Blacksmith - Stating The McCann's Will Settle On Amaral's Terms ........PLUS NEW ***McCanns ask for extrajudicial settlement by Joana Morais**TRIAL NOW SUSPENDED**

Me wrote:
My own belief is that in TB's case the McCann's will see if they can
obtain judgement against him without going to a full libel trial. If
they fail on that count and the Judge orders a full libel trial then i
feel reasonably certain that that too will be canned.

aiyoyo wrote:

Me wrote:
My own belief is that in TB's case the McCann's will see if they can
obtain judgement against him without going to a full libel trial. If
they fail on that count and the Judge orders a full libel trial then i
feel reasonably certain that that too will be canned.

I concur.

Hobs wrote:If the gruesome twosome decide they wnt to drag it out for 6 months so they can try and win over Tony Bennet they will still lose.

Should they win and then the truth comes out regarding Goncalo Amaral showing they did in fact lie then Tony Bennet can in turn either appeal his case citing new and revealing evidence or sue them.

The Sunday Times is currently suing lance armstrong for the money they had to pay him ( plus costs and interest) since he has now admitted lying after suing them for libel when they printed a story saying he doped and winning.

The gruesomes have somewhat of a sticky problem in that they can#t block anyone from venturing an opinion on what they think happened as revealed i the files ( i bet they were not happy bunnies when they realised that making the files public meant exactly that, the public were free to read the released files and come to their own conclusion rather than the file being released to a select few and thus eabling them to continue the charade)

I wonder if this is why the accounts are so vague about what was spent where and who is getting paid what.

I will also bet when Goncalo and Tony win they will spin itan claim they are taking money away from finding Madeleine, momey that might have been the key to finally finding her and bringing her home.

I wonder then what the seven dwarves will do since they may also find themselves in line for libel, will they be talking to their attornies finding out where they stand and what options they have if any.

Will they decide to tell the truth in the hope possible court cases go away or charges are minimised.

It is going to be interesting as it is going to be every man for themselves, no one is going to take the fall for the gruesomes.

I also wonder if clarence mitchell is in line for libel charges since he was the mouthpiece for the gruesomes and wasn't at all nice about Goncalo.

I also wonder how much he really knows since, in order to defend his clients and speak for them he has to make sure nothing he says leads to the truth coming out. He isn't going to say something that inadvertantly reveals something of interest so he needs to know some if not all the truth in order to avoid opening mouth and inserting foot.



The plus side is everytime they say anything be it in an interview etc it gives us statement analysts something to work with, looking for the expected and noting anything unexpected which reveals the truth ( remember her wanting to press a button and they would ALL be togeather? This only makes sense if she knows Madeleine is dead as otherwise she has just murdered her 2 remaining children and made Madeleine an orphan)

ed1976 wrote:

Smokeandmirrors wrote:

ed1976 wrote:

Me wrote:

ed1976 wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:BS's latest.

SATURDAY, 19 JANUARY 2013

Libel diary January 18
So there we are: readers will no doubt have seen the Portuguese announcement that the trial is suspended (for a maximum of six months) for the negotiations to take place.

The Bureau sits here placidly waiting for the first comments from Kate & Gerry McCann or people speaking on their behalf. Listen to them carefully and you'll be able to judge for yourselves who is asking whom for a settlement. Of course if they don't say anything over the next week or so – we'll just have to nag them again.

Come on Clarence – you're up to the task, aren't you?

Can wee also expect a comment from GA

Why should he? Amaral did not launch what has turned out to be a FAILED libel action.

So its a FAILED libel action now, you know for sure.

it would follow then that the action against Tony must fail, strange he is so quiet.

Doh!!! What part of TWO failed court actions with the McCanns paying costs do you not understand?? The book was not considered libellous, so it would be VERY difficult for the McCanns to pursue Amaral in Court.
You still haven't answered various questions as to why you joined the forum. Why won't you answer? I can almost sense various Mod fingers hovering over the "Ejecta-Troll" button.

