Book Ban Overturned

Hi Candyfloss, thanks it was the Millenium restaurant that the McCanns dined at on the first evening of their holiday. As you say, Warner's will have laid everything on for free, for the McCanns including a buggy, after Madeleine disappeared. I never understood why they never took a buggy with them when they went to Praia da Luz, because the twins weren't even 2 and although I have never been to the Algarve or even Portugal, I would imagine P.D.L. is quite a hilly place.

I think the McCanns not dining at the Millenium anymore because they didn't have a buggy, was a poor excuse. Madeleine was the eldest of all the children in the group and I would imagine some of the Tapas group, would have brought buggies with them, for their young children. I feel sure that there would have been at least one of the group, who could have put one of the McCann children on his shoulders, while the McCanns carried their other 2 children in the same way.

I don't believe Madeleine was abducted, but if she was and the reports of the children crying on the previous evenings weren't true, the McCanns had a massive wakeup call on the morning of the evening Madeleine disappeared. When she told them that along with Sean, she had cried for them the previous evening. I don't know why the McCanns went out again leaving Madeleine alone in that unlocked apartment. They knew they were taking a risk, but they still went out.

Also for the McCanns to say they "UPPED" their checks to every 30 minutes is criminal. Madeleine was a toddler sleeping in a bed, she was capable of getting up to all kinds of mischief as well as being at risk of falling ill. I am only speaking about Madeleine because after hearing what Gerry McCann said, I don't believe the twins were in the apartment, when she disappeared.

If this case gets reopened and the McCanns are prosecuted, there will be a lot of people who could also be prosecuted for aiding and abetting the "gruesome twosome." Gordon Brown is a prime candidate for finding himself in court. He was a friend of the McCanns and Gerry McCann said he gave them his personal telephone number and told them they could call him anytime, day or night. Goncalo Amaral said that the PJ wanted to prosecute the McCanns, but they couldn't because of the British Government intervened. I suspect it was Gordon Brown who intervened.

I wonder why the McCanns who never miss an opportunity to sue, would have sued Goncalo for making that very public statement, on the steps of the Lisbon court, early this year, if he was lying. Not that I doubted Dr Amaral's word for one minute. The Government also kept quiet when Goncalo made that statement.

The McCanns and the Paynes also kept quiet when Katherine Gaspar made a very public statement, regarding David Payne's crude remarks about Madeleine. They never denied what Mrs Gaspar had said, so one can only presume she is telling the truth.

When I read Mrs Gaspar's statement, I felt physically sick and I wonder, just what went on in Prai da Luz, on that so called family holiday.

Judge Mental wrote:
Has it ever been ascertained as to whether the Tapas 9 were frequenting another establishment at the point where the staff had to seek them out? An establishment named Chaplins?

KathyBelle wrote:
Judge Mental, I only read on the net that the McCanns were brought back from a beach bbq by Warner's to see to their crying children. I have seen interviews where the McCanns have been asked about these reports and they have always denied them. They have always said that once their children were asleep, they never woke up.

Thank you KathyBelle. This is just as one thought. Yet to be ascertained. We very much need a reconstruction not just of the events alleged to have taken place on the 3rd May, but from the very beginning of this confounded holiday.

KathyBelle wrote: 'When I read Mrs Gaspar's statement, I felt physically sick and I wonder, just what went on in Prai da Luz, on that so called family holiday.'

You were amongst many, KathyBelle.

We have yet to ascertain how the Leicester police dealt with this matter without informing the Portuguese police until at least five months later. How could this possibly have been dealt with in a proper professional manner if the Portuguese were uninformed?

This is a blight on the investigations..

Hi Judge Mental, I would like to know just who the McCanns are, that without proof they can say Madeleine was abducted. The way they behaved in Portugal was criminal, yet they have walked away from their crime, due to intervention by the British Government.

They have had the use of a private jet, supplied by Philip Green. Richard Branson said he paid £100000 for lawyers to help the McCanns and he said that if they were prosecuted, he would pay for top lawyers to defend them. Brian Kennedy the double glazing magnet, also helped the McCanns.

If this case gets reopened and the McCanns are successfully prosecuted, Gordon Brown, Philip Green, Richard Branson, Brian Kennedy and other prominent figures, who have publicly defended the McCanns, will end up with egg on their faces. For taking part in this charade and treating the McCanns as victims, when it was Madeleine who was made a victim because of her parents cruel behaviour.

kathyBelle wrote: Hi Kadang,

KathyBelle,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think the interview you refer to is this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is6yRUA4qYo

I believe the words KM actually said, when do the shaking motion, was "I've persecuted myself so many times over that statement and I think why didn't I just kind of hold her and say "what do you mean, what do you mean you woke up"..."

Hi Kadang, I thought it was anniversary interview, when Kate McCann said she grabbed Madeleine by the arm. I'm just trawling the net to see if I can find it, because she looked angry when she said she grabbed Madeleine by the arm. She doesn't look angry on the anniversary interview, but I believe her tears to be crocodile tears.

Gerry McCann looks like he is trying to suppress a laugh.

Shibboleth wrote:I think he looks hot!

And yes, Kathy, I think that the McCanns will try and squirm out of the libel trial. But of course, Mr Amaral might not be so willing to let them off the hook. Even as we speak, I believe he is putting a case together to counter-sue, anyway.

Shibboleth, I think the same as you and I am praying that Dr Amaral doesn't let them off the hook. I'm also praying that the lifting of the ban, is the beginning of the end for the McCanns.

KathyBelle

The lifting of the ban on the book will have come as a huge blow to the McCanns, they have become so accustomed to things going their way that I doubt they had considered for one second that this would happen. As the book ban hasn't had much media coverage in the UK, most people will be unaware of these developments therefore the McCanns will probably think it best to lay low for a while whilst they plan their next move. Following close on Gamble's resignation, things are certainly not looking good for the McCanns and think we may well be seeing the beginning of the end for them - lets hope so

I do fear for Amaral as there do seem to be some nasty people associated with this case. When cornered, I think Gerry could be dangerous. IMO they will use all their money and every resourse available to them to try and destroy him.

kathyBelle wrote: Hi Kadang, I thought it was anniversary interview, when Kate McCann said she grabbed Madeleine by the arm. I'm just trawling the net to see if I can find it, because she looked angry when she said she grabbed Madeleine by the arm. She doesn't look angry on the anniversary interview, but I believe her tears to be crocodile tears.

Gerry McCann looks like he is trying to suppress a laugh.

Ok, quite possible as I believe they had a script for a series of interviews..the same questions the same answers...yawn.

It's Kandang btw not kadang...lol

It's Kandang btw not kadang...lol

Are you sure?

http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.com/

This is interesting if true.

littlepixie wrote:http://blacksmithbureau.blogspot.com/

This is interesting if true.

Yes, thank you for posting.

The judges' (there were three of them) ruling sounds fully authentic, the kind of straight-down-the-line reasoning that should never have had this book banned in the first place.

It is very good to see the reasoning of the judges based on the clear words of the police final report and not just on Amaral's book.

Why has Amaral been allowed to sell his book once again.

Because the judges have said - and they are dead right - that Amaral has assembled a series of important facts, which are fully in line with facts uncovered in the official investigation, and has offered his interpretation of those facts, and has done so in a reasonable and logical manner.

Not unlike '60 Reasons', if I may say so, though that was written, obviously, without some of the facts in Amaral's book.

The judges have also said, in effect, that Amaral may be wrong. But they are happy for his book to be sold because his arguments and provisioanl conclusions are based on solod reasoning.

Sorry, I don't know who 'blacksmithbureau' really is, but thank you for giving us the core of this very healthy judgment - healthy for freedom of discussion and debate.

Costs were awarded against the McCanns. [quote]

How much would said costs be??

[quote="candyfloss"]Costs were awarded against the McCanns.

How much would said costs be??

With a backer like BK - would it matter?

candyfloss wrote:QUOTE: Costs were awarded against the McCanns.

How much would said costs be??

That means that Dr Kate McCann and Dr Gerald McCann will have to pay Amaral's costs.

That's the cost of all his Solicitor's preparation for the appeal and his charge for representation at the appeal.

If in addition the court were to order Amaral's costs in the lower court to be paid as well (on the grounds that the lower court got the original decision wrong in September and also got the banning appeal wrong in January/February), then Amaral could get all his lawyers' costs for preparing for and representing him at those lower court hearings.

These costs would include any actual expenses of the Solicitors e.g. photocopying or of Amaral e.g. his travel costs to Lisbon.

I don't know if Amaral had a Barrister as well as a Solicitor?

If we compare costs with a typical British libel hearing then, say:

6 days' hearing at at least £1,000 a day = £6,000 (Carter-Ruck's Adam Tudor would probabaly charge 3-4 times that)

100 hours of preparation at £150 an hour = £15,000 (Adam Tudor is reckoned to charge £500 an hour PLUS VAT)

plus expenses

plus any court fees, maybe a few hundred pounds at least

plus VAT.

...I don't think the McCanns would get away with much less than £25,000 for Amaral's costs - and the figure could easily be double or treble that.

And that's not counting the McCanns having to fork out thier own costs, so double that again.

I would therefore put the total bill for the McCanns for this whole series of actions at between £50,000 and £150,000.


Get out your cheque-book (again), Brian!

TB - "Get out your cheque-book (again), Brian!"

And keep it handy!

Daoud wrote:It's Kandang btw not kadang...lol

Are you sure?

Well if you insist I could add Kadang to the ever growing list of attributed pseudonyms

Get out your cheque-book (again), Brian!

Ouch...and with Christmas not that far away too...

Posted by Sasha on Little Morsals

Friday, 22 October 2010

Court Decision to overturn McCann ruling on the ban of Goncalo Amaral’s book (The Truth in the Lie)

Although I’ve been aware of the ban on Mr Amaral’s book (The truth in the lie) having been overturned by the Appeal Courts, I’ve held off from posting anything on 'Little Morsals' for several days. Sometimes it’s better to see how the News unfolds on a situation first and then do the research, but perhaps even more importantly, waiting for the words of the judges concerned in the case to surface.

During these days of silence, whilst keeping a watchful eye on the British news, I’ve noticed something specific. The British tabloids seemed to have focused on one aspect of the overruling. It appears they've concentrated on the only part which may be misconstrued as Mr Amaral’s book being returned to the bookshelves purely because Portugal believes in the freedom of speech or, more specifically, the freedom of expression.

What the British tabloids failed to report is that it was not only the freedom of expression which overturned the original ruling to ban the book (instigated by the McCann couple) but perhaps more importantly, that the panel of Appeal judges (judges Francisco Bruto da Costa, Catarina Arelo Mando and António Valente) did not find anything in Mr Amaral's book (the Truth in the Lie) that was not in the Police Files. In other words, the facts laid out in Mr Amaral’s book are from the official PJ Files.

What the British tabloids also failed to mention is the following statements made by the panel of judges:

"Concerning the applicants' (the McCann couple's) protection of private life, it is themselves who give multiple interviews and intervene in the media, offering them [the media] information that would otherwise hardly be published" and that "they voluntarily decided to limit their right to the intimacy of private life, in order to pursue higher values like the discovery of their daughter’s whereabouts".

Nonetheless, in doing so, "they opened the doors for others to give their opinion about the matter, in accordance to what they were saying, but eventually also in contradiction with their directions, yet always within a legitimate and constitutionally consecrated right of opinion and freedom of expression of thought".

No wonder I have lost faith in the British press. If they cannot report the whole truth then they should not bother at all...unless of course, this was a deliberate attempt by the mainstream media to manipulate the public into believing an abduction scenario which has no substance at all, and that Mr Amaral's book is fiction from beginning to end. If so, then the question begs: Who is behind all this manipulation and why?

The whole article regards the ruling of the judges can be read at McCann Files (a copy of which I’ve reproduced below):

The Lisbon Appeals Court has given the former Polícia Judiciaria inspector, Gonçalo Amaral, reason concerning the injunction that had been filed against him by Madeleine McCann's parents.

In a decision that is dated Thursday last week, the Appeals Court judges have overturned the prohibition that had been decreed by the Lisbon Civil Courts, which forbade the distribution and sales of the book Maddie – The Truth of the Lie, as well as interviews and television reports about said book, both in Portugal and abroad.

The McCann couple alleges that Gonçalo Amaral's book, as well as the interviews that he gave about it, prompt "a serious and hardly reparable damage" to their family, especially to the twins, Sean and Amelie. They invoked damages to the protection of their private and family life and damages to their good name and their image rights.

