Blacksmith 'Meanwhile' 9th March

by scrants 09.03.13 14:03

Www.blacksmithbureau.blogspot.co.uk

New posting from Blacksmith.

by **PeterMac** 09.03.13 14:10

SATURDAY, 9 MARCH 2013

Meanwhile

Meanwhile, as the out-of-the-loop activists fight over the bones of yesterday's battles, there is the next question they haven't even begun to face because things are moving too fast for them: is there a link between the Scotland Yard/PJ review and the McCanns/Amaral libel case?

Of course there is! Don't take our word for it: you can work it out from public information for yourselves.

In early 2012, as we know, Goncalo Amaral received hitherto secret information about the Anglo-Portuguese review. He then made three public claims before just as abruptly falling silent. Two of those claims, the existence of close liaison between UK and Portugal and the existence of the Oporto squad, were immediately confirmed by the Attorney-General's department as 100% accurate.

On the third, "things are not going well for the McCanns", they were silent, for obvious reasons. Note that the Attorney-General's department made no criticism of Amaral for speaking publicly.

We know that the original position of the McCanns and their lawyers was that Amaral was a "lone voice", a "rogue cop" who did not reflect the views of his fellow investigators. That position was destroyed in court in January 2010 by the evidence of fellow officers, the demolition confirmed by the appeal court later in the year. Duarte then critically altered her case, as she revealed in her long press release following the Wikileaks stuff: everything before October 2007 was just "old news", no longer relevant since the PJ had altered the direction of its investigation.

Since early 2012 and the Amaral revelations Duarte has had to wrestle with the possibility that Amaral's informant, or informants, on current, not old, PJ thinking might be called at the libel trial. Note that Amaral's complete silence on the matter has given her no clue.

Whether the informant's name is now on the current Amaral witness list, visible to both parties, we don't know. But does anyone seriously believe that Amaral made public everything about "things" and how they were going? And that his lawyers are not going to bring this information to court?

Tantalising, when we remember that JB has in the past claimed to have a source very close to GA.

by plebgate 09.03.13 22:38

so the trial is deffo going ahead? I wish we could get a date if it is.

by **Nina** 09.03.13 22:47

plebgate wrote:so the trial is deffo going ahead? I wish we could get a date if it is.

And I wish I could be there to applaud this wonderful man who has lost so much in the last years.

by aiyoyo 10.03.13 4:33

Nina wrote:
plebgate wrote:so the trial is deffo going ahead? I wish we could get a date if it is.

And I wish I could be there to applaud this wonderful man who has lost so much in the last years.

He lost his dad last week I read on the other forum. At least his dad was blessed to have a son with principles and enormous courage.
Unlike a certain pair of doctors whose parents must live with their shameful behavior and evil deed.

by sammyc 10.03.13 19:47

@aiyoyo

He lost his dad last week I read on the other forum. At least his dad was blessed to have a son with principles and enormous courage.
Unlike a certain pair of doctors whose parents must live with their shameful behavior and evil deed.

Regarding the parents of the two Doctors and their friends, I have many a time wondered how their respective families live with knowledge that a little girl suddenly went missing, the parents and friends who were with her neglected all their children alone in dark, strange surroundings, in their own selfishness to go eating and drinking. Added to that they all gave dubious accounts of the night a child disappeared, changed their statements, didn't search until daylight, didn't immediately check their own children were safe from 'the abductor'.... Need I go on?

I am pretty much convinced that my own Mother and Father would STILL be asking me questions, almost 6 years later, as to what truly happened.

The McCann and Healy families should hang their heads in shame for keeping silent.

by Guest 10.03.13 19:56

I'm afraid even my Maman would look at me with different eyes and different feelings, if I'd lost one of my dogs due to negligence...

