The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Mm11

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Regist10
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Mm11

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Regist10

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Page 5 of 17 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11 ... 17  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Dr What on 26.01.13 18:07

russiandoll

I agree with your previous statement that litigation is brutal.It can lay bare habits or events in one's past that one would not want family or friends to know about.Whether these habits or events are social or sexual it does not matter.They must not see the light of day.They could be seen as repugnant or embarrassing.They could also ruin a career or lifestyle that has been worked hard for, that has required sacrifice by one's wider family.How could one allow all those hopes and sacrifices to be made worthless by the exposure of certain habits or events.Protect these at all costs.No matter who has to be targeted.

But that lid can only be screwed on for so long.
avatar
Dr What

Posts : 249
Activity : 286
Likes received : 35
Join date : 2012-10-26

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Guest on 26.01.13 18:15

Banned !
Pfew.
Thank you.
I was getting nauseous :-(

But Medusa may grow another head ...
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Guest on 26.01.13 18:23

If he or she is the person I think they were before, they will soon be trumpeting on the Missing Madeleine forum again about there being no freedom of speech allowed here.

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 375754for now.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Guest on 26.01.13 18:27

You think so, Jean?
Oh, well ...
If it isn't this one, there will be another ... pulled out of the closet from time to time ;-)
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Guest on 26.01.13 18:30

Jean wrote:If he or she is the person I think they were before, they will soon be trumpeting on the Missing Madeleine forum again about there being no freedom of speech allowed here.

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 375754for now.

I don't know Jean....admin will have to check. They certainly can't complain they weren't given the the right to speak here, can they. It was just a matter of time before the nastiness came out, and then of course they deserve what they get. Another one will now doubt descend on us very shortly. They're like pimples, get rid of one and another pops usLetter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 110921
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by PeterMac on 26.01.13 18:47

Châtelaine wrote:
But Medusa may grow another head ...
Or even Hydra !
Medusa lost hers and Perseus kept it in a bucket to flash at passing Kings to turn them to stone. And Pegasus sprang from her body as her head was cut off.
PeterMac
PeterMac
Investigator

Posts : 12094
Activity : 14936
Likes received : 1914
Join date : 2010-12-06

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Montclair on 26.01.13 18:55

ed1976 wrote:
@russiandoll wrote:Thank you Peter Mac and you have reminded me that I need to say sorry to a few members here including your good self. I am sincerely sorry if in the heat of the moment when I did what you lot call a flounce [ very Scarlett O 'Hara and not my style!] I caused offence. I also have MS and can be a real f*****g tosser when the going gets tough.

What I should have said is that I was going through a very tough time physically and emotionally and needed to distance myself as I was getting easily wound up [again not my style, honest guvnor] at reading about some Sandyhook parents' distress not being genuine. I thought it gave ammunition to those who say our stance re the Maddie affair does not come from a good place.
For what it's worth we are imo in interesting times. Please ignore ed now.....no amount of Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 3139096799can alter these simple FACTS.

1. Goncalo Amaral has NOT backed down from his position that the McCanns are NOT telling the truth.
2. The McCanns have decided NOT to pursue their claim in court that he has libelled them by stating the above.

GO FIGURE !

The statement in red is incorrect. The McCanns reserve the right to continue with the court case if Amaral does not meet their demands.

the McCanns have not caved in.

I actually thought I was dealing with people who could actually read a sentence and understand what it means. Plainly I am not. It is impossible to have an intelligent conversation with someone who is not intelligent. It is no wonder that the vast majority on this forum have got most of the facts of this case back to front, led by TB who has been so stupid he will shortly be losing what little he has left once he has settled with Smethurst. Poor , deluded fools.

The McCanns are certainly in no position to make any kind of "demands" on Gonçalo Amaral or any of the other defendents! If their proposals are not accepted, the case goes to court. So, if the McCanns had such a strong case in the first place why have they then asked for a suspension just a few days before the trial was to begin and not opted to go to court.Some people just don't understand or don't want to see the truth.
Montclair
Montclair

Posts : 156
Activity : 159
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-01-26
Age : 74
Location : Algarve

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by PeterMac on 26.01.13 18:58

The important thing is that it is useless arguing about an unknown fact. Argument will not change it.
EITHER
the McCanns have asked for a settlement, for whatever reason
OR
Amaral has asked for it, for whatever reason

Argument and speculation can be fun, but they do not change that central issue, which we shall discover in the fullness of time.
It may be that one of more people already know.

Clearly the truth is known by
McCanns
McCanns portuguese legal team
Carter-Ruck
Dr Amaral
Dr Amaral's legal team
Portuguese court
Court officials
Secretaries
and a whole host of others.

