The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[DCI]

I don't see the judge reminding Gerry he was not running the show.  I don't see humiliation, but you do, why?

The judge also asked Gerry if he knew about books written by

Paulo Cristóvão on the Maddie Case (A Estrela de Madeleine)

Manuel Catarino (A Culpa dos McCann?) and

Hernâni Carvalho and Luís Maia (Maddy 129)?

Very helpful judge by all accounts!

Odd Amaral's lawyer only asked Gerry one question, innit!

[Miss Taken Identity]

....So as it turns out I was correct on two counts.

This was not a victim statement- they went above the judge's head to get their oar in! for that pesky Media 'they so hate'
The judge made sure they knew (whether they understood this or not beggars belief) That SHE was asking the questions!

She also reminded the Team that this is not a criminal or Libel trial - this was about their 'suffering due to Amarals book'

And what mother would say that although she felt bad about her 3 year old daughter being'abuducted' the book made it mush much worse..

So tell me.. really, how can words in a book be worse than having your 3 year old daughter 'abducted' by-'gypsies, theives, paedophiles to be raped and tortured then murdered'(?)

No seriously can you really imagine anything worse that that happening to your daughter?

Well, the judge heard for herself:
1. Kate did have something to make her pain worse.
2.Kate was not suffering from Depression (clinical or other wise).

[Miss Taken Identity]

@Admin
Can you apply for court transcripts from Portuguese courts?

It may have been the Judge 'guestured' for him to be quiet as in a hand movement perhaps?

She certainly didn't let him have his own way.


Anyway, It was good to know that this was NOT a criminal trial and Team McC's were not running the 'show'!

[Miss Taken Identity]

....So as it turns out I was correct on two counts.

This was not a victim statement- they went above the judge's head to get their oar in! for that pesky Media 'they so hate'
The judge made sure they knew (whether they understood this or not beggars belief) That SHE was asking the questions!

She also reminded the Team that this is not a criminal or Libel trial - this was about their 'suffering due to Amarals book'

And what mother would say that although she felt bad about her 3 year old daughter being'abuducted' the book made it mush much worse..

So tell me.. really, how can words in a book be worse than having your 3 year old daughter 'abducted' by-'gypsies, thieves, paedophiles to be raped and tortured then murdered'(?)

No seriously can you really imagine anything worse that that happening to your daughter?

Well, the judge heard for herself:
1. Kate did have something to make her pain worse.
2.Kate was not suffering from Depression (clinical or other wise).

Does this post tell lies? make up stories? persoanlly attack anyone.. NO it is stating facts!
Things some people just can't seem to handle on this forum.

I want justice for Maddie- if that means challenging everyone I WILL.

[pegasus]

What do those peeps here, who claim that Eddie was alerting to blood from irrelevant peeps' shaving cuts etc, make of this apparent insistence that he was not alerting to blood at all ?

[sadie]

.So as it turns out I was correct on two counts.

This was not a victim statement- they went above the judge's head to get their oar in! for that pesky Media 'they so hate'
The judge made sure they knew (whether they understood this or not beggars belief) That SHE was asking the questions!

She also reminded the Team that this is not a criminal or Libel trial - this was about their 'suffering due to Amarals book'

And what mother would say that although she felt bad about her 3 year old daughter being'abuducted' the book made it mush much worse..

So tell me.. really, how can words in a book be worse than having your 3 year old daughter 'abducted' by-'gypsies, theives, paedophiles to be raped and tortured then murdered'(?)

No seriously can you really imagine anything worse that that happening to your daughter?

Well, the judge heard for herself:
1. Kate did have something to make her pain worse.
2.Kate was not suffering from Depression (clinical or other wise).




Does this post tell lies? make upstories? persoanlly attack anyone.. NO it is stating facts!
Things some people just can't seem to handle on this forum.

I want justice for Maddie- if that means challenging everyone I WILL.

I think your post lacks comprehension of what that dreadful book was capable of doing to an already distraught mother.

Of course it piled the agony on Kate and Gerry

And Yes she was depressed if not clinically so.

[Mr Gray]

So the judge made it clear that the mccanns do not have to show that anything in amarals book is wrong. they just have to quantify how much damage the book has done to them and their family so taht the judge can quantify the damages...does anyone need anymore proof that amaral has lost

[stephen25000]

Meanwhile gerry mccann clearly thinks the dogs did have value in the apartment.

Otherwise why did he try to bring it up in court, before being slapped down by the judge ?

[stephen25000]

What do those peeps here, who claim that Eddie was alerting to blood from irrelevant peeps' shaving cuts etc, make of this apparent insistence that he was not alerting to blood at all ?

Good question.

it seems like pure desperation.

[Mr Gray]

Meanwhile gerry mccann clearly thinks the dogs did have value in the apartment.

Otherwise why did he try to bring it up in court, before being slapped down by the judge ?

you were saying he thought they were useless yesterday...shows how completely muddled your thinking is

[ferryman]

The judge did not tell him literally to "shut up" but she did interrupt him and did not let him continue speaking. She also told him that whatever he said would not be taken into consideration. He was only there to answer questions not to give a statement.

To argue that truth or its absence is irrelevant to libel is a bit like arguing that sperm is irrelevant to pregnancy ...

[Montclair]

To argue that truth or its absence is irrelevant to libel is a bit like arguing that sperm is irrelevant to pregnancy ...

Why don't you take that up with the judge. Perhaps you have finally realised that this trial is not about libel but about damages?

[Mr Gray]

Why don't you take that up with the judge. Perhaps you have finally realised that this trial is not about libel but about damages?

damages for what...if amaral told the truth there are no damages..if not it is libel..you are in denial

[Alfred R Jones]

Why don't you take that up with the judge. Perhaps you have finally realised that this trial is not about libel but about damages?

Damage to the search for Madeleine can only be said to have occurred if lies were told in the first place, do you not agree?

[ferryman]

Why don't you take that up with the judge. Perhaps you have finally realised that this trial is not about libel but about damages?

I think the judge was simply saying that it the job of the PJ and Scotland Yard (in the second enquiry) to try to establish what happened to Madeleine.

I am certain the judge was not saying that Amaral could lie to his heart's content (in traducing the McCanns) and that would have no influence or bearing on the outcome of the libel trial.

How could she?

There would be no point in Portugal having libel laws if that were the case.