The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[Eleanor]

I suspect that if people stop Libelling The McCanns then there will be no further Libel Trials.

[icabodcrane]

And where will the McCanns get money from if there's no payout awarded from Amaral?

Who will be the next person they will sue?

Losing against Amaral surely would diminish many of their arguments and make their general legal position much more difficult in the future.

What are we saying?  That because of the high profile nature of the case and the fact that a sometimes negative media is playing a big role, there will always be someone next in line to be sued in order to to top up the fund?

How long would that type of strategy be sustainable?

If the McCanns lose the libel action they have brought against the former policeman in charge of the investigation into their child's unexplained disappearance it will surely have a profound effect  on the 'prohibition'  of open discussion on the case

Previously, merely the threat of legal action was enough to stifle debate and silence those who questioned the McCanns version of events

This is the first,  and  only,  time,  the McCanns have gone beyond intimidation and actually sued for libel ...  if they lose,  the terms of engagement  will be changed dramatically,  and will almost certainly be reflected in press coverage 

The  "how dare you ...  we'll set our lawyers on you"  approach of the McCanns will be seen as nothing more than bluff and bluster 

[Eleanor]

But what if they win?  Which is looking increasingly likely after yesterday's fiasco.  Defence Witnesses dismissed and Evidence Withheld?
This is not looking good.

[icabodcrane]

But what if they win?  Which is looking increasingly likely after yesterday's fiasco.  Defence Witnesses dismissed and Evidence Withheld?
This is not looking good.

If they win then we will all have to accept that open discussion and honestly expressed views and opinions will be just as dramatically affected

It has been a very risky move,  but the McCanns must have been confident   (  and very well advised  ) before they took it

[Conkers]

ISABEL DUARTE: Because everyone believes in Goncalo Amaral. Everyone believes that I am defending a father and a mother that have killed the daughter and got rid of the corpse.

I'm intrigued by this because I haven't seen this quote before.  Where did you find it Lace?

She surely only would have wanted/needed to discuss her case with colleagues and I find it impossible to imagine that she would be shunned by them - the nature of their profession blah blah... (Btw is she a Barrister?).

If she's tried to talk about it with friends (which I don't for a moment believe  has) then she deserves their opinions.

If this is a genuine quote it looks as if it's taken out of context.  Why would she be whiney? She has more dignity than that.

[Eleanor]

If they win then we will all have to accept that open discussion and honestly expressed views and opinions will be just as dramatically affected

It has been a very risky move,  but the McCanns must have been confident   (  and very well advised  ) before they took it

Job done then in that case.  The McCanns had to do something because Amaral was just going on and on getting worse and worse.  And they only ever wanted him to stop.  He chose not to.  He was even at it again last week,
I bet that went down well with The Judge if she was in any doubt.

[icabodcrane]

I'm intrigued by this because I haven't seen this quote before.  Where did you find it Lace?

She surely only would have wanted/needed to discuss her case with colleagues and I find it impossible to imagine that she would be shunned by them - the nature of their profession blah blah... (Btw is she a Barrister?).

If she's tried to talk about it with friends (which I don't for a moment believe  has) then she deserves their opinions.

If this is a genuine quote it looks as if it's taken out of context.  Why would she be whiney? She has more dignity than that.

You will find the quote  (  spoken directly by Duarte,  and entirely  'in context'  )   in Redblossom's post  (    reply 902 on this thread  ) 

Her friends,  Duarte  says,  will not speak to her about the case because they believe she is defending parents who killed their child

[Conkers]

Thank you Icabod - will look now but my immediate reaction is that she shouldn't be talking to friends. She's supposed to be professional and all should be in confidence.

[Eleanor]

Thank you Icabod - will look now but my immediate reaction is that she shouldn't be talking to friends. She's supposed to be professional and all should be in confidence.

It's her friends that aren't talking to her.

[icabodcrane]

Thank you Icabod - will look now but my immediate reaction is that she shouldn't be talking to friends. She's supposed to be professional and all should be in confidence.

I got the impression in the earlier court hearing  ( the  one requesting an injunction on Amaral's book  )  that Isobel Duarte is a rather  'dramatic' character   ....  she waved a folder around,  became animated and, frankly, a bit hysterical  ...  speaking of  'vampires' 

This particular brief is not of the calibre employed by the McCanns in the UK,  it appears

Going by the court transcripts,  kindly provided by Anne and John,  Duarte doesn't seem to have been up to it

[Conkers]

You will find the quote  (  spoken directly by Duarte,  and entirely  'in context'  )   in Redblossom's post  (    reply 902 on this thread  ) 

Her friends,  Duarte  says,  will not speak to her about the case because they believe she is defending parents who killed their child

Thank you for pointing me in the right direction but I'm too tired to look at the video - I take everyone's word for it.

If, as Eleanor says, it's her friends who aren't talking to her, that paints a different picture for me.

I'm interested because my late husband was a Barrister although he never went into practice.

I hope if he had and defended (to my eyes) the indefensible my friends would have understood.

One thing I know. He would never, never have talked about his cases to me or friends.

[Eleanor]

Thank you for pointing me in the right direction but I'm too tired to look at the video - I take everyone's word for it.

If, as Eleanor says, it's her friends who aren't talking to her, that paints a different picture for me.

I'm interested because my late husband was a Barrister although he never went into practice.

I hope if he had and defended (to my eyes) the indefensible my friends would have understood.

One thing I know. He would never, never have talked about his cases to me or friends.

She most certainly will not have been discussing a court case with all and sundry. No Barrister would.  She was simply pointing out the effect that Amaral's book had on her circle of friends and acquaintances.

[icabodcrane]

Thank you for pointing me in the right direction but I'm too tired to look at the video - I take everyone's word for it.

If, as Eleanor says, it's her friends who aren't talking to her, that paints a different picture for me.

I'm interested because my late husband was a Barrister although he never went into practice.

I hope if he had and defended (to my eyes) the indefensible my friends would have understood.

I should have thought so to

Even the guilty are entitled to legal representation   (  not that I am saying the McCanns are guilty of any crime  )

Isobel Duarte's   friends would surely acknowledge  that simple principal,   on which the law is based,  and respect her for upholding it

I think,   perhaps,  Duarte was being her customary  'dramatic'  self  ...  and,  in an attempt to emphasise the effect Amaral's book had on the public,  introduced the almost inconcievable scenario of her own friends rejecting her because they had been so influenced by the former detective's opinions 

It was a silly, elaborate, and frankly unbelievable little anecdote

[Conkers]

I should have thought so to

Even the guilty are entitled to legal representation   (  not that I am saying the McCanns are guilty of any crime  )

Isobel Duarte's   friends would surely acknowledge  that simple principal,   on which the law is based,  and respect her for upholding it

I think,   perhaps,  Duarte was being her customary  'dramatic'  self  ...  and,  in an attempt to emphasise the effect Amaral's book had on the public,  introduced the almost inconcievable scenario of her own friends rejecting her because they had been so influenced by the former detective's opinions 

It was a silly, elaborate, and frankly unbelievable little anecdote

Yes.  Very silly and demeaning. I expect more in a case of this importance.

[Eleanor]

Some people on this Forum believe the lies and innuendo in Amaral's book.  So why not in Portugal?

However, I do have to say that not all Portuguese people are thus affected.