It may be that TB is in possession of facts which for obvious reasons he will not reveal here. And in my view he should not.
I cannot imagine that after four years of persecution from the McCanns and their egregious team he has not made some useful contacts,
perhaps even directly with Dr Amaral.

Wait and see.
Then discuss from a position of knowledge.
PeterMac
PeterMac
Investigator

Posts : 12094
Activity : 14936
Likes received : 1914
Join date : 2010-12-06

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Guest on 26.01.13 18:59

Don't think I have had a chance to say welcome Montclair, Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 4239481642
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Guest on 26.01.13 19:04

@PeterMac wrote:The important thing is that it is useless arguing about an unknown fact. Argument will not change it.
EITHER
the McCanns have asked for a settlement, for whatever reason
OR
Amaral has asked for it, for whatever reason

Argument and speculation can be fun, but they do not change that central issue, which we shall discover in the fullness of time.
It may be that one of more people already know.

Clearly the truth is known by
McCanns
McCanns portuguese legal team
Carter-Ruck
Dr Amaral
Dr Amaral's legal team
Portuguese court
Court officials
Secretaries
and a whole host of others.

It may be that TB is in possession of facts which for obvious reasons he will not reveal here. And in my view he should not.
I cannot imagine that after four years of persecution from the McCanns and their egregious team he has not made some useful contacts,
perhaps even directly with Dr Amaral.

Wait and see.
Then discuss from a position of knowledge.


Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 41345390
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Guest on 26.01.13 19:12

@PeterMac wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
But Medusa may grow another head ...
Or even Hydra !
Medusa lost hers and Perseus kept it in a bucket to flash at passing Kings to turn them to stone. And Pegasus sprang from her body as her head was cut off.
***
Oh dear! I've been mixing all my life the Greek and the Roman. And all of the Myths. I loved them, still do and can read them over and over again, as if they were "new" .... because I just cannot remember them correctly.

ETA there's an advantage there. As I said: as if they were new to me ;-) so no boring tales, but an aha-erlebnis every time :-)
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Montclair on 26.01.13 19:58

@Portia wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:The important thing is that it is useless arguing about an unknown fact. Argument will not change it.
EITHER
the McCanns have asked for a settlement, for whatever reason
OR
Amaral has asked for it, for whatever reason

Argument and speculation can be fun, but they do not change that central issue, which we shall discover in the fullness of time.
It may be that one of more people already know.

Clearly the truth is known by
McCanns
McCanns portuguese legal team
Carter-Ruck
Dr Amaral
Dr Amaral's legal team
Portuguese court
Court officials
Secretaries
and a whole host of others.

It may be that TB is in possession of facts which for obvious reasons he will not reveal here. And in my view he should not.
I cannot imagine that after four years of persecution from the McCanns and their egregious team he has not made some useful contacts,
perhaps even directly with Dr Amaral.

Wait and see.
Then discuss from a position of knowledge.


Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 41345390



There is no either or. It is a FACT that the McCanns asked for the suspension and negotiation and Gonçalo Amaral and the other defendents were ready to go to court. I don't understand why there are still some people who are unable to face up to this FACT.
Montclair
Montclair

Posts : 156
Activity : 159
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-01-26
Age : 74
Location : Algarve

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Bob Southgate on 26.01.13 20:12

Jean wrote:If he or she is the person I think they were before, they will soon be trumpeting on the Missing Madeleine forum again about there being no freedom of speech allowed here.

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 375754for now.



Is that the same as the Stop the Myths forum JLetter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 410353720ean?
Bob Southgate
Bob Southgate

Posts : 161
Activity : 161
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2012-11-01
Age : 59

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Guest on 26.01.13 20:19

Heavens no, it's not a pro site but the person I'm thinking of is a member there. He or she didn't get any sympathy!
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by PeterMac on 26.01.13 21:24

@Montclair wrote:There is no either or. It is a FACT that the McCanns asked for the suspension and negotiation and Gonçalo Amaral and the other defendents were ready to go to court. I don't understand why there are still some people who are unable to face up to this FACT.
You may be right. I don't know.
All I have seen here is a letter from TB to C-R. Not the other way round.
I can envisage a legal situation where only the Plaintiffs have the legal power to ask for a trial to be halted. That would make perfect sense.
So if Dr Amaral had indicated that he wanted to settle or to give in, that would be communicated to the Plaintiffs, who would then approach the court for permission to stay the process whilst they sought to finalise the terms.
It might look to an outsider that the Plaintiffs had taken the lead, but the reality would be entirely different.

