Re: SMITHMAN 9 - Is Goncalo Amaral sticking to his original conclusions re Smithman?

by Guest 01.12.15 21:29

Tony Bennett wrote:
Sophiebubbles wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Sophiebubbles wrote:...what I gleaned from listening to him speak on a news progamme in Portugal was that he himself spoke of another book that he has already written...now I assumed the book would be regarding the case...
Amaral has of course already published a second book on the case, titled 'A Mordaca Inglesa', or The English Gag.

I published a translation of Chapter 6 of that book on this forum, here:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]Than
@ Tony Bennett...Thank you for that info, I haven't read it...had heard of The English Gag, but didn't know he was the author...look forward to reading it.
The Madeleine Foundation only paid for Chapter 6 to be translated, so that's all that we have on the forum.

AFAIK no-one has yet published an English translation of the rest of the book

If you have a Portuguese copy, and are willing to host a Portuguese to English translation, whether in summary or otherwise, I'm happy to translate the rest.

by **Tony Bennett** 01.12.15 23:03

Elça Craig wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
The Madeleine Foundation only paid for Chapter 6 to be translated, so that's all that we have on the forum.

AFAIK no-one has yet published an English translation of the rest of the book

If you have a Portuguese copy, and are willing to host a Portuguese to English translation, whether in summary or otherwise, I'm happy to translate the rest.

I do not have a personal copy, but can get hold of a copy.

I would love to see a translation of the book, but there is another issue: respect for Goncalo Amaral's copyright.

I published a translation of one short chapter of his book, which I am sure would be covered by the provisions for 'fair use', especially as I was defending him at the time and striving to point out how evil it was for him to learn that his book had been banned via the restaurant owner's TV set - because he had never been informed that there was even a hearing (which was held ex parte).

I think if you live in Portugal it would be much easier for you to get hold of a copy anyway?

by Guest 02.12.15 0:05

Tony Bennett wrote:
Elça Craig wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
The Madeleine Foundation only paid for Chapter 6 to be translated, so that's all that we have on the forum.

AFAIK no-one has yet published an English translation of the rest of the book

If you have a Portuguese copy, and are willing to host a Portuguese to English translation, whether in summary or otherwise, I'm happy to translate the rest.
I do not have a personal copy, but can get hold of a copy.

I would love to see a translation of the book, but there is another issue: respect for Goncalo Amaral's copyright.

I published a translation of one short chapter of his book, which I am sure would be covered by the provisions for 'fair use', especially as I was defending him at the time and striving to point out how evil it was for him to learn that his book had been banned via the restaurant owner's TV set - because he had never been informed that there was even a hearing (which was held ex parte).

I think if you live in Portugal it would be much easier for you to get hold of a copy anyway?

It quite possibly is easier for me to get hold of a copy (don't know) but I wouldn't post it my blog, due to copyright issues.

So all we have on this forum is it is limited by copyright issues, but not for want of any translation capabilities.

by Google.Gaspar.Statements 02.12.15 6:31

Dr Amaral's first book was translated and posted all over the internet. I don't recall he sued AnnaEsse over copyright issues.

Maybe someone could ask him for permission.

Or, maybe just certain paragraphs could be translated so we could get the general gist of what the book is about?

by Carrry On Doctor 02.12.15 9:02

Verdi wrote:snipped

If Goncalo Amaral believes that GM was seen carrying the body of his child, or a substitute child as some like to think, around the streets of PdL at 10:00 pm then all I can say, he's either listening to the wrong people or he's lost his marbles - neither of which I believe to be true. The mere suggestion is so ridiculous it's laughable.

snipped

Time will tell [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], but I detect a movement in thinking towards an early demise of MBM, and if correct, then this poses the question of who Smithman (if he existed) was actually carrying.

2 significant 'ifs' perhaps, but we perhaps cannot rule out either with any certainty.