I joined the forum to expresss my point of view. Nothing wrong with that I would have thought. For now I will refrain from posting until there is further news as I feel rather a lot of hostility towards me. Free speech is important remember.

monkey mind wrote:

ed1976 wrote:

Smokeandmirrors wrote:

ed1976 wrote:

Me wrote:

ed1976 wrote:

aiyoyo wrote:BS's latest.

SATURDAY, 19 JANUARY 2013

Libel diary January 18
So there we are: readers will no doubt have seen the Portuguese announcement that the trial is suspended (for a maximum of six months) for the negotiations to take place.

The Bureau sits here placidly waiting for the first comments from Kate & Gerry McCann or people speaking on their behalf. Listen to them carefully and you'll be able to judge for yourselves who is asking whom for a settlement. Of course if they don't say anything over the next week or so – we'll just have to nag them again.

Come on Clarence – you're up to the task, aren't you?

Can wee also expect a comment from GA

Why should he? Amaral did not launch what has turned out to be a FAILED libel action.

So its a FAILED libel action now, you know for sure.

it would follow then that the action against Tony must fail, strange he is so quiet.

Doh!!! What part of TWO failed court actions with the McCanns paying costs do you not understand?? The book was not considered libellous, so it would be VERY difficult for the McCanns to pursue Amaral in Court.
You still haven't answered various questions as to why you joined the forum. Why won't you answer? I can almost sense various Mod fingers hovering over the "Ejecta-Troll" button.

I joined the forum to expresss my point of view. Nothing wrong with that I would have thought. For now I will refrain from posting until there is further news as I feel rather a lot of hostility towards me. Free speech is important remember.

Hmmm, I can think of a couple of other people who say they believe in the freedom of speech whilst portraying themselves as victims....now who might they be?

ed1976 wrote:GA and TB?

ed1976 wrote:

monkey mind wrote:

ed1976 wrote:[quote="
I joined the forum to expresss my point of view. Nothing wrong with that I would have thought. For now I will refrain from posting until there is further news as I feel rather a lot of hostility towards me. Free speech is important remember.

Hmmm, I can think of a couple of other people who say they believe in the freedom of speech whilst portraying themselves as victims....now who might they be?

GA and TB?

Cristobell wrote:As an old legal secretary, my experience was that settlements are usually done immediately. Usually at the door of the Court. I think this will be an interesting weekend newswise.

aquila wrote:

ed1976 wrote:

Me wrote:

ed1976 wrote:of course if Aamral agrees to withdraw his book and his accusations then...the McCanns will settle on Amarals terms and Blacksmith will be right. From what I can see a libel trial is of no benefit to the McCanns as Amaral has no money and would not be able to pay damages, including the McCanns legal fees.

Similarly with Tony. Once Tony has paid the costs of Smethurst he will have no money to pay any amounts awarded by the court should he lose the libel case.

ed1976 wrote:This really is an incredible situation. Has Amaral decided he cannot
defend what he has said in the book? If he could surely he would relish
his day in court seeing the McCanns squirm. if he had done this would
have been fantastic for Tony. We don't know yet. Interesting times
ahead.

Why would Amaral choose to settle when he WON the last legal case regarding the banning of his book and this case revolves around the same arguments? Amaral has a judicial precedent that what he said in his book was a valid interpretation of the facts of the case.

Armed with that verdict in his pocket do you really believe he would be seeking to settle now?

Why would he need to do that?

On the other hand and conversely, The McCann's LOST the trial regarding the book and were faced with the damning verdict of the judges (part of which you can read in my email signature) and were told that Amaral's thesis was a valid police led one.

Equally Amaral had no money at the book banning trial but they ploughed on with that.

So i'd ask you, to use an Americanism, to "do the math".

first, the words of the judge would have been in portuguese and you have no idea how accurate the translation is.

Secondly, yes the banning of the book was overturned. IMO this is because the court has to have a valid reason to ban a book and at that time it had not been decided if the book was libellous. The court did not release the frozen assets of GA which shows nothing had been decided. If the McCanns wished to halt their libel case they simply withdraw their action, which they haven't. For me everything points to GA backing down. We don't know for certain but hopefully we will soon. If the McCanns have backed down this is very good news for Tony, but he has been very quiet since the news broke.

