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

by sallypelt 21.01.15 17:57

In the end it was so humiliating that we felt guilty for laughing at them – the Support Group, that is, not the “destroyed” parents. They were getting their information from the newspapers and one Team in May 2007 and they believed it all. And it was just the same eight years later on January 21 2014, the poor bastards. The poor, exploited bastards.

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

by plebgate 21.01.15 18:06

Should that read January 2015 SallyP? I know you have c & P'd it, but I think it is referring to today's court session.

by SuspiciousMinds 21.01.15 18:07

We seem to have skipped a few more numbers here:

36. The documentary was reproduced, and even subtitled in the English language, by third parties that published it on the internet, without permission and against the will of the defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”?

Proved.

by SuspiciousMinds 21.01.15 18:08

1. Gonçalo Amaral made the statements that are attributed to him under item Z)*?

*(item Z is the Correio da Manhã interview)

Proved.

2. The cover price of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” in Portugal is € 13.80, including VAT?

It is proved that the editor set the selling price at 13,33 euro, including VAT.

3. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” an amount that is not less than € 621.000,00?

4. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of editions in foreign languages of the book an amount that is not less than € 498.750,00?

(Items 3&4) It is proved that Gonçalo Amaral earned 342.111,86 euro from the sales of the book in the years 2008 and 2009. This information is based on data from the Portuguese Revenue Agency.

by plebgate 21.01.15 18:09

Well no. 36 sounds good for the defendants imo.

I am going to wait now until we see it all in full.

by SuspiciousMinds 21.01.15 18:11

Doesn't look like they're going to get anywhere near 1.2million, even if they do win! big grin

by Guest 21.01.15 18:12

Presumably these items, taking precedence over/before the bits already out in the open, are longer, thouroughly thought out, legally more intricate, and hence more time consuming to translate.

Cleary, Lady Castro y Melo is weighing her words with the utmost care, in order not to supply anyone with unnecessary, preventable arguments for an appeal

by Smokeandmirrors 21.01.15 18:19

Hmmmm…. interesting so far. Doesn't look too promising for the Mc's so far if I'm reading it correctly.

I wonder what they'd have to pay in costs for their own legal team and Amarals if they lose? And if Amaral wins, will he sue them for wasting 6 yrs of his life, in terms of frozen assets, slander and so on. If he wins, I hope he takes legal action of his own.

by SuspiciousMinds 21.01.15 18:27

5. The book was sold in Brazil by defendant “Guerra e Paz, Editores, S.A.”?

Not proved.

6. The DVD has a cover price of € 6,00?

Proved that it was sold for 6,95 euro with newspaper Correio daManhã.

7. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the DVD an amount that is not less than € 112.500,00?

Proved that he earned 40.000 euro from DVD sales in 2008. Based on info from the Revenue Service.

8. The DVD that is mentioned under AN) has been edited and the edited copies have been sold by defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”?

Proved.

9. Defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”? has already made the DVD, in an English version, available for immediate delivery via internet order?

Not proved.

10. At least two million and two hundred thousand people have watched the programme that was broadcast on 13.4.2009?

Proved.

by sallypelt 21.01.15 18:35

plebgate wrote:Should that read January 2015 SallyP? I know you have c & P'd it, but I think it is referring to today's court session.

Yes, plebgate, here's the date: Wednesday, 21 January 2015

by **Tony Bennett** 21.01.15 19:04

Have opened a new thread with a full list of all the 36 points in the 'summary of facts' we have heard about today.

For convenience, I am posting it here as well:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1. Gonçalo Amaral made the statements that are attributed to him under item Z)*?

*(item Z is the Correio da Manhã interview)

Proved.

2. The cover price of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” in Portugal is €13.80, including VAT?

It is proved that the editor set the selling price at €13,33, including VAT.

3. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” an amount that is not less than €621.000,00?

4. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of editions in foreign languages of the book an amount that is not less than €498.750,00?

(Items 3&4) It is proved that Gonçalo Amaral earned 342.111,86 euro from the sales of the book in the years 2008 and 2009. This information is based on data from the Portuguese Revenue Agency.

