Re: Libel Trial 7th Jan Postponed - confirmed

by Cristobell 11.04.14 13:56

Clocker wrote:
Cristobell wrote:This eerie silence about the libel trial is bizarre, I know cases to get adjourned and sometimes it is difficult to get a fixed date, especially when considering the availability of all the witnesses, etc, but over 3 months seems very strange in the middle of an actual trial.

I am still leaning towards the trial has collapsed, but thats only my opinion, I am sure there are quite a few good reasons for the hold up.
I'm of the same opinion Cristobel. I don't believe it would be made public either. GA is far too dignified to gloat and if the Mcs had won we would know about it.

I think the McCanns have probably reached a point where they know they have lost the case. Resuming the trial, for them, would be throwing good money after bad. It was worth investing in at the beginning as there was a prospect of winning 1.25m Euros of Goncalo's money. That is but a distant memory now after the shambolic case they put up. I wonder how keen they are to return for their public defeat? The honourable thing to do would be to face the music and allow the drums the roll and their barrister to put forward her closing arguments with the McCanns tall and proud alongside her. If they do return I will be mightily impressed, but I somehow doubt they will.

by tasprin 11.04.14 14:16

If the trial has collapsed I can't understand why it would not be made public. Portugal is a democratic country and justice is supposed to be open in a democracy. It's not a matter of Amaral gloating, but he's been accused of libel (amongst other things) and has had his assets frozen for several years and his book banned for much of that time. Surely if the trial collapsed he'd have the right to make that publicly known. Perhaps the trial has been postponed because of the WOC and Justice Hogg & the British courts are deliberately dragging their feet. One of the features of this case has been the obvious lack of cooperation from UK authorities. The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it. I'd be surprised if Amaral agreed to that but after all this time he could be financially desperate.

by ultimaThule 11.04.14 14:20

lj wrote:
Doug D wrote:‘Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer filed a request for the court to evaluate the McCann couple's legitimacy to file a lawsuit in their daughter's name, as she is a Ward of Court in the UK.

He did not ask for any postponement. It was the judge that issued a 15-day deadline for him to submit the relevant documentation’.

Not being a legal person, so I may be completely off track, but I would have thought that of everything being considered in the trial, the WOC situation was one of the few things that was actually black & white.
I have no idea how long and detailed a WOC document is, but it must surely be readily available and once submitted (within the 15 day deadline given) should not take three months to evaluate.

Would it be possible that a request is being made to justice Hog if she on behalf of Madeleine would enter the trial, if that is at all possible. I can see judge Hog taking a nice long time to decide.

As far as I can ascertain, a transcript of the hearing in the High Court in April 2008 which maintained Madeleine Beth McCann as a Ward of the Court until such time as the the Wardship is discharged or she attains her majority is not in the public domain, nor has the Order been made public (nb: the content of the Order is a subject for further speculation).

It may therefore be that such evidence of Wardship which is available has been submitted to the judge and the defence have asked the Lisbon court to make a formal request to the High Court in London for the necessary confirmations. However, given the speed at which the higher courts move and the necessity for all letters/documents to be translated on both sides, it may take some time before the Lisbon court is in possession of the facts of the matter which it has been asked to evaluate.

While the 'WOC situation' is 'black and white' insofar as the law of England/Wales is concerned, DougD, as I understand it there is no equivalent to Ward of Court in Portuguese law and it may be that the Lisbon court will find it necessary to utilise the services of a lawyer who is familiar with these proceedings in English law to assist in any evaluation,

In this particular case the custody of the child is vested in the High Court and it is probable that care and control of the Ward has been given to the parents. However, as previously stated, no important step can be taken in the child's life without the court's consent and it is customary for consent to be sought by those who have been granted care and control of the Ward prior to any important step being taken in her life,

It can, of course, be argued that being named in libel proceedings is an 'important step' in this child's life, as it would be for any child regardless of their legal status, and, also as previously stated, as yet I have been able to find any precedent in English law for this unusual step to be taken.

Prior to their application and on the making of the Order, the parents would have been fully advised of the merits and otherwise of Wardship, including the requirement for the court's consent to be sought prior to any important steps being taken in her life.