You have been quiet though haven't you...up until now. So do indulge us with your reason for joining the forum within the last couple of days. Most people on this forum introduce themselves. Forgive me for being direct, it's just good to get these things out of the way.

Portia wrote:

Cristobell wrote:As an old legal secretary, my experience was that settlements are usually done immediately. Usually at the door of the Court. I think this will be an interesting weekend newswise.

Spot on, my thoughts precisely Christobell!

Obviously the facts in the Amaral libel case are potentially so damaging for the TB -mere- breacht-of-contract case, that their becoming public is to be avoided at all costs.

There now is a six month reprieve, enabling the McCs to bury TB first, and THEN break off negotiations with Dr. Amaral

The UK are a far more important battle ground than Portugal as most of the Funds donors are from the UK.

This, and nowhere else, is where they must be seen to come out smelling of roses. (as in: Fund, donors, money etc etc)

Who cares about little old sardine-swilling Mediterranean (!) Portugal?!

Me wrote:

Ribisl wrote:
Are his assets still frozen?

YES, far as I know. This is the bizarre part - the asset freeze is part of the libel case process.
So long as the libel case is not settled, ruled on, done and dusted, the asset wont be released.
It forms part of the process and the process has to end before the asset is released.

I didn't realise that. That then adds further ammunition to the "negotiations" being instigated by the McCann's. Because i am sure there would be a price to pay for initiating libel and freezing someone's assets and then simply pulling out at the 11th hour.

Ribisl wrote:

Me wrote:

Ribisl wrote:
Are his assets still frozen?

YES, far as I know. This is the bizarre part - the asset freeze is part of the libel case process.
So long as the libel case is not settled, ruled on, done and dusted, the asset wont be released.
It forms part of the process and the process has to end before the asset is released.

I didn't realise that. That then adds further ammunition to the "negotiations" being instigated by the McCann's. Because i am sure there would be a price to pay for initiating libel and freezing someone's assets and then simply pulling out at the 11th hour.

Just for the record, I did not say any of what's quoted above. The question was posed by Bob Southgate and the answer was given by aiyoyo.

Me wrote:
That then creates a conundrum for the McCann's both in their media image here and in their court case with TB.

How can can they accept defeat publically which is what you would think Amaral will push for as part of the settlement and yet at the same time spin this capitualtion in their favour and all the while keeping the case going against TB.

They are having to keep a lot of plates up in the air now.

Me wrote:I'm hypothesising here but usually settlements are confidential between the parties, however i cannot see GA accepting any kind of confidentiality clause given the way his name has been dragged through the mud and that he knows full well and to his great cost the way their spin machine works.

With a confidentiality clause Clarence as "spokesman" or "source close to the pair" will spin it as a victory for the McCanns.

Given they have asked for the settlement and that Amaral appears to be holding the aces here i can't see how he will accept a confidential outcome.

That then creates a conundrum for the McCann's both in their media image here and in their court case with TB.

How can can they accept defeat publically which is what you would think Amaral will push for as part of the settlement and yet at the same time spin this capitualtion in their favour and all the while keeping the case going against TB.

They are having to keep a lot of plates up in the air now.

Châtelaine wrote:Whilst this was a wonderful Saturday morning for me so far, Monkey Mind, your post has made me sad, as I am afraid that they may indeed be playing for time ...

monkey mind wrote:

Of course the cynic in me does raise a question or two that they may be playing the long game.
Could this be a possibility?

There hasn’t been a deadline for Grange to come up with some sort of final opinion or recommendation has there? Have I missed that? If such a deadline has been set one could guess it would likely be set around the two year anniversary and once again coinciding with another birthday etc and two months ahead of the 6 month Portuguese deadline.

If SY conclude with the bizarre line they pushed last May that she was still alive and being looked after by some kind and loving couple then they may use this in one of a couple of ways, to drown out any hint of the Pt decision in the media, or perhaps, they have no intent on reaching any settlement at all. Rather they know what the SY verdict is going to be and upon that there will be an abrupt u turn which they will hold that up in a Portuguese court as vindication in a subsequent libel trial.

