The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[jassi]

 8-)(--) nope it not 

Yes it is because someone can be smeared without having a conviction.

[jassi]

He wouldn't need to read the book to know the conclusions - he was part of them.  It's the content of the book which is being questioned - and which he now says he hasn't read.

Don't you find the fact that Tavares de Almeida has apparently committed perjury - either at the Appeal hearing or this trial to be even remotely disturbing Montclair?

Perhaps something has been lost in translation. It would be for  a court would decide if someone had committed perjury, not an internet forum.

[AnneGuedes]

He wouldn't need to read the book to know the conclusions - he was part of them.  It's the content of the book which is being questioned - and which he now says he hasn't read.

Don't you find the fact that Tavares de Almeida has apparently committed perjury - either at the Appeal hearing or this trial to be even remotely disturbing Montclair?

You'd better not jump to conclusions before having evidence. Tavares de Almeida had no interest not to say the truth (he read the last pages). The accusation called two witnesses who were dismissed rapidly because none of them had read the book nor watched the documentary (Melchior Gomes and Alipio Ribeiro). For a reading, quite a time consuming activity, some people prefer Eça de Queiroz to Gonçalo Amaral (so do I).
Had TdA said he had read the AG report, he would have been interrogated.
All the providência cautelar files are on top of the Judge's desk (very high piles).

[Benice]

You'd better not jump to conclusions before having evidence. Tavares de Almeida had no interest not to say the truth (he read the last pages). The accusation called two witnesses who were dismissed rapidly because none of them had read the book nor watched the documentary (Melchior Gomes and Alipio Ribeiro). For a reading, quite a time consuming activity, some people prefer Eça de Queiroz to Gonçalo Amaral (so do I).
Had TdA said he had read the AG report, he would have been interrogated.
All the providência cautelar files are on top of the Judge's desk (very high piles).

I haven't jumped to any solid conclusions - which is why I used the word 'apparently'. 

Have the witnesses who were dismissed because they had not read the book claimed under oath at a previous time that they HAD read the book?    If not - I don't see any similarity between them and TdA.      If it is true that TdA has previously made that claim and is now admitting to only reading a couple of pages, then those are contradictory statements - both made under oath.  They can't both be true.

If it is true that TdA has never read the AG report - then I am truly gobsmacked.  One would think that the PJ officers involved in the case - especially those leading the investigation, would be the people who were most interested to see what it said.    All very odd IMO.

[DCI]

Funny what you find when looking for old news.

11:00 jondipaolo:
Mr Santos: The contract between the documentary maker, VC Films, and Mr Amaral was signed in March 2008.

jondipaolo:
Mr Menezes said that a claim made by the McCanns on the first day after Madeleine's disappearance was not true. 
Tuesday January 12, 2010

jondipaolo:
The witness was asked what the probability was of Madeleine still being alive. He replied that he thought it was 50/50. 
Tuesday January 12, 2010

January 12, 2010
4:09 jondipaolo...jondipaolo:
Paiva: amaral's thesis has prevented other theories from being investigated.

8th October 2013
Jerry Lawton‏@JerryLawton
Judge to Paiva: `What's new in the book that's not in the police files?' Paiva: `Nothing' #McCann

jondipaolo:
Flores is an acquaintance of amaral's and wrote the preface to the sequel to his book about madeleine. 
Wednesday January 13, 2010

[Montclair]

Funny what you find when looking for old news.

11:00 jondipaolo:
Mr Santos: The contract between the documentary maker, VC Films, and Mr Amaral was signed in March 2008.

jondipaolo:
Mr Menezes said that a claim made by the McCanns on the first day after Madeleine's disappearance was not true. 
Tuesday January 12, 2010

jondipaolo:
The witness was asked what the probability was of Madeleine still being alive. He replied that he thought it was 50/50. 
Tuesday January 12, 2010

January 12, 2010
4:09 jondipaolo...jondipaolo:
Paiva: amaral's thesis has prevented other theories from being investigated.

