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

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.

Apology, now I see what you mean.

I misunderstood because parts of the words were missing from the article upthread, but I've since seen said article on gerrymccannblog.

You are right. I stand corrected.

The court will on Wednesday ( 21) to the statement of the facts that will be considered at the trial of the case against the former Inspector of Judicial Police Gonçalo Amaral by the parents of Madeleine McCann .

Kate and Gerry McCann , parents of the British 4 year old disappeared in the Algarve in May 2007 , will be absent from the session in the Palace of Justice in Lisbon, but claim compensation of EUR 1.2 million for defamation and violation of rights, freedoms and guarantees family .

Remember that this action drags in court for over five years , with successive postponements of trial sessions and an attempted extrajudicial settlement between the parties.

At issue is the book " Maddie : The Truth of the Lie ' by Gonçalo Amaral , who defends the thesis that the parents of Madeleine McCann have been involved in the disappearance and the child's corpse concealment.

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

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

[size=9]Today[/size]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Photography © Steven Government / File Globalimagens

Judge will proceed today to the statement of the facts that will be considered for the award of the process.Kate and Gerry McCann claim compensation of 1.2 million euros.

The court today reveals the matter proved at the trial of the case against former inspector Gonçalo Amaral by the parents of Madeleine McCann, missing British child in May 2007, which will be absent from the session in the Palace of Justice in Lisbon.
Judge Emilia Castro Melo and shall communicate the facts to be considered for the process of judgment, in which Kate and Gerry McCann claim compensation of 1.2 million euros to former Inspector of Judicial Police, for defamation and violation of rights and freedoms of the British family.
This action creeps in court for over five years, with successive postponements of trial sessions and an attempted extrajudicial settlement between the parties, which was never realized.
At issue is the book "Maddie: The Truth of the Lie", written by Gonçalo Amaral, in which the former coordinator of the Department of Criminal Investigation of Portimão Judicial Police defended the thesis that the parents of Madeleine McCann have been involved in the disappearance and in the child's corpse concealment.
Madeleine McCann disappeared after 4 years in the tourist village of Praia da Luz in the Algarve, where the family was on vacation.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Translated with Google,

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

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

Substitute "proved" with "provided".

Thankyou!

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

I'm confused with what's actually happened in Court today.  Has the case been proved against Goncalo Amaral?

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

I don't do twitter, so Im a bit confused here over the time and date...4:19 am - 21 Jan 2015.

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

'Materia de prova' translates from Portuguese to English as 'matter of proof' and at today's hearing the judge established what she will retain as 'the matters that can be used as evidence within the limits fixed for this trial'.

It's my understanding that counsels for the plaintiffs and the defendants now have 10 days in which to give written submissions concerning points of law and their interpretation relevant to these evidential matters to the court, after which it is anticipated that the judge will hand down her verdict in due course.

However, should either side challenge what the judge has established today this will inevitably cause the verdict to be delayed beyond the one or two months which would seem to be is currently anticipated before Dr Amaral and his co-defendants are put out of their misery, or not as the case may be.  

With regard to the Wardship, cJune 2014 the judge "decided that the final court session, which will include a statement from Gerald McCann and the presentation of closing arguments from all sides, should take place regardless of the matter of the Wardship.

After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

At 'the final court session' held on 10 December 2014 which heard closing arguments from all sides the judge alluded  "to the 30 days that are granted to the plaintiffs to obtain from the High Court the authorisation to legally represent, in this trial, their missing daughter. After this time, the lawyers (all requested it) will have 10 days to hand written alegações de direito (allegations concerning points of law and their interpretation) over to the court (whereas the matter of fact concerns what happened and how it happened, the matter of law comes under the conformity to law and justice)". [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I'm hoping that there will be clarification from today's proceedings as to whether the 30 days granted to the McCanns commenced on 10 December 2014, or whether they have 30 days from today to obtain the required authorisation.  

With acknowledgement to Pamalam's website and in appreciation of Anne Guedes' stalwart attendance at the Lisbon court and her excellent work in providing transcripts and commentary.

@Fiona09  The case against Dr Amaral and his co-defendants has most certainly NOT been proved today!!!

Thanks for the clarification ultima Thule.  So glad to hear I was reading that wrongly

It seems to be generally accepted on Twitter that the McCanns have won? 
Is this true?