The book was sold in Brazil by defendant “Guerra e Paz, Editores, S.A.”?

Not proved.

5. MISSING

6. The DVD has a cover price of €6,00?

Proved that it was sold for €6,95 euro with newspaper Correio da Manhã.

7. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the DVD an amount that is not less than € 112.500,00?

Proved that he earned €40.000 from DVD sales in 2008. Based on info from the Revenue Service.

8. The DVD that is mentioned under AN) has been edited and the edited copies have been sold by defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”?

Proved.

9. Defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”? has already made the DVD, in an English version, available for immediate delivery via internet order?

Not proved.

10. At least two million and two hundred thousand people have watched the programme that was broadcast on 13.4.2009?

Proved.

11. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, the Polícia Judiciária stopped collecting information and investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?

Not proved.

12. 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 McCann and Gerald McCann are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

Not proved.

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 McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved.

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.

14. Authors Kate McCann and Gerald McCann feel a deep shame and an indescribable ill-being because they are considered, by most people who know the theories of defendant Gonçalo Amaral, as having responsibility in the death of their daughter, being so cowardly that they have hidden her cadaver, simulating abduction, all of this to avoid criminal accusations?

Proved that the couple felt badly about being considered responsible over the hiding of their daughter's body and simulating her abduction by those who believe in Mr Amaral's thesis.

The judge states that it is not possible to determine what most people who have read or seen Mr Amaral's thesis actually think.

She adds that the plaintiffs failed to prove shame, even with Kate stating it was not shame that she felt.

The judge once more believes it is expectable that the plaintiffs would feel badly about being considered to be responsible for hiding the body and staging an abduction - not, the judge stresses, about being responsible for their daughter's death, as is commonly, and mistakenly, believed.

15. Authors Kate McCann and Gerald McCann live under enormous daily pressure due to the need to keep their younger children away from the knowledge of defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s opinions about their moral integrity?

Proved that the couple feels the need to keep their younger children from finding out about said thesis.

This fact also derives from common experience and was corroborated by David Trickey's testimony.

16. Namely because of defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s statements in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, author Kate McCann is immerged in a deep and serious depression, which has already made her state publicly “I wish I was in a coma, to relieve the pain”?

Not proved.

17. Sean and Amelie McCann will soon become aware of the conclusions that are mentioned in J), because they will go to school?

It is proved that Sean and Amelie started school in August of 2010 and have not learned about Mr Amaral's thesis yet.

18, 19, 20 MISSING

21. The criminal inquiry was reopened due to the appearance of new evidence?

Not proved.

22. The attention of the media and of people in general diminished when defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s book was published?

Not proved.

23. MISSING

24. The so-called “Maddie Case” has been profoundly treated within the Portuguese and foreign society, whether by the media, or through books, like those authored by Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, Manuel Catarino and Hernâni Carvalho?

Proved.

25. The so-called “Maddie Case” was commented upon by Dr. Francisco Moita Flores, former inspector, writer, criminalist and commentator, in various media?

Proved.

26. MISSING

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.

29, 20, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 MISSING
36. The documentary was reproduced, and even subtitled in the English language, by third parties that published it on the internet, without permission and against the will of the defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”?

Proved.

++++++++++++++++++++

ETA: I will just add my take on points 12 and 13.

Which are reported thus:

12. 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 McCann and Gerald McCann are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

Not proved.

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 McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved.

THEREFORE...LIST OF THINGS CAUSED BY AMARAL'S STATEMENTS IN HIS BOOK:

Mr McCanns are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

BUT NOT CAUSED BY AMARAL'S BOOK:

The McCanns suffering from

* permanent anguish,
* insomnia,
* lack of appetite,
* anxiety and irritability,
* preoccupation and
* indefinable fear?

This all looks like a botched attempt at compromise.

They are 'totally destroyed'...yet NOT 'totally destroyed'.

