Re: LIBEL TRIAL DISCUSSION HERE

by Guest 24.09.13 9:08

aiyoyo wrote:
Cristobell wrote:Gerry's name is on the Writ Hicks, evidence of his claim must be presented to the Court. Perhaps that is what we will hear on Friday. Trickey (?) spoke on behalf of twins, Pike on behalf of Kate, so who will present Gerry's claim? I am not sure if Madeleine's name is still on the Writ, it may be because Isabel said she was claiming 250k for each of them, and they are five. What are they going to claim for Madeleine?
A little bird told me Trish Cameron will represent him.......

Popcorns time again soon........

That must be agonising for Gerry. An ego that size and he has to leave it to others to speak on his behalf. big grin

by ProfessorPPlum 24.09.13 9:09

Uh somebody mentioned GM's crotch earlier. Last night I grabbed a copy of the 'whoosh-clunked' video and I was struck (metaphorically-speaking) by GM's 'balls in yer face' posture. I can't help thinking it's some kind of 'animal message' going on there. Someone very erm... 'cocksure' you might say?

by Guest 24.09.13 9:15

What with the last posting and someone elsewhere mentioning diarrhoea-filled nappies, I'm feeling as delicate as the saintly Kate. :puke:

Perhaps Gerry realises that he wouldn't be allowed to behave like a spoilt brat in court, hence his sending drones to speak on his behalf.

What wonderful choices have been made with the witnesses!

by **PeterMac** 24.09.13 9:20

Poe wrote:That must be agonising for Gerry. An ego that size and he has to leave it to others to speak on his behalf. ::

He may not be very sharp, or able to speak English coherently, but he is obviously well aware of the dangers associated with having to tell the truth.
They both are.
No lawyer would let them anywhere near the witness box, as we have predicted many times before.

And given Gerry's propensity to call other witnesses liars and perjurers, on the steps of the Court, no decent lawyer would let him be anywhere close.
In this case, not even in the same country.

by jeanmonroe 24.09.13 10:49

There is a hell of a difference to sitting on a sofa giving interviews, sometimes from a different country, with CM just out of camera shot mouthing your 'responses' than standing four-square in a real witness box, in a real court room, looking a judge in the eyes, without CM there to mouth your responses.
I've look at most of S Healy's 'interviews' and she is always 'looking/glancing' to/at someone off camera during her interviews.
And then replying.

She'll get no help in the court room.

Bring her on, i say.

by susible 24.09.13 11:07

This has of course turned into a major problem for the McCanns, claiming all of this depression to the point of suicide, unable to function etc, so how exactly are they supposed to be responsible for two 8yr olds and of course, Gerry's career, which requires him to be level headed, focused, in control etc, leaving us with words to the effect of...

"well erm, yes they were really, err depressed and err, you know, suicidal, about the book, and it's not fair that Amaral should have written the book, did Amaral break the judicial secrecy laws or something err, because it's just not fair err...but they're not actually going to provide appropriate proof of that because they can't, err don't want to, because that would really ruin them err...sh*t"

As I keep saying, if it wasn't for the tragedy of a missing, presumed dead, 3yr old child, it would be totally hilarious.

by Cristobell 24.09.13 11:26

susible wrote:This has of course turned into a major problem for the McCanns, claiming all of this depression to the point of suicide, unable to function etc, so how exactly are they supposed to be responsible for two 8yr olds and of course, Gerry's career, which requires him to be level headed, focused, in control etc, leaving us with words to the effect of...

"well erm, yes they were really, err depressed and err, you know, suicidal, about the book, and it's not fair that Amaral should have written the book, did Amaral break the judicial secrecy laws or something err, because it's just not fair err...but they're not actually going to provide appropriate proof of that because they can't, err don't want to, because that would really ruin them err...sh*t"

As I keep saying, if it wasn't for the tragedy of a missing, presumed dead, 3yr old child, it would be totally hilarious.

Don't think it was ever intended to go to trial Susible. They were on a roll when they issued the Writ against Goncalo Amaral, having received payouts from Express and of course the 'secret' one from NOTW. They thought they could destroy Goncalo financially and emotionally and then simply help themselves to the contents of his bank account. Unfortunately they found themselves up against a man of integrity, and integrity is not a word they are familiar with.

by susible 24.09.13 11:40

I totally agree Cristobell, I really don't think they thought they would actually end up in a court of law, and now of course they have and it's all falling apart in a major way.

