McCanns demand Amaral divorce to be rewarded

by **Jill Havern** 01.11.15 9:53

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

Original Source: TVI: 08 SEPTEMBER 2010

Broadcast by TVI, Jornal Nacional, 8 September 2010, Night News Edition

With thanks to Astro for translation

McCanns demand Amaral divorce to be rewarded

TVI’s anchor – Madeleine McCann’s parents want Gonçalo Amaral and his wife to execute a separation of assets in order to guarantee that the former Judiciary Police Inspector, author of the book “The Truth of the Lie”, has sufficient goods to pay up a damages claim. Gonçalo Amaral’s wife says she will not obey that court decision.

Voice Over reporter: The McCann couple ask for 1,2 million Euros to Gonçalo Amaral, for the contents of the book “The Truth of the Lie”. The process is ongoing, however in legal terms and in order to guarantee that the former Judiciary Police Inspector possessions are not lost, an apprehension of assets was ordered. Nevertheless, since those are common to his wife, the seizure of the said assets was refused. Currently, Maddie's parents demand that Gonçalo Amaral and his wife execute a separation of assets.

Sofia Leal Interview

Sofia Leal: It is an issue of separation of assets, but the dilemma is that all of our possessions are common. Our separation, of our life together and assets would be a fraud. We live, as everyone knows, in communion of goods [i.e. conjugal status], of togetherness, of life. During the last years of difficulties, of sadness; but also with many moments of joy.

Voice Over Reporter: This measure is foreseen in the law, but the couple affirms they will not oblige.
Sofia Leal: I do not even want to envisage that there is someone in Portugal that wants to force me to separate from my husband. Not to me, not to any other couple!

[TVI’s footage cut...] I did not expect any kind of posture; I would never authorize one of our lawyers to make such an outrageous proposal to a family.

Voice Over: In July 2009, the injunction requested by the McCanns to Gonçalo Amaral’s book was granted. At that time, Maddie’s parents attained his book authorship rights, half of his retirement pension as well as his share [half] of a rural house in Olhão.

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

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

by lj 01.11.15 17:10

Lowlife scumbags, those pathetic parents.

by ROSA 04.11.15 11:35

Go get em Goncalo cant wait to see them locked up and the twins set free bomb

by plebgate 13.11.15 10:29

Isn't it about time the whole of this sorry business was sorted? What an absolute nightmare all of it is.

Let's hope a decision is made this side of Christmas.

How long did it take for the last appeal court decision to be made?

by **Tony Bennett** 13.11.15 11:08

plebgate wrote:Isn't it about time the whole of this sorry business was sorted? What an absolute nightmare all of it is. Let's hope a decision is made this side of Christmas.

I make it very nearly six years and five months since the original libel writ was issued in June 2009 - or, according to my calculations, 2,340 days so far.

And the Appeal Court hearing has apparently not yet taken place.

And even after that, either side will be able to appeal that verdict to the Supreme Court.

The case has made the Portuguese judicial system an international joke.

When this writ was issued, Goncalo Amaral was aged 50. He is now aged 57. Seven birthdays in a row, worried about a libel action that has ruined his life.

He once said: 'Justice works in silence'.

He should have said: 'Justice doesn't work'.

by willowthewisp 13.11.15 12:24

Tony Bennett wrote:
plebgate wrote:Isn't it about time the whole of this sorry business was sorted? What an absolute nightmare all of it is. Let's hope a decision is made this side of Christmas.
I make it very nearly six years and five months since the original libel writ was issued in June 2009 - or, according to my calculations, 2,340 days so far.

And the Appeal Court hearing has apparently not yet taken place.

And even after that, either side will be able to appeal that verdict to the Supreme Court.

The case has made the Portuguese judicial system an international joke.

When this writ was issued, Goncalo Amaral was aged 50. He is now aged 57. Seven birthdays in a row, worried about a libel action that has ruined his life.

He once said: 'Justice works in silence'.

He should have said: 'Justice doesn't work'.

Hi Tony and do you think the UK has performed any better after having a huge amount of Police resources,MI5/6, at least 3 Prime Ministers and numerous Home Secretaries still no nearer a conclusion today after over Eight years?
What needs to be asked is why has all these resources and time been allocated to one specific event,Cover up?

by plebgate 13.11.15 17:39

Hi Tony, yes it does appear that justice isn't working for him at the moment.

