Re: McCanns vs Amaral verdict nearing.

by espeland 09.04.15 18:32

Daryl Dixon wrote:
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.

The story of an abduction makes no sense either, unless you think like a McCann. Like the McCanns' view of the dogs ... totally unreliable. The rest of us see that if they've failed, it's just once - in the McCann case - and we quite reasonably wonder why it should be. Similarly, the McCanns' claimed that all book revenues will be put into the fund. That this wouldn't happen until years after publication was clearly an oversight by us - it's perfectly normal in McCann world.

by plebgate 09.04.15 18:39

Daryl Dixon wrote:
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.

IIRC it was reported on Joana's site, and I've never seen an official statement saying that they didn't ask for one.

EDITED TO ADD - there was also a six month delay to see if the two sides could come to an agreement before the trial started. Who instigated that then?

by Liz Eagles 09.04.15 19:13

I'm not going to be very popular (whenever was I) for giving my opinion on this.

Goncalo Amaral was was removed from the case very quickly and offered a sideways career step (that's the equivalent of being given janitorial duties and move your desk into the broom cupboard). The UK media with the help of Gordon Brown and the handy professional spin doctor Clarence Mitchell set about destroying any professional reputation he had. A bunch of high level people removed him.

Goncalo left the police service and wrote a book.

The book Goncalo wrote would have netted him (and still could) way, way above and beyond any potential earnings he could have achieved working for the PJ. This was his mistake imo and for that I'll no doubt get slated...but hang on a wee minute. You see, Goncalo wrote a book about his time on the investigation. It was factual. He defended himself. The Portuguese media lapped it up. Everyone stood to make money. The McCann machine didn't intervene until there was a shed load of money in the pot. I say the McCann machine because I think it's always been a machine. It has never had and still has no regard for the life of anyone - Madeleine is probably last in the queue.

Goncalo's life has been turned upside down and inside out. His gizzards have been picked over with a fish fork by the UK media. Imagine five years of judicial shite wearing you down and then imagine being offered a quiet retirement to enjoy the sunshine, live your life and put this trauma behind you with a tidy pension earned from a book you wrote - as long as you don't write another and your current book is withdrawn. This could all be offered to Goncalo by a Portuguese court. I wouldn't blame him for doing that.

This is not about Goncalo being a hero. Rather than the Portuguese court playing the long game, I think it's always been the UK playing the long game.

Just my opinion.

by Letterwriter 09.04.15 20:23

If tonight is going to be about unpopular posts, then maybe I can chip in.

I'm not expressing a view on what the verdict might be, but I do feel that some confidence could be misplaced.

I think there is a tendency sometimes for some people to get overexcited/over optimistic about anything that might help resolve this case.

Something I've seen in some comments on this case, and about Tony's when it was in progress, is a tendency to believe that the matter being decided is alleged abduction or all the other rights and wrongs of the whole case.

But it isn't.

Some will have noticed that the cases are brought on very particular, carefully worded issues. Courts look at these issues at in isolation - not taking into account all the matters that this forum would like to be looked at.

Hopefully the outcome will be positive for GA, but just because that's what we'd like, doesn't mean that that's what will happen. And just because we have a view on one issue, that is irrelevant as to the court deciding another.

by jeanmonroe 10.04.15 0:00

Letterwriter wrote:If tonight is going to be about unpopular posts, then maybe I can chip in.

I'm not expressing a view on what the verdict might be, but I do feel that some confidence could be misplaced.

I think there is a tendency sometimes for some people to get overexcited/over optimistic about anything that might help resolve this case.

Something I've seen in some comments on this case, and about Tony's when it was in progress, is a tendency to believe that the matter being decided is alleged abduction or all the other rights and wrongs of the whole case.

But it isn't.

Some will have noticed that the cases are brought on very particular, carefully worded issues. Courts look at these issues at in isolation - not taking into account all the matters that this forum would like to be looked at.

Hopefully the outcome will be positive for GA, but just because that's what we'd like, doesn't mean that that's what will happen. And just because we have a view on one issue, that is irrelevant as to the court deciding another.

I'd like a court, any court, to substantiate, in isolation, if need be, that an 'abduction', let alone 'THE abduction' ever took place.

A High Court judge has ALREADY 'mused' on this 'point', hasn't he, i believe in McCanns vs Bennett.

As for the 'carefully worded issues' (the 'symptoms' caused to the McCanns by GA's book) did they provide a scintilla of 'evidence' of them actually having 'suffered' from ALL of those 'symptoms' other than 'HEARSAY' from their 'witnesses'?

In fact, KM, in her final 'statement' to the court, 'dismissed', herself, over half of her alleged 'symptoms' she said she 'suffered' from.

by Joss 10.04.15 4:15

Daryl Dixon wrote:
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.

It was reported in the Portugese Press

[color:3f18=000000]The McCanns £1million damages claim against Gonçalo Amaral suffers two delays: The first, apparently due to Snr Amaral's lawyer undergoing surgery and secondly, due to an apparent attempt by the McCanns to negotiate an out of court settlement (as reported in the Portuguese press).

