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!

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Mm11

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Regist10

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Page 10 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by jeanmonroe on 02.02.15 13:05

The Telegraph can also disclose that Madeleine was made a ward of court last summer at the request of the McCanns, to empower judges to act in her best interests in any legal dispute such as the case which is about to be heard.
----------------------------------------------

to EMPOWER judges TO "ACT" in her best interests in any legal dispute such as the case which is about to be heard.

"IN ANY LEGAL 'DISPUTE'"

"SUCH as 'THE (book 'ban'/ 'libel') CASE' which is about to be heard" (2009?)

And THAT, as they 'say', is THAT!

Perhaps the McCann's should have taken Justice Hogg, with them to Portugal, as a "HEARSAY" 'witness' at their 'damages' claim 'trial'!

I'm sure that Madeleine's 'fund' finances could have 'run to' financing a 'stay' at a Lisbon 5* for her!

It DID for the McCann's, didn't it?

(Also, Madeleine's 'search' 'fund, financed all their "HEARSAY" 'witnesses travel +' to Portugal! to testify on their 'behalf')

Anyone know how did their TRUTHFUL witnesses, "HEARSAY" 'testimonies' come across, in the Lisbon courtroom, btw?  laughat
avatar
jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Activity : 7756
Likes received : 1674
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Guest on 02.02.15 13:25

I have finally understood the purpose of the WOC.  So the McCanns were, within a few weeks of (or most likely before) their daughter's reported disappearance, already planning for future legal action.  IMO.
Thanks, jeanmonroe.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by LombardySkeptik on 02.02.15 13:27

Of course it is possible that the Court appointed guardians did not think that pursuing damages from GA was in their ward's best interest

____________________
Morto, ma io non ho dimenticato lei
avatar
LombardySkeptik

Posts : 80
Activity : 83
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2014-05-12

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by G-Unit on 02.02.15 13:53

@Ladyinred wrote:I have finally understood the purpose of the WOC.  So the McCanns were, within a few weeks of (or most likely before) their daughter's reported disappearance, already planning for future legal action.  IMO.
Thanks, jeanmonroe.
On 17th May 2007, fourteen days after Madeleine went missing, her parents applied to the High Court for a disclosure order enabling them to force people to give their solicitors any information they may have;

'which might assist in identifying Madeleine’s whereabouts'



More good discussion on this thread; 

Re: Ward of Court information for Madeleine Beth McCann
G-Unit
G-Unit

Posts : 358
Activity : 456
Likes received : 92
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by jeanmonroe on 02.02.15 14:00

@LombardySkeptik wrote:Of course it is possible that the Court appointed guardians did not think that pursuing damages from GA was in their ward's best interest

Madeleine's 'best interest'?

I might remind everyone that, by her parent's 'action' in the book 'ban' case, which they LOST (twice) Madeleine, by way of 'inclusion' in that 'writ', BY her own PARENTS, is ALREADY 'liable' to pay her 'share' of the 'costs' for losing the 'claim'!

And, just for good measure, so are the twins 'liable' for 'costs' awarded AGAINST them!!

No 'pocket money' for them, for many, many, years then!

Thx 'mum and dad'!

REF:

At the judicial circuit of Lisbon Kate Marie Healey McCann, Gerald Patrick McCann, Madeleine Beth McCann, Sean Michael McCann and Amelie Eve McCann

Have filed an unspecified injunction against::

Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral, Guerra e Paz, Editores, SA VC – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, SA and TVI – Televisão Independente, SA -
---------------------------------------------------------------

III – Decision

In harmony with what is written above, under the terms of the cited dispositions, the Judges at this Appeals Court declare the validity of the appeal filed by defendant Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, and the sentence of the Court a quo is revoked, its disposition replaced by the following:

"The injunction is deemed not valid because it was not proved. Furthermore we deliberate that we do not acknowledge the rest of the appeals"

"Costs to be paid, by the appellants*.

"COSTS, to be PAID......."

THE *appellants ARE G&K McCann, Madeleine, Sean and Amelie McCann.

Lisbon and Appeals Court, 14.10.2010

http://madeleinemccann.org/blog/2014/04/20/appeals-court-lifts-ban-on-amarals-book/#sthash.waRy2I71.dpuf

THX , MUM and DAD!
avatar
jeanmonroe

Posts : 5818
Activity : 7756
Likes received : 1674
Join date : 2013-02-07

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by LombardySkeptik on 02.02.15 14:22

@jeanmonroe wrote:
@LombardySkeptik wrote:Of course it is possible that the Court appointed guardians did not think that pursuing damages from GA was in their ward's best interest

Madeleine's 'best interest'?

