Goncalo Amaral's interview 23 Jan 2015 after the libel trial hearing - FULL TRANSCRIPT

Joss wrote:

ScarletLaw wrote:

Joss wrote:

ScarletLaw wrote:

Joss wrote:

ultimaThule wrote:

Joss wrote:

ScarletLaw wrote:I have two theories on why they were helped. First, if true because I haven't checked it out fully, if Gerry was on the panel as a doctor advisor for tests in Scotland. Or its the Masons because Gerry; Gordon Brown and Kate's uncle have connections on what I've seen. I don't know if you're aware but there is a programme on Sky arts called "In Confidence" with the DJ Andy Kershaw. In the programme Andy talks about a campaign on the Isle Of Man where he was stopped by judges, officials and various others from seeing his children because his ex was dating a police officer.  At the end of the programme he tells how someone told him of the Masons involvement. I'm in no doubt if they can do this to Andy, who's well known, then they have no scruples about helping a couple who aren't famous. I don't know if the programmes on YouTube but you can look for it if you want. Shows how powerful they are as an organisation.

Or something to do with this:
COMARE Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment = UK government committee on which Gerry McCann sits as a member
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic17175.html

As far as can be ascertained, Dr G P McCann was a member of the Medical Practices Subcommittee of COMARE from 2006 until 2008 http://web.archive.org/web/20061006232338/http://www.comare.org.uk/comare_members.htm

Yes it was from a link i posted that was an older article.

Silkwood comes to mind Joss.

Yes, along those similar lines in as much as the effects of children living near Nuclear Power Plants.
I was just reading about this before, interesting.

Available evidence on childhood leukaemia risk and nuclear power plants

Independent investigations commissioned by the British government in the wake of the 1983 discovery confirmed a markedly increased incidence near Sellafield [1] and Dounreay, another nuclear fuel reprocessing site in Scotland [42], but concluded that these facilities released too little radioactivity to explain the observed excess incidence.
Many studies on childhood cancer and nuclear installations followed, in the UK and elsewhere. Most studies, summarised in recent reviews [2, 4, 43, 44], were ecological. Typically, they applied national cancer incidence rates to the population of children that lived in given geographical units (municipalities, communities or wards) and calculated the number of expected cancer cases in each unit. Comparing observed to expected cancer cases returns the standardised incidence ratio (SIR), an estimate of relative risk of children living in an area, compared with the average risk country-wide. About 200 different nuclear facilities, including NPPs, research facilities, nuclear fuel or weapons production sites and reprocessing plants in 10 countries, were investigated in this fashion [2]. Among these, clear excesses were evident around only three sites: the two nuclear reprocessing sites of Sellafield and Dounreay, and around Kruemmel, a power generating plant in Germany [2]. There was no evidence of increased risk at other sites, either singly or in aggregate [2]. A meta-analysis of 136 single sites did report slightly increased risks [43] but its methodology was questionable [45].
http://www.smw.ch/content/smw-2014-13912/

Says it all Joss. My worst fear was that Gerry was one of their own and I was kind of hoping it was just a Mason link but deep down I felt that the phone calls he made in those early hours and the fact that people were sent there straight away, said it all really about this man and his links. I feel sorry for Amaral especially, he never stood a chance in getting a conviction with these people. I just hope he gets to publish over here and people can read the truth for themselves.

I agree ScarletLaw, it's all very convoluted, and the McC's have certainly been protected by the establishment for reasons we can only guess at from certain facts in the case that have been given to the public.
For whatever happened to Madeleine i hope that in some way there is some kind of justice for her, she is the real victim in this whole sordid affair, and definitely Goncalo Amaral deserves to have his good name reinstated and compensated according to the wrongs done to him, to have his life back the way it needs be. As an officer of the law in Portugal it was his job to uphold those laws, and for doing his job and caring about the victim and trying to find what exactly happened to her, he was punished in the most horrible way for voicing his truth about the investigation. He deserves justice too.

ScarletLaw wrote:

Joss wrote:

ScarletLaw wrote:

Joss wrote:

ScarletLaw wrote:

Joss wrote:

ultimaThule wrote:

Joss wrote:

ScarletLaw wrote:I have two theories on why they were helped. First, if true because I haven't checked it out fully, if Gerry was on the panel as a doctor advisor for tests in Scotland. Or its the Masons because Gerry; Gordon Brown and Kate's uncle have connections on what I've seen. I don't know if you're aware but there is a programme on Sky arts called "In Confidence" with the DJ Andy Kershaw. In the programme Andy talks about a campaign on the Isle Of Man where he was stopped by judges, officials and various others from seeing his children because his ex was dating a police officer.  At the end of the programme he tells how someone told him of the Masons involvement. I'm in no doubt if they can do this to Andy, who's well known, then they have no scruples about helping a couple who aren't famous. I don't know if the programmes on YouTube but you can look for it if you want. Shows how powerful they are as an organisation.