[color:3f18=000000][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 10.04.15 8:29

and secondly, due to an apparent attempt by the McCanns to negotiate an out of court settlement (as reported in the Portuguese press).

Yes.. but which way?

by Daryl Dixon 10.04.15 8:42

Joss wrote:
Daryl Dixon wrote:
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.

It was reported in the Portugese Press

The McCanns £1million damages claim against Gonçalo Amaral suffers two delays: The first, apparently due to Snr Amaral's lawyer undergoing surgery and secondly, due to an apparent attempt by the McCanns to negotiate an out of court settlement (as reported in the Portuguese press).

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

Ah yes, reported in the Portuguese Press... then it must be true.

by plebgate 10.04.15 9:06

The Portugese Press and Joana M reported it. Thanks Joss for the link.

As numerous posters have said umpteen zillion times, the abduction was reported in the World press, so it must be true,- even though TMs own solicitor, in a British court of law said that she had no evidence of it actually being the case (words to that effect).

by Joss 12.04.15 6:34

I personally don't see how GA would lose this case seeing as the Court has already found him not to have been libelous in his book, and overturned the removal of the book from the shelves. But this trial is a damages trial because the case of libel has already been determined ages ago in the Court, but because of the purported, disproven damages the McC's and their children have supposedly suffered because of GA's book. It is my opinion the McC's have not proven their case of personal damages against GA for what he wrote about the investigation of the missing child Madeleine, and of what that investigation had found, before his removal from the case. That was not just GA's opinion but the opinion of other officials that were working the case at the time, its just that GA wrote a book concerning the investigation, as others wrote books about the case also, not just GA. I would think the worst hurt inflicted on the parents of a missing child is the fact that their child is missing, and because of the public circus surrounding the case it was only the fault of the McC's for allowing all of that to continue in the public arena. And if you place yourself out there in the public then you get what you get i suppose, and there will always be opinion against you on both sides as to any involvement in a crime with the evidence presented to the public. It happens in all high profile cases. What the McC's were wanting was only opinion skewed favorably toward them IMO, but that is not possible in a free thinking society. In other words they wanted the impossible, in that they wanted the public to see them as not accountable for any wrongdoing in the disappearance of their child, and consequently all the litigation against those who voiced an unfavorable opinion toward them.

by Guest 12.04.15 8:02

Probably the crux of the whole matter is this.

Did dr Amaral cause the Mecs to been seen as involved in their little girls disappearance, or did something, someone else?

In other words: if he had not published his book, would they have been thought of as wrongdoers towards their own child, or would they not

If the answer to that is: yes, regardless of GA they would have been considered as criminals, then he walks free

If not, then not

But strangely, this wasn't (quite) the issue at the Lisbon trial.

The issue there was: were they hurt by what he said.

Even if it was the truth

by Joss 12.04.15 8:12

Portia wrote:Probably the crux of the whole matter is this.

Did dr Amaral cause the Mecs to been seen as involved in their little girls disappearance, or did something, someone else?

In other words: if he had not published his book, would they have been thought of as wrongdoers towards their own child, or would they not

If the answer to that is: yes, regardless of GA they would have been considered as criminals, then he walks free

If not, then not

But strangely, this wasn't (quite) the issue at the Lisbon trial.

The issue there was: were they hurt by what he said.

Even if it was the truth

I agree, that is the issue with the current trial. But they did not prove their case for that in the Court, their case was weak, IMO.

by waiting for justice 12.04.15 11:48

EBeen lurking everyday in the hope of news.

I do wonder if the Mc's silence recently has been down to the Judges open knowledge of the many TV appearances and media coverage of them. Not many depressed, anxious people would be able to keep a smile on thier faces in the circumstances of a missing child.

by HelenMeg 13.04.15 11:10

Surely cant be much longer?? I wonder how soon we will hear after the result has been communicated ....

will it be leaked - or will either of the two parties communicate it ?
Depends upon the result... but I still think GA may bide his time.

by HelenMeg 14.04.15 10:14

I read yesterday in an old Daily Wail article that the verdict will be read out in Court before being sent in written format to both parties. Therefore, we should get to hear as soon as a date is set for the Court to read out the verdict.

It seems to be taking so long - why?

by Richard IV 14.04.15 10:40

HelenMeg wrote:I read yesterday in an old Daily Wail article that the verdict will be read out in Court before being sent in written format to both parties. Therefore, we should get to hear as soon as a date is set for the Court to read out the verdict.

It seems to be taking so long - why?

Everyday now I come here to see if there is a verdict and everyday I feel like I`m watching the kettle waiting for it to boil.

Yesterday I thought something similar HelenMeg - I even thought `can`t someone just phone the Court and see when the verdict is scheduled for`.

by plebgate 14.04.15 10:46

Yep it is taking ages especially as there was an article in the Portugese paper which said that we might even get to hear the verdict earlier than first thought.