I might remind everyone that, by her parent's 'action' in the book 'ban' case, which they LOST (twice) Madeleine, by way of 'inclusion' in that 'writ', BY her own PARENTS, is ALREADY 'liable' to pay her 'share' of the 'costs' for losing the 'claim'!

And, just for good measure, so are the twins 'liable' for 'costs' awarded AGAINST them!!

No 'pocket money' for them, for many, many, years then!

Thx 'mum and dad'!

Again I do not think the court would have allowed Madeleine to act as a co-plaintiff in that case - but happy to be directed to a source that states otherwise

The twins as minors are not themselves liable for costs as such, though of course they would suffer financially

I do however agree completely with your sentiments

____________________
Morto, ma io non ho dimenticato lei
avatar
LombardySkeptik

Posts : 80
Activity : 83
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2014-05-12

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by tiny on 05.02.15 15:16

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 HK5DuTJ2_normal Rangeeni @Rangeeni  ·  1h 1 hour ago
"@algarvnewswatch: Portugal Newswatch: McCanns vs Amaral verdict nearing http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.nl/2015/02/mccanns-vs-amaral-verdict-nearing.html?spref=tw … #McCann #WardOfCourt
tiny
tiny

Posts : 2274
Activity : 2311
Likes received : 4
Join date : 2010-02-03

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by ultimaThule on 05.02.15 23:44

Portugal Newswatch

Reflections on current affairs in Portugal by journalist and author Len Port.
Thursday, February 5, 2015
McCanns vs Amaral verdict nearing
The verdict in Kate and Gerry McCann’s civil action against the former lead detective Gonçalo Amaral may come sooner than expected because of a recent behind-the-scenes development in the long-drawn-out case.
The question of whether or not Kate and Gerry McCann are legally entitled to represent their daughter Madeleine in their claim for damages has taken a significant step closer to being resolved, according to a source close to the process.
Madeleine was made a ward of court in the UK in April 2008. In January last year, Amaral argued in Lisbon’s Palace of Justice that because Madeleine was still a ward of court the McCanns did not have the legal right to represent her in their Lisbon lawsuit against him and three other parties.
The Lisbon judge, Emília Melo e Castro, gave Madeleine’s parents the opportunity to obtain appropriate documentation about the ward of court matter from the British High Court.
The McCanns had a 30-day set period in which to present this. They did so without delay and much earlier than expected. The documentation was presented to the Lisbon court through the couple’s lawyers on 23 January. None of the defence lawyers has or is expected to raise any objections.
So it is now up to the Lisbon judge to decide the relatively straightforward matter of whether the documentation attests to the McCanns’ right to represent Madeleine. When this is settled, the trial is expected to move towards its last formal exchanges and then, finally, sooner than most people had anticipated, perhaps next month, a verdict.
The McCanns are seeking €1.2 million in damages for the severe distress they say has been caused to them by Amaral’s book, A Verdade da Mentira (‘The Truth of the Lie’), and a subsequent documentary.
The judge’s recent summary of the main points in the case that had been proved or not proved left Amaral and his supporters optimistic about the eventual outcome.
Amaral said this week that he was hoping for an acquittal and the lifting of financial difficulties that have burdened him since the McCanns decided to sue five years ago.





ultimaThule
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Activity : 3376
Likes received : 7
Join date : 2013-09-18

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by IKNOWWHATHAPPENED on 08.02.15 10:16

After a person has been missing for 7 years, English courts can declare death by absentia. April 2015 marks 7 years since Madeline was made WoC.

Would this account for the McCanns rushing WoC paperwork over to Portugal ?
avatar
IKNOWWHATHAPPENED

Posts : 110
Activity : 116
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2012-12-04

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Casey5 on 08.02.15 10:35

@IKNOWWHATHAPPENED wrote:After a person has been missing for 7 years, English courts can declare death by absentia. April 2015 marks 7 years since Madeline was made WoC.