However, I am still of the belief that it will prevail for him. When though that is the quesiton?

Such a slow process, but is it possible his human rights are being breached with this long delay? Not that he can do anything about it even if it is the case.

I am so glad that he had so many people willing to donate to help him, at least that has gone some way to buoy him up and I would hazard a guess that some people are not at all pleased with the success of it.

Again, well done Leanne. clapping

by **Tony Bennett** 13.11.15 20:32

plebgate wrote:Hi Tony, yes it does appear that justice isn't working for him at the moment.

However, I am still of the belief that it will prevail for him. When though that is the quesiton?

Such a slow process, but is it possible his human rights are being breached with this long delay?

YES.

If you look up Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, you'll see that the Convention guarantees 'the right to a fair trial' - whether of a criminal or a civil issue.

A delay like this of 6 years and 5 years - without an outcome in immediate sight - means, I am sure, that the Portuguese government's judicial system has breached Snr Amaral's human rights.

If he applied to the European Commission on Human Rights (EHCR), probably he would receive compensation from the Portuguese government, though cases there take a long time to hear as well, and the amounts of compensation awarded are very low.

It's an old-established and valid principle of any legal system that 'Justice Delayed is Justice Denied'. The Portuguese government and its judicial system have massively added to Snr Amaral's problems. The delay has been an intolerable, international outrage, no matter what the eventual outcome

by jean-pierre.t50 20.11.15 14:59

Tony Bennett wrote:
plebgate wrote:Hi Tony, yes it does appear that justice isn't working for him at the moment.

However, I am still of the belief that it will prevail for him. When though that is the quesiton?

Such a slow process, but is it possible his human rights are being breached with this long delay?
YES.

If you look up Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, you'll see that the Convention guarantees 'the right to a fair trial' - whether of a criminal or a civil issue.

A delay like this of 6 years and 5 years - without an outcome in immediate sight - means, I am sure, that the Portuguese government's judicial system has breached Snr Amaral's human rights.

If he applied to the European Commission on Human Rights (EHCR), probably he would receive compensation from the Portuguese government, though cases there take a long time to hear as well, and the amounts of compensation awarded are very low.

It's an old-established and valid principle of any legal system that 'Justice Delayed is Justice Denied'. The Portuguese government and its judicial system have massively added to Snr Amaral's problems. The delay has been an intolerable, international outrage, no matter what the eventual outcome

How would Dr Amaral be able to claim that his human rights and his 'right to a fair trial" have been breached when most of the delays to the trial have been occasioned by him?

by Liz Eagles 20.11.15 20:46

jean-pierre.t50 wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
plebgate wrote:Hi Tony, yes it does appear that justice isn't working for him at the moment.

However, I am still of the belief that it will prevail for him. When though that is the quesiton?

Such a slow process, but is it possible his human rights are being breached with this long delay?
YES.

If you look up Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, you'll see that the Convention guarantees 'the right to a fair trial' - whether of a criminal or a civil issue.

A delay like this of 6 years and 5 years - without an outcome in immediate sight - means, I am sure, that the Portuguese government's judicial system has breached Snr Amaral's human rights.

If he applied to the European Commission on Human Rights (EHCR), probably he would receive compensation from the Portuguese government, though cases there take a long time to hear as well, and the amounts of compensation awarded are very low.

It's an old-established and valid principle of any legal system that 'Justice Delayed is Justice Denied'. The Portuguese government and its judicial system have massively added to Snr Amaral's problems. The delay has been an intolerable, international outrage, no matter what the eventual outcome

How would Dr Amaral be able to claim that his human rights and his 'right to a fair trial" have been breached when most of the delays to the trial have been occasioned by him?

You make a fair point there jp, would you care to list the delays that have been occasioned during the whole process by both sides?

by Amy Dean 20.11.15 21:57

The only delay caused by GA that I remember was when he changed his lawyer.

by **Tony Bennett** 20.11.15 22:49

Amy Dean wrote:The only delay caused by GA that I remember was when he changed his lawyer.

He delayed the hearing listed for IIRC 10 December 2009 because his lawyer was ill. The trial was adjourned to the following month

by Guest 20.11.15 23:02

Wasn't there another occasion, more recently, when Goncalo changed his lawyer? Kate was moaning outside the court that they'd have to arrange childcare again. big grin

by Amy Dean 20.11.15 23:15

That's what I thought.

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

by Liz Eagles 21.11.15 9:08

There was also a delay as the judge had to attend to a personal matter.

Sorry, I don't have a link.

by Doug D 21.11.15 9:36

And Lawyers son ill/hospitalized 27/9/13:

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

by Amy Dean 21.11.15 11:19

It does look as if there was only one delay which could be described as being GA's "fault".

by joyce1938 21.11.15 11:37

Can't recall who exactly, but a Portugeuse person said at one time that it's not at all unusual for cases to go through to courts very slow pace. Drive us all Madrid's here, eh? It's possibly true. joyce1938

by Liz Eagles 21.11.15 11:38

Amy Dean wrote:It does look as if there was only one delay which could be described as being GA's "fault".

It doesn't look like anything. It looks like there is nothing reported on the 'libel' trial and there is no accurate reportage of exactly what has gone on in terms of delay to the trial.

I'd like jp to list the delays on both sides. I'm not interested in bashing anyone's opinion. I'm interested in getting to the truth.

by willowthewisp 21.11.15 11:46

May be April 2016, when Operation Grange would require a new account of funding to continue their investigation, now down to four officers and DCI Nichola Wall, "I nick em before they know they're nicked" not up to yet, Nichola?

offtopic

by jean-pierre.t50 21.11.15 13:01

aquila wrote:
Amy Dean wrote:It does look as if there was only one delay which could be described as being GA's "fault".
It doesn't look like anything. It looks like there is nothing reported on the 'libel' trial and there is no accurate reportage of exactly what has gone on in terms of delay to the trial.

I'd like jp to list the delays on both sides. I'm not interested in bashing anyone's opinion. I'm interested in getting to the truth.

Well the first delay was on the 11th December 2009.

[color:ece1=000000]"From JdN 11 December 2009

Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer is in quarantine at home, after learning that an employee of his office has influenza A. António Cabrita has requested the postponement of the trial of the book "The Truth About The Lie."

The first session of the trial process against the book by the former coordinator of the Judicial Police, is scheduled for 9:30 pm today, at the 7th Circuit Court Civil Court of Lisbon, in the Courthouse. The prevention of Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer can dictate the postponement of the trial, which would then be likely to occur in about 21 days."

Adjourned to Jan 12 2010

by jean-pierre.t50 21.11.15 13:19

Monday 16th June 2014. Dr Amaral announced to the court on the day of the trial that he had sacked his lawyer Vitor Santos Olivera and applied for the case to be adjourned.

Do I need to go on?

by jean-pierre.t50 21.11.15 13:30

January 2013. Proceedings halted for 6 months while both parties attempt to reach an out of court settlement.

by Liz Eagles 21.11.15 13:30

jean-pierre.t50 wrote:Monday 16th June 2014. Dr Amaral announced to the court on the day of the trial that he had sacked his lawyer Vitor Santos Olivera and applied for the case to be adjourned.

Do I need to go on?

Please give a comprehensive list of all delays to the trial. This would help everyone.

by Guest 21.11.15 13:41

jean-pierre.t50 wrote:January 2013. Proceedings halted for 6 months while both parties attempt to reach an out of court settlement.

What is the point of this discussion?

by worriedmum 21.11.15 21:01

jean-pierre.t50 wrote:January 2013. Proceedings halted for 6 months while both parties attempt to reach an out of court settlement.

Is this strictly accurate, jean-pierre?

Can you give details of who offered whom an out of court settlement? It's best to be factual, isn't it?

by jean-pierre.t50 22.11.15 8:45

worriedmum wrote:
jean-pierre.t50 wrote:January 2013. Proceedings halted for 6 months while both parties attempt to reach an out of court settlement.
Is this strictly accurate, jean-pierre?

Can you give details of who offered whom an out of court settlement? It's best to be factual, isn't it?

WM - Do you have exact details of the negotiations? No me neither. big grin

Which party sought time to negotiate out of court settlement cannot be determined from the party requesting a stay in proceedings .

The only party who can ask the court for a stay in proceedings is the plaintiff (i.e.the McCanns).

So whether Dr Amaral made the McCanns an offer or whether the McCanns offered a lower figure for a quick (and more certain) settlement cannot be guessed at by the plaintiffs asking the court for a stay to negotiate.

Whichever way it was the parties could not agree and the case proceeded to trial.

The fact is that the majority of civil cases are settled out of court and parties are strongly urged to try to reach a settlement to reduce expense and valuable court time.

by **Tony Bennett** 22.11.15 9:59

worriedmum wrote:
jean-pierre.t50 wrote:January 2013. Proceedings halted for 6 months while both parties attempt to reach an out of court settlement.
Is this strictly accurate, jean-pierre?

Can you give details of who offered whom an out of court settlement? It's best to be factual, isn't it?

This article on Joana Morais' site [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

...confirms that there was indeed an adjournment for six months in January 2013 to enable the parties to reach an out-of-court agreement.

Various statements were made to the press at the time confirming that the McCanns asked for the adjournment.

At the time, I spoke to a journalist in very close contact with Goncalo Amaral, a journalist who in the past has asked me for information about the case needed by Amaral's lawyer.

The journalist confirmed to me that the McCanns' lawyers had sent a formal letter to the Court, about two weeks ahead of the trial IIRC, asking for time to try to reach a settlement.

What was so unusual about this is that usually it is the defendant who asks for more time to settle. This time it was the plaintiffs.

I asked for the details in writing from the journalist because I planned to (and did) use this information in my libel/contempt of court trial the following month - to prove that no court had yet ruled that the McCanns had been libeled by anyone.

It was to no avail

ETA:

I have searched my e-mail database and found this e-mail from the journalist sent to me on 24 January 2013:

Mr. Bennett,

As I suppose you already know, the Maddie image mentioned by the Daily Express (the one from Brazil) has taken in Ibiza by Moises Copa (AP) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

By the size and shape of the image the Daily Express received should have been removed from this site [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Concerning the article I send you, there is another one published by Hernani Carvalho in a Portuguese magazine that confirms the information that McCann’s asked for a Settlement out of the court.

Best regards

by jean-pierre.t50 22.11.15 14:08

Thank you for the link above to Astros / TV1 article which is a reasonable summary. Although there were actually three delays the first being (as above) the delay where a member of of Dr Amarals lawyers staff was suspected of having 'flu.

The action starting in June 2009 was concluded on 28th April 2015 when the court reached its verdict. The appeal to this decision is legally a separate action, (although it is not a retrial or a new trial and new evidence cannot be introduced so it is lined to the original trial. But the appeal is at the behest of the appellant - Dr Amaral had the choice between accepting the verdict or risking an appeal).

The original question was whether Dr Amaral's human rights have been breached as a result of the delays in this case. I would suggest that they have not because

(a) there have been delays occasioned by Dr Amaral or his team outside the control of the court.

(b) the delay to see if an out of court settlement could be reached, whichever party instigated it, is a normal part of the process and strongly encouraged by the courts, and would not count as an excessive delay. (In the UK this is written into the Civil Procedure Rules (the White Book) and there will be equivalent sets of rules in other EU states.)

(c) 5 years and ten months is not an excessive time for a civil case (were it a criminal trial, and particularly had been held on remand, and the case had dragged on this long, I would heartily agree with you, but not for a civil case).

In conclusion, I really do not see how you can suggest that Dr Amarals right to a fair trial has been breached.

by Liz Eagles 22.11.15 18:12

jean-pierre.t50 wrote:

(c) 5 years and ten months is not an excessive time for a civil case (were it a criminal trial, and particularly had been held on remand, and the case had dragged on this long, I would heartily agree with you, but not for a civil case).

Could you post up examples of civil cases in Portugal and/or UK that have taken longer than five years?

You've made a point of out of court settlement - the UK Press has most certainly taken advantage of that option in the case of McCann. I tend to think Sr Amaral would quite rightly listen to his Counsel to see what was being placed before him which is the smart move to understand what's critical to the basis of the Plaintiff's case.

Goncalo Amaral chose not to go with a settlement.