I think that 5 years and 7 months after the McCanns' writ was issued, the Court still can't make up its mind

ETA 2: On reflection, on what I've read of today's proceedings, this tweet by Martin Brunt does not look hugely unfair:

Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt ·  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Lisbon judge rules ex-cop's book caused McCanns hurt and emotional distress. From private hearing ahead of libel judgement

by fz2 21.01.15 20:59

ETA: I will just add my take on points 12 and 13.

Which are reported thus:

12. 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 McCann and Gerald McCann are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

Not proved.

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 McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved.

THEREFORE...LIST OF THINGS CAUSED BY AMARAL'S STATEMENTS IN HIS BOOK:

Mr McCanns are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

BUT NOT CAUSED BY AMARAL'S BOOK:

The McCanns suffering from

* permanent anguish,
* insomnia,
* lack of appetite,
* anxiety and irritability,
* preoccupation and
* indefinable fear?

This all looks like a botched attempt at compromise.

They are 'totally destroyed'...yet NOT 'totally destroyed'.

I think that 5 years and 7 months after the McCanns' writ was issued, the Court still can't make up its mind

ETA 2: On reflection, on what I've read of today's proceedings, this tweet by Martin Brunt does not look hugely unfair:

Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt ·  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Lisbon judge rules ex-cop's book caused McCanns hurt and emotional distress. From private hearing ahead of libel judgement

Tony Bennett wrote:Have opened a new thread with a full list of all the 36 points in the 'summary of facts' we have heard about today.

For convenience, I am posting it here as well:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1. Gonçalo Amaral made the statements that are attributed to him under item Z)*?

*(item Z is the Correio da Manhã interview)

Proved.

2. The cover price of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” in Portugal is €13.80, including VAT?

It is proved that the editor set the selling price at €13,33, including VAT.

3. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” an amount that is not less than €621.000,00?

4. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of editions in foreign languages of the book an amount that is not less than €498.750,00?

(Items 3&4) It is proved that Gonçalo Amaral earned 342.111,86 euro from the sales of the book in the years 2008 and 2009. This information is based on data from the Portuguese Revenue Agency.

The book was sold in Brazil by defendant “Guerra e Paz, Editores, S.A.”?

Not proved.

5. MISSING

6. The DVD has a cover price of €6,00?

Proved that it was sold for €6,95 euro with newspaper Correio da Manhã.

7. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the DVD an amount that is not less than € 112.500,00?

Proved that he earned €40.000 from DVD sales in 2008. Based on info from the Revenue Service.

8. The DVD that is mentioned under AN) has been edited and the edited copies have been sold by defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”?

Proved.

9. Defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”? has already made the DVD, in an English version, available for immediate delivery via internet order?

Not proved.

10. At least two million and two hundred thousand people have watched the programme that was broadcast on 13.4.2009?

Proved.

11. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, the Polícia Judiciária stopped collecting information and investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?

Not proved.

12. 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 McCann and Gerald McCann are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

Not proved.

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 McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved.

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.

14. Authors Kate McCann and Gerald McCann feel a deep shame and an indescribable ill-being because they are considered, by most people who know the theories of defendant Gonçalo Amaral, as having responsibility in the death of their daughter, being so cowardly that they have hidden her cadaver, simulating abduction, all of this to avoid criminal accusations?

Proved that the couple felt badly about being considered responsible over the hiding of their daughter's body and simulating her abduction by those who believe in Mr Amaral's thesis.

The judge states that it is not possible to determine what most people who have read or seen Mr Amaral's thesis actually think.

She adds that the plaintiffs failed to prove shame, even with Kate stating it was not shame that she felt.

The judge once more believes it is expectable that the plaintiffs would feel badly about being considered to be responsible for hiding the body and staging an abduction - not, the judge stresses, about being responsible for their daughter's death, as is commonly, and mistakenly, believed.

15. Authors Kate McCann and Gerald McCann live under enormous daily pressure due to the need to keep their younger children away from the knowledge of defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s opinions about their moral integrity?

Proved that the couple feels the need to keep their younger children from finding out about said thesis.

This fact also derives from common experience and was corroborated by David Trickey's testimony.