Other than the transcript of the hearing which took place in June 2008, at which the McCanns' withdrew their demand that Leicestershire Police provide all of the information which they hold on file in respect of Madeleine's disappearance, the Wardship proceedings have been kept secret and we do not know what consents have been granted or what other Orders have been made.

If it transpires that the McCanns' failed to seek the court's consent before they embarked on legal proceedings in respect of themselves, the Ward, and their younger siblings, it will not simply be a matter of asking the court to give retrospective consent to the Lisbon proceedings nor can the court, or Mrs Justice Hogg for that matter, 'enter the trial on behalf of Madeleine', lj.

Of course it may be that the McCanns' sought and were given the appropriate consent(s), or that the Wardship was discharged prior to the commencement of the proceedings, but in any event all we can sure of is that no date will be set for closing arguments unless and until whatever matters or issues under consideration in the Lisbon court are resolved.

by Newintown 11.04.14 14:46

tasprin wrote:If the trial has collapsed I can't understand why it would not be made public. Portugal is a democratic country and justice is supposed to be open in a democracy. It's not a matter of Amaral gloating, but he's been accused of libel (amongst other things) and has had his assets frozen for several years and his book banned for much of that time. Surely if the trial collapsed he'd have the right to make that publicly known. Perhaps the trial has been postponed because of the WOC and Justice Hogg & the British courts are deliberately dragging their feet. One of the features of this case has been the obvious lack of cooperation from UK authorities. The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it. I'd be surprised if Amaral agreed to that but after all this time he could be financially desperate.

The only other thing I can think of is that there is a manslaughter/murder/fund fraud investigation going on between the PJ and SY and the libel trial has been put on hold until all facts are known as to what happened to Madeleine before GA is deemed right or wrong in writing his book.

by tasprin 11.04.14 15:02

Newintown wrote:
tasprin wrote:If the trial has collapsed I can't understand why it would not be made public. Portugal is a democratic country and justice is supposed to be open in a democracy. It's not a matter of Amaral gloating, but he's been accused of libel (amongst other things) and has had his assets frozen for several years and his book banned for much of that time. Surely if the trial collapsed he'd have the right to make that publicly known. Perhaps the trial has been postponed because of the WOC and Justice Hogg & the British courts are deliberately dragging their feet. One of the features of this case has been the obvious lack of cooperation from UK authorities. The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it. I'd be surprised if Amaral agreed to that but after all this time he could be financially desperate.

The only other thing I can think of is that there is a manslaughter/murder/fund fraud investigation going on between the PJ and SY and the libel trial has been put on hold until all facts are known as to what happened to Madeleine before GA is deemed right or wrong in writing his book.

I thought that was a possibility too but several posters (some Portuguese) have said it's not possible as the libel trial and police investigation are completely separate matters, so I really don't know what to think.

by Newintown 11.04.14 15:12

tasprin wrote:
Newintown wrote:
tasprin wrote:If the trial has collapsed I can't understand why it would not be made public. Portugal is a democratic country and justice is supposed to be open in a democracy. It's not a matter of Amaral gloating, but he's been accused of libel (amongst other things) and has had his assets frozen for several years and his book banned for much of that time. Surely if the trial collapsed he'd have the right to make that publicly known. Perhaps the trial has been postponed because of the WOC and Justice Hogg & the British courts are deliberately dragging their feet. One of the features of this case has been the obvious lack of cooperation from UK authorities. The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it. I'd be surprised if Amaral agreed to that but after all this time he could be financially desperate.

The only other thing I can think of is that there is a manslaughter/murder/fund fraud investigation going on between the PJ and SY and the libel trial has been put on hold until all facts are known as to what happened to Madeleine before GA is deemed right or wrong in writing his book.

I thought that was a possibility too but several posters (some Portuguese) have said it's not possible as the libel trial and police investigation are completely separate matters, so I really don't know what to think.

I can't see how that's possible because say, if the McCanns win their case and are awarded Euros 1million on what they purport (GM's favourite word) happened to Madeleine and GA was found guilty of defaming them, then a year or two later the PJ and SY finish their investigation and say the opposite of what they say happened to Madeleine, where would that leave the Portugese legal system in fairness and having awarded Euros 1 million to parents who had covered up the manslaughter or murder of their daughter a year or so beforehand.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it.