Would this account for the McCanns rushing WoC paperwork over to Portugal ?
After seven years relatives of a missing person can petition the court to declare death but is usually done so financial loose ends can be tied up.
As far as I'm aware it wouldn't normally happen with a child because there would be no point really and the relatives would always hope the child would, in fact, still be alive.
Goncalo Amaral requested our Court provide paperwork showing that the McCanns could, in fact, legally act for Madeleine even though she was a Ward of Court.
avatar
Casey5

Posts : 348
Activity : 402
Likes received : 52
Join date : 2013-02-01

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Doug D on 08.02.15 11:00

IKWH:
 
‘Would this account for the McCanns rushing WoC paperwork over to Portugal?’
 
Hardly ‘rushing’!
 
The Mc’s were made aware of this requirement on 1st June 2014 and Amaral had first questioned the legality of them acting for MM back in January 2014.
 
‘After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”.
 
although I could never quite work out why the judge gave them 30 days from the date of the next hearing (which was originally scheduled for 16th June 2014), rather than just giving them 30 days and telling them to pull their fingers out.
avatar
Doug D

Posts : 3312
Activity : 4767
Likes received : 1201
Join date : 2013-12-03

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Guest on 08.02.15 11:14

@Doug D wrote:IKWH:
 
‘Would this account for the McCanns rushing WoC paperwork over to Portugal?’
 
Hardly ‘rushing’!
 
The Mc’s were made aware of this requirement on 1st June 2014 and Amaral had first questioned the legality of them acting for MM back in January 2014.
 
‘After that hearing is completed, the proceedings will be suspended for 30 days. During that period, Madeleine’s parents “shall arrange for the collection and documentation in the records of the British Court’s authorization for the bringing of this action on behalf of the minor Madeleine McCann”. If they fail to do so, the defendants will be “acquitted of the proceedings concerning the requests that have been formulated on behalf of the latter”.
 
although I could never quite work out why the judge gave them 30 days from the date of the next hearing (which was originally scheduled for 16th June 2014), rather than just giving them 30 days and telling them to pull their fingers out.
Because the hearing wasn't completed until Jan 21st 2015,the Judge then suspended the case.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Doug D on 09.02.15 7:42

Sorry WMD, but my point was that they were aware of the WoC issue last year, yet did nothing about it till now.
 
I do not understand why they were given 30 days starting from the last court date, rather than from 16th June 2014, when it was a technical issue that had nothing to do with the actual case against Amaral, other than how many claims they could make against him and there was no reason that this could not have been sorted out months ago.
avatar
Doug D

Posts : 3312
Activity : 4767
Likes received : 1201
Join date : 2013-12-03

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Ashwarya on 09.02.15 7:48

Maybe they have had the decision since it was first requested, but for some reason didn't want to hand it over immediately.

They may have calculated that they have no choice now, so decided to get it over with even before the 30 days were up.
Ashwarya
Ashwarya

Posts : 141
Activity : 162
Likes received : 19
Join date : 2011-04-23

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Guest on 09.02.15 8:27

@Doug D wrote:Sorry WMD, but my point was that they were aware of the WoC issue last year, yet did nothing about it till now.
 
I do not understand why they were given 30 days starting from the last court date, rather than from 16th June 2014, when it was a technical issue that had nothing to do with the actual case against Amaral, other than how many claims they could make against him and there was no reason that this could not have been sorted out months ago.
Ah! my apologies also,why the delay from them? delaying once again,some one wanting another to be miserable and feel fear.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by HelenMeg on 17.02.15 10:39

We should be hearing fairly imminently from Lisbon re outcome ? When I say imminently I mean within 2 - 4 weeks? nod
I dont think there will be any progress on other areas until that outcome emerges
avatar
HelenMeg

Posts : 1782
Activity : 2081
Likes received : 213
Join date : 2014-01-08

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by SuspiciousMinds on 21.02.15 11:55

The 30 days was up yesterday. So now what...?
avatar
SuspiciousMinds

Posts : 85
Activity : 154
Likes received : 67
Join date : 2014-06-24

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Liz Eagles on 21.02.15 11:58

@SuspiciousMinds wrote:The 30 days was up yesterday. So now what...?
I suspect another convenient point of law/spanner in the works will be produced.
Liz Eagles
Liz Eagles

Posts : 10390
Activity : 12779
Likes received : 2198
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Guest on 21.02.15 12:07

aquila wrote:
@SuspiciousMinds wrote:The 30 days was up yesterday. So now what...?
I suspect another convenient point of law/spanner in the works will be produced.
Not sure to be honest,is any one? any how the WOC documents were handed into the court on the 23rd Jan,so that would not be an issue any more would it,the lawyer's were then given 10 days to argue legal points of law over the initial findings after this the verdict will be considered and delivered,now do the 10 days start after the 30 days in which the Judge gave the McCanns to hand over the WOC docs or does the 10 days start after they were handed in.From the link posted earlier the verdict could come any time now.
http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.nl/2015/02/mccanns-vs-amaral-verdict-nearing.html?spref=tw
The McCanns had a 30-day set period in which to present this. They did so without delay and much earlier than expected. The documentation was presented to the Lisbon court through the couple’s lawyers on 23 January. None of the defence lawyers has or is expected to raise any objections.
So it is now up to the Lisbon judge to decide the relatively straightforward matter of whether the documentation attests to the McCanns’ right to represent Madeleine. When this is settled, the trial is expected to move towards its last formal exchanges and then, finally, sooner than most people had anticipated, perhaps next month, a verdict.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by ultimaThule on 23.02.15 4:28

@Doug D wrote:Sorry WMD, but my point was that they were aware of the WoC issue last year, yet did nothing about it till now.
 
I do not understand why they were given 30 days starting from the last court date, rather than from 16th June 2014, when it was a technical issue that had nothing to do with the actual case against Amaral, other than how many claims they could make against him and there was no reason that this could not have been sorted out months ago.

The last hearing was scheduled to take place on 10th July 2014.

Had the Judge been aware that the last hearing wouldn't take place until January 2015 I suspect she would have varied her order, Doug, but I agree that the McCanns should have been required to produce the relevant documentation within 30 days from 16 June 2014.
ultimaThule
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Activity : 3376
Likes received : 7
Join date : 2013-09-18

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by ultimaThule on 23.02.15 4:30

http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/mccanns-vs-amaral-verdict-nearing.html

It seems only Len Port has reported that the McCanns' submitted the required documentation on 23rd January and, as his account appears to be based on information "according to a source close to the process", I find myself reaching for the salt cellar.  

As stated elsewhere, after a number of lengthy searches I've been unable to find any precedent for a minor alleged to have been abducted by stranger(s) being made a Ward of Court, nor have I been able to find any precedent for a Ward of Court to be made party to the type of legal action which has been ongoing in Lisbon for the past 7 years.  This doesn't necessarily mean that such precedents don't exist, but if they do I again ask others to provide the revelant case numbers.
.
Fwiw, any authorisation/direction from the High Court in respect of its Ward in this matter will be in the form of an Order, or Orders, dated prior to the commencement of the proceedings in Lisbon and, as any such Order(s) will have been served on both the McCanns and their solicitors at the time they were made, it shouldn't take more than a week or so to have the required document(s) translated and properly attested.

In any event the 30 day period granted to the McCanns elapsed on Friday of last week and, by my estimation, lawyers for all of the parties have until 2 March to submit their 'allegations of law' to the Court, after which the Judge will retire to consider her verdict.
ultimaThule
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Activity : 3376
Likes received : 7
Join date : 2013-09-18

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by G-Unit on 23.02.15 8:38

Following an application by the McCanns lawyers on 17th May 2007, Judge Hogg made an order on 22nd May which required anyone having 'information which might assist in identifying Madeleine's whereabouts' to disclose it to the McCann's solicitors. 


At some point this Order was served on Leicester Police, who refused to release the information they were holding. The McCann's lawyers sought a ruling from the Court on this matter on 2nd April 2008. Coincidentally, Madeleine McCann was made a Ward of Court on this date also, which could have been done to add weight to the request for information from the Police. 


I think the McCanns and their legal team surprised everyone by trying to use the Order to force the Police to disclose their files, and  the judge quickly changed the Order at the hearing on 7th April 2008 so it no longer applied to any UK law enforcement agencies.
G-Unit
G-Unit

Posts : 358
Activity : 456
Likes received : 92
Join date : 2014-12-29
Location : UK

Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Guest on 23.02.15 11:50

@ultima Thule
I sent you a pm.
I'll send a second one.
Please read them.
Kindest regards.
parapono
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by Guest on 23.02.15 11:59

[quote="G-Unit"][size=13]Following an application by the McCanns lawyers on 17th May 2007, Judge Hogg made an order on 22nd May which required anyone having 'information which might assist in identifying Madeleine's whereabouts' to disclose it to the McCann's solicitors. [/size]


[size=13]At some point this Order was served on Leicester Police, who refused to release the information they were holding. The McCann's lawyers sought a ruling from the Court on this matter on 2nd April 2008. Coincidentally, [b]Madeleine McCann was made a Ward of Court on this date also, which could have been done to add weight to the request for information from the Police. [/b][/size]


[size=13]I think the McCanns and their legal team surprised everyone by trying to use the Order to force the Police to disclose their files, and [/size] [size=13]the judge quickly changed the Order [/size][size=13]at the hearing on 7th April 2008 [/size][size=13]so it no longer applied to any UK law enforcement agencies[/size][size=13].[/size][/quote]

Hmm.
So already on May 17 2007 the MCCanns firmly suspected their daughter to have been abducted/harmed/... by somebody or more than one person WITHIN BRITISH JURISDICTION (instead of inside Portugal, where the Order would carry no weight whatsoever?

In fact, this suspicion was so firm, they judged it worthwhile to pay money to a law firm to take the matter to Court, and get that Order. 

Remember: the big money was not rolling in at that time yet (10 days after the facts), so it was their own money they had to spend. From which you may surmise, that their suspicions were very firm indeed, probably based on solid facts known to them.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014 - Page 10 Empty Re: Ward of Court: Decision issued by Judge in Libel Trial June 1st 2014

Post by j.rob on 23.02.15 13:06

@Portia wrote:
@G-Unit wrote:Following an application by the McCanns lawyers on 17th May 2007, Judge Hogg made an order on 22nd May which required anyone having 'information which might assist in identifying Madeleine's whereabouts' to disclose it to the McCann's solicitors. 


At some point this Order was served on Leicester Police, who refused to release the information they were holding. The McCann's lawyers sought a ruling from the Court on this matter on 2nd April 2008. Coincidentally, Madeleine McCann was made a Ward of Court on this date also, which could have been done to add weight to the request for information from the Police. 


I think the McCanns and their legal team surprised everyone by trying to use the Order to force the Police to disclose their files, and  the judge quickly changed the Order at the hearing on 7th April 2008 so it no longer applied to any UK law enforcement agencies.

Hmm.
So already on May 17 2007 the MCCanns firmly suspected their daughter to have been abducted/harmed/... by somebody or more than one person WITHIN BRITISH JURISDICTION (instead of inside Portugal, where the Order would carry no weight whatsoever?

In fact, this suspicion was so firm, they judged it worthwhile to pay money to a law firm to take the matter to Court, and get that Order. 

Remember: the big money was not rolling in at that time yet (10 days after the facts), so it was their own money they had to spend. From which you may surmise, that their suspicions were very firm indeed, probably based on solid facts known to them.


which required anyone having 'information which might assist in identifying Madeleine's whereabouts' to disclose it to the McCann's solicitors.


 
I presume that the McCanns were desperate to cover their own backsides. And find out exactly what other people knew that might incriminate them.

I think this is why they took the (extreme?) measure of making Madeleine a ward of court. To force Leicester police to disclose information. It was nothing to do with 'finding Madeleine'. Quite the opposite, in fact. I think TM were desperate that Madeleine would NOT be found.

I think the McCanns and their legal team surprised everyone by trying to use the Order to force the Police to disclose their files, and  the judge quickly changed the Order at the hearing on 7th April 2008 so it no longer applied to any UK law enforcement agencies.


So the Judge saw through their rouse and made sure that it didn't apply to UK police. 

Hmm.
So already on May 17 2007 the MCCanns firmly suspected their daughter to have been abducted/harmed/... by somebody or more than one person WITHIN BRITISH JURISDICTION (instead of inside Portugal, where the Order would carry no weight whatsoever?



Indeed. Who would they know that, I wonder?  prisoner 

What about Pimple-man, Tractor-man, Swarthy Continental Tanner-man, Bundle-man, Ugly-man and the Big Bad Bogey-man?  window

Mere diversions, of course. All part of 'the script' to keep everyone's eye off the ball.

Remember: the big money was not rolling in at that time yet (10 days after the facts), so it was their own money they had to spend. From which you may surmise, that their suspicions were very firm indeed, probably based on solid facts known to them.



Indeed. When Gerry and Kate put their hands in their pockets you can guarantee it is not for babysitters or 'child care'. 

They had to pull out the heavy guns very early on. And they would only do that to cover their own backsides, imo.  fan

Something really bad had 'happened'. Now just was it, exactly? It sure as hell wasn't the big bad mystery bogey-man climbing in through the bedroom window.
avatar
j.rob

Posts : 2243
Activity : 2511
Likes received : 266
Join date : 2014-02-02

Back to top Go down

Page 10 of 11 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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