16. Namely because of defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s statements in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, author Kate McCann is immerged in a deep and serious depression, which has already made her state publicly “I wish I was in a coma, to relieve the pain”?

Not proved.

17. Sean and Amelie McCann will soon become aware of the conclusions that are mentioned in J), because they will go to school?

It is proved that Sean and Amelie started school in August of 2010 and have not learned about Mr Amaral's thesis yet.

18, 19, 20 MISSING

21. The criminal inquiry was reopened due to the appearance of new evidence?

Not proved.

22. The attention of the media and of people in general diminished when defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s book was published?

Not proved.

23. MISSING

24. The so-called “Maddie Case” has been profoundly treated within the Portuguese and foreign society, whether by the media, or through books, like those authored by Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, Manuel Catarino and Hernâni Carvalho?

Proved.

25. The so-called “Maddie Case” was commented upon by Dr. Francisco Moita Flores, former inspector, writer, criminalist and commentator, in various media?

Proved.

26. MISSING

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.

29, 20, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 MISSING
36. The documentary was reproduced, and even subtitled in the English language, by third parties that published it on the internet, without permission and against the will of the defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”?

Proved.

++++++++++++++++++++

ETA: I will just add my take on points 12 and 13.

Which are reported thus:

12. 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 McCann and Gerald McCann are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

Not proved.

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 McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved.

THEREFORE...LIST OF THINGS CAUSED BY AMARAL'S STATEMENTS IN HIS BOOK:

Mr McCanns are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

BUT NOT CAUSED BY AMARAL'S BOOK:

The McCanns suffering from

* permanent anguish,
* insomnia,
* lack of appetite,
* anxiety and irritability,
* preoccupation and
* indefinable fear?

This all looks like a botched attempt at compromise.

They are 'totally destroyed'...yet NOT 'totally destroyed'.

I think that 5 years and 7 months after the McCanns' writ was issued, the Court still can't make up its mind

ETA 2: On reflection, on what I've read of today's proceedings, this tweet by Martin Brunt does not look hugely unfair:

Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt ·  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Lisbon judge rules ex-cop's book caused McCanns hurt and emotional distress. From private hearing ahead of libel judgement

ETA: I will just add my take on points 12 and 13.

Which are reported thus:

12. 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 McCann and Gerald McCann are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

Not proved.

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 McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved.

THEREFORE...LIST OF THINGS CAUSED BY AMARAL'S STATEMENTS IN HIS BOOK:

Mr McCanns are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

BUT NOT CAUSED BY AMARAL'S BOOK:

The McCanns suffering from

* permanent anguish,
* insomnia,
* lack of appetite,
* anxiety and irritability,
* preoccupation and
* indefinable fear?

This all looks like a botched attempt at compromise.

They are 'totally destroyed'...yet NOT 'totally destroyed'.

I think that 5 years and 7 months after the McCanns' writ was issued, the Court still can't make up its mind

ETA 2: On reflection, on what I've read of today's proceedings, this tweet by Martin Brunt does not look hugely unfair:

Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt ·  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Lisbon judge rules ex-cop's book caused McCanns hurt and emotional distress. From private hearing ahead of libel judgement.

There has been a dearth of silence since Tony posted this and Im not surprised.

by Smokeandmirrors 21.01.15 21:03

Well I'm VERY interested to know what the missing points were. IMO it seems to be coming down more on Amarals side from my reading, but it could all depend on the missing items. I certainly got the feeling that the judge was not impressed/interested in the McCann family/friends witness statements in the earlier hearing. I don't think either side will be popping corks just yet, but there may be a bit of "fury" reverberating somewhere in Leicestershire tonight.

by aiyoyo 21.01.15 21:21

Martin Brunt @skymartinbrunt [/u] · [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Lisbon judge rules ex-cop's book caused McCanns hurt and emotional distress. From private hearing ahead of libel judgement

Diabolical, and he's supposed to be a journalist / reporter !

It's not a libel suit for a start.