Or something to do with this:
COMARE Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment = UK government committee on which Gerry McCann sits as a member
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic17175.html

As far as can be ascertained, Dr G P McCann was a member of the Medical Practices Subcommittee of COMARE from 2006 until 2008 http://web.archive.org/web/20061006232338/http://www.comare.org.uk/comare_members.htm

Yes it was from a link i posted that was an older article.

Silkwood comes to mind Joss.

Yes, along those similar lines in as much as the effects of children living near Nuclear Power Plants.
I was just reading about this before, interesting.

Available evidence on childhood leukaemia risk and nuclear power plants

Independent investigations commissioned by the British government in the wake of the 1983 discovery confirmed a markedly increased incidence near Sellafield [1] and Dounreay, another nuclear fuel reprocessing site in Scotland [42], but concluded that these facilities released too little radioactivity to explain the observed excess incidence.
Many studies on childhood cancer and nuclear installations followed, in the UK and elsewhere. Most studies, summarised in recent reviews [2, 4, 43, 44], were ecological. Typically, they applied national cancer incidence rates to the population of children that lived in given geographical units (municipalities, communities or wards) and calculated the number of expected cancer cases in each unit. Comparing observed to expected cancer cases returns the standardised incidence ratio (SIR), an estimate of relative risk of children living in an area, compared with the average risk country-wide. About 200 different nuclear facilities, including NPPs, research facilities, nuclear fuel or weapons production sites and reprocessing plants in 10 countries, were investigated in this fashion [2]. Among these, clear excesses were evident around only three sites: the two nuclear reprocessing sites of Sellafield and Dounreay, and around Kruemmel, a power generating plant in Germany [2]. There was no evidence of increased risk at other sites, either singly or in aggregate [2]. A meta-analysis of 136 single sites did report slightly increased risks [43] but its methodology was questionable [45].
http://www.smw.ch/content/smw-2014-13912/

Says it all Joss. My worst fear was that Gerry was one of their own and I was kind of hoping it was just a Mason link but deep down I felt that the phone calls he made in those early hours and the fact that people were sent there straight away, said it all really about this man and his links. I feel sorry for Amaral especially, he never stood a chance in getting a conviction with these people. I just hope he gets to publish over here and people can read the truth for themselves.

I agree ScarletLaw, it's all very convoluted, and the McC's have certainly been protected by the establishment for reasons we can only guess at from certain facts in the case that have been given to the public.
For whatever happened to Madeleine i hope that in some way there is some kind of justice for her, she is the real victim in this whole sordid affair, and definitely Goncalo Amaral deserves to have his good name reinstated and compensated according to the wrongs done to him, to have his life back the way it needs be. As an officer of the law in Portugal it was his job to uphold those laws, and for doing his job and caring about the victim and trying to find what exactly happened to her, he was punished in the most horrible way for voicing his truth about the investigation. He deserves justice too.

I saw a poll earlier that said 94% of people thought the McCanns were wrong to sue him. The establishment; media friends of Clarences and the McCanns themselves, have all tried to use their influence over media and dirty his name. But have failed because the majority of us knows he's a good man who just did his job as the poll shows. In away that is Justice and he can walk with his head high down the street.

Joss wrote:ScarletLaw, That is good that people are starting to see through the TM bag of dirty little tricks. It's about time, and i hope all their lies implode on them. The tables are starting to turn and if nothing else justice might come in the form of exposing them and their cohorts for what they really all are, because i don't think they will ever be held to account for Madeleine's disappearance. But at least they can know people now are starting to see right through them and are sick of them.

ScarletLaw wrote:


 I pinched this from the McCanns files Joss; it just made me laugh.

Isabel Duarte, the McCanns' lawyer: "I am struggling alone against 90% of the population of Portugal who believe that they [the McCanns] were connected to the disappearance."

Kate McCann: "It's only a very tiny minority of people that are criticising us...the vast majority of people support us."

PeterMac wrote:Has Isabel Duarte been Abducted too ?
Or just "Whooshed" ?

PeterMac wrote:Has Isabel Duarte been Abducted too ?
Or just "Whooshed" ?

Judge – Have you had insomnia, lack of appetite?