Yes of course that is also a possibility; but GA has been ridiculed, vilifed and insulted by being called all sorts of terrible names in the UK press, I can't see him just rolling over and accepting a payment from the McCanns and being told to keep quiet, knowing all the hardship he's been through - losing his home, his marriage etc - and not being able to put his side of his case to the press and being suppressed from suing the press and the McCanns who have between them destroyed his life.

by sar 11.04.14 16:08

Newintown wrote:
tasprin wrote:
Newintown wrote:
tasprin wrote:If the trial has collapsed I can't understand why it would not be made public. Portugal is a democratic country and justice is supposed to be open in a democracy. It's not a matter of Amaral gloating, but he's been accused of libel (amongst other things) and has had his assets frozen for several years and his book banned for much of that time. Surely if the trial collapsed he'd have the right to make that publicly known. Perhaps the trial has been postponed because of the WOC and Justice Hogg & the British courts are deliberately dragging their feet. One of the features of this case has been the obvious lack of cooperation from UK authorities. The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it. I'd be surprised if Amaral agreed to that but after all this time he could be financially desperate.

The only other thing I can think of is that there is a manslaughter/murder/fund fraud investigation going on between the PJ and SY and the libel trial has been put on hold until all facts are known as to what happened to Madeleine before GA is deemed right or wrong in writing his book.

I thought that was a possibility too but several posters (some Portuguese) have said it's not possible as the libel trial and police investigation are completely separate matters, so I really don't know what to think.

I can't see how that's possible because say, if the McCanns win their case and are awarded Euros 1million on what they purport (GM's favourite word) happened to Madeleine and GA was found guilty of defaming them, then a year or two later the PJ and SY finish their investigation and say the opposite of what they say happened to Madeleine, where would that leave the Portugese legal system in fairness and having awarded Euros 1 million to parents who had covered up the manslaughter or murder of their daughter a year or so beforehand.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it.

Yes of course that is also a possibility; but GA has been ridiculed, vilifed and insulted by being called all sorts of terrible names in the UK press, I can't see him just rolling over and accepting a payment from the McCanns and being told to keep quiet, knowing all the hardship he's been through - losing his home, his marriage etc - and not being able to put his side of his case to the press and being suppressed from suing the press and the McCanns who have between them destroyed his life.

some say, rightly or wrongly, everyone has a price

by tasprin 11.04.14 16:17

Newintown wrote: .

I can't see how that's possible because say, if the McCanns win their case and are awarded Euros 1million on what they purport (GM's favourite word) happened to Madeleine and GA was found guilty of defaming them, then a year or two later the PJ and SY finish their investigation and say the opposite of what they say happened to Madeleine, where would that leave the Portugese legal system in fairness and having awarded Euros 1 million to parents who had covered up the manslaughter or murder of their daughter a year or so beforehand.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it.

Yes of course that is also a possibility; but GA has been ridiculed, vilifed and insulted by being called all sorts of terrible names in the UK press, I can't see him just rolling over and accepting a payment from the McCanns and being told to keep quiet, knowing all the hardship he's been through - losing his home, his marriage etc - and not being able to put his side of his case to the press and being suppressed from suing the press and the McCanns who have between them destroyed his life.[/quote]

I think TM's original plan was to sue Amaral, freeze his assets and see him cave in under huge financial pressure long before the case reached a courtroom but despite everything he's continued all the way so it is hard to believe that he's accepted a gag at the final hurdle - the last five years would've all been for nothing. I hope that's not the case but his assets have been frozen since 2009 and we have absolutely no idea what hardships he's endured over the years.

Just a thought - could the postponement be due to serious illness of one of the parties?

by Newintown 11.04.14 16:40

tasprin wrote:
Newintown wrote: .

I can't see how that's possible because say, if the McCanns win their case and are awarded Euros 1million on what they purport (GM's favourite word) happened to Madeleine and GA was found guilty of defaming them, then a year or two later the PJ and SY finish their investigation and say the opposite of what they say happened to Madeleine, where would that leave the Portugese legal system in fairness and having awarded Euros 1 million to parents who had covered up the manslaughter or murder of their daughter a year or so beforehand.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it.