As I say, I do not know.
I do not know enough ( or indeed anything) about the Portuguese legal system and procedures, and I do not have sufficient hard facts to decide at the moment.
PeterMac
PeterMac
Investigator

Posts : 12094
Activity : 14936
Likes received : 1914
Join date : 2010-12-06

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Inspectorfrost on 26.01.13 22:42

LMFAO at Ed76 complaining he cant have an intelligent conversation with intelligent people, thats because you Ed are dense, obnoxious, biased, a troll,who threw their dummy out the pram when busted.Tatty Bye.

big grin

avatar
Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Activity : 878
Likes received : 3
Join date : 2012-12-09

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Montclair on 26.01.13 23:50

@PeterMac wrote:
@Montclair wrote:There is no either or. It is a FACT that the McCanns asked for the suspension and negotiation and Gonçalo Amaral and the other defendents were ready to go to court. I don't understand why there are still some people who are unable to face up to this FACT.
You may be right. I don't know.
All I have seen here is a letter from TB to C-R. Not the other way round.
I can envisage a legal situation where only the Plaintiffs have the legal power to ask for a trial to be halted. That would make perfect sense.
So if Dr Amaral had indicated that he wanted to settle or to give in, that would be communicated to the Plaintiffs, who would then approach the court for permission to stay the process whilst they sought to finalise the terms.
It might look to an outsider that the Plaintiffs had taken the lead, but the reality would be entirely different.

As I say, I do not know.
I do not know enough ( or indeed anything) about the Portuguese legal system and procedures, and I do not have sufficient hard facts to decide at the moment.

Why do you continue to say you don't know when I have just told you that the McCanns asked for the suspension. That is an indisputable FACT! BTW TB quoted a letter from CR to him which stated the FACT that the McCanns are trying to seek a settlement. It was also mentioned on Portuguese television by Hernâni Carvalho and in an article in TVMais. What more FACTS do you need?
Montclair
Montclair

Posts : 156
Activity : 159
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-01-26
Age : 74
Location : Algarve

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Bob Southgate on 26.01.13 23:52

Jean wrote:Heavens no, it's not a pro site but the person I'm thinking of is a member there. He or she didn't get any sympathy!



I only mentioned StopThe Myths because I googled my name and came across a few posts there which were personal attacks on me. Is that their normal MO on there?
Bob Southgate
Bob Southgate

Posts : 161
Activity : 161
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2012-11-01
Age : 59

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Inspectorfrost on 26.01.13 23:58

@Bob Southgate wrote:
Jean wrote:Heavens no, it's not a pro site but the person I'm thinking of is a member there. He or she didn't get any sympathy!



I only mentioned StopThe Myths because I googled my name and came across a few posts there which were personal attacks on me. Is that their normal MO on there?


It is generally a grotty and very negative site which host 90 per cent of posts slagging people off, best avoided as most of the natives there have emotional problems which do not allow them to argue rationally about very much
avatar
Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Activity : 878
Likes received : 3
Join date : 2012-12-09

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Tony Bennett on 27.01.13 0:18

@Me wrote:**EDIT** Tony, would it be possible, and I can understand if you didn't want to, to scan and upload the letter from Carter Ruck which states the above so we can end this debate once and for all about who has caved in and asked for a postponement
Almost impossible for me, as I don't have a scanner I can use at the moment. I have quoted from an AFFIDAVIT of Isabel Martorell, NOT from a letter.

[The letter in Portugal was sent by Isobel Duarte on or about 8 January 2013].

What I have quoted from the Affidavit is verbatim and leaves nothing important out regarding the propsed settlement].

* It is ADMITTED by Carter-Ruck that the McCanns, via Isabel Duarte, wrote to Dr Amaral and to the Lisbon Civil Court, two weeks ahead of the final trial, asking for an adjournment

* It is CLAIMED by Carter-Ruck that this is to enable the parties to try to reach a settlement

* It is ASSERTED by Carter-Ruck that the McCanns seek a settlement which "gives the [McCanns] sufficent vindication and protection in the future".

That's it.

No more than that.

EXCEPT THAT IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN whether or not, having themselves having sought an adjournment (as russiandoll has I think also pointed out, almost unprecedented for a claimant), the McCanns can now extract a settlement which gives the McCanns 'sufficient vindication and protection'.

The McCanns WERE asking for COMPLETE vindication, and 1,200,000 euros (I make that £1,010,760 at the current rate of exchange - see NOTE).

They have changed their position.

Thet are now merely seeking SUFFICIENT vindication.

I am not sure how they could be 'protected' from Dr Amaral's facts and his hypothesis, given that Amaral's book has been back on sale in Portugal for 2 years and 3 months, has been translated into nine European languages, is on sale in 32 countries, and is freely available in an English translation on the internet.

Unless, that is, Dr Amaral agrees that:

* his book be banned again

* his book be no longer sold in any of the 32 countries where it is now being sold, and

* he uses his best endeavours to remove all English translations of his book from the internet.