Yet, to the Appeals Court of Lisbon, "the contents of the book does not offend any of the applicants' fundamental rights. The exercise of its writing and publication is included in the constitutional rights that are ensured to everyone by the European Convention of Human Rights and by the Portuguese Republic’s Constitution" (concerning freedom of expression and information and freedom of press and the media).

We recall that the investigation into Maddie's disappearance was coordinated by Gonçalo Amaral and ended up being archived, without any certainties concerning what happened to the three-year-old child. In the book Maddie – The Truth of the Lie, the former inspector sustains that Maddie died in the apartment where her parents were spending their holidays, in Praia da Luz, probably due to a domestic accident, on the 3rd of May, 2007 – and then the McCann couple, assisted by their friends who where on holidays with them, concealed the cadaver.

And he alleges that he was forced to write the book in order to defend his reputation and to restore his professional honour, given the fact that at a certain point in time, he was removed from the investigation before its conclusion, through a decision from the Judiciária's national directory.

The judges at the Appeals Court in Lisbon compared the book with the archiving dispatch from the investigation into Maddie's disappearance: "We do not find any mention to any facts in the book that are not also in that dispatch. Where the author (Gonçalo Amaral) differs from the Prosecutors that wrote the dispatch is in the logical, police-work-oriented and investigative interpretation of said facts. In that sense, we stand before the exercise of the right of opinion, namely in a domain in which the author is an expert, as he worked as a criminal investigator for 26 years".

"Concerning the applicants' (the McCann couple's) protection of private life, it is themselves who give multiple interviews and intervene in the media, offering them [the media] information that would otherwise hardly be published" and that "they voluntarily decided to limit their right to the intimacy of private life, in order to pursue higher values like the discovery of their daughter’s whereabouts".

Nonetheless, in doing so, "they opened the doors for others to give their opinion about the matter, in accordance to what they were saying, but eventually also in contradiction with their directions, yet always within a legitimate and constitutionally consecrated right of opinion and freedom of expression of thought".

The decision was issued by the Appeals judges Francisco Bruto da Costa, Catarina Arelo Mando and António Valente.

Spudgun has written an excellent article on the recent news regarding the overruling of Mr Amaral’s book: Spudguns Spoutings

Please see Joana Morais site for a more thorough explanation and also recent interviews with Mr Goncalo Amaral.
------------------

http://littlemorsals.blogspot.com/2010/10/court-decision-to-overturn-mccann.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+LittleMorsals+%28Little+Morsals%29

-----------------

It's good to see Sasha blogging again

"they voluntarily decided to limit their right to the intimacy of private life, in order to pursue higher values like the discovery of their daughter’s whereabouts".

The judges at the Appeals Court in Lisbon compared the book with the archiving dispatch from the investigation into Maddie's disappearance: "We do not find any mention to any facts in the book that are not also in that dispatch.

The three judges made two very sharp observations which can be used by Amaral's defence team in the defamation trial since the charges filed were on the same basis ie contents of the book, and breach of their rights to privacy.

Since the judges decided facts in book are also in the dispatch and that it was the mccanns who gave up their privacy by their media interviews and press publicity, the mccanns have no legs to stand on in the defamation trial.

This is not a very cleverly written piece by the Algarve resident's Ms Sampson, and one is most annoyed that they are so precious about their text that we are unable to copy and paste some of the areas one would wish to take to task and discuss here.

To have placed the Attorney General's comment so centrally in the report is not at all helpful to Madeleine. There are many other police and judicial figures who are more aware of the discrepances in the witness statements and therefore do not hold with the Attorney General that the McCanns are ''entirely innocent'', and Ms. Sampson's article does not at all refect this adequately.

If one were to be asked as to whether this newspaper has been nobbled, one would have to reply with a belch and yawning great yes.

One noted some time ago that the paper was threatened, and this threat would appear to still be in place.

@ Judge Mental

You can email your views to her ines.lopes@theresidentgroup.com



And here's the copy and paste for you to pick apart :

By DAISY SAMPSON daisy.sampson@theresidentgroup.com

A controversial book about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann by Gonçalo Amaral has been allowed to go back on sale after the appeal court in Lisbon on October 19 overturned the ruling to ban the publication, as the block on the book was deemed unconstitutional.