Well hell mend them, they have brought every last bit of this on themselves, I just feel sorry for all of the people who are undoubtedly affected by the fall out from all of this, not least of all their remaining children...poor kids Sad

by margaret 24.09.13 11:40

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:What with the last posting and someone elsewhere mentioning diarrhoea-filled nappies, I'm feeling as delicate as the saintly Kate. :puke:

Perhaps Gerry realises that he wouldn't be allowed to behave like a spoilt brat in court, hence his sending drones to speak on his behalf.

What wonderful choices have been made with the witnesses!

When you think of who they've called up - not being able to take the stand themselves - and the impact those 'witnesses' have made, the McCanns are finished really.

by The Rooster 24.09.13 13:01

I just wrote to Dave to let him know how I feel about Mitchell representing the Conservatives in Brighton. It's an ill wind!

by ShuBob 24.09.13 13:10

The Rooster wrote:I just wrote to Dave to let him know how I feel about Mitchell representing the Conservatives in Brighton. It's an ill wind!

On Mitchell's official campaign page, they've omitted to add his work with the McCanns. I've queried the MP who put the link on Twitter about this but no response yet.

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/about-clarence

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/more-about-me

by jeanmonroe 24.09.13 13:25

ShuBob wrote:
The Rooster wrote:I just wrote to Dave to let him know how I feel about Mitchell representing the Conservatives in Brighton. It's an ill wind!
On Mitchell's official campaign page, they've omitted to add his work with the McCanns. I've queried the MP who put the link on Twitter about this but no response yet.

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/about-clarence

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/more-about-me

I like how Nancy Grace increases the leads oops Persons of Interest to 39. Who might the extra one be ?

Clarence, "i don't even know the McCanns" Mitchell?
Clarence "Gerry and Kate who" Mitchell?
Clarence " f*ck me, THEY dun it?" Mitchell?

I posted the above on August 28th 2013!

As you say not a peep about the McCanns on his 'website'
Not a mention about how many of the 'donations' to the 'fund' he personally pocketed.
It's as if NOW he dosen't know who he has been spokesman for these last SIX years!

by tiny 24.09.13 13:33

He might forget,but we wont:biggrin:
------------------------
Note from Admin: You need to leave a space before using emoticons for them to work! big grin

by jeanmonroe 24.09.13 13:47

Is this correct?

Both 'sides' can only have 10 'witnesses'?

IF that is correct then the McCann 'side' has already had their 10.

So no hearing from Ma Healy or Trish then?

Probably just as well, IMO!

The 'expert' witnesses have already done enough 'damages' (oh, the IRONY!)

They thought they'd steam roll into the 'third world' Portugal, that dosen't even have a navy, according to GM, and the plebs, judges, police etc, would be tugging their forlocks in total deference to the almighty McCanns

Worked a treat, didn't it?

by margaret 24.09.13 13:50

ShuBob wrote:
On Mitchell's official campaign page, they've omitted to add his work with the McCanns. I've queried the MP who put the link on Twitter about this but no response yet.

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/about-clarence

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/more-about-me

Proof if it were needed that Clarence knows his association with the McCanns isn't going down well. shit happens

by Cristobell 24.09.13 14:04

margaret wrote:
ShuBob wrote:
On Mitchell's official campaign page, they've omitted to add his work with the McCanns. I've queried the MP who put the link on Twitter about this but no response yet.

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/about-clarence

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/more-about-me
Proof if it were needed that Clarence knows his association with the McCanns isn't going down well.

I can't see the candidate for Brighton taking the stand in Lisbon anytime soon. I'll eat my hat if I am wrong, but methinks this ship is sinking.

by jeanmonroe 24.09.13 14:06

margaret wrote:
ShuBob wrote:
On Mitchell's official campaign page, they've omitted to add his work with the McCanns. I've queried the MP who put the link on Twitter about this but no response yet.

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/about-clarence

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/more-about-me
Proof if it were needed that Clarence knows his association with the McCanns isn't going down well.

WHAT?

Being associated with imo lying, libel threatening, self confessed child neglecting, possibly fraudulent, irresponsible, feckless parents, is possibly the very basic criteria needed, for a Tory PCC to be nominated!

Not forgetting being a spokesperson for a convicted benefits cheat who stole over £53,000!

Probably it was THAT 'trump card' that swung it for Mitchell's 'nomination!

None of his fellow nominees could pull out a wabbit like THAT!

by margaret 24.09.13 14:10

Cristobell wrote:
margaret wrote:
ShuBob wrote:
On Mitchell's official campaign page, they've omitted to add his work with the McCanns. I've queried the MP who put the link on Twitter about this but no response yet.