Another thing, why did he not twit the full fact instead of cherry picked?
Priceless man, still trying to suck up to the Mccanns.

by plebgate 21.01.15 21:24

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
THE TRUTH about today's day in court. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Media gets it Wrong [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by ultimaThule 21.01.15 21:41

fz2 wrote:[b]
< a very large snip >
There has been a dearth of silence since Tony posted this and Im not surprised.

As it's dinner time for some and supper time for others, I'm not surprised either, fz2.

by **Tony Bennett** 21.01.15 21:46

plebgate wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
THE TRUTH about today's day in court. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Media gets it Wrong [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The burden of the argument by Isabelle McFadden, quoting astro, is that the media were WRONG to quote Point 13 alone.

I agree with that - up to a point.

And that is that the media didn't also quote point 12.

But point 13 still stands. And it says:

QUOTE

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 McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved.

UNQUOTE

In plain English, and if the reporting from the court is accurate, this means that the judge is saying:

"What Goncalo Amaral said in his book, in a TV documentary, and in a Correia da Manhan interview, caused the McCanns...

1. permanent anguish,
2. insomnia,
3. lack of appetite,
4. anxiety
5. irritability,
6. preoccupation, and
7. indefinable fear.

This does NOT necssarily mean, as I understand it, that Amaral has 'lost' his case.

But there's no getting away from it.

Nor can we get away from this: (Point 28) "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".

There are IMO things that both sides can draw from the 36 points today.

Maybe there will not be a clear-cut victory for either side?

by aiyoyo 21.01.15 21:47

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Well I'm VERY interested to know what the missing points were. IMO it seems to be coming down more on Amarals side from my reading, but it could all depend on the missing items. I certainly got the feeling that the judge was not impressed/interested in the McCann family/friends witness statements in the earlier hearing. I don't think either side will be popping corks just yet, but there may be a bit of "fury" reverberating somewhere in Leicestershire tonight.

Main thing is the crux of the matter inter-alia 11, 12, 13 are "not proved" or "proved" with a qualifying statement from the Judge.
Claim that search is hampered - not proved.
Claim of social isolation - not proved
Claim of depression etc - proved - natural, but pertinent point it was pre-existent before book and not caused by book.
So far so good there for Team Amaral.

The rest such as profits from book, availability of the English version on internet produced by outside party etc are all incidentals.

The thing that got my attention is the point read as "proven" factual - that the re-opening was not based on "new evidence". What then, if not on new evidence?

by ultimaThule 21.01.15 21:58

That's an interesting one, aiyoyo.

The official line at the time was that "Portugal's attorney general said "new elements of evidence" justified the "continuation of the investigation", which was shelved by police in 2008" and the "Portuguese police said a review team had been working since March 2011 to look back through information from the original investigation - and this process had uncovered potential new lines of inquiry".

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

by brixham 21.01.15 22:00

Not proved.

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 McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

OK so the judge said that this is proved but she then goes on to say that these were pre-existing conditions, made worse by the books publication. I therefore can't see how the Mcs can win as they have attributed all of the above solely, as far as this case is concerned, to the book. In effect the judge is dismissing this claim as it only partially correct, it surely needs to be 100% correct to win a case.

by SuspiciousMinds 21.01.15 22:06

So, in short, this is what has been proved, and what the case will be judged on:

Gonçalo Amaral made the statements that are attributed to him in the Correio da Manhã interview.

The editor set the selling price of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” in Portugal at €13,33, including VAT.

Gonçalo Amaral earned 342.111,86 euro from the sales of the book in the years 2008 and 2009.
The DVD was sold for €6,95 euro with newspaper Correio da Manhã.

Gonçalo Amaral earned €40.000 from DVD sales in 2008.

The DVD has been edited and the edited copies have been sold by defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”

At least two million and two hundred thousand people have watched the programme that was broadcast on 13.4.2009.

Kate and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear which existed prior to the book, documentary and interview, and was not caused by the book. But it’s unreasonable to believe that the book, the documentary and the interview had no effect.
But how can the effect of the book etc. be quantified or proven, if those conditions already existed beforehand?

