Re: McCanns vs Amaral verdict nearing.

by aiyoyo 14.03.15 11:53

HelenMeg wrote:
I thought legal arguments closed on 26th Jan...... no wonder I've been getting impatient...

If I understand correctly (I stand corrected if someone keeps a better memory record), reading of facts was done by Judge in Court on 21 January, Mccanns had 30 days to present WOC documentation from this date onward, and they presented it on 23 January (rather unexpectedly quick).
Final legal arguments by both parties lawyers "for or against" the 21 January listed "proven" facts was completed - as in fully submitted on papers by both parties lawyers, no court session- on 26 Feb, then henceforth 30 days (according to stipulated guideline) to deliver the verdict, taking it to somewhere end of March.

One side is going to have a miserable Easter if verdict is announced prior to Easter.
It's going to be relatively imminent anyway, in a matter of weeks.
Even if they delay releasing or announcing until after Easter it will add only a week to it.
First week April at the latest if all goes according to course.

by HelenMeg 14.03.15 12:07

Yes, sounds right - thanks for clarifying.

by HelenMeg 23.03.15 10:41

Getting impatient again clapping

by Guest 23.03.15 11:23

I've read elsewhere of a letter being handed in on the 12th March,the 30 day count down can't start until 10 day's after this request? was handed in.

Sorry haven't any more info.

by Constablekid 28.03.15 15:25

Don't the Judicial holidays start today?

If so does this mean we won't hear anything until after 7th April?

Unless the verdict has already been communicated.

by HelenMeg 31.03.15 10:38

Is that little icon - saying 'view latest post' on the menu - new?

Its very useful - I only noticed it today... that speech bubble thing....

Much easier !

Hoping for news soon

by HelenMeg 02.04.15 10:27

Looks like we will be hearing something after the Easter Hols. never mind

by jeanmonroe 02.04.15 10:58

HelenMeg wrote:Looks like we will be hearing something after the Easter Hols.

Why do i have a 'feeling' the McS already KNOW the 'result', of the libel case?

All this 'money' stuff recently, from them.

"We've got to put up a 'mill' of OUR money' 'our 'fund' has dried up' etc.,

"SHOULD have been a £million of GA's and 'others' money" "we're just 'poor' millionaires"

"BUT, LUCKILY, WE'VE GOT THE ODD 'SPARE' £1MILLION, 'PHEW', TO PUT IN, 'TRANSFER' TO, OUR PRIVATE MADELEINE 'FUND', SHOULD YOU ~~PLEBS~~ GREAT BRITISH PUBLIC, NOT 'DONATE' EVEN MORE, MONEY, MONEY, MONEY, TO 'FIND' THE CHILD WE DILIBERATELY AND CONSCIOUSLY, LEFT ALONE, WITH HER EVEN YOUNGER BROTHER AND SISTER, IN AN UNLOCKED APARTMENT, OUT OF OUR SIGHT"

by HelenMeg 02.04.15 11:03

If they have any sense they will have realised that things dont look encouraging for them re this trial . .....

If they dont get awarded any damages (which seems likely) - what will they have to pay? costs?

by lj 02.04.15 13:37

Isn't it cost from all parties?

by Liz Eagles 02.04.15 13:41

lj wrote:Isn't it cost from all parties?

This is what gets to me. Joana Morais could easily answer this question. With all the court transcripts and the understanding of Portuguese law it wouldn't be too much to expect an explanation as to what GA is facing in terms of costs whichever way the ruling goes.

by jeanmonroe 02.04.15 15:12

The 'losers' PAY ALL the 'costs' of BOTH 'sides'

The McCanns still OWE 'costs' of LOSING, twice, GA's 'book ban' case!

Don't know 'how' but the 'costs' of LOSING, twice, by the McS, in Portuguese Courts, were 'deferred' UNTIL after the 'libel' case.

So should they LOSE, AGAIN!, then there are 'costs' to pay, by them for the 2 previous LOSSES plus the libel case 'costs'!

And the really sad thing about THAT, is that Sean and Amelie (and Madeleine!) are also 'liable' for their 'share' of the LOSING book 'ban' COSTS!

Because the McCanns included THEIR names on the book 'ban' writ.

Just like they have in the 'libel' case, against GA and 'others'

No 'pocket money' for the McCann kids.......EVER!

They'll be paying off court 'costs' .............forever?

Thanks Mum and Dad..............for THAT!

"You DIDN'T put me and Amelie at risk of harm, abduction or worse, like Madeleine, did you mummy and daddy?"

"er, umm, to be honest, Sean, errr, we sorta, um, DID"

"WTF? You've never told us that before, you f**king lying pair of f**king Tossers!"

"Language! Sean"

by XTC 04.04.15 23:54

jeanmonroe wrote:
HelenMeg wrote:Looks like we will be hearing something after the Easter Hols.