I'm also afraid that the McCs are very, very lonely. Imagine going to a shop, hairdresser, social activity. No-one, I guess, will say anything, but their looks will be telling. Cold shoulders, I imagine. Of course, there will be others, trying to shine in their "celebrity". How vain. IMO
Enough said. Going to feed my dogs, before Maman thinks I'm neglecting them Blacksmith 'Meanwhile' 9th March 302873

by **Nina** 10.03.13 20:50

Châtelaine wrote:I'm afraid even my Maman would look at me with different eyes and different feelings, if I'd lost one of my dogs due to negligence...

I'm also afraid that the McCs are very, very lonely. Imagine going to a shop, hairdresser, social activity. No-one, I guess, will say anything, but their looks will be telling. Cold shoulders, I imagine. Of course, there will be others, trying to shine in their "celebrity". How vain. IMO
Enough said. Going to feed my dogs, before Maman thinks I'm neglecting them

Chatelaine, how do you keep your dogs from eating you waiting till this time. Ours all wear watches and know when it is even approaching 6pm feed time as they get all silly and puppyish.
soz

Yes my dear Mum, who would have been 100 years old today had she lived, would have given me a very hard time for any shortcomings with child care, even the most mild such as clothes not been aired properly by her standards.

by Guest 10.03.13 21:44

Staying OT:
Nina, don't worry. I feed my dogs at 10-11am, at 6-7pm and at 10-11pm.
So, yes, I was late for the 2nd round, but they were not famished Blacksmith 'Meanwhile' 9th March 302873

ETA Maman, D.V., will be 100 by the time I am your age ...
Fingers crossed. Not only for justice for Madeleine.

by **Hobs** 10.03.13 23:14

Châtelaine wrote:Staying OT:
Nina, don't worry. I feed my dogs at 10-11am, at 6-7pm and at 10-11pm.
So, yes, I was late for the 2nd round, but they were not famished

ETA Maman, D.V., will be 100 by the time I am your age ...
Fingers crossed. Not only for justice for Madeleine.

Dear doggies,

I am sorry Châtelaine was late with your dinner,I know how you fade away to nothing in mere moments if your dishes remain unfilled,You see, she was occupied typing some important stuff for our information, yes, i know, sometimes there are things marginally more important than an empty doggy tummy, not much though

I would suggest you forgive her for her tardiness and maybe make her take you out for an extra long walk (if the weather allows) followed by 5 mins of tummy rubs and ear scratching each.

Failing that i would suggest Looking Hopeful with Menaces For Dummies, it isn't begging if you use the beady eye method and it is highly effective.

yours , Hobs xx

by Guest 10.03.13 23:41

I've grown a thick skin for beady eyes, Hobs. Have to. Otherwise life's a pain on both sides ;-)

But ... I get the message.
I'll be commenting on McCs exclusively.
Here.
Now.
Well.
Tomorrow.

Oh, and don't you worry about the tummy rubs and ear scratching. That's part of [lovely] daily routine.
Am just waiting for them to do the same thing to me ...
But then there is: licking my nose [who needs a hanky?], kisses [Gucci, the French breed, does French kisses, so lips pressed], licking ears, petting my thighs, jumping so high that they knock me between the eyes and nearly knock me out ...

All said and done: back to the case.
Domani.
Bonne nuit Blacksmith 'Meanwhile' 9th March 160807

by plebgate 11.03.13 15:40

Snipped from the banner at top of page:
"For all of us until then the concealment of the cadaver, the simulation of abduction and the exposure or abandonment were proved".

Thanks for putting this up admin. Thinking about it surely they must continue to trial.
Settling out of court would not be an option for me if as they say they have been so very wronged by what was said.

by lufc50337 11.03.13 16:41

Blacksmith says the GA case and the investigation are linked so in that case SY and/or the Oporto squad won't move till the GA case is resolved.

I can see why they would wait as if it goes to court the McCanns are likely to perjure themselves or provide another contradiction to contribute towards the case against them

by Guest 11.03.13 17:58

sally66 wrote:Blacksmith says the GA case and the investigation are linked so in that case SY and/or the Oporto squad won't move till the GA case is resolved.