Kate and Gerald McCann feel badly (but not ashamed) about being considered responsible over the hiding of their daughter's body and simulating her abduction by those who believe in Mr Amaral's thesis. This is to be expected.
As confirmed by the judge later, the facts in the book come from the police investigation. People always feel bad when they are accused of crimes by the police. It's expected. Feeling bad about it doesn't constitute 'damage'. Does it...?

The couple feels the need to keep their younger children from finding out about said thesis.
Obviously - who wouldn't? But that's neither here nor there.

Sean and Amelie started school in August of 2010 and have not learned about Mr Amaral's thesis yet.
So Sean and Amelie haven't been damaged yet, and presumably can't claim damages?

The case has been profoundly treated within the Portuguese and foreign society, whether by the media, or through books, like those authored by Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, Manuel Catarino and Hernâni Carvalho?

The case was commented upon by Dr. Francisco Moita Flores, former inspector, writer, criminalist and commentator, in various media.

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. So the information in the book would mostly be available via the PJ files to anyone interested anyway, including the twins.

The documentary was reproduced, and even subtitled in the English language, by third parties that published it on the internet, without permission and against the will of the defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”.

by plebgate 21.01.15 22:09

Tony Bennett wrote:
plebgate wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
THE TRUTH about today's day in court. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Media gets it Wrong [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The burden of the argument by Isabelle McFadden, quoting astro, is that the media were WRONG to quote Point 13 alone.

I agree with that - up to a point.

And that is that the media didn't also quote point 12.

But point 13 still stands. And it says:

QUOTE

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 McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved.

UNQUOTE

In plain English, and if the reporting from the court is accurate, this means that the judge is saying:

"What Goncalo Amaral said in his book, in a TV documentary, and in a Correia da Manhan interview, caused the McCanns...

1. permanent anguish,
2. insomnia,
3. lack of appetite,
4. anxiety
5. irritability,
6. preoccupation, and
7. indefinable fear.

This does NOT necssarily mean, as I understand it, that Amaral has 'lost' his case.

But there's no getting away from it.

Nor can we get away from this: (Point 28) "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".

There are IMO things that both sides can draw from the 36 points today.

Maybe there will not be a clear-cut victory for either side?

Re. Pink highlighting - mine - the judge reportedly went on to say along the lines that although the book did cause those feelings, this was normal.

This is what I was querying really.    By saying that these feelings are normal does it mean that they will not get a payout despite having these feelings?

Yellow highlighting - mine - (point 28) the judge is reported as using the word facts are not complete(in the book) and some facts in the book are not in the case files.

What does the use of the word facts indicate?   Facts are facts whether they are not complete or not in the case files imo?

by Smokeandmirrors 21.01.15 22:13

I read this as the Judge recognising MUCH of what Amaral says is FACT and not scurrilous nonsense, as the McCanns would have us believe. The use of the word facts is significant IMO.

by **Tony Bennett** 21.01.15 22:13

brixham wrote:OK so the judge said that this is proved - but she then goes on to say that these were pre-existing conditions, made worse by the book's publication. I therefore can't see how the Mcs can win as they have attributed all of the above solely, as far as this case is concerned, to the book. In effect the judge is dismissing this claim as it only partially correct, it surely needs to be 100% correct to win a case.

An off-set for a pre-existing condition is a common feature of English law, especially in cases of industrial injury, personal injury and industrial disease.

For example:

"Carrying a heavy load caused the claimant to suffer acute back pain and chronic back pain for 1 years, so is awarded £xxx compensation, reduced by 50% because of pre-existing back problems caused by 15 years playing rugby when then claimant was younger".

Happens all the time in English law...but in Portuguese law?