Yes of course that is also a possibility; but GA has been ridiculed, vilifed and insulted by being called all sorts of terrible names in the UK press, I can't see him just rolling over and accepting a payment from the McCanns and being told to keep quiet, knowing all the hardship he's been through - losing his home, his marriage etc - and not being able to put his side of his case to the press and being suppressed from suing the press and the McCanns who have between them destroyed his life.

I think TM's original plan was to sue Amaral, freeze his assets and see him cave in under huge financial pressure long before the case reached a courtroom but despite everything he's continued all the way so it is hard to believe that he's accepted a gag at the final hurdle - the last five years would've all been for nothing. I hope that's not the case but his assets have been frozen since 2009 and we have absolutely no idea what hardships he's endured over the years.

Just a thought - could the postponement be due to serious illness of one of the parties?
[/quote]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

I doubt it, according to people on the website GA has been looking very health lately.

Just my opinion of course but the McCanns most probably thought that GA would have been terrified of them and would have caved in very easily to their demands as so many other people/newspapers have done; but they didn't foresee that GA was a man of principle and discipline (two things the McCanns still have to learn about) and they then knew they'd met their Nemesis and he would take some shifting, to this day they're still trying to shift him anyway they can.

But of course it doesn't mean that one of the MCanns have not been feeling too well lately, they must both be under enormous pressure at the moment from outside influences and within their families.

by Clocker 11.04.14 16:42

tasprin wrote:If the trial has collapsed I can't understand why it would not be made public. Portugal is a democratic country and justice is supposed to be open in a democracy. It's not a matter of Amaral gloating, but he's been accused of libel (amongst other things) and has had his assets frozen for several years and his book banned for much of that time. Surely if the trial collapsed he'd have the right to make that publicly known. Perhaps the trial has been postponed because of the WOC and Justice Hogg & the British courts are deliberately dragging their feet. One of the features of this case has been the obvious lack of cooperation from UK authorities. The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it. I'd be surprised if Amaral agreed to that but after all this time he could be financially desperate.

I think that could be a possibility but if the trial was still ongoing would GA have been permitted to speak out about it like he did recently when he reiterated his theories that MM had died in the apartment? I have always believed that was the main reason of the trial, GM sister said the book left no alternative other than Madeleine had died and this would prevent people looking for her and therefore harmed the search. So would he publicly reiterate that during a trial, I didn't think he could and that is how I came to the opinion that the trial must be over but I could be very wrong.

by Doug D 11.04.14 16:58

I don't think GA said anything new in the recent interview, so he was probably able to say what he liked. New information that was about to be brought up in court would presumably have been a different matter though, potentially leading to injunctions or whatever the Portuguese equivalent is.

by Cristobell 13.04.14 9:58

Clocker wrote:
tasprin wrote:If the trial has collapsed I can't understand why it would not be made public. Portugal is a democratic country and justice is supposed to be open in a democracy. It's not a matter of Amaral gloating, but he's been accused of libel (amongst other things) and has had his assets frozen for several years and his book banned for much of that time. Surely if the trial collapsed he'd have the right to make that publicly known. Perhaps the trial has been postponed because of the WOC and Justice Hogg & the British courts are deliberately dragging their feet. One of the features of this case has been the obvious lack of cooperation from UK authorities. The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it. I'd be surprised if Amaral agreed to that but after all this time he could be financially desperate.
I think that could be a possibility but if the trial was still ongoing would GA have been permitted to speak out about it like he did recently when he reiterated his theories that MM had died in the apartment? I have always believed that was the main reason of the trial, GM sister said the book left no alternative other than Madeleine had died and this would prevent people looking for her and therefore harmed the search. So would he publicly reiterate that during a trial, I didn't think he could and that is how I came to the opinion that the trial must be over but I could be very wrong.

Good point Clocker! It would be bizarre for him to be publicly repeating the thesis that is the subject of the trial.

I personally think the McCanns have cut and run. We are rapidly approaching the 7th anniversary (no marathons and triathlons this year) - a deadline where a missing person can be pronounced dead for the purposes of probate, although I am not sure if the family have to apply for this or if they can leave it open. And of course this case is further complicated because Madeleine is a Ward of Court, so that decision may rest with the Court rather than the parents.

It is of course ridiculous for the parents to be claiming £250k for a child who hasn't been seen in 7 years but it is a stretch of the imagination to believe it is this issue that is holding everything up. If it were a simple technical issue, the Writ could be amended but if the claim was fraudulent, then it would be a different matter altogether.

Further to the point you made Clocker, it is not only Amaral who is saying publicly that Madeleine is dead, it is has now also been said by DCI Redwood - and its obvious they are not looking for a live child.

Given all the revelations since the libel trial was adjourned, what on earth will the barristers say during their summing up? How can Isabel push forward the claim that Goncalo Amaral's book hindered the search for Madeleine if the parents are now suspects for deleted? And this eerie silence gives us very good reason to believe that they are arguidos and judicial secrecy is in place. Announcing what has happened to the missing trial, may at this point infringe on the judicial secrecy.

by **tigger** 13.04.14 13:10

It's quite possible that the delay is only in the interest of the McCanns inasmuch that the publicity (such as it was) has died down completely.
The case can then be quickly concluded at a moment when convenient 'bigger' news is available to obscure it.

On the evidence submitted so far it seems highly unlikely the McCanns will win the case so there may be behind the scenes agreement between the Home Office and Portugal to tone the whole thing down as much as possible.
The WoC issue may be of significance in facilitating a delay. That is, it may already be clear what the outcome is going to be, but the timing can still be manipulated.
In that respect the SY review may come into play as a valid reason to keep the result low-key so as not to compromise their investigation.

All the above may be rubbish, but imo that's how things are done behind the scenes.
I certainly don't think the courtcase has collapsed, had it done so the publicity in the UK would have claimed victory. No, I think this was one of the most ill-advised steps ever taken by TM in general and Gerboy in particular.
Avarice and an apparent assumption that a number of laws do not apply to all things McCann have led them to a point of no return. They can give up and pay costs, or they can wait for the court's decision and try to keep it out of the UK press and - very probably - pay costs.

by Guest 13.04.14 14:45

Cristobell wrote:

Given all the revelations since the libel trial was adjourned, what on earth will the barristers say during their summing up? How can Isabel push forward the claim that Goncalo Amaral's book hindered the search for Madeleine if the parents are now (deleted) And this eerie silence gives us very good reason to believe that they are arguidos and judicial secrecy is in place. Announcing what has happened to the missing trial, may at this point infringe on the judicial secrecy.

If the McCanns are once again arguidos would that status have any gravitas in the UK?

Would they have to be on Portuguese soil for the rights e.g., silence, to apply or would they have to abide by the restrictions aguido status would impose even while on home soil?

If the UK is hostile to Portugal would the authorities be obliged to give any credence to the status or could they simply ignore it? Conversely, if the UK is working with the Portuguese is it possible that suspect status under UK law has been applied?

I am assuming the McCanns are still in this country. Anyone seen them since the Everton match?

Excuse my ignorance and many questions, I'm just trying to understand if arguido status has been imposed then do the McCanns have to be in Portugal for that to have happened?

by **tigger** 14.04.14 8:23

Cristobell wrote:
Clocker wrote:
tasprin wrote:If the trial has collapsed I can't understand why it would not be made public. Portugal is a democratic country and justice is supposed to be open in a democracy. It's not a matter of Amaral gloating, but he's been accused of libel (amongst other things) and has had his assets frozen for several years and his book banned for much of that time. Surely if the trial collapsed he'd have the right to make that publicly known. Perhaps the trial has been postponed because of the WOC and Justice Hogg & the British courts are deliberately dragging their feet. One of the features of this case has been the obvious lack of cooperation from UK authorities. The only other thing I can think of is that all parties have reached a settlement and are not legally permitted to discuss it. I'd be surprised if Amaral agreed to that but after all this time he could be financially desperate.
I think that could be a possibility but if the trial was still ongoing would GA have been permitted to speak out about it like he did recently when he reiterated his theories that MM had died in the apartment? I have always believed that was the main reason of the trial, GM sister said the book left no alternative other than Madeleine had died and this would prevent people looking for her and therefore harmed the search. So would he publicly reiterate that during a trial, I didn't think he could and that is how I came to the opinion that the trial must be over but I could be very wrong.

Good point Clocker! It would be bizarre for him to be publicly repeating the thesis that is the subject of the trial.

I personally think the McCanns have cut and run. We are rapidly approaching the 7th anniversary (no marathons and triathlons this year) - a deadline where a missing person can be pronounced dead for the purposes of probate, although I am not sure if the family have to apply for this or if they can leave it open. And of course this case is further complicated because Madeleine is a Ward of Court, so that decision may rest with the Court rather than the parents.

It is of course ridiculous for the parents to be claiming £250k for a child who hasn't been seen in 7 years but it is a stretch of the imagination to believe it is this issue that is holding everything up. If it were a simple technical issue, the Writ could be amended but if the claim was fraudulent, then it would be a different matter altogether.

Further to the point you made Clocker, it is not only Amaral who is saying publicly that Madeleine is dead, it is has now also been said by DCI Redwood - and its obvious they are not looking for a live child.

Given all the revelations since the libel trial was adjourned, what on earth will the barristers say during their summing up? How can Isabel push forward the claim that Goncalo Amaral's book hindered the search for Madeleine if (deleted) And this eerie silence gives us very good reason to believe that they are arguidos and judicial secrecy is in place. Announcing what has happened to the missing trial, may at this point infringe on the judicial secrecy.[/quote]

-----------------------------------------------------------------end of Cristobell's quote (quote box not working)

Tigger writes:

It is a public court case, it's been reported verbatim in the press and elsewhere. There is no earthly reason why Dr. Amaral may not tell the public what is widely and legally available in the press.

As to the last - bolded paragraph above, as far as I know the parents are NOT 'suspects for her murder'. It is dangerous to make such statements, especially here. Dangerous for the forum I mean.
If they were made arguidos it would be in the press. the Portuguese are very keen on their democratic laws.
Imo it would be impossible to be made arguido behind the scenes.

by Doug D 14.04.14 10:22

Tigger:

‘If they were made arguidos it would be in the press. the Portuguese are very keen on their democratic laws.
Imo it would be impossible to be made arguido behind the scenes’.

But last time round was it not the McC’s that actually broke the arguido story, with KM then trying to blame the press for intrusion etc?

I’ll have to look at some of the old reports for a timeline.

If the PJ’s current record is anything to go on, they would not have said anything unless it was already out there surely and this time round I'm sure the McC's would be keeping schtum if it was the case, as it's the last thing they would want publicised.

by Guest 14.04.14 11:06

by ultimaThule 14.04.14 13:27

Perhaps it should be made clear that the clip you've linked to (above) of Gerry emerging from Portimao police station having been declared an arguido (person of interest) by the Policia Judiciaria is from 7 September 2007, Chatelaine.

As the world has witnessed the McCanns' observance of judicial secrecy on occasions too numerous to mention, I consider it to be highly unlikely the PJ will repeat the experiment until such time as they can declare whoever they find to be responsible for this heinous crime suspects, which status is required before any EAW which may be necessary can be issued.

by Cristobell 14.04.14 14:09

Judicial Secrecy must be in operation as the case has been reopened and the investigation is live. We are not getting any announcements from the PJ. How far Judicial Secrecy extends I'm not sure, but I remember the McCanns in early interviews prior to their being made arguidos saying they were restricted in what they said because of Judicial Secrecy. In fact wasn't this the reason that Team McCann emerged, friends and relatives speaking on their behalf?

by **PeterMac** 14.04.14 14:53

tigger wrote:
As to the last - bolded paragraph above, as far as I know the parents are NOT 'suspects for her murder'. It is dangerous to make such statements, especially here. Dangerous for the forum I mean.
If they were made arguidos it would be in the press. the Portuguese are very keen on their democratic laws.