[NOTE: Every time the value of the euro goes up against the pound by one-hundredth of a cent, the value of the McCanns' claim against Dr Amaral goes up by £120. Or down by £120 for every one-hundredth of a cent the euro falls against the pound.

The McCanns have done really well in the past few months because the euro has recovered from a low point of 77.82 pence to the euro to 84.23 pence to the euro.

If...

1. the case does go to trial, and

If...

2. the McCanns win, and

If...

3. the Court agrees that the McCanns are entitled to what they claim, viz. 1,200,000 euros damages, THEN the McCanns will have gained a handome £76,920 during the past few months, due to the euro's recovery.

That could give the Find Madeleine Fund a much-needed boost

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16201
Activity : 23862
Likes received : 3588
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 73
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Bob Southgate on 27.01.13 0:44

@Inspectorfrost wrote:
@Bob Southgate wrote:
Jean wrote:Heavens no, it's not a pro site but the person I'm thinking of is a member there. He or she didn't get any sympathy!



I only mentioned StopThe Myths because I googled my name and came across a few posts there which were personal attacks on me. Is that their normal MO on there?


It is generally a grotty and very negative site which host 90 per cent of posts slagging people off, best avoided as most of the natives there have emotional problems which do not allow them to argue rationally about very much

I thought as much. I didn't bother to register as they seem to think they can slag someone off who they know nothing about. All it does is is to deprive them of any credibility as we all know that when they make personal attacks it undermines any arguments they have.
Bob Southgate
Bob Southgate

Posts : 161
Activity : 161
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2012-11-01
Age : 59

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Inspectorfrost on 27.01.13 0:50

@Bob Southgate wrote:
@Inspectorfrost wrote:
@Bob Southgate wrote:
Jean wrote:Heavens no, it's not a pro site but the person I'm thinking of is a member there. He or she didn't get any sympathy!



I only mentioned StopThe Myths because I googled my name and came across a few posts there which were personal attacks on me. Is that their normal MO on there?


It is generally a grotty and very negative site which host 90 per cent of posts slagging people off, best avoided as most of the natives there have emotional problems which do not allow them to argue rationally about very much

I thought as much. I didn't bother to register as they seem to think they can slag someone off who they know nothing about. All it does is is to deprive them of any credibility as we all know that when they make personal attacks it undermines any arguments they have.

They have no credibiity, they are a cult site, I would steer away

eta

one of their members reckons madeline mccann is A sign of the second coming of christ, LOL so yes deluded nutters at best
avatar
Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Activity : 878
Likes received : 3
Join date : 2012-12-09

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by russiandoll on 27.01.13 1:23

Maddie as the Holy Grail.......you have got to be kidding me, I have heard it all now. Need to go and lie down in a dark room.

btw I asked on twitter last night was there any clarification re the trial adjournment from a legal rep from either side or the Portuguese justice system, nothing it seems, so it is as yet speculation re who made the first move. Like watching a game of chess. It certainly seems like something significant is going on and the coincidence with the SY trip this past week is intriguing. I guess this is a watershed moment, the importance of which will be revealed as P Mac said, in good time.

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy

russiandoll
russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Activity : 4058
Likes received : 15
Join date : 2011-09-11

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by Inspectorfrost on 27.01.13 1:36

@russiandoll wrote:Maddie as the Holy Grail.......you have got to be kidding me, I have heard it all now. Need to go and lie down in a dark room.

btw I asked on twitter last night was there any clarification re the trial adjournment from a legal rep from either side or the Portuguese justice system, nothing it seems, so it is as yet speculation re who made the first move. Like watching a game of chess. It certainly seems like something significant is going on and the coincidence with the SY trip this past week is intriguing. I guess this is a watershed moment, the importance of which will be revealed as P Mac said, in good time.

not kidding its all on this nutters blog

http://nigelnessling.wordpress.com/twisting-the-knife/

if you dare to press LOL LOL
avatar
Inspectorfrost

Posts : 841
Activity : 878
Likes received : 3
Join date : 2012-12-09

Back to top Go down

Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'? - Page 5 Empty Re: Letter 25 Jan 2013 to Carter-Ruck and the Court about THAT proposed settlement with Dr Amaral: is this now an 'Abuse of Process'?

Post by T4two on 27.01.13 8:04

Yes, the religious fervour displayed in some quarters is truly perplexing and frankly somewhat disturbing, since KM is no Virgin Mary and GM hardly Joseph material... Too much Dan Brown as opposed to Pat Brown influence perhaps?
T4two
T4two

Posts : 166
Activity : 171
Likes received : 5
Join date : 2012-01-22
Age : 72
Location : Germany

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 17 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11 ... 17  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum