Re: Breaking News on Sky News - SY back in PDL suspects to be interviewed

by Themis 07.07.14 19:11

Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell added: "Kate and Gerry are planning to attend court on Tuesday as required by the judge."

Have I missed something or did the McCann's lawyer appeal to overturn the Court's decision that they could not make statement? That seems a little different to attending court 'as required by the judge"

The first part of the comment 'Kate and Gerry McCann are fearful about going to Lisbon for a libel trial because of more bizarre behaviour from Goncalo Amaral.' might be true!

by Varriott 07.07.14 19:25

I just wonder. If Amaral doesn't actually have a lawyer, does that mean he can represent himself and personally cross-examine Kate and Gerry, should they take the stand? I'd buy a ticket for that show.

by Snifferdog 07.07.14 19:42

Themis wrote:Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell added: "Kate and Gerry are planning to attend court on Tuesday as required by the judge."

Have I missed something or did the McCann's lawyer appeal to overturn the Court's decision that they could not make statement? That seems a little different to attending court 'as required by the judge"

The first part of the comment 'Kate and Gerry McCann are fearful about going to Lisbon for a libel trial because of more bizarre behaviour from Goncalo Amaral.' might be true!

Perhaps because they asked for special permissions to speak at the trial, and it was granted by the judge, they are now obliged to attend and take the stand.

by TheTruthWillOut 07.07.14 19:45

Snifferdog wrote:
Themis wrote:Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell added: "Kate and Gerry are planning to attend court on Tuesday as required by the judge."

Have I missed something or did the McCann's lawyer appeal to overturn the Court's decision that they could not make statement? That seems a little different to attending court 'as required by the judge"

The first part of the comment 'Kate and Gerry McCann are fearful about going to Lisbon for a libel trial because of more bizarre behaviour from Goncalo Amaral.' might be true!

Perhaps because they asked for special permissions to speak at the trial, and it was granted by the judge, they are now obliged to attend and take the stand.

A bad case of careful what you wish for! big grin

by Guest 07.07.14 19:58

TheTruthWillOut wrote:
Snifferdog wrote:
Themis wrote:Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell added: "Kate and Gerry are planning to attend court on Tuesday as required by the judge."

Have I missed something or did the McCann's lawyer appeal to overturn the Court's decision that they could not make statement? That seems a little different to attending court 'as required by the judge"

The first part of the comment 'Kate and Gerry McCann are fearful about going to Lisbon for a libel trial because of more bizarre behaviour from Goncalo Amaral.' might be true!

Perhaps because they asked for special permissions to speak at the trial, and it was granted by the judge, they are now obliged to attend and take the stand.

A bad case of careful what you wish for!

If I have understood it correctly they are now obliged to make statements in their defence (as they asked). These statements must be "from the heart" ie 'from the heart, impulsive'.
Not from pre-written speeches, pondered over, reworded for the best effect, and referred to in the process. Nor just submitting pre-written statements.
The pile of papers in GM's hand at the last (postponed) hearing make me wonder if they understand what will be required.
I have trust in the judge.
GO, GO, GA.

by TheTruthWillOut 07.07.14 20:02

daffodil wrote:
TheTruthWillOut wrote:
Snifferdog wrote:
Themis wrote:Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell added: "Kate and Gerry are planning to attend court on Tuesday as required by the judge."

Have I missed something or did the McCann's lawyer appeal to overturn the Court's decision that they could not make statement? That seems a little different to attending court 'as required by the judge"

The first part of the comment 'Kate and Gerry McCann are fearful about going to Lisbon for a libel trial because of more bizarre behaviour from Goncalo Amaral.' might be true!

Perhaps because they asked for special permissions to speak at the trial, and it was granted by the judge, they are now obliged to attend and take the stand.

A bad case of careful what you wish for!
If I have understood it correctly they are now obliged to make statements in their defence (as they asked). These statements must be "from the heart" ie 'from the heart, impulsive'.
Not from pre-written speeches, pondered over, reworded for the best effect, and referred to in the process. Nor just submitting pre-written statements.
The pile of papers in GM's hand at the last (postponed) hearing make me wonder if they understand what will be required.
I have trust in the judge.
GO, GO, GA.

Exactly right as I understand it. Squirming Gerry is best Gerry titter

(is that too cruel?)

by Guest 07.07.14 20:03

I cannot say, I cannot wait until tomorrow, because I'll have to. But, apart from having my hairdresser as usually at noon, I'll be on-line, keeping fingers crossed and a can of coffee on my side big grin

by Miraflores 07.07.14 21:10

Is Kate due to speak? Last time she spoke off the cuff, she well and truly put her foot in it with her complaint about having to have her children cared for.

by Guest 07.07.14 21:12

I'm confident, she'll be able to do better than that .... winkwink

by Montclair 07.07.14 21:41

Varriott wrote:I just wonder. If Amaral doesn't actually have a lawyer, does that mean he can represent himself and personally cross-examine Kate and Gerry, should they take the stand? I'd buy a ticket for that show.

Don't worry, Gonçalo has a lawyer.

by FrankS 07.07.14 23:54

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by lj 08.07.14 3:26

HelenMeg wrote:
AndyB wrote:
Popcorn wrote:How odd. The Gaspars are apparently "weird" because they allowed other parents – who they believed to be friends – to bathe their kids. Just like Martin Grime's methods are questionable, and Goncalo Amaral's. Funny how everybody whose evidence in some way conflicts with that of the parents (one of whom wouldn't even answer police questions) is painted as dubious by someone or other.
I'm neither casting aspersions as to the reliability of their statements nor trying to paint them as dubious in some way and for the record I think that the Gasper statements may well run to the heart of what was going on in PdL. They are IMO very important and their importance is highlighted by the UK's failure to pass them onto the PJ for (I think) six months. None of that though prevents me from voicing the opinion that I find it weird that they - or any other parent for that matter - would let people that they don't know that well bathe their children. However, as I'm not a parent, I have to accept that my thinking maybe different to those that have children
Well it is completely unnatural and against any instinct to trust an intimate duty such as bathing your small child to anyone other than you, your partner or your mother.

I have posted it several times before: I completely agree, I would not trust anyone else on that either.

Plus indeed it seems so unpractical.

by lj 08.07.14 3:32

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
AndyB wrote:
I'm neither casting aspersions as to the reliability of their statements nor trying to paint them as dubious in some way and for the record I think that the Gasper statements may well run to the heart of what was going on in PdL. They are IMO very important and their importance is highlighted by the UK's failure to pass them onto the PJ for (I think) six months. None of that though prevents me from voicing the opinion that I find it weird that they - or any other parent for that matter - would let people that they don't know that well bathe their children. However, as I'm not a parent, I have to accept that my thinking maybe different to those that have children

It isn't.

Being bluntly honest, I don't even bathe my own daughter - I leave that to the ball and chain.

However, people are strange (Jim Morrison said that fifty years ago, and it's still true) and it's possible that the communal bathing is an extension of the shared holiday, halls of residence bed-hopping style existence that these manchild middle class types never quite seem to be able to grow out of.

My husband never wanted to do things that involved intimate parts of our daughters, and I think he might have bathed the girls only once or twice, when I really was not able too. For all other duties he was there, often taking on more than I wanted, so it was not "getting out of the work".

I love your last sentence Clay.

edited to add: sorry candyfloss, I just saw your post. It's just that I always come hours behind you guys.

by missbeetle 08.07.14 6:00

I have bathed other people's children before - nieces, nephews and (I'm almost afraid to say it) Godchildren - male and female.

Each time to give the mother a break, and the father was not there to help out.

These days I would rather take over the cooking, and pour the mother a stiff drink...

...while she deals with knotty hair, fights over grotty toys and water everywhere.

I can think of at least a handful of friends and sisters/cousins I could trust implicitly with looking after a baby girl.

All are grown women, experienced and watchful.

All women.

Ps. sorry - totally off topic - which is the best thread to discuss middle class bed-hopping on?

by Dutchgirl 08.07.14 6:16

JUST ON: Sky news - Kate and Gerry have arrived - Martin Brunt met them at the airport. He spoke to Gerry, Gerry stated he hopes THIS time he can be heard and stated they they are looking for juctice for Madeleine, Amelie and Sean.

by Carrry On Doctor 08.07.14 6:21

Dutchgirl wrote:JUST ON: Sky news - Kate and Gerry have arrived - Martin Brunt met them at the airport. He spoke to Gerry, Gerry stated he hopes THIS time he can be heard and stated they they are looking for juctice for Madeleine, Amelie and Sean.

Mr had a permanent smirk on his face. What's so funny Gerry ?

by MrsC 08.07.14 6:41

Carrry On Doctor wrote:

Mr had a permanent smirk on his face. What's so funny Gerry ?

He's just dreaming of how he is going to spend all the money he is just about to win. sad

by Iamtheseeker 08.07.14 7:10

The hideous pair have returned in hope of returning to the UK with a million pounds , I hope they get ASKED TO ANSWER THE 48 QUESTIONS THEY REFUSED TO ANSWER 7 YEARS AGO if Portuguese nationals are made to answer 200 plus questions which they did as they had nothing to hide , why have these two been allowed to refuse to answer ? That will be Justice ! notme

by Pershing36 31.08.14 16:42

MrsC wrote:
Carrry On Doctor wrote:

Mr had a permanent smirk on his face. What's so funny Gerry ?

He's just dreaming of how he is going to spend all the money he is just about to win.

They probably feel this is going to plan. If you can afford an expensive legal team (plus SY Operation popping up at strategic moments) you can win almost anything. They have a legal team most people could only dream of having. They know it and unfortunately with the defendants continual legal defence problems it will probably take a miracle for these two to lose.

It is more of the same, the McCann's are laughing all the way to the bank/fund and they have another scalp of somebody who disagrees with their version of events.