Why do i have a 'feeling' the McS already KNOW the 'result', of the libel case?

All this 'money' stuff recently, from them.

"We've got to put up a 'mill' of OUR money' 'our 'fund' has dried up' etc.,

"SHOULD have been a £million of GA's and 'others' money" "we're just 'poor' millionaires"

"BUT, LUCKILY, WE'VE GOT THE ODD 'SPARE' £1MILLION, 'PHEW', TO PUT IN, 'TRANSFER' TO, OUR PRIVATE MADELEINE 'FUND', SHOULD YOU ~~PLEBS~~ GREAT BRITISH PUBLIC, NOT 'DONATE' EVEN MORE, MONEY, MONEY, MONEY, TO 'FIND' THE CHILD WE DILIBERATELY AND CONSCIOUSLY, LEFT ALONE, WITH HER EVEN YOUNGER BROTHER AND SISTER, IN AN UNLOCKED APARTMENT, OUT OF OUR SIGHT"

That is a reason why it begged the question.

In Madeleineland nothing is uttered via the media without a reason in my opinion.

Perhaps ( I may be wrong ) The Fighting Fund - otherwise known as " The Fund " may be due to be depleted if the Damages case is lost?

The replenishment of The Fund could be via the funds from the book?

Is there an updated version of Madeleine the story so far due for publication to raise a few more funds for The Fund?

Opinion though.

by Bishop Brennan 06.04.15 12:46

If the McCanns were to lose and need to pay costs, then we can expect a press blitz on the "poor parents" and how it is only Maddie who really suffers, because now the Fund must be used to pay the wicked Amaral and his lawyers. Whether the money comes from the Fund, from the McCann's own stash, or from a new appeal on behalf of poor Maddie is almost irrelevant. The spin surrounding the verdict is all.

- If they win - even on a technicality, their goal will be to milk the story for all its worth. Anticipate much coverage on all media.

- If they lose or have to pay out, their goal will be to keep the story out of the press / sky news, and - where it cannot be suppressed - to denigrate Amaral / Portugal / the PJ / the slow and chaotic Portuguese justice system / anyone else they can think of.

Either way, I don't think the McCanns are particularly worried. They have a potentially huge up-side if they win (cash for them, plus the joy of making Amaral pay their extortionate UK legal costs); and a down-side that is covered by the Fund and by their PR team.

It's a big decision for Amaral, and I just hope it goes his way. After all these years and the forces ranged against him from the start, he deserves a break at long last.

by lj 06.04.15 14:09

I don't think they can have the fund pay for their costs. The fund is no party to this lawsuit. The only way around is they pay and have the fund support them again.
However I believe, if they lose, they'll appeal and pay nothing. Who knows how long an appeal is going to take.

by Bishop Brennan 06.04.15 14:25

lj wrote:I don't think they can have the fund pay for their costs. The fund is no party to this lawsuit. The only way around is they pay and have the fund support them again.
However I believe, if they lose, they'll appeal and pay nothing. Who knows how long an appeal is going to take.

They have plenty of people who may be able to find a legal way for the fund to pay for any legal costs, but I agree with you - even if they lose an appeal would be the most likely next move.

by jeanmonroe 06.04.15 14:37

lj wrote:I don't think they can have the fund pay for their costs. The fund is no party to this lawsuit. The only way around is they pay and have the fund support them again.
However I believe, if they lose, they'll appeal and pay nothing. Who knows how long an appeal is going to take.

They may be able to 'appeal' about their libel 'claim' outcome, but they cannot 'appeal' against the two LOSING book 'ban' writ, 'costs', can they.

For which they, AND their 3 children, named in THAT 'writ', are STILL liable for.

by Casey5 06.04.15 15:50

If the McCanns do lose and appeal does this mean that Goncalo Amaral would still be unable to have his assets reinstated until the appeal is heard?
Would interest be paid on any money lying in bank accounts etc. that he is unable to touch ?
I was just wondering because Senor Amaral has not only lost access to his assets but also - maybe - any interest accruing.
I just hope and pray he wins and the McCanns do not appeal. They may not as if they again lose on appeal they would have further costs to pay and they may decide, hopefully, to cut their losses.

by Guest 06.04.15 15:56

Isn't the main thrust of their argument that the book and dvd harmed the search for Madeleine,job to see how an appeal could be launched if they lose,there are ongoing investigations taking place now so no harm done is there? in this respect.Also the book was allowed to be sold in Europe again following an appeal.

by **PeterMac** 06.04.15 15:58

jeanmonroe wrote:
They may be able to 'appeal' about their libel 'claim' outcome, but they cannot 'appeal' against the two LOSING book 'ban' writ, 'costs', can they.
For which they, AND their 3 children, named in THAT 'writ', are STILL liable for.

Does that imply that Madeleine is liable for the costs of those cases ! !
So that if she is alive and well, she can now only give her "Farthings-worth"

by Liz Eagles 06.04.15 16:01

PeterMac wrote:
jeanmonroe wrote:
They may be able to 'appeal' about their libel 'claim' outcome, but they cannot 'appeal' against the two LOSING book 'ban' writ, 'costs', can they.
For which they, AND their 3 children, named in THAT 'writ', are STILL liable for.

Does that imply that Madeleine is liable for the costs of those cases ! !
So that if she is alive and well, she can now only give her "Farthings-worth"

It couldn't possibly mean the UK pick up the tab from a 'ward of court' decision could it? Those little loopholes that are sometimes a shocker.

by lj 06.04.15 17:17

Casey5 wrote:If the McCanns do lose and appeal does this mean that Goncalo Amaral would still be unable to have his assets reinstated until the appeal is heard?
Would interest be paid on any money lying in bank accounts etc. that he is unable to touch ?
I was just wondering because Senor Amaral has not only lost access to his assets but also - maybe - any interest accruing.
I just hope and pray he wins and the McCanns do not appeal. They may not as if they again lose on appeal they would have further costs to pay and they may decide, hopefully, to cut their losses.

I wonder in the case of the McCanns losing and going for an appeal they still can put an hold on his finances. That seem very unfair, but then justice often is unfair.

by lj 06.04.15 17:19

jeanmonroe wrote:
lj wrote:I don't think they can have the fund pay for their costs. The fund is no party to this lawsuit. The only way around is they pay and have the fund support them again.
However I believe, if they lose, they'll appeal and pay nothing. Who knows how long an appeal is going to take.

They may be able to 'appeal' about their libel 'claim' outcome, but they cannot 'appeal' against the two LOSING book 'ban' writ, 'costs', can they.

For which they, AND their 3 children, named in THAT 'writ', are STILL liable for.

Yes, you wonder how far can they push the envelope risking money of their kids.

by Guest 06.04.15 18:44

[quote="lj"]I don't think they can have the fund pay for their costs. The fund is no party to this lawsuit. The only way around is they pay and have the fund support them again.
However I believe, if they lose, they'll appeal and pay nothing. Who knows how long an appeal is going to take.[/quote]

Forever

by Briohazard 08.04.15 7:34

Portia wrote:
lj wrote:I don't think they can have the fund pay for their costs. The fund is no party to this lawsuit. The only way around is they pay and have the fund support them again.
However I believe, if they lose, they'll appeal and pay nothing. Who knows how long an appeal is going to take.

Forever

Could this be why they've just dumped a million of their own cash into the fund? So, if they lose, they could claim bankruptcy but still live comfortably from the fund? How does it work in the UK?

by espeland 08.04.15 9:26

Could this be why they've just dumped a million of their own cash into the fund? So, if they lose, they could claim bankruptcy but still live comfortably from the fund? How does it work in the UK?

The fund isn't a charity and therefore can't be used to protect their own cash.

by Liz Eagles 08.04.15 15:56

I don't expect an outright winner in this damages trial.

I expect there will be damages awarded to the McCanns in some form. The amount will probably be negligible and the most probable outcome. I expect each side will be asked to pay their own costs. IIRC Portuguese law in civil suits ask for this anyway.

I expect it to be an 'end'. I expect GA to take the hit and neither side will lose a large amount of money with the caveat that GA will accept to not publish his book in English for the English speaking population of the world.

This is what I expect. It doesn't mean I'm right.

I used to think there would be an outright winner and an appeal. I don't now. I think there will be compromise. GA will be allowed (by compromise) access to funds made from writing his book. The McCanns will probably be awarded some token gesture from the Portuguese media company and that will be an end to it.

All done and dusted. No appeals.

Just my opinion.

by plebgate 09.04.15 12:04

IMO Rocky will win outright. Why was an offer made for him to settle before the hearing began?

by jeanmonroe 09.04.15 12:47

plebgate wrote:IMO Rocky will win outright. Why was an offer made for him to settle before the hearing began?

Ain't THAT the TRUTH!

I'd say several 'offers' were 'made'. (to 'settle' out of court) winkwink

"out of court" settlements have served the McCanns and their 'friends', rather 'nicely' haven't they?

No 'questions' asked, of ANY of them, under 'oath'

GA, imo, was, and is, only 'interested' in getting JUSTICE for a defenceless child, left, diliberately and consciously, at total risk of harm, by her own parents.

by Daryl Dixon 09.04.15 17:52

plebgate wrote:IMO Rocky will win outright. Why was an offer made for him to settle before the hearing began?

I've never seen an official statement that confirms that the McCanns asked Mr Amaral for an out of court settlement. In fact, this scenario in makes no sense whatsoever.

Latest topics