite emotional sometimes, using words like unbelievable, incredible, unimaginable, etc. but she made rational points, too, in my opinion.
--------------
Miguel Coroadinha, representing TVI, started his allegations with a copy of today's Correio da Manha and an article about the Faro questioning sessions, using it to make the following points:

the visits by SY deviate attention from the trial, repeatedly and conveniently

the case has already been subject to studies about its exceptional media exposure

the McCanns have pushed the case into the media spotlight and do everything they can to keep it there

the media attention has never diminished and the book had no impact on media attention or on the investigation

witnesses for the McCanns stated that media attention increased with the book's publication

TVI did not broadcast the McCanns' documentary because the couple did not want that (the channel had already negotiated the broadcast when the couple backtracked)

concerning the alleged damages, it is impossible to prove a causal link to the book

this court is not the place to discuss the investigation's mistakes (like Ricardo Afonso did), but if one major mistake can be pointed out it's the mistake of not making the McCanns arguidos on the very next day after the disappearance, and if that had been done, we might not be here [in this court room] today

the witnesses that were brought by the couple were too emotionally involved and too close to the couple to be credible

the two "expert" reports were used for their authors to evade any questioning about said reports

the couple is trying to rewrite history, making everyone believe the only theory is their own, but the book is already part of the case history

Taken from Pamalan's website, with thanks to Astro and Pamalan.

by Smokeandmirrors 11.12.14 8:42

Some sharp points made by the defence. No doubt giving rise to the customary "fury" in a Leicestershire village.

I am beginning to wonder if 7 yrs of frustrating ignoring of the obvious by the media and UK police may be about to change. Considering the Mc's have been driving through this case for over 5 yrs, they certainly seem to have done a very poor job of presenting their case.

by **Jill Havern** 11.12.14 8:43

jeanmonroe wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
"thanks" to Daily Fail for the FREE 'publicity' for GA's book!

"Cost" to GA for 'publicity'?

PRICELESS!

Free advertising indeed - 32,024 googled Amaral's book yesterday and found my blog and stayed to have a good old read. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks Daily Mail thumbsup

every little helps!

by Smokeandmirrors 11.12.14 8:53

Every little does help, and the public are entitled to know all sides of this case as it is THEIR money as taxpayers which is funding the ongoing "investigation", at a time where cuts being made elsewhere may be directly affecting them. Every taxpayer in the land is effectively a stakeholder in this investigation and as such are more than entitled to express their views on any aspect of the case they choose.

by aiyoyo 11.12.14 9:18

the their witnesses made vague depositions, and two of them even added reports afterwards, without being subject to questions from the defence (she was referring to reports that were handed in by Pike and Trickey long after their witness statements; these reports were correctly refused by the judge because this is highly irregular; the accusation appealed to a higher court which overturned the judge's decision and allowed both reports to be included in the case; the judge is free to value said reports or not, of course, but we also need to keep in mind that this case is certainly going to be appealed so the reports may be valued differently later on - or not)

It's interesting to note the Mcs went behind the Judge's back not only once but twice.
When the Judge refused them permission to speak they appealed to a higher court and got they way. They did it again with the late production/submission of Pike and Trickey's reports and got their wish too.

It is indeed highly irregular for expert-witnesses not to submit clinical notes on their clients in useful time for Court and Defence to cross examine. Submission in retrospect post their verbal depositions smacks of hindsight tactics, very unprofessional from start to finish.

This action was not lost to Court and the Other Side and Observers. Not looking good for the Mcs at all and of course the sycophantic MSM close one eye to the shamles coming out from the Mcs.

by endgame 11.12.14 9:27

aiyoyo wrote:
It's interesting to note the Mcs went behind the Judge's back not only once but twice.
When the Judge refused them permission to speak they appealed to a higher court and got they way. They did it again with the late production/submission of Pike and Trickey's reports and got their wish too.