I can see why they would wait as if it goes to court the McCanns are likely to perjure themselves or provide another contradiction to contribute towards the case against them

Perjure themselves?

Have they been called as witnesses then by GA, or have they volunteered to declare as such on behalf of themselves?

Anyway, their claim against GA is dead in the water: no court on the Continent will ever award the sort of crazy compensation so prolific in the UK and US.

And also: GA's counterclaim against them will probably dwarf theirs against him.

by Guest 11.03.13 21:17

What would be the position of the 'fund' in a counter claim of sr Amaral. Could that money be seized? Or that 'fund', their limited frozen?
As well as Gerry McCann's income of course, and last but not least that house in Rothley?
Just thinking

parapono

by plebgate 11.03.13 22:14

@sally66
Probably didn't make my post very clear.

I meant that TM must surely carry on with the libel trial, not the police.
As I say - if what was said has wronged them so very badly why settle out of court?

by Guest 11.03.13 22:28

parapono wrote:What would be the position of the 'fund' in a counter claim of sr Amaral. Could that money be seized? Or that 'fund', their limited frozen?
As well as Gerry McCann's income of course, and last but not least that house in Rothley?
Just thinking

parapono

The Fund: no

That explains them pouring their remaining funds into it.

So the Fund walks.

And GA & TB -vindicated- will have to pay all their own costs and expenses, while not retrieving a single penny from the Mc Cs

So, financially, the Mecs will walk.

And morally, all of us will.

Amelie and Sean, are you listening, let's say in ten years time?

by Liz Eagles 11.03.13 22:33

I'm sorry, I have to declare that I find it totally wrong to include the McCann's twins in anything. I find it distasteful and well just plain wrong. They are children.

ETA I was directing my post to Portia's comment.

by aiyoyo 12.03.13 2:12

Portia wrote:
sally66 wrote:Blacksmith says the GA case and the investigation are linked so in that case SY and/or the Oporto squad won't move till the GA case is resolved.

I can see why they would wait as if it goes to court the McCanns are likely to perjure themselves or provide another contradiction to contribute towards the case against them

Perjure themselves?

Have they been called as witnesses then by GA, or have they volunteered to declare as such on behalf of themselves?

Anyway, their claim against GA is dead in the water: no court on the Continent will ever award the sort of crazy compensation so prolific in the UK and US.

And also: GA's counterclaim against them will probably dwarf theirs against him.

I stand corrected but far as I understand neither party is obliged to attend Court. Only the presence of their legal representatives would suffice.
All arguments, counter arguments, and supportive evidence to those arguments are given to Judge with each party cc the other party. Everything is argued with supporting material/references on papers to be submitted to Court well in advance before trial process starts.
Both sides lawyers will present and close their case as a formality unless witnesses are produced then questioning or cross questioning of the witnesses may yield unexpected point/situation that may need conferment with clients.

Far as I understand although neither party is obliged by requirement of law to appear, it is generally expected of them to show up in court. Neither party is required to testify in Court. Questions arising during court process will be posed by the Judge to their lawyer (as intermediary) and not from one party directly to the other (as in cross examination). Unless the lawyers are so au fait and well versed with every aspect of every detail pertaining to the case and have ready to hand answers to give out when asked, then how will it look if the clients chose to stay away from Court and not present for lawyers to confer with them.

It goes without saying Amaral will attend Court regardless, but can anyone see the Mccanns showing up in Court knowing beforehand that the writing is pretty much on the wall, and predictably the scene inside and outside Court is going to be ugly for them, if showing up or not is an option? The highlight in this trial I suspect will be in who will be witnesses and what they will bring to the table.
No reason why this trial cant be conducted in open court. If this is held in secret then it is safe to assume there will be a future trial and therefore precaution taken not to sub judice future trial.

by Ollie1 12.03.13 13:20

Didn't the McCanns have a list of witnesses, including one of the nannies from Warners, who were going to appear in court. Wonder if they are still willing to appear for the McCanns?