Maddie –A Verdade da Mentira (Maddie – The Truth of the Lie), written by former lead police investigator in the case, Gonçalo Amaral, was first banned in September 2009 after Kate and Gerry McCann launched a case against the book.

In the book, Gonçalo Amaral claims that Kate and Gerry McCann were involved in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine from their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz in 2007 and that they had fabricated claims of abduction.

UK plans

Portugal’s Attorney General has reviewed the case and stated that there was no evidence to suggest that the McCanns were anything other than “entirely innocent” but the book can now go back on sale as the ban had broken “a constitutional and universal right: that to the freedom of expression” and the contents of the book did not breach the basic rights of the plaintiffs.

The 50 minute DVD documentary based on the book will also now be allowed to be sold again.

Gonçalo Amaral told Portuguese newspaper Correio da Manhã: “I have a sensation of liberty and I am sure that democracy in Portugal has been reinforced.

“My editor is going to immediately recuperate all the books that have been seized and take them to be placed in shops for sale once again and we are looking at other initiatives, including the publication of the book in England.”

Appeal

A spokesman for the McCann family told the British press this week: “The defamation action against Mr Amaral is very much continuing and Kate and Gerry’s lawyers are now examining the detail of this latest ruling and are considering an appeal.”

The spokesman continued: “As painful and personally damaging as the slanderous claims of Mr Amaral and his supporters have been to us and our family, our primary focus has always been, and always will be, to find Madeleine through our own best investigative efforts.”

[quote] [snipped]

to find Madeleine through our own best investigative efforts.”

Remind me who were these people they hired for their best investigative efforts. Oh yes, Metodo3, Halligen, and Edgar and Cowly,

And the latest mob, who also have no experience in finding missing children, but plenty in corporate fraud.

If the McCanns have to pay all the legal costs of this failed injunction, where will they get the money from???

Goncalo Amaral interview - does anyone here speak Portuguese?

http://sic.sapo.pt/online/video/programas/companhia-das-manhas/2010/10/caso-maddie20-10-2010-185219.htm

Shibboleth wrote:And the latest mob, who also have no experience in finding missing children, but plenty in corporate fraud.

If the McCanns have to pay all the legal costs of this failed injunction, where will they get the money from???

The mccanns are doing this hoping deep pocket 'BK' will come to their rescue.

Now's the real test to see whether he'll be true to his words.

aiyoyo wrote:

Shibboleth wrote:And the latest mob, who also have no experience in finding missing children, but plenty in corporate fraud.

If the McCanns have to pay all the legal costs of this failed injunction, where will they get the money from???

The mccanns are doing this hoping deep pocket 'BK' will come to their rescue.

Now's the real test to see whether he'll be true to his words.

If he is deeply involved he will be thinking of number one - so yes he will pay whatever is necessary to keep the deception going.

Cheshire Cat wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:

Shibboleth wrote:And the latest mob, who also have no experience in finding missing children, but plenty in corporate fraud.

If the McCanns have to pay all the legal costs of this failed injunction, where will they get the money from???

The mccanns are doing this hoping deep pocket 'BK' will come to their rescue.

Now's the real test to see whether he'll be true to his words.

If he is deeply involved he will be thinking of number one - so yes he will pay whatever is necessary to keep the deception going.

I beg to differ. The mccanns hoping is one thing, what they will get (if any) is quite another matter.

Far as I know, I dont think BK had supported them financially.
Not sure whether he'd made a one-off payment in the beginnging like other big shots or was his pledge of support an indefinible kind not restricted to anything in particular, and when it comes to having to spend some of his precious commodity it's a different ball game altogether.

Even if he'd known he's backed the wrong horse from the outset, now's the time to run as fast as he can with tail between his legs because now it's where his pocket is going to be really damaged.

Whereas before, he was using up only bullying tactics - cheap....no, in fact FOC.

The moment he starts been seen backing them publicly with money now, his role becomes obviously transparent, there's no hiding.
Its not only about money support, it about hanging his reputation out to dry! Would he risks that for them when the crunch comes?

I dont think a cunning guy like him earns his millions by being that stupid.
He knows exactly when to make a run -- the moment wind direction changes, he will be first out the door.

Getting him is bit more complicated, unless there is a full trial and all the peripherals are look at.