GMC -  says there were not many nights without thinking of that book. Anxiety was big and of course appetite was failing, but it wasn't permanent. 
 
Judge – Have you observed that people thought differently of you after the publication of the book?
GMC notes that it is difficult to answer because this requires knowing what the people thought before.

Judge – Do you think that for most people these theories are true?
GMC argues that there was clearly no evidence that Madeleine was dead and that nothing supported that Kate and him were anyhow responsible. People strongly believed them, but after the book was published and after a huge media coverage most Portuguese stopped believing because they were bombarded by the idea of Madeleine's death and of a staged abduction.

Judge – The twins know the theory of the book?
GMC says they try not to talk upon that subject, but they answer the twins' questions. Sean asked Kate a specific question; he asked why Mr Amaral said that they hid Madeleine. They're aware that the twins make those questions because they hear people tell things.

Judge – What did you do?
GMC mentions that they were very worried about the twins and took a professional advice. They contacted a child psychologist who told them how to handle the issue the best way. He still advises them when they need it. GMC adds that the key-piece of advice is to answer the questions as openly as possible, at their understanding level. Up to now, he says, it has functioned very well, but he's worried by the fact they're going to discover on the Web horrible things about their parents. He's worried by the effect it will have on them.
 
The Judgeasks whether there is a coordination with the school upon that issue.
GMC says that the school provided a big support and is in contact with Kate, but there hasn't been specific incidents.

Gonçalo Amaral's new lawyer, Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, is the only one who has a question for GMC. He wants to know what caused more distress, the disappearance, the arguido status or the reason for this trial.

The judge rephrases – What disturbed you more: the disappearance of your daughter, the fact you were made arguido or the reason for this trial, i.e the book and the documentary?


GMC says that those events happened at different times. A missing child is the hugest pain there is, but the publication of the book sharpened the pain.
 
There's no more questions and the Judge is about to dismiss the plaintiff when GMC claims that he has something to say.

The judge says that in a civil trial the parties aren't allowed to spontaneous depositions. But she allows him: please do speak!

GMC says that he wants to make a comment about the dogs; he wants to make it clear that it is not a fact that they detected blood...
The judge interrupts him – The issue here isn't not to elucidate what actually happened. The perspective, in this trial, is to determine whether the book and the documentary affected the plaintiffs.

GMC – But the book mentions facts that aren't true.

[/b]

The judge– The point isn't to establish whether things are true or not, this is not the issue. We want to know whether we are in the juridical remit of offence to persons. For this it's not necessary to know what the truth is. As a judge I'm not supposed to stand in for a criminal investigation.

Statement of Kate McCann

Judge – How did you feel when you read the book?
KMC says that she was devastated. She already had an idea of what was in that book, but when she read it all she felt desperate because of the injustice against her and her family as a whole and also felt anxious because of the damage that this book was causing to Madeleine.Oh the irony !  Madeleine has no voice. And, her parents have no authority to represent her. She gives as an example the fact that the book accuses her and her husband of being somehow involved and of faking an abduction. The book smears her and her husband throughout.

Judge – What data are you now referring to?
KMC says that the book had many negative effects in Portugal. She says that this book sounds credible and if people believe what it says, that Madeleine is dead, they will not search for her and bring more information about her. She says that it is a particularly serious matter that such a theory is published in Portugal, because it is from there that Madeleine disappeared.

Judge – Do you remember the documentary?
KMC says that Portuguese and non Portuguese friends told her that it had been horrible, they didn't dare to tell her on the night it was broadcast, but the following day they gave her details.

Judge – Did you happen to watch it?
KMC says that she watched it when it was available on the Web.

Judge – What new element does this documentary bring? How did you feel watching it compared to what you felt when you read the book?

KMC finds that the destructive power of the documentary is bigger, it is yet more damaging.

Judge – Did you feel worse and why?
KMC explains that the documentary is more definitive and cutting than the book. She felt despair because of the injustice towards her family as a whole and she was anxious that it would damage the search since there was no official investigation and they were the only ones working very hard.caught out bare face lying in Court. How can she has the audacity to say that when Grange is on the job? As it was jeopardising their efforts, she felt pain and fear.

The Judge asks whether KMC knows about an interview given by Gonçalo Amaral to the Correio da Manhã, whether she remembers a particular interview.
KMC remembers an interview about the documentary, she remembers in particular one where it was said that Madeleine was dead, that they had kept her body in a freezer and transported it in the car boot.
Judge asks how KMC was made aware of the interviews.
KMC replies that she has friends in Portugal and that those friends sent her the articles and indicated the essential points.
Judge – When did you learn of that interview?
KMC doesn't remember the date but thinks it was soon after... (Suspended voice)  
Judge – [b/How did you react?[/b]
KMC says that her friends in Portugal were a big support. She fails to tell the Judge her feelings when asked.......leaving one to deduce she didnt anything neither distraught nor pain...she didnt say it so no one can say it for her.

