The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[ferryman]

She [Isabel Duarte] lost the ban of the book,

Not strictly true.

She was  never there to contest the lifting of the ban on the book.

The ruling that lifted it was ex-parte.

[AnneGuedes]

I think they just want him to stop spreading lies about them and about what happened to their daughter. 

How do you know that they are lies ? Do you know the truth about what happened to Madeleine McCann ?

[Rogerandout]

How do you know that ? Have you some knowledge about Mr McCann's salary ?

As a consultant of his standing it would be surprising if he was earning less than £120,000 a year. Very comfortable.

[ferryman]

How do you know ? And have you forgotten already what you wrote earlier ?

Amaral wrote in his book that Jane Tanner implicated Murat -- one of many inaccuracies ...

[AnneGuedes]

She [Isabel Duarte] lost the ban of the book,

Not strictly true.

She was  never there to contest the lifting of the ban on the book.

The ruling that lifted it was ex-parte.

No, Ferryman, this has been discussed many times. The Supreme Court judges the minor court, not the parties' allegations. If the Supreme Court judges the minor court (in this case the Appeal one) made some mistake, the process goes back to the first Court and is judged again.

[AnneGuedes]

Amaral wrote in his book that Jane Tanner implicated Murat -- one of many inaccuracies ...

How do you know that it is inaccurate ?

[ferryman]

How do you know that it is inaccurate ?

Jane Tanner made it clear in her rogatory interview that she did not implicate Robert Murat.

Nothing in the files (including that section indicating how suspicions about Murat arose) indicates otherwise.

[AnneGuedes]

In Portugal a NSH heart consultant having a family of 4 needs private resources to live comfortably.

[ferryman]

No, Ferryman, this has been discussed many times. The Supreme Court judges the minor court, not the parties' allegations. If the Supreme Court judges the minor court (in this case the Appeal one) made some mistake, the process goes back to the first Court and is judged again.

Sometimes discussions miss the crucial point.  The McCanns were unrepresented at the proceedings that lifted the injunction.

That is the meaning of ex-parte

One side not represented.

The McCanns were not represented.

[AnneGuedes]

Jane Tanner made it clear in her rogatory interview that she did not implicate Robert Murat.

[AnneGuedes]

Sometimes discussions miss the crucial point.  The McCanns were unrepresented at the proceedings that lifted the injunction.

That is the meaning of ex-parte

One side not represented.

The McCanns were not represented.

Mr Amaral wasn't represented as well. Fifteen love

[ferryman]

Why does that make you laugh?

[ferryman]

Mr Amaral wasn't represented as well. Fifteen love

Amaral made the appeal.

Try again ...

[Rogerandout]

In Portugal a NSH heart consultant having a family of 4 needs private resources to live comfortably.

Not in the UK. Doctors had their mouths stuffed with gold. Gerry's salary would be in the top 10%.

[Montclair]

Amaral made the appeal.

Try again ...

That's the way Appeals courts work. BTW, the hearing when the judge decided to implement the injunction on the book and the freezing of Gonçalo Amaral's assets as well as denying him his freedom of expression was carried out in total secrecy by the plaintiffs. The defendents, Gonçalo Amaral, TVI, Valentim de Carvalho and Guerra & Paz, were unaware of what was going on and were caught by surprise, with no possibility of presenting any arguments in their defense at that time.