It is indeed highly irregular for expert-witnesses not to submit clinical notes on their clients in useful time for Court and Defence to cross examine. Submission in retrospect post their verbal depositions smacks of hindsight tactics, very unprofessional from start to finish. Their belated action is not lost on Court and the other side and observers.

Well yes but I think there has to be considerable concern that the trial judge has twice made perfectly reasonable decisions absolutely in the mainstream of the law and on both occasions a higher court has buckled to the McCanns. IMO does not bode well for the longer term outcome of the case.

by Smokeandmirrors 11.12.14 9:36

endgame wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
It's interesting to note the Mcs went behind the Judge's back not only once but twice.
When the Judge refused them permission to speak they appealed to a higher court and got they way. They did it again with the late production/submission of Pike and Trickey's reports and got their wish too.

It is indeed highly irregular for expert-witnesses not to submit clinical notes on their clients in useful time for Court and Defence to cross examine. Submission in retrospect post their verbal depositions smacks of hindsight tactics, very unprofessional from start to finish. Their belated action is not lost on Court and the other side and observers.
Well yes but I think there has to be considerable concern that the trial judge has twice made perfectly reasonable decisions absolutely in the mainstream of the law and on both occasions a higher court has buckled to the McCanns. IMO does not bode well for the longer term outcome of the case.

Or perhaps another way of looking at it, because the Portugese legal system recently went into a disorganised meltdown, they are keen to be seen as fair and addressing their shortcomings. If the overall conclusion is in Amarals favour, the McCanns will have less to come back with than if the Judges original decision was allowed to stand. Perhaps it was with some fore site of this possibility that the higher court capitulated to the Mc's. I may be very naive, but I have a glimmer of hope inside that this will fall to Amarals favour.

by Bishop Brennan 11.12.14 9:42

aiyoyo wrote:
the their witnesses made vague depositions, and two of them even added reports afterwards, without being subject to questions from the defence (she was referring to reports that were handed in by Pike and Trickey long after their witness statements; these reports were correctly refused by the judge because this is highly irregular; the accusation appealed to a higher court which overturned the judge's decision and allowed both reports to be included in the case; the judge is free to value said reports or not, of course, but we also need to keep in mind that this case is certainly going to be appealed so the reports may be valued differently later on - or not)

It's interesting to note the Mcs went behind the Judge's back not only once but twice.
When the Judge refused them permission to speak they appealed to a higher court and got they way. They did it again with the late production/submission of Pike and Trickey's reports and got their wish too.

It is indeed highly irregular for expert-witnesses not to submit clinical notes on their clients in useful time for Court and Defence to cross examine. Submission in retrospect post their verbal depositions smacks of hindsight tactics, very unprofessional from start to finish.

This action was not lost to Court and the Other Side and Observers. Not looking good for the Mcs at all and of course the sycophantic MSM close one eye to the shamles coming out from the Mcs.

They just LOVE all this court-stuff don't they. Love playing their little tricks, trying to prove to the courts and the world just how clever they and their lawyers are. How they always have to win. This is entirely typical behaviour of narcissists. If they are guilty as per Amaral's book, then ONLY a narcissist could have done what they have done and keep it going for so long. It's because winning, and continually winning, is ALL that matters - Maddie herself becomes just a vehicle for the next 'battle'.

It's why they will NEVER give it up - narcissists have to keep feeding their ego with 'mini-battles' in which they are centre-stage.

by tiny 11.12.14 9:47

fromMCF.

Well said this man.just hope the judge was listening.

Henrique Costa Pinto, lawyer for VCI Filmes, was the last one addressing the court.

He stressed that the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine ended the way it ended (archived in July 2008) because of the lack of cooperation from the parents and their friends. The parents then tried to make it look like they had been acquitted, which they were not. The archiving dispatch mentions the death theory as the most likely.

Concerning the alleged damages, he stated that no evidence had been produced by the accusation.

And he closed by concluding that the McCanns sued over the book merely because they were enraged and irritated by Gonçalo Amaral's thesis.

by endgame 11.12.14 9:48

Smokeandmirrors wrote: Or perhaps another way of looking at it, because the Portugese legal system recently went into a disorganised meltdown, they are keen to be seen as fair and addressing their shortcomings. If the overall conclusion is in Amarals favour, the McCanns will have less to come back with than if the Judges original decision was allowed to stand. Perhaps it was with some fore site of this possibility that the higher court capitulated to the Mc's. I may be very naive, but I have a glimmer of hope inside that this will fall to Amarals favour.

Yes I can see that you could view it that way and I sincerely hope you're right. Unfortunately I have little faith in the Portuguese legal system and this would weaken it more. The purpose of the higher court is to decide on matters of law and not to anticipate outcomes, take into account extraneous information, personal views, political lobbying etc. On the other hand, I suppose I don't mind if they do this as long as Amaral wins out in the end.

by Smokeandmirrors 11.12.14 9:49

Bishop Brennan wrote:
aiyoyo wrote:
the their witnesses made vague depositions, and two of them even added reports afterwards, without being subject to questions from the defence (she was referring to reports that were handed in by Pike and Trickey long after their witness statements; these reports were correctly refused by the judge because this is highly irregular; the accusation appealed to a higher court which overturned the judge's decision and allowed both reports to be included in the case; the judge is free to value said reports or not, of course, but we also need to keep in mind that this case is certainly going to be appealed so the reports may be valued differently later on - or not)

It's interesting to note the Mcs went behind the Judge's back not only once but twice.
When the Judge refused them permission to speak they appealed to a higher court and got they way. They did it again with the late production/submission of Pike and Trickey's reports and got their wish too.

It is indeed highly irregular for expert-witnesses not to submit clinical notes on their clients in useful time for Court and Defence to cross examine. Submission in retrospect post their verbal depositions smacks of hindsight tactics, very unprofessional from start to finish.

This action was not lost to Court and the Other Side and Observers. Not looking good for the Mcs at all and of course the sycophantic MSM close one eye to the shamles coming out from the Mcs.

They just LOVE all this court-stuff don't they. Love playing their little tricks, trying to prove to the courts and the world just how clever they and their lawyers are. How they always have to win. This is entirely typical behaviour of narcissists. If they are guilty as per Amaral's book, then ONLY a narcissist could have done what they have done and keep it going for so long. It's because winning, and continually winning, is ALL that matters - Maddie herself becomes just a vehicle for the next 'battle'.

It's why they will NEVER give it up - narcissists have to keep feeding their ego with 'mini-battles' in which they are centre-stage.

Thats a very good point actually. If they are so stressed and concerned for the twins wellbeing, which is often the excuse they use, then why do THEY add to the twins possible psychological damage by continuing to ensure that there is ALWAYS something in the pipeline which will garner yet more acreage of coverage. It is their own doing that the twins will have an infinite source of material to come across in the future.

by Smokeandmirrors 11.12.14 9:53

endgame wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote: Or perhaps another way of looking at it, because the Portugese legal system recently went into a disorganised meltdown, they are keen to be seen as fair and addressing their shortcomings. If the overall conclusion is in Amarals favour, the McCanns will have less to come back with than if the Judges original decision was allowed to stand. Perhaps it was with some fore site of this possibility that the higher court capitulated to the Mc's. I may be very naive, but I have a glimmer of hope inside that this will fall to Amarals favour.
Yes I can see that you could view it that way and I sincerely hope you're right. Unfortunately I have little faith in the Portuguese legal system and this would weaken it more. The purpose of the higher court is to decide on matters of law and not to anticipate outcomes, take into account extraneous information, personal views, political lobbying etc. On the other hand, I suppose I don't mind if they do this as long as Amaral wins out in the end.

It's very frustrating all round really that there have been so many issues that have strung this out for years. There is fault on both sides and it is only the lawyers coffers that are benefitting at the moment. I just wish there would be some concrete progress sooner rather than later. If nothing else, this case has proved in my mind that legal manoeuvrings are nothing to do with justice and everything to do with obfuscation.

by Joss 11.12.14 11:28

I think it would be very difficult for the Court to prove any damages toward the McCann's by the writing of Mr. Amaral's book seeing it was largely based upon the initial findings of the investigation, and also the laws regarding a person's right to the freedom of speech. The ban on his book was already overturned in the Appeals Court in Lisbon after its initial banning. So in what way have the McC's been damaged by anything that they did not incur themselves? What about all the internet forums that the McC twins would have access to? Are they going to take them to Court as well for having an opinion regarding theories as to what really happened to Madeleine that goes against what the parents think should be allowed to be said? The McC's can't control everything that the general public wants to say about what they think happened, and to have their own conclusions in it being the parents fault, which it really is, because they are solely responsible for placing all three of their children at great risk, and only they are responsible for the outcome of having their child go missing. I think it would greatly help if those two would own their own failure to protect their children and stop blaming everyone else for the outcome of that irresponsibility.

by jeanmonroe 11.12.14 12:20

Joss wrote: So in what way have the McC's been damaged by anything that they did not incur themselves? What about all the internet forums that the McC twins would have access to? Are they going to take them to Court as well for having an opinion regarding theories as to what really happened to Madeleine that goes against what the parents think should be allowed to be said? The McC's can't control everything that the general public wants to say about what they think happened, and to have their own conclusions ...

"the McCann's can't control.....what the general public think"

G McCann went so far as to ASK, publicly, in 2010, what the general public 'thought' by way of asking the general public about 'what OTHER explanation can explain...' (Madeleine's 'disappearance')

The 'golden oldies' are ALWAYS the 'BEST!'

GM: 'Where... where, you know... where is... where... where is... where is... where is the child? We're looking for that evidence. Where is the child? What OTHER explanation can explain how she's not here?'

10th February 2010.
-------------------------------------------------

Well, since you've, publicly, on record, ASKED me, and the general public, "what OTHER 'explanation' can explain how she (Madeleine) is not here" Ge££y.

My 'other' explanation agrees with GA's 'other' explanation.

Take me to court?

Oh, you can't, can you?

YOU, Mr McCann, asked me, and the general public, anyone, what OTHER 'explanation' i/they could have, to 'explain' how Madeleine's 'not here'.

And i've told you mine.

Cya in court?

I don't think so!

by nglfi 11.12.14 12:50

This is slightly off topic but I'm not sure it's enough to warrant a new thread - I'm travelling on a Bedford to Brighton train service and there is a ' have you seen me ' Madeleine poster on A4 paper that's clearly been put up by a customer! Now who do we know in either Flitwick or Brighton (both on this line) who could have put it up?

by aiyoyo 11.12.14 12:57

endgame wrote:Well yes but I think there has to be considerable concern that the trial judge has twice made perfectly reasonable decisions absolutely in the mainstream of the law and on both occasions a higher court has buckled to the McCanns. IMO does not bode well for the longer term outcome of the case.

Not bode well for which side though IYV?

I think it looks more positive for Dr. Amaral.
I'm not sure I agree with posters who believed the Mcs will appeal. Throwing more money (that is running scarce) on an uncertain chance possibly with very little probability of having it turned aroud for them isn't good such good a option unless they prefer to go through the motion for the sake of it because they can.

The verdict is in March. I feel their appeal decision will depend on the developments out of SY. Though it is said the libel case is independent of criminal investigation the seen synchronisation of timing of events seem to suggest something was co-ordinated behind the scene between Investigators and Judiciary. Just a guts instinct.

One coincidence, two coincidence maybe, more than that.....hmmm....questionable ?

Will be interesting to see what pans out of SY before March or timed for March.