Joana Morais: The McCanns' Injunction: Quotes by the Defence Lawyers

The McCanns' Injunction: Quotes by the Defence Lawyers
by Joana Morais 9 years ago


The following quotes come from notes taken in loco [on spot] at the 7th Civil Court, at Palace of Justice in Lisbon, on the day when the closing arguments were presented by the defence lawyers of the four entities targeted in this case and by the McCanns layer. The order of publication of the said quotes follows the order in which they were presented in court, firstly Dr. António Cabrita for Dr. Gonçalo Amaral’s defence, after Drª. Fátima de Oliveira Esteves on behalf of the Book publisher's Guerra and Paz, then Dr. Miguel Coroadinho for the Portuguese television channel TVI and finally Dr. Henrique Costa Pinto for Valentim de Carvalho movies.

The final allegations of Drª. Isabel Duarte, the last to present her arguments were particularly difficult to note down. From her over-the-top lengthy reasoning and between reading in full Kate McCann's letter in 2008 to the second PJ coordinator, Paulo Rebelo, and an opinion chronicle by Pedro Mexia, we draw attention to the fact that the McCanns lawyer accused the spectators, bloggers and media present, as well as the defence lawyers of being ‘vultures and vampires’. She also accused a PJ Inspector of being a ‘liar’, and did not refrain herself from trying to ridicule Dr. Gonçalo Amaral. The allegations made by this lawyer were already divulged by her own voice, in several interviews given to multiple TV channels as well as in the form of a press release (see here, here, here and here), not seeming to us necessary, therefore, to repeat them again.

January 14, 2010

Quotes from the final allegations of Dr. António Cabrita, Gonçalo Amaral’s defence lawyer

It is unhealthy the McCanns obsession about the child being alive, the refusal to admit that she may be dead.

The withdrawal of the book and DVD embody this obsession.

What should worry us is the court decision to forbid debate about the situation, of commenting or of giving opinions. Everyone, everywhere comments on everything, that cannot be stopped. The discussion of an archived case cannot be forbidden.

This matter is too serious to be treated lightly. You cannot forbid like in other times (reference books burned in the University of Berlin).

Why attack this book?

Other books were written on the case, for example “The McCanns' Guilt” or “Maddie 129”. Despite the first having on its cover, the word “guilt”, it was not attacked. Why? Why this book? Why Gonçalo Amaral?

Why ask for the seizure and destruction of the book after more than a year? At a time when it was being negotiated the translation and publication of this book in English.

Maybe because what is said in this book is dangerously close to that is the truth. Perhaps because Gonçalo Amaral is a renowned investigator, and has knowledge of many things.

António Cabrita regrets the subservience of the Portuguese: who do not even interpret, but accept the interpretation of others.

The whole process is ‘sick’ of provincialism, of atrocious subservience.

It is enough to read the book to understand that what is in here is the story of an investigation, and no one can erase it.

The archiving dispatch says, at page 4647, that “it was not achieved any evidence to formulate any hypothesis...nor to state ... alive or dead, as seems more likely”

The book says nothing but: 'it is likely that ...'.

But what offends the McCanns is the archival dispatch, which says “Considering the statements… contradictions ... reconstitution… following very important information ... Jane Tanner’s proximity in relation to Gerry McCann and Jeremy Wilkins when she saw someone, carrying the child ... the situation relative to the open window, the movement of the curtains ... required a reconstruction…the fact that it is very difficult to assemble the conditions for entering the apartment ... the fact that the denials ( or lack of solidarity from the friends) to do the reconstruction were not justified ... This prevented the investigation.”

The McCanns said they were watching the apartment every half hour, but on May 1st, the children cried for over an hour.

Kate left the twins alone in the apartment to go alert the friends, the twins never woke nor moved in the midst of the turmoil.

The distance and lack of visibility of the apartment from the restaurant.
It can be concluded that if she disappeared, and if in fact, it was not possible to find her, then it was not as they told.

Is there offense in the book?
Or at the archival dispatch?

Curiously, the dispatch was omitted in the request for the injunction.

It is the McCanns perverse understanding that since the archival no one can say anything that contradicts their thesis. It is not so in a democracy. Especially, when you tell stories that rely entirely on the facts of an investigation.

I am ashamed to be Portuguese.

On June 1, 2007, a British detective interpreted Gerry McCann’s testimony about the way his daughter was sleeping ... as a commitment to convey a positive image.

António Cabrita refers to and reads the «extremely confidential» report by Lee Rainbow from the «National Policy Investigation Agency» which recommends an investigation to the couple because of contradictions in their statements, “the family is a lead that should be explored” and considers that “one should investigate not only the kidnapping but as well the death of the child”.

To obtain a decision of censorship, based on assumptions, facts were omitted from the injunction. That is why the DVD [containing the investigation case files] was shockingly omitted.

It was always given to the press the idea that Gonçalo Amaral accused the couple of killing their daughter. However, the book does not accuse the McCanns of killing their daughter. It alleges simulation of abduction without mentioning by whom, and only suspicion of concealment of a cadaver.

The book is the story of an investigation, written by whom is endorsed to write it.

If the McCanns were constituted as arguidos it is because there were suspicions against them.

Gonçalo Amaral treated the couple with kindness; the British police was tougher with them.

António Cabrita speaks of the invasion of tourism in the Algarve, a land of fishermen and makes an analogy. Any tourist is treated as English, even if it is German, etc.. He then tells a story about a yacht owner who put his head out the porthole and made a fisherman say “what do you do at 6 am with a yacht around your neck”.

