The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Too many Chardonnays in the heat of the day

[Mr Gray]

What I am saying is, Davel, is that this taking people to court is not the most diplomatic way of getting the Portuguese, or anyone, on one's side.

It is not only that the Portuguese are hostile to the McCanns, but that the McCanns are showing their hostility to the Portuguese. Is this the wisest thing to do at the same time they are asking for co-operation?

I understand what you are saying but the MCanns started this action long before the new SY investigation was started. Perhaps this answers then question of why they may have tried to settle this out of court. The whole thing is a mess.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I understand what you are saying but the MCanns started this action long before the new SY investigation was started. Perhaps this answers then question of why they may have tried to settle this out of court. The whole thing is a mess.

It doesn't matter when they started it, because they would always have been aware, presumably, that should the case re-open at any point down the line regardless of when, Portuguese co-operation would be required.

Their whole complaint is that the case went down the wrong track and then was closed. Now they are trying to open it up - and at the same time doing this.

It's a mess all right.

[AnneGuedes]

  Chinagirl --
    Apparently, at the beginning of proceedings Amaral requested that the hearing be conducted in camera.  What were his reasons for this request, and what were the grounds for its rejection?

Repeating this question from yesterday.  An answer would be very much appreciated, Anne, particularly the last part underlined here. 

I don't now, Chinagirl, apparently it's not rare in that sort of trial but it has to be justified. It seems Mr Amaral's request was to restrain the audience to the public, excluding the media. Martin Brunt even asked me if, in this case, I would report for him (I was the only member of the public).

[AnneGuedes]

What I am saying is, Davel, is that this taking people to court is not the most diplomatic way of getting the Portuguese, or anyone, on one's side.

It is not only that the Portuguese are hostile to the McCanns, but that the McCanns are showing their hostility to the Portuguese. Is this the wisest thing to do at the same time they are asking for co-operation?

The Portuguese aren't hostile and they don't mind the McCanns suing Mr Amaral, may be because here like elsewhere everybody knows that suing is rarely a good idea though sometimes it can't be avoided.

[AnneGuedes]

What an absolute disgrace...it seems an argument over the length of the lunchbreak has caused the loss of half a day.......no wonder they are derided and referred to as sardine munchers

Imagine the judge had an heart attack. This is possible, I don't know what happened. How do you dare ?

[AnneGuedes]

You have observed both sessions now Anne and we are all very grateful for your reports.  In all honesty can you see this going anywhere?

In a libel case the injured party has to establish personal loss of one sort or another so what are the McCanns claiming to have lost due to the actions of the defender Gonçalo Amaral?

I prefer posting my notes. Then we can talk about it.

[DCI]

Is it true Amaral is an arguido again, Anne?

[Sherlock Holmes]

The Portuguese aren't hostile and they don't mind the McCanns suing Mr Amaral, may be because here like elsewhere everybody knows that suing is rarely a good idea though sometimes it can't be avoided.

I don't mean that the Portuguese as a whole are hostile, only that, generally speaking, they have taken a dim view of the McCanns.

I hardly think this is a court case that couldn't have been avoided...

[Chinagirl]

  Chinagirl --
    Apparently, at the beginning of proceedings Amaral requested that the hearing be conducted in camera.  What were his reasons for this request, and what were the grounds for its rejection?

Repeating this question from yesterday.  An answer would be very much appreciated, Anne, particularly the last part underlined here. 

I don't now, Chinagirl, apparently it's not rare in that sort of trial but it has to be justified. It seems Mr Amaral's request was to restrain the audience to the public, excluding the media. Martin Brunt even asked me if, in this case, I would report for him (I was the only member of the public).

Thank you for your reply, Anne.  So it seems the reason for Amaral's request was to exclude the media from reporting on it, presumably both Portuguese as well as UK (and other) media.  One has to wonder why, given his former eagerness to encourage dissemination of his views about this matter.

And it would be interesting to know the grounds on which his request was refused.

[icabodcrane]

Thank you for your reply, Anne.  So it seems the reason for Amaral's request was to exclude the media from reporting on it, presumably both Portuguese as well as UK (and other) media.  One has to wonder why, given his former eagerness to encourage dissemination of his views about this matter.

And it would be interesting to know the grounds on which his request was refused.

You've clearly given it some thought    ...   what conclusion have you come to Chinagirl  ?  ...   why do  you  think Amaral wanted to exclude the media from the trial  ? 

[AnneGuedes]

Though I see some journalists take notes, I wonder what they do with them. I suspect they're half bored half lost sometimes because they hardly know the case, so they stop noting, or leave the court room to send something to the UK.
Fact is nobody seems very much interested in freedom of speech, my main concern, vs the right to privacy and good name. When I answered this to the BBC reporter who asked what I was there for, she replied "then you are a lawyer" !
Next week I can try and ask GA's lawyer why the judge rejected the no media request.

[AnneGuedes]

I don't mean that the Portuguese as a whole are hostile, only that, generally speaking, they have taken a dim view of the McCanns.

I hardly think this is a court case that couldn't have been avoided...

It seems Mrs Duarte said (I didn't hear it) that they had offered a deal to Mr Amaral, in vain.

[AnneGuedes]

Is it true Amaral is an arguido again, Anne?

No, DCI, as I said before, Mr Amaral is the "réu" and the five McCanns are the "autores".
The accused and the accusers.

[Sherlock Holmes]

It seems Mrs Duarte said (I didn't hear it) that they had offered a deal to Mr Amaral, in vain.

What I mean is that there was no desperate need to take Amaral to court in the first place.