I am even wondering if it has something to do with OG and what is going on in that investigation. ALL FRONTS seem very quiet.

by HelenMeg 14.04.15 11:16

After all the 'leaks' from Andy Redwood and other activity in 2014 , we are just not used to such long silences.....

by HelenMeg 14.04.15 12:05

Yes - here is an article which anticipated a verdict sooner rather than later
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

WRONG!! tease

by Guest 14.04.15 12:07

HelenMeg wrote:After all the 'leaks' from Andy Redwood and other activity in 2014 , we are just not used to such long silences.....

My bet is election week.

There will be some much flack about that it might get buried.

by HelenMeg 14.04.15 12:08

BlueBag wrote:
HelenMeg wrote:After all the 'leaks' from Andy Redwood and other activity in 2014 , we are just not used to such long silences.....
My bet is election week.

There will be some much flack about that it might get buried.

Yes, but that would suggest the Portugese courts are IN CAHOOTS ... are they?

by plebgate 14.04.15 12:41

I wonder if Len Port has any updates he could post here.

Yep, could be that something will be announced after the election.

by Guest 15.04.15 19:39

HelenMeg wrote:I read yesterday in an old Daily Wail article that the verdict will be read out in Court before being sent in written format to both parties. Therefore, we should get to hear as soon as a date is set for the Court to read out the verdict.

It seems to be taking so long - why?

According to Anne Guedes trial report on gerrymccannsblog "This note is obviously my last contribution to the trial reports, as the sentence will be notified to each lawyer by mail."

I believe Anne Guedes was in attendance at the court on 21st January so she is a good a source as any, at least more reliable than the British press. Is it possible the sentence has already been notified but not made public for some reason? It does seem to be very drawn out.

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 11:06

Verdi wrote:
HelenMeg wrote:I read yesterday in an old Daily Wail article that the verdict will be read out in Court before being sent in written format to both parties. Therefore, we should get to hear as soon as a date is set for the Court to read out the verdict.

It seems to be taking so long - why?

According to Anne Guedes trial report on gerrymccannsblog "This note is obviously my last contribution to the trial reports, as the sentence will be notified to each lawyer by mail."

I believe Anne Guedes was in attendance at the court on 21st January so she is a good a source as any, at least more reliable than the British press. Is it possible the sentence has already been notified but not made public for some reason? It does seem to be very drawn out.

That may well be correct Verdi. Anne is likely to know more than the Daily Wail.. let me check the article I found....here it is - but it doesnt mean that it is correct of course.

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

The rulings left Mr Amaral confident of court victory next month when the judge is expected to announce her final verdict in open court before releasing her sentence in writing.

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 11:09

Everyone quiet. DCI Wall / Portugal / Court / Amaral / Mc Canns

by Carrry On Doctor 16.04.15 11:52

Courts back on Monday ?

by Guest 16.04.15 12:12

HelenMag today @ 12:06pm

In a way I hope the Wail is correct, at least a court sitting would give some indication of when news might be forthcoming. As it stands it's a case of waiting indefinitely, I'm not very good at patience.

The attitude adopted by the Mccanns, Kate in particular, does nothing for their public image, even less for their position before the Lisbon court:

"I was devastated. It made me feel quite desperate because of the injustice I felt towards my daughter and our family as a whole" Kate McCann

　

Following their line of thought, no crime would ever be solved. I can just see them cuffed at the foot of the steps of the Old Bailey demanding to speak with the Prime Minister because their human rights have been violated and all because they, whichever way you care to look at it, are totally responsible for Maddies disappearance.

　

I remember at some stage Gerry was reported to have said 'they had to create evidence', or words to that effect. Well they certainly created something didn't they?

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 14:52

Yes, I'm also very impatient -it seems that everyone is waiting for this verdict....

by HelenMeg 16.04.15 15:02

This is the last we heard:

14/03/2015 16:10

PGR receives the English

A working meeting with the Portuguese authorities to strengthen cooperation in searches.

By Tânia Laranjo

An hour and a half meeting. The stage was the Attorney General's Office; the protagonists, the British and Portuguese authorities. The goal was the same that has led to other such meetings. Strengthen the link between the authorities of both countries, cementing bonds that allow a joint investigation to clarify the Maddie case.

The leader of the British police team, Nicola Wall, was one of those attending the meeting. On the other side the Judicial Police represented by magistrate Pedro do Carmo, National Deputy Director. Also the District Attorney General and the leader of the investigation which remains open in the region of Faro were present. Also requested to participate was a representative of the English Attorney-General in the Republic, as well as the British Ambassador.

This was the second meeting of Nicola Wall with the most senior representatives of the process. Late last year, the English Inspector succeeded Andy Redwood who retired from the Metropolitan Police Service. Nicola Wall transferred from the Homicide and Serious Crimes division to Operation Grange, which is investigating the disappearance of the British child on May 3, 2007, from the room where she slept with younger twin siblings, in an apartment of a tourist village, in Praia da Luz in the Algarve. The case was closed and then reopened, but nothing new was found. All scenarios remain open.

Read more at: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 16.04.15 17:20

For the last news about the trial in Lisbon try [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It's the site of the Projecto Justiça Gonçalo Amaral.

All the court trancripts from Anne Guedes you can find on Pamalam's site.

I'm still patiently waiting for Justice to be done.

parapono