It would be interesting to get the views of other members.

by joyce1938 02.12.15 9:53

Is it really necessary to have some of 2nd book of Mr Amaral's online here? He had plenty of hastle when the first one got all over the web, don't you think. Yes, it's true it has onto been in English this year, but I read it online before that, must have been on someone's blog. I just don't know if we should bother Goncalo on this, what exactly will it prove. He wrote what he knew for first book and it was indeed very good for us, but now so long has passed by, he must be cautious. Too many fines he has had to pay for his principles. We do have to make some decisions now on what we can glean, which has been going on for so long. I hope one day she will be found and then we shall know. Meanwhile, we just try. joyce1938

by skyrocket 02.12.15 9:55

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

No, my comment was most certainly not tongue in cheek - I was deadly serious. It's quite noticeable how, whenever anyone wants the e-fits issued by Operation Grange to be Gerry McCann, they always select the same one to superimpose.

If Goncalo Amaral believes that GM was seen carrying the body of his child, or a substitute child as some like to think, around the streets of PdL at 10:00 pm then all I can say, he's either listening to the wrong people or he's lost his marbles - neither of which I believe to be true. The mere suggestion is so ridiculous it's laughable.

As regards the e-fits, if one was inclined towards scepticism, one might be led to think that the e-fit was deliberately made to vaguely resemble GM in order to explain away Martin Smith's embarrassing recognition moment - just the same as DCI Redwood conjured up his revelation moment to explain away Jane Tanner's mystery man. Now there's a thought..

I concur with all you've said. It is almost inconceivable to imagine GM wandering around PDL as suggested. If we for one minute assume it happened it would mean that there was a destination planned (agreed with a third party?). But if that were the case (i.e. planned destination) a mode of concealed transport would surely have been included in the plan. Doesn't make any sense. But then why has Smithman not come forward (Tannerman's late 'appearance' is easily explained)? There are only a few possibilities, in no particular order: Smithman is a fabrication; he was a genuine innocent person with child, who for some reason has failed to come forward; he was someone acting a part to give credence to the abduction claim; he was the 'abductor'; he was someone involved in whatever happened to MBM but not an 'abductor'. Frustratingly, all possibilities are unlikely but one of them has to be correct.

by Carrry On Doctor 02.12.15 10:10

skyrocket wrote:snipped

I concur with all you've said. It is almost inconceivable to imagine GM wandering around PDL as suggested. If we for one minute assume it happened it would mean that there was a destination planned (agreed with a third party?). But if that were the case (i.e. planned destination) a mode of concealed transport would surely have been included in the plan. Doesn't make any sense. But then why has Smithman not come forward (Tannerman's late 'appearance' is easily explained)? There are only a few possibilities, in no particular order: Smithman is a fabrication; he was a genuine innocent person with child, who for some reason has failed to come forward; he was someone acting a part to give credence to the abduction claim; he was the 'abductor'; he was someone involved in whatever happened to MBM but not an 'abductor'. Frustratingly, all possibilities are unlikely but one of them has to be correct.

In blue, yes, if Smithman existed.

Conditional on the above, in red, no, there would be no destination necessary as he role was to be seen carrying a child, then return.

IMO

by pennylane 02.12.15 10:49

@ verdi says: If Goncalo Amaral believes that GM was seen carrying the body of his child, ~~or a substitute child as some like to thin~~k, around the streets of PdL at 10:00 pm then all I can say, he's either listening to the wrong people or he's lost his marbles - neither of which I believe to be true. The mere suggestion is so ridiculous it's laughable.

I crossed out a substitute child because I don't believe that is viable. But since we are hitting a tad below the belt here, I would say that to believe the absurd goings on of the evening, followed by the convoluted and pathetic version of events and Tanner's crap alibi for Gerry, both revised to within an inch of their life; and the gemmied/ungemmied window, and the McCanns not searching for Maddie, and the (no doubt) drugged twins, and the subsequent disappearing blanket and blue sports bag, and the minging Renault, was all the result of a pre-planned strategy devised days' before, is (imo) ridiculous and laughable. But I'm usually too polite to say so! titter

Let's face it, we remain at a stalemate here. hello

SMITHMAN 9 - Is Goncalo Amaral sticking to his original conclusions re Smithman?

Is Goncalo Amaral, in this Portuguese TV interview, sticking to his original conclusions re Smithman?