The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[stephen25000]

Gerry is a consultant cardiologist...he teaches the undergraduates and post graduates

Interesting you refer to your son.

I seem to remember a short while ago in a post, that you were reading your son a bedtime story. >@@(*&)

[Mr Gray]

Interesting you refer to your son.

I seem to remember a short while ago in a post, that you were reading your son a bedtime story. >@@(*&)

 would it be possible for me to have more than one son

[Mr Gray]

and then theres my daughters

[stephen25000]

would it be possible for me to have more than one son

You referred to the singular not plural.

[Mr Gray]

You referred to the singular not plural.

only one son studied at leicester

[Eleanor]

Query removed.

I think this only applies to The Plaintiff and The Defendant.  They aren't actual witnesses.

[John]

I think this only applies to The Plaintiff and The Defendant.  They aren't actual witnesses.

Thanks Eleanor.  So what we have in fact is the plaintiff and the defender being permitted to present impact statements.

[Eleanor]

Thanks Eleanor.  So what we have in fact is the plaintiff and the defender being permitted to present impact statements.

Not on this occasion as it is only allowed by permission of The Judge, which she has refused.

Apparently, prior to July when The Law was changed, it wasn't allowed at all.

[jassi]

Not on this occasion as it is only allowed by permission of The Judge, which she has refused.

Apparently, prior to July when The Law was changed, it wasn't allowed at all.

Is there a right of appeal?  If so, I fear this case will go on for ever.

[Eleanor]

Is there a right of appeal?  If so, I fear this case will go on for ever.

I really don't know.  But so far only The Defence has held up The Trial, so mayhap Amaral will Appeal.  Although I don't see the point myself since both sides have been refused.

[icabodcrane]

Whatever the true position on the burden of proof, there are key lies of Amaral's that can be disproved:

Madeleine was never driven anywhere in the car (dead or alive)

Mark Harrison did not switch the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead.  He was handed a brief to consider that Madeleine had been "murdered" and worked to it.

In reaching his "thesis" that Gerry "hid" Madeleine's body on the beach, Amaral plagiarised the proper detective work of Mark Harrison (who, himself, never said any such thing).

If the McCanns have Stuart Prior's report, disproving that Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the PJ's powers of arrest after being contradicted and corrected by Amaral on interpretation of the forensic results ought to be a doddle.

Disproving the "frozen cadaver remains from the boot of the car" comment is as easy as reading John Lowe's forensic report.

Difficult to know how Grime's deception over presentation of the dogs and incompetent handling of them will affect things.  The judges may view it that Amaral  couldn't reasonably be expected to understand principles of dog handling, even though PJ Inspector Dias had a good grasp of the subject. 

Still, Amaral's claim in his book that Eddie had no hesitation in singling out the Renault is patently false.

There never was a "preliminary report", only an e-mail from John Lowe to Stuart Prior explaining a result from the one and only report.

I'm sure there's much more ...

But none of this was brought up by the McCanns' lawyer during the trial

In fact,  as far as I can see,  the McCanns' lawyer offered no evidence at all that  Amaral  had  'lied' 

The entire prosecution rested on the claim that Amaral's book had damaged the McCanns and damaged  'the search'  for Madeleine 

[Eleanor]

The Judge must have read the book and be conversant with what transpired.  She also knows that Amaral has no proof to support his claims.
So it appears to me to be a question of whether or not Amaral had a right to voice these accusations.
The fact that Amaral bent the truth and sometimes lied is a matter of record.  Did he have a right to do this?

Damages for Distress are more difficult to define.  But if Amaral is found to have Defamed The McCanns and caused them Distress then it is only proper that he should not be allowed to benefit financially.  This is why The McCanns are looking for the profit from Amaral's endeavours.
Whether or not they will get it remains to be seen.

[icabodcrane]

The Judge must have read the book and be conversant with what transpired.  She also knows that Amaral has no proof to support his claims.
So it appears to me to be a question of whether or not Amaral had a right to voice these accusations.
The fact that Amaral bent the truth and sometimes lied is a matter of record.  Did he have a right to do this?

Damages for Distress are more difficult to define.  But if Amaral is found to have Defamed The McCanns and caused them Distress then it is only proper that he should not be allowed to benefit financially.  This is why The McCanns are looking for the profit from Amaral's endeavours.
Whether or not they will get it remains to be seen.

"The fact that Amaral bent the truth and sometimes lied is a matter of record"

Where is it recorded  ? 

It it has not been established in court that Amaral lied  ...  indeed,  the McCanns' lawyer offered no evidence at all in that regard

[slartibartfast]

The Judge must have read the book and be conversant with what transpired.  She also knows that Amaral has no proof to support his claims.
So it appears to me to be a question of whether or not Amaral had a right to voice these accusations.
The fact that Amaral bent the truth and sometimes lied is a matter of record.  Did he have a right to do this?

Damages for Distress are more difficult to define.  But if Amaral is found to have Defamed The McCanns and caused them Distress then it is only proper that he should not be allowed to benefit financially.  This is why The McCanns are looking for the profit from Amaral's endeavours.
Whether or not they will get it remains to be seen.

I must be getting confused here?

Amral's book has already been allowed in Portugal as the McCann's challenge to it failed.

This trial is trying determine if the book adversely affected the search for Madeleine?

[Victoria]

"The fact that Amaral bent the truth and sometimes lied is a matter of record"

Where is it recorded  ? 

It it has not been established in court that Amaral lied  ...  indeed,  the McCanns' lawyer offered no evidence at all in that regard

Have you seen all of the evidence that has been presented to the court?