Translated by Joana Morais, from which article I have no clue, but must be from something in Portugal press.

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

I got this from twitter:

Read from the bottom. I hope the image displays correctly.

It seems all of it is covered here:

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

Maddie : Court gives as proven damage caused by Gonçalo Amaral


The court gave this Wednesday as evidence that the book of former Inspector of Judicial Police ( PJ ) Gonçalo Amaral , entitled ' Maddie : The Truth of the Lie ' , caused damage to the parents of MadeleineMcCann , missing British child in 2007 in the Algarve .


The court gave this Wednesday as evidence that the book of former Inspector of Judicial Police ( PJ ) Gonçalo Amaral , entitled ' Maddie : The Truth of the Lie ' , caused damage to the parents of Madeleine McCann , missing British child in 2007, Algarve .


In order, the magistrate also considered that the book reproduces excerpts appearing on the process in which Kate and Gerry McCann were made defendants , in September 2007 , filed in July of the following year, even though the British couple has been charged .


Madeleine McCann disappeared when he was four years in the tourist village of Aldeia da Luz , near Portimao , where the family was on vacation.


Kate and Gerry McCann have always maintained the position that Maddie was abducted . The case was recently reopened by prosecutors .


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


It looks as if Dr Amaral lost, then?

I can't help thinking if it went in their favour it would be all over the MSM

noddy100 wrote:I can't help thinking if it went in their favour it would be all over the MSM

Noddy, I am confused. I can't make out whether Dr Amaral won or lost, or is the verdict mixed?

This link  may help:

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

This was the judgement from the Court of Appeal which GA won his right to his book: It is understood Goncalo Amaral wrote the book specifically to defend his Professional & Personal Integrity and was within his legal right to do so. The book does not violate any of the McCann's fundamental rights and on this proviso why should the McCann's win anything? I think the Judge in this case has to follow from the Appeals Court decision.

(Quote):
We thus arrive at this conclusion. It seems important to stress the following:

The indicative facts that led to the McCanns being made formal suspects [arguidos] in the initial investigation were not deemed by the Ministry of Justice to be sufficient to lead to anyone being charged with any criminal offence. But those very same facts, seen through another prism and from another foundation, may well lead to a different conclusion from that reached by the Justice Ministry. The evidence that was deemed to be insufficient for a criminal prosecution can be understood in a different way, for example in an interpretation that can quite legitimately be published as a work of literature, so long as the said interpretation does not offend the fundamental rights of anyone involved. And as we have stated above, we have explained why the interpretation in Dr Amaral’s book does not offend the McCanns’ rights.

To sum up: The main purpose of the book at issue in these proceedings - ‘Maddie: The Truth About A Lie’ - which was written by the defendant, Dr Goncalo Amaral – is to defend his personal and professional integrity, as the author himself points out straightaway in his preface, and throughout the text. 

The contents of the book do not violate any of the McCanns’ [the applicants’] fundamental rights.

The actions of its being written and published are justified under the constitutional rights which belong to all of us by virtue of the European Convention on Human Rights and by Articles 37 and 38 of the Portuguese Republic’s Constitution.

Lots of 'unprovens'
Has it concluded?

I don't think it's a done deal yet.

What's happened to proven/not proved 1 - 10? It seems to start at 11.

 ALERT

What is it with these kneejerk reactions?  

The trial is NOT over, the verdict has NOT been handed down and speculation at this point in time serves no purpose whatosever.

13. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, authors Kate MacCann and Gerald MacCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved........BUT:

The judge adds that this psychological state is pre-existent to the book, the documentary and the interview and was not caused by the book. Nonetheless, it cannot be reasonable to believe that the book, the documentary and the interview had no effect on the couple, i.e. It had an effect but that is perfectly normal.


^^^^THIS.


IMO The McCann lost.

Next bit: (quoting!)

27. Are the facts that are reported by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book and in the aforementioned interviews, like he himself writes and said, facts that were established during the inquiry?

28. Does the documentary only contain facts that are also in the inquiry files?

(Both articles) It is proved that the facts in the book and in the documentary, concerning the investigation, are mostly facts that took place in the investigation and are documented as such.

The judge does note that some of the facts in the book are not complete, and some facts that are in the book are not in the case files, including Jane Tanner's "informal" recognition of Robert Murat.

I'm still wondering why points 1 - 10 have been omitted. Surely the most important points would have been dealt with first.