I have no idea

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

ETA:

Have found this article on the internet giving a practical example of an off-set for a pre-existing condition - an industrial accident case:

QUOTE

The claimant injured his right knee in an industrial accident on 5 February 1990. On 28 November 1990 he had an arthroscopic menisectomy of the right knee. He claimed disablement benefit on 15 April 1991. The adjudicating medical authority (AMA) on 15 May 1991 found the loss of faculty to be impaired movement with pain in the right knee joint and assessed the resulting disablement at 12% from 20 May 1990, with at least 1% disablement to continue for life. In reaching the figure of 12% the AMA [Adjudicating Medical Authority - T.B.] had started with a gross figure of 15% and applied an offset of 3% for pre-existing arthritis...

by Letterwriter 21.01.15 22:14

What I'm interested in is not "Did the book upset the McCanns."

Of course it would - true or not.

What will be interesting is whether Mr Amaral has the right to publish anyway. Whether their upset is a "tort" demanding compensation or whether it is just one of those things a person has to deal with as someone else goes about their lawful business.

by plebgate 21.01.15 22:16

Smokeandmirrors wrote:I read this as the Judge recognising MUCH of what Amaral says is FACT and not scurrilous nonsense, as the McCanns would have us believe. The use of the word facts is significant IMO.

Yes I agree - significant indeed Smokeandmirrors, imo too.

Rocky will be laughing again soon I do believe.

by Smokeandmirrors 21.01.15 22:25

plebgate wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:I read this as the Judge recognising MUCH of what Amaral says is FACT and not scurrilous nonsense, as the McCanns would have us believe. The use of the word facts is significant IMO.
Yes I agree - significant indeed Smokeandmirrors, imo too.

Rocky will be laughing again soon I do believe.

We obviously don't want to get our hopes up prematurely, but fingers crossed.

If, and I mean IF the transcripts we have seen from previous court days is 100% accurate, I'd say the judge is no fool. She shoved the Ma Healy off saying she had nothing of interest/use to say or words very si,milar, she disallowed the McCanns to force themselves forwards when it was their wish to do so, there was the cringeworthy Wright episode with a crib sheet, and that woman who said she's seen the book for sale in England, which of course she hadn't, so it was all a bit cr@p from Team McCann - AND they had YEARS to prepare, so no excuse for their shabby performance IMO.

by SuspiciousMinds 21.01.15 22:26

I want to know why the judge specifically used the example of Jane Tanner's 'informal' recognition of Robert Murat. Why is that particularly pertinent in this case when it involves neither of the McCanns directly, and doesn't appear to reflect on them personally?

by plebgate 21.01.15 22:30

Smokeandmirrors wrote:
plebgate wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:I read this as the Judge recognising MUCH of what Amaral says is FACT and not scurrilous nonsense, as the McCanns would have us believe. The use of the word facts is significant IMO.
Yes I agree - significant indeed Smokeandmirrors, imo too.

Rocky will be laughing again soon I do believe.
We obviously don't want to get our hopes up prematurely, but fingers crossed.

If, and I mean IF the transcripts we have seen from previous court days is 100% accurate, I'd say the judge is no fool. She shoved the Ma Healy off saying she had nothing of interest/use to say or words very si,milar, she disallowed the McCanns to force themselves forwards when it was their wish to do so, there was the cringeworthy Wright episode with a crib sheet, and that woman who said she's seen the book for sale in England, which of course she hadn't, so it was all a bit cr@p from Team McCann - AND they had YEARS to prepare, so no excuse for their shabby performance IMO.

yeah

by **Tony Bennett** 21.01.15 22:33

SuspiciousMinds wrote:I want to know why the judge specifically used the example of Jane Tanner's 'informal' recognition of Robert Murat. Why is that particularly pertinent in this case when it involves neither of the McCanns directly, and doesn't appear to reflect on them personally?

I don't think it is pertinent EXCEPT that no doubt the McCanns made much in their pleadings to the court of every sentence they could find in Amaral's book that couldn't be strictly proved from the files.

Maybe finding nothing about the 'unofficial' identity parade in the files was just the clearest and biggest example.

Yet the fact that this incident actually happened is confirmed by Jane Tanner herself and by others; the only thing Tanner maintains is that she wasn't quite so insistent on the fact that it was Murat she'd seen on 3 May as Amaral maintains.

If I'm asked to choose Amaral's version or Tanner's...I choose Amaral's.

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