Judge – How do you feel concerning the perception that the majority of Portuguese are against you?
KMC says that negative claims are very distressing and bothering.
Judge – Do you feel rather uncomfortable, ashamed?
KMC replies that "ashamed" is not quite the right word for it. She clarifies that it makes her lose confidence.
Judge asks whether she suffered because the people thought that they were cowards for having hidden the body.
KMC, after a silence, says that people thought much worse than that.

Judge – Did that cause you insomnia?
KMC says that it happened obviously, but that she isn't no more as she was, destroyed. She says that she cried, that the book brought her pain and emotion while she was desperate to find Madeleine.

Judge – Do the twins know about the book, the documentary?
KMC answers that of course they use computers at school and at home and she has to be very careful and try to supervise the information they get.
Judge – Do they have a global idea about what people say?
KMC mentions that her son, in October asked her why Mr Amaral said that they hid Madeleine. She answered that there were many stupid things in his book.
Judge – How did your son know about that? How was it possible if you were careful to prevent access to the book?
KMC thinks he heard it on the radio, in the school bus.
Judge – So what did you do?
KMC says that they spoke to David Trickey who advised them to let the twins make comments and just answer when they ask questions. She says that they had to contact the school in case a child would tell the twins about something that is in the book. She says that the book is noxious for adults and must be even more damaging for children.

Judge asks if KMC had a depression.
KMC says no, but of course she had been depressed.
Judge – Clinically?
KMC – No.
Judge – Did you publicly say that you wished you were in a coma to forget the pain?
KMC – Yes.
Judge – In what circumstances? Was it linked to the disappearance of Madeleine or to the book and the documentary?
KMC replies that the pain was increased by the book.
The judge asks how old the twins are (9) and when they started school (2009).

Isabel Duarte (for the plaintiffs) – Was there a reaction to the book and the documentary in the UK?
Judge reformulates but keeps the question
KMC says that there were a bit less reactions than in Portugal and that it was because of the media who accepted what the book said and published reports upon it. People on the Web and through e-mails were stimulated to insult them, like the Madeleine Foundation, and created a lot of damages. As Gonçalo Amaral was the coordinator of the investigation, it provided him credibility and it intensified the vilification of them.

Judge – What is the Madeleine Foundation?
KMC explains that it's a group of people who essentially promotes theories up to the point of trying to manipulate people in their village.
Judge – What relation is there between this group and the book?
KMC says there is none, but they invited Gonçalo Amaral. She thinks that he didn't go.
Judge – This group was created because of the book?
KMC – No, it existed before the book was published. She says that obviously the book strengthened them.

Isabel Duarte says she wants KMC to speak of the threats. The judge asks from who, from where, but as Isabel Duarte doesn't known the judge rejects this question because it is not within the scope of the trial.

The judge gets back to the conversation with Sean and asks whether he left it at that.
KMC says it occurred only then, after that they followed the Trickey's advice.
Judge – Did Sean speak again to you about it?
KMC – No.

Gonçalo Amaral's new lawyer, Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, wants to know what caused more distress to KMC.
The judge rephrases – What disturbed you more: the disappearance of your daughter, the fact you were made arguido or the reason for this trial, i.e the book and the documentary?
KMC says there's nothing worse than the abduction of a child, but that the rest intensified the pain and that there are limits to what a person can bear.

MCR mentions the topic of the social (image) destruction. The judge confirms that it is an issue to establish or refute.
Judge – Did you have the support of famous people like Angelina Jolie?
KMC says that she has no idea about Angelina Jolie, but knows that renowned people supported them.

MCR mentions a celebration that gathered 20 thousand people in order to pray on the 8th of December 2008
http://www.blackburncitizen.co.uk/news/3959495.Thousands_join_
East_Lancashire_group_s_prayers_for_Madeleine_McCann/
KMC doesn't remember and asks where it was.
MCR says it was in the UK.
KMC says that there are obviously people who pray.

MCR mentions that KMC became an ambassador for Missing People in July 2012. Judge repeats the question.
KMC – Yes[

MCR mentions a gala party in January 2010 to commemorate 1000 days. Does she remember?
KMC – Yes.

PeterMac wrote:Quick, Someone contact the "Ambassador" !