In other words, simply a delaying tactic using time to their advantage whilst wrong footing all concerned. Nothing should be put past this lot....

Portia wrote:
A confidentiality clause between Dr Amaral and the McCs is not pre se prejudicial to his future dealings with the Media. They are outsiders in any deal of his with the McCs. He could in theory proceed against the Media after an agreement with the McCs. But, him being a man of honour, I find it highly unlikely he will do that, unlike some others I could but do not want to mention.

But let's wait and see: hasn't GA himself said so poignantly: Justice works in silence?

Portia wrote:

Cristobell wrote:As an old legal secretary, my experience was that settlements are usually done immediately. Usually at the door of the Court. I think this will be an interesting weekend newswise.

Spot on, my thoughts precisely Christobell!

Obviously the facts in the Amaral libel case are potentially so damaging for the TB -mere- breacht-of-contract case, that their becoming public is to be avoided at all costs.

There now is a six month reprieve, enabling the McCs to bury TB first, and THEN break off negotiations with Dr. Amaral

The UK are a far more important battle ground than Portugal as most of the Funds donors are from the UK.

This, and nowhere else, is where they must be seen to come out smelling of roses. (as in: Fund, donors, money etc etc)

Who cares about little old sardine-swilling Mediterranean (!) Portugal?!

Me wrote:

monkey mind wrote:


In other words, simply a delaying tactic using time to their advantage whilst wrong footing all concerned. Nothing should be put past this lot....

That would all be a possiblity but what on earth is there they have got from "reviewing" the existing files that could lead them to concluding that she was abducted and still be alive?

Absolutely nothing. In fact there is more than credible evidence to the contrary.

We know there is nothing within the files that would even hint at that and where are the credible new leads? None of the publically released ones have come to anything and if there was a real genuine one would they not be requesitng a formal reopening in Portugal and announing it to the world?

Agreed. I have stated on more than one occasion that an enquiry with 200 outstanding *leads* is an enquiry without direction. The process is to narrow those leads to one credible direction. Personally I do not see how anyone can read those files and go in any direction that differs from the one the PJ took. That does not mean to say that Grange may not open endedly conclude that in the absence of a body - despite the evidence that there was one - they will leave the presumption that she is still alive.

The answers last year were bizzare but were also straight bat non commital answers which didn't rule anything in or out. Of course they have to say at that stage they think there is a possibilty she is alive, to suggest otherwsie would be prejudicial.

The timing of it was interesting though wasn't it. As was ex colleagues of Redwood coming out in national media, beng presented as abduction experts and propounding the theory that she is alive and well and being raised as someone elses child. I'm sorry, that and othe factors makes me very suspicious.

I do not believe they know what the SY review will conclude because i cannot see how the Yard can be seen to informing the people the files they are reviewing regarded as the main suspects.

They won't be *seen* to do that. There is evidence to say that the McCanns are being kept up to date on the progress or lack thereof isn't there? Unless I am mistaken they and Redwood have said as much. Any future libel trial in Portugal would surely have to be based on the evidence known at that time and not what has subsequently come out.

And let's be honest we all know there is nothing there of note to suggest an outcome other than asking for a reconstruction and questioning the T9 or simply to leave it as closed. There is simply nothing else there to come to any other conclusion.

I think sometimes we credit the Mccann's with too much knowledge and influence.

Well inexplicably they've had in their corner three prime ministers, and their media men, NGI, seemingly all of the British media, some of the best PR people money can buy, billionaire business men and their legal men, some of the best legal advocates in the land etc etc. It would be careless in the extreme not to cater for the fact they may have great influence for indeed great influence is being exerted on their behalf. Nice thing is though, it only needs the right piece of evidence for them all to jump ship.....

My take is that they are now on a very sticky wicket.

They've been on a sticky wicket from the minute they failed to produce evidence of a break in to substantiate their claims. The wicket became stickier when they were brought in as suspects hence the venom towards the man charged with trying to find their daughter and determined to expose the truth. They are still batting though. I'm not being deliberately difficult here, simply highlighting what appears to me to be a possibility, judging by history a good one. I genuinely hope it isn't so.