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/about-clarence

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/more-about-me
Proof if it were needed that Clarence knows his association with the McCanns isn't going down well.
I can't see the candidate for Brighton taking the stand in Lisbon anytime soon. I'll eat my hat if I am wrong, but methinks this ship is sinking.

So do l Cristobell, so do l. Ironic really when the Costa Concordia - Clarences other PR job, has just been raised.

Jeanmonroe spit coffee

by tiny 24.09.13 14:11

I do wonder why the mccanns never called Mitchell as a witness for them,after all he was /is there spokesman 24/7 so must know how Gerry and kate suffered

by Cristobell 24.09.13 14:11

jeanmonroe wrote:Is this correct?

Both 'sides' can only have 10 'witnesses'?

IF that is correct then the McCann 'side' has already had their 10.

So no hearing from Ma Healy or Trish then?

Probably just as well, IMO!

The 'expert' witnesses have already done enough 'damages' (oh, the IRONY!)

They thought they'd steam roll into the 'third world' Portugal, that dosen't even have a navy, according to GM, and the plebs, judges, police etc, would be tugging their forlocks in total deference to the almighty McCanns

Worked a treat, didn't it?

Can't get over the arrogance of the man in telling the Judge the McCanns wanted to launch their own PROPER investigation.

When will McCanns and their band of demons understand that their own peculiar brand of xenophobia is offensive, particularly in a Portuguese courtroom.

by ShuBob 24.09.13 14:16

margaret wrote:
ShuBob wrote:
On Mitchell's official campaign page, they've omitted to add his work with the McCanns. I've queried the MP who put the link on Twitter about this but no response yet.

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/about-clarence

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/more-about-me
Proof if it were needed that Clarence knows his association with the McCanns isn't going down well.

You may remember that Esther McVey did exact same thing i.e. disassociated herself from the McCanns and duly got elected as an MP.

by Cristobell 24.09.13 14:17

tiny wrote:I do wonder why the mccanns never called Mitchell as a witness for them,after all he was /is there spokesman 24/7 so must know how Gerry and kate suffered

I would imagine no-one knows better than he Tiny, he was practically family and receiving £70k pa from the Fund (even though the Fund had no employees according to the accounts).

by Cristobell 24.09.13 14:19

ShuBob wrote:
margaret wrote:
ShuBob wrote:
On Mitchell's official campaign page, they've omitted to add his work with the McCanns. I've queried the MP who put the link on Twitter about this but no response yet.

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/about-clarence

http://www.clarence4pavilion.com/more-about-me
Proof if it were needed that Clarence knows his association with the McCanns isn't going down well.
You may remember that Esther McVey did exact same thing i.e. disassociated herself from the McCanns and duly got elected as an MP.

It was a wise move on her part. She was the one who read out the Directors' statement that the Fund would not be used for legal expenses. It would appear that is all it is used for now.

by plebgate 24.09.13 14:20

Whatever way this trial goes (and I can only see it going in Mr. A's favour, but ya never know), even if they get zillions I really do not think they or any of their friends will be so quick to threaten to sue anybody again.

We have seen that they do not go near a witness box themselves, their friends have not performed very well, neither have the professionals who have been called as their witnesses.

Having had a taste of what it is like to be under cross examination and from the reading of the proceedings kindly posted by Ann G. I cannot see anybody ever volunteering again to act as a witness for them.

Where does that leave them, more and more people will be openly saying what is on their minds and there are quite a few bloggers who are openly goading them to sue, but they have not and imo will not.

Wolf, wolf, wolf.

@ Bobbin, yes it would be very good if the tables could be turned, as you suggest.

Let's see on Friday who will turn up (my guess is not a one of the McSpies). Let's be honest, would you having seen the proceedings thus far.

Forgot to add, if Ma Healy , Trish and whoever else had intention of turning up on Friday, why would their lawyer ask that their written statements be offered as evidence into court?

by tiny 24.09.13 14:23

Cristobell wrote:
tiny wrote:I do wonder why the mccanns never called Mitchell as a witness for them,after all he was /is there spokesman 24/7 so must know how Gerry and kate suffered
I would imagine no-one knows better than he Tiny, he was practically family and receiving £70k pa from the Fund (even though the Fund had no employees according to the accounts).

Perhaps he is TRYING to distance himself from them,but we wont forget his part in all this,vile man

Log in for more topics