The accusation of violation of the secrecy of justice (because of the delivery of the manuscript to the publisher) acknowledges after all that what is in the book is what is in the process.

On July 21, 2008, it was announced in the press that the case would be filed.

The book was launched on July, 24. From September 2007 there was no longer secrecy of justice with the amendments made to the Criminal Procedure Code, Article 86, paragraph 6.

It was not the PJ or Gonçalo Amaral who called the media to publicize the disappearance of the child, it was the couple.

Since the archival dispatch, there is no longer secrecy of justice.

So the media could reproduce the case files and Gonçalo Amaral not?

Regarding the profits of Gonçalo Amaral with the book, it is a recurrent argument.

It is alleged that Gonçalo Amaral made abyssal profits, and that he wrote the book to pay off his debts.

Did anyone come here to work for free? Profit is a normal thing, where is the harm?

What is a shame is the fund that is supposed to help find Madeleine.

Citizens who have contributed to the fund have been defrauded.

They are curtailing Gonçalo Amaral financial possibilities, to make impossible his defence.

“I refuse to be subservient.”

He says that as a Portuguese citizen he feels ashamed.

The couple never thanked the efforts of the PJ and the population of Praia da Luz.

They just came to do their reconstruction.

He ends by asking the judge to return his pride of being Portuguese.

Gonçalo Amaral’s freedom of expression was limited by those who should thank him.

Quotes from Drª. Fátima de Oliveira Esteves, defence lawyer for Guerra e Paz [War and Peace], Publishers, SA


Their action is belated, the McCanns seems to have waited to see if the book would sell or not, and if there was an English version.

The McCanns used the Portuguese courts to prevent the divulging of the book.

They made an abusive misuse of the court's decision, with the French authorities, and German (Amazon), in an attempt to close sites (mentions Carter Ruck letter sent to pamalam’s site and the English version of the book that is on the Web).

The injunction was initially rejected for lack of legal basis, and continues to have no foundation.

The parents are the ones who are responsible for the moral and physical integrity of Madeleine, not Gonçalo Amaral, Guerra & Paz, TVI nor Valentim de Carvalho Movies.

So much interest the parents have, that they have reported nothing to the process regarding the sightings. They alone have used the media; the media have been abused and manipulated by the couple, which works only for the media aspect of the case.

When there is no reason, you shoot in all directions, referring to the McCanns lawyer.

The injunction does not have justification; the book adds nothing and does not alter the facts of the investigation.

Other books were published and nothing was done against them. Guerra & Paz published the book 'The McCanns' Guilt', only the title could have produced problems but the McCanns did nothing.

The publication of this book is comprised in the freedom of the press.

The book by Gonçalo Amaral contains an opinion based on an investigation. There is persecution in parallel proceedings against Gonçalo Amaral.

This is a case of purely personal persecution; the couple publicly denigrated the good name of Gonçalo Amaral.

She ends asking the lifting of the injunction, with all the consequences arising therefrom.

Quotes from the closing arguments of TVI's defence lawyer, Dr. Miguel Coroadinha

The case continues to exist, information continues to come in - but none from the couple, despite them telling the media that their private investigation continues to gather information.

The couple does not inform the PJ of anything, they do not ask for the reopening of the investigation. They merely manage the information in the media.

TVI tried to acquire the rights to broadcast Channel Four's documentary, in order to display both sides of the case. That did not happen because the couple stopped the transmission by TVI. The film was eventually broadcast by SIC.

TV ratings are important, but they are not everything. Obviously, companies have profits as an objective, but TVI intended to shed some light on this issue, in depth.

The behaviour of the couple is very different from TVI. The applicants [McCann couple] subjected themselves to, encouraged, benefited and even influenced the media circus surrounding this case. And the police investigation turned out to be constrained by those same media.

Everything is released by the couple to the media, but nothing is sent to the process. Even the lunch hour was used to give a ‘show’, and to publicize another action against TVI. The applicants make a planned media management, but nothing is investigated.

The McCanns want the media to reproduce only what they want to see debated, and they do not want to it to exceed a certain threshold.

He concluded appealing for the personal rights of the applicants to not prevail over freedom of expression.

Quotes from the final allegations of Dr. Henrique Costa Pinto, representative of Valentim de Carvalho Movies

The applicants, strangely, are more concerned with preventing the production of evidence.

The contradictions and evidence led the investigators to consider the thesis of death above the abduction one.

An archival dispatch does not innocent anyone, that happens at the proper place, in court.

The dispatch refers the lack of cooperation, and he refers the process at pages 4638, “the arguidos lost the chance to prove their innocence”.

The proof in this case was not done; it is only general considerations and value judgments. Where is the offense? Where is a concrete violation of the personal rights of the applicants?

There is nothing. There are no facts of concrete violation in the book or in the video.

It is not possible that the documentary offends any right of personality of the McCanns.

Nothing was pointed out, in concrete as being false, mainly in the text of the main action.

The documentary and book are distributed worldwide. If someone divulges Gonçalo Amaral’s thesis, it is the McCanns through their media approach to the case.

This media festival is forced on us by the applicants.

He concludes with an appeal for the injunction to be lifted.


original in Portuguese here: Providência Cautelar dos McCann: Citações dos Advogados de Defesa

https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2010/02/mccanns-injunction-quotes-by-defense.html