The January 2015 McCanns v Amaral hearing on the facts - what did the Portuguese Court of Appeal say about the facts?

Doug D wrote:Aiyoyo:
 
That begs the question how come there's going to be a reading in court of the "facts" in the civil trial of McCanns vs Amaral & Co, going against the norm?
 
I think you’ve missed the point that it’s an unknown at the moment. Anne is going to turn up, but doesn’t know whether the public will be able to get in or if it will just be pronouncements in front of the lawyers, either in the Judges Chambers or a closed Court.

aquila wrote:

PeterMac wrote:Before people start lighting candles and having vigils, tomorrow is NOT the final verdict.
It is (so far as I can understand) a judicial statement of the 'facts' on which the final verdict will rely.

That's my understanding too PeterMac. It's a form of 'summing up', which does make Blacksmith's 'cop out/hedge your bets/call to those who have any opinion' tripe all the more annoying.

Sorry, forgot to add...in my opinion.

A reminder of what is at stake, here is snip of Amaral's script.

Let us be clear. What is at stake is to find out:

- Whether the writing of my book "Maddie: A Verdade da Mentira" was a lawful or unlawful action;

- Whether or not the plaintiffs have suffered damages and whether or not there are facts to prove it;

- Whether or not it is possible to establish a causal nexus between the book and such damages.

This is what is at stake.

Concerning the book's lawfulness, I suggest to anyone who has doubts to read [color:17af=000000]the Lisbon Appellate Court's decision within the injunction that preceded the current action. The truth is that for the Appellate Court's Illustrious Judges, as can be concluded from that decision, the lawfulness of the book's publication is indisputable.

With proof of the lawfulness of the book, the matter should rest here, without the need to investigate anything further, namely concerning the damages that the plaintiffs complain about.

Nonetheless, we should note that even if the lawfulness may still be at stake, there is still the need to establish a causal nexus between the publication and the damages that the plaintiffs complain about, such as deep depression, social isolation, etc. And, of course, to prove that said damages, no matter where they originate from, really exist.

Concerning the social part, it seems obvious to me, if we pay attention to the countless social events that the plaintiffs have participated in, including speeches at the British Parliament, interviews on television shows like Oprah Winfrey's, gala dinners with illustrious personalities, namely British, among others, that said social isolation is totally false.

Concerning the depressions, although they are in no way proved within the case, in my opinion, in fact it would be very strange if they didn't exist. The disappearance of a daughter, whether she is dead or alive, whether or not she was abducted, has to originate enormous consequences of that kind. How strange would it be if that wasn't the case! But about this issue I won't say anything further, given that the plaintiffs seem to attribute to me and my book all of their pain, as if said disappearance, followed by their arguido status and other circumstances that surround the case, were of no importance, or weren't more than enough!

Doug D wrote:
I think you’ve missed the point that it’s an unknown at the moment. Anne is going to turn up, but doesn’t know whether the public will be able to get in or if it will just be pronouncements in front of the lawyers, either in the Judges Chambers or a closed Court.

Court reveals today proved matter against Gonçalo Amaral without presence of McCanns

Searcher wrote:Could someone way what this headline means in terms of law?  "Court reveals today proved matter .."?

jeanmonroe wrote:AnneGuedes‏@aacg
@mariaccnr @sw4nvesta It was no hearing and is over. No public reading but some infos will come.


4:19 am - 21 Jan 2015

eta:

Izzy Duarte = 'no show'

GA = 'not there'.....................UNWELL.


Ima van den Hoek‏@parapono·21 mins21 minutes ago
#Mccann 2/2 This was the last session. The verdict will be in writing. When?
Two months from now is an optimistic guess, Amarals lawyer said


Ima van den Hoek‏@parapono·25 mins25 minutes ago
#mccann Isabel Duarte was not present. Gonçalo Amaral was absent as well, not being well. I understood. Verdict will be sent to parties 1/2

Searcher wrote:Could someone say what this headline means in terms of law?  "Court reveals today proved matter .."?

Dave Heavy @Heavy_Dave
.... this psychological state is pre-existent to the book. Not reasonable to believe that the book,etc had no effect on the couple #McCann

@Heavy_Dave

#McCann 11. Because of the statements made by defendant GA .... the PJ stopped collecting information and investigating : Not proved

@Heavy_Dave
12. .... K & G #McCann are completely destroyed, .... beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them? : Not proved.