The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[Carana]

To what extent may his role as a coordinator during the first few months have influenced the public, either at the time or since then?

[Eleanor]

There are several parties being sued in this case.

Does Amaral count as "press/media" as an author, or as a private citizen expressing his views? Do his views count as a common citizen or as someone closely involved in the case at the time as coordinator of the investigation?

What legal differences may there be between his book, the documentary, his numerous interviews (audiovisual or written press)? Does he have the same responsibility in each or not?

Ha ha.  There is the rub.  Personally, I think that they others are more culpable.  But then I also believe that if he had left it with his book then it would never have gone this far.
But he just went on and on, encouraged by other outlets, until finally The McCanns had to do something.

[Carana]

@ Eleanor

I've no idea how this will go, either. It could drag on for years with all the various appeals.

My basic point is that even if the judge rules in his favour, it's only about the supremacy of legal considerations in the context of this defamation case and means nothing in terms of what has happened to Madeleine.

He could win the case, but it means nothing in terms of what has happened to her, whether she is dead or alive.

He could still win this case, even if she is holed up in some creep's cellar.

[Carana]

Ha ha.  There is the rub.  Personally, I think that they others are more culpable.  But then I also believe that if he had left it with his book then it would never have gone this far.
But he just went on and on, encouraged by other outlets, until finally The McCanns had to do something.

Who is responsible for an "interviewee"? The person interviewed or the media outlet that published it?

[pinkblossoms]

And it still wont prove that hes right at the end of day,its only his opinion, we all have them after all 

[jassi]

And it still wont prove that hes right at the end of day,its only his opinion we all have them after all 

Is that not  the case with the McCanns as well - its only their opinion ?

[Estuarine]

Well Tuesday is a significant day and on cue in advance the silly stories start. In a novel by Gavin Lyall the hero says "I knew he would try to hit me before he did".

[Mr Gray]

Well Tuesday is a significant day and on cue in advance the silly stories start. In a novel by Gavin Lyall the hero says "I knew he would try to hit me before he did".

 I don't think Tuesday is significant..may not even be the last day...then the verdict could be another month

[Estuarine]

I don't think Tuesday is significant..may not even be the last day...then the verdict could be another month

Oh! I don't dispute there are plenty of legs left in this. My point is that the tactics are so predictable. I wouldn't pay the orchestrator in washers.

[Redblossom]

Oh! I don't dispute there are plenty of legs left in this. My point is that the tactics are so predictable. I wouldn't pay the orchestrator in washers.

Hi there, care to share who these orchestrators are?

[Estuarine]

Hi there, care to share who these orchestrators are?

I don't know a name! Being a subscriber to Al Capone's theory I believe there is an orchestrator.
Al Capone's theory: "once is happenstance; twice is coincidence; three times is enemy action". Sometimes incorrectly attributed to Ian Fleming.
It seems every time something that maybe iffy is about to happen the silly stories start and fill the English press.
Of course I could be wrong.

[Redblossom]

I don't know a name! Being a subscriber to Al Capone's theory I believe there is an orchestrator.
Al Capone's theory: "once is happenstance; twice is coincidence; three times is enemy action". Sometimes incorrectly attributed to Ian Fleming.
It seems every time something that maybe iffy is about to happen the silly stories start and fill the English press.
Of course I could be wrong.

OK, no worries I "get you" now, thank you

 

[John]

The new Civil Procedure Code as now applies in Portugal

The new Civil Procedure Code introduces a new means of evidence - the declarations by a party - in which the party itself [i.e. the McCanns and/or Gonçalo Amaral], on its own initiative, may request, until the start of oral allegations at first instance [the closing arguments], to make a statement about facts in which the party intervened personally or of which the party has direct knowledge. The party that makes a statement is subject to the duty of cooperation and truth, which means that it must reply to everything that is asked, to submit to any necessary inspections and to provide everything that is requested from the party. The questioning of the party that makes a statement is led by the Judge, and the lawyers may only ask for clarifications. If, in its statements, the party confesses to any fact, that confession is valued in the files and with due effects, which is to say it is irreversible and has full probative force [it is considered evidence]. In the absence of a confession, the statements by the party are freely valued by the Court.

[Mr Gray]

The new Civil Procedure Code as now applies in Portugal

The new Civil Procedure Code introduces a new means of evidence - the declarations by a party - in which the party itself [i.e. the McCanns and/or Gonçalo Amaral], on its own initiative, may request, until the start of oral allegations at first instance [the closing arguments], to make a statement about facts in which the party intervened personally or of which the party has direct knowledge. The party that makes a statement is subject to the duty of cooperation and truth, which means that it must reply to everything that is asked, to submit to any necessary inspections and to provide everything that is requested from the party. The questioning of the party that makes a statement is led by the Judge, and the lawyers may only ask for clarifications. If, in its statements, the party confesses to any fact, that confession is valued in the files and with due effects, which is to say it is irreversible and has full probative force [it is considered evidence]. In the absence of a confession, the statements by the party are freely valued by the Court.

 I think this ahs been explained before..if the mCannns appear they can only be questioned by the judge ...not by the lawyers

[Sherlock Holmes]

Let's hope the McCann legal team have something very clever in store this week, because the facebook webmaster just claimed that it's the UK press who have hampered the search.