8th October 2013
Jerry Lawton‏@JerryLawton
Judge to Paiva: `What's new in the book that's not in the police files?' Paiva: `Nothing' #McCann

jondipaolo:
Flores is an acquaintance of amaral's and wrote the preface to the sequel to his book about madeleine. 
Wednesday January 13, 2010

Jon di Paolo got it wrong when he wrote that Paiva stated that Gonçalo Amaral's book prevented other theses from being investigated. Paiva said the contrary, that it did not prevent.

[DCI]

Jon di Paolo got it wrong when he wrote that Paiva stated that Gonçalo Amaral's book prevented other theses from being investigated. Paiva said the contrary, that it did not prevent.

Were you there, to hear what was said? Seems, I'm not the only one posting it.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id297.html

[Redblossom]

Were you there, to hear what was said? Seems, I'm not the only one posting it.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id297.html

Does it matter if a hundred people posted it? it was viral tweets, all quoting the same tweeter.....what Montclair suggests rings true IMO and especially when you consider the work done post Mr Amarals dismissall off the case

[DCI]

Posters have criticised the testimony of witnesses for the McCanns...was the report right yesterday theat Tavares de Almeida...not sure of the spelling...appearing for amaral....sat down, muttered "what am I doing here", admitted he had only read the last two pages of the book and was instantly dismissed by the judge. Is that the worst witness so far by a mile?

Another defence witness, Mr Amaral's ex-number two Vitor Tavares de Almeida, was bizarrely dismissed after being asked just one question.
The police chief, still a serving officer despite being convicted in January of torturing a crime suspect and receiving a two and a half suspended jail sentence, has previously claimed he believes the McCanns concealed Madeleine's body.
He was overheard on a video link muttering: 'What am I doing here?' before being sent away after admitting he had only read the final two pages of Mr Amaral's book.
Mr Amaral denies defamation. The case continues.

[Angelo222]

The next hearing is on Guy Fawkes day the 5th of November, sure to be fireworks.

Still to come are Paulo Sargento, Luis Varela Marreiros, Mario Lopes, Tania Raposo and Antonio Paulo dos Santos.

The judge is yet to make her pronouncement about the McCanns or Gonçalo Amaral testifying.

[Luz]

Were you there, to hear what was said? Seems, I'm not the only one posting it.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id297.html

In that case post all his quotes for that session:
«By Jon di Paolo
Tuesday January 12, 2010

ive text: Afternoon session, 12 January 2010
    

Live text: Afternoon session Sky News

By Jon di Paolo
Tuesday January 12, 2010

3:28-- We're back in court. The mcanns are here but mr amaral is missing.

3:29-- Mr amaral has just walked in and we're under way.

3:33-- Inspector ricardo paiva, of the portuguese police, has taken the stand.

3:34-- Insp paiva says he was the family liaison officer for the case but was taken off at the mcanns' request.

3:45-- Paiva is asked whether he ever got the impression from the mccanns they thought maddie could be dead. He says yes.

3:47-- Kate whispers something in gerry's ear and gives him a little smile. He stays looking straight in front.

3:52-- Gerry has put his arm round kate as they listen to paiva's testimony

4:03-- Paiva also says the mccanns were made suspects after the british sniffer dogs were brought in.

4:04-- Paiva: there was total collaboration between british and portuguese police on the case

4:09-- Paiva: it was scotland yard who first thought it could be a murder case.

4:09-- Paiva: amaral's theories are based on the facts of the investigation.

4:12-- Paiva: amaral's thesis has prevented other theories from being investigated.

4:13-- Paiva: mccanns never pointed me towards any evidence that maddie was still alive.

4:16-- Mr amaral looks like he's dozing off.

4:29-- Paiva: we found the 'merchandising' operation with wristbands and so on very strange.

4:31-- Paiva: if she was being held somewhere publicity would be more likely to hasten her death