As I recall the only people who have ever mentioned Murder were the McCanns themseelves
"Find the body and prove we killed her" Gerry
"Police don't want a murder in Portugal and all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they're blaming us."' Kate

I think everyone else, (apart from some deranged internet nutters - obviously) has followed the evidence uncovered by the investigations and the views of the various professional Police officers of several countries, and has tended towards accident.

by ultimaThule 14.04.14 15:19

PeterMac wrote:
tigger wrote:
As to the last - bolded paragraph above, as far as I know the parents are NOT 'suspects for her murder'. It is dangerous to make such statements, especially here. Dangerous for the forum I mean.
If they were made arguidos it would be in the press. the Portuguese are very keen on their democratic laws.
As I recall the only people who have ever mentioned Murder were the McCanns themseelves
"Find the body and prove we killed her" Gerry
"Police don't want a murder in Portugal and all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they're blaming us."' Kate

I think everyone else, (apart from some deranged internet nutters - obviously) has followed the evidence uncovered by the investigations and the views of the various professional Police officers of several countries, and has tended towards accident.

As I see it, the problem for those who are complicit in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is that, regardless of any supposition or belief that she may have succombed to a fatal accident, in the absence of a body to prove otherwise the charge is murder with a precautionary second count of manslaughter and other charges as appropriate, PeterMac.

Eta I agree with tigger's estimation of the danger for this forum were it to be put about here that the McCanns are suspects or, indeed, persons of interest (arguidos) without proof of the assertion.

by Liz Eagles 14.04.14 15:32

ultimaThule wrote:
PeterMac wrote:
tigger wrote:
As to the last - bolded paragraph above, as far as I know the parents are NOT 'suspects for her murder'. It is dangerous to make such statements, especially here. Dangerous for the forum I mean.
If they were made arguidos it would be in the press. the Portuguese are very keen on their democratic laws.
As I recall the only people who have ever mentioned Murder were the McCanns themseelves
"Find the body and prove we killed her" Gerry
"Police don't want a murder in Portugal and all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they're blaming us."' Kate

I think everyone else, (apart from some deranged internet nutters - obviously) has followed the evidence uncovered by the investigations and the views of the various professional Police officers of several countries, and has tended towards accident.
The problem for those who are complicit in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is that, regardless of any supposition or belief that she may have succombed to a fatal accident, in the absence of a body to prove otherwise the charge is murder with a precautionary second count of manslaughter and other charges as appropriate.

I'm sorry uT, once again I don't understand this as it seems to be only your opinion as it's not qualified by anything. It's a statement which is clearly only an opinion.

You'll have to forgive me for challenging it but there is no substance to it let alone no account made for the fact that what happened to Madeleine was in Portugal and no reference made to Portuguese law or for that matter UK law.

by ultimaThule 14.04.14 16:07

Notwithstanding the difference between inquisitorial and adversarial justice systems and processes, in cases of murder and manslaughter the laws of Portugal and the UK may vary only in terms of what sentence(s) are handed down on conviction and I very much doubt it is beyond your understanding to put this assertion to the test by undertaking your own research to prove or disprove it, aquila.

As I have said upthread, my intention when joining this forum was to put such knowledge as I possess at the disposal of others who are free to accept, reject, or form views of it as they see fit, as I do when reading the opinions of others.

by Liz Eagles 14.04.14 16:12

ultimaThule wrote:Notwithstanding the difference between inquisitorial and adversarial justice systems and processes, in cases of murder and manslaughter the laws of Portugal and the UK may vary only in terms of what sentence(s) are handed down on conviction and I very much doubt it is beyond your understanding to put this assertion to the test by undertaking your own research to prove or disprove it, aquila.

As I have said upthread, my intention when joining this forum was to put such knowledge as I possess at the disposal of others who are free to accept, reject, or form views of it as they see fit, as I do when reading the opinions of others.

what a pity that I asked a fair question, received a diatribe and no answer.

What a bloody pity. sad

by ultimaThule 14.04.14 16:48

The problem I have with your 'fair questions', aquila, is that you do not appear to be interested in any answers I provide, nor do you acknowledge them.

For examples of what constitutes a 'diatribe', I would suggest you look elsewhere as my answer to your earlier question is complete in itself and consists of only two brief paragraphs.

Log in for more topics