Re: Implications for the Libel trial

by aiyoyo on 15.10.13 8:09

@PeterMac wrote:
@galena wrote:
@plebgate wrote:From the outset they wanted the publicity, so I do not see how they could use that as a reason not be have a fair trial. Not that I believe there will ever be one.

It's been said many, many times - if they asked for the public to help then it was inevitable many would ask questions. Can't expect people to give of their time and their money without knowing exactly what happened the night Maddie was taken.
Like you I'm dubious about a trial but at the moment I would be happy if the libel action against GA was to be dropped. Too many people have suffered as a result of the McCanns determination to stifle free speech!
I take the opposite view.
I would prefer the judge to admit both Kate and Gerry to give evidence - in person - under oath, and listen to what they have to say.
If they are allowed to drop the case they will always be able to McSpin it in the same way they used the archiving to maintain that they had been exonerated.

I agree they should be admitted to speak, if only for the Judge to pose them a few pertinent questions to clarify matters.
My understanding is they cant give evidence because too much vested interest in their cause. But they can speak to clarify matters.
Besides Team Amaral can seek clarification through the Judge, which is good enough. They're obliged to answer one way or another.
Just put Gerry and Kate in the box and they wont be able to contain their mouth! I'd love to see that.

There is no way to quantify the damage they suffered because there were plenty negatives printed about them prior to the book.
I hope the Judge accedes to their request.

by gbwales on 15.10.13 13:51

@PeterMac wrote:
@galena wrote:
@plebgate wrote:From the outset they wanted the publicity, so I do not see how they could use that as a reason not be have a fair trial. Not that I believe there will ever be one.

It's been said many, many times - if they asked for the public to help then it was inevitable many would ask questions. Can't expect people to give of their time and their money without knowing exactly what happened the night Maddie was taken.
Like you I'm dubious about a trial but at the moment I would be happy if the libel action against GA was to be dropped. Too many people have suffered as a result of the McCanns determination to stifle free speech!
I take the opposite view.
I would prefer the judge to admit both Kate and Gerry to give evidence - in person - under oath, and listen to what they have to say.
If they are allowed to drop the case they will always be able to McSpin it in the same way they used the archiving to maintain that they had been exonerated.

100% agree. They drove this, they manipulated it, they tried to duck out of it. Let's see it finished with them in the courtroom.
And let's hope it's the undoing of their action against TB too.

by Truthandjustice on 20.10.13 16:40

When GA wins this case presumably the documentary can then be shown on British TV. It would certainly send ratings through the roof.

by suzyjohnson on 21.10.13 0:58

@bobbin wrote:
@Pershing36 wrote:I know nothing about the law or court trials, but have said for ages I feared this SY investigation was just set up to aid the libel trial.
I am worried about this, Amarals book and TV program was based on the timeline we have all discussed over and over again. If SY say it is inaccurate between 8:30 and 22:30 (been on sky news all day) then surely it discredits Amarals theories?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it's the opposite, it GIVES credit to the Portuguese investigation. Goncalo Amaral and the PJ said, the timeline could NOT be possible. The timeline was given by the Tapas bunch. The police did NOT believe it. SY are also saying it can't be correct.
This strengthens Goncalo Amaral's case, furthermore, this very searching and SY investigating shows that Goncalo Amaral's book and the documentary HAVE NOT diminished the search for Madeleine.

On the whole, I agree with Bobbin. Now that Tannerman has been eliminated (binned), the man seen by the Smiths has become, according to SY, the main suspect. (And the witnesses say the man they saw resembled GM). Which does add weight to the theories of GA. And of course all his conclusions are based on the evidence within the PJ files. In other words, two police forces, are now in agreement with (aspects of) GA's theories. Which must lessen the claims that GA has been libellous of the McCanns?

I think the judge would be interested to know why the McCanns did not take steps (by taking part in a reconstruction) to clarify their own evidence of events on 3/5/07 (and thereby have prevented some of their perceived anti-McCann publicity in Portugal). From the questions asked so far, I think the judge is very familiar with the Archiving Summary.

Also, I wonder what, if anything, will be said about the recent Crimewatch documentary, shown across various European countries but not in Portugal? Sy can't have been oblivious to the libel trial taking place and it's difficult to see why they would put out this appeal whilst it was taking place. GA's book has never been available in the Uk (or Ireland?), but possibly in Germany and Holland? By the responses to the program clearly people are still interested in finding MM.

by Guest on 21.10.13 10:53

@suzyjohnson wrote: [...] GA's book has never been available in the Uk (or Ireland?), but possibly in Germany and Holland? By the responses to the program clearly people are still interested in finding MM.

***
GA's book was published indeed in the Netherlands and Germany [as well as in France, Denmark and Spain IIRC].

by Sietah on 21.10.13 12:59

@sallypelt wrote:Kate and Gerry McCann may lose PR man after tycoon Brian Kennedy pulls funding

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-and-gerry-mccann-may-lose-pr-398737

Mayby they should hire this man to replace him.
Implications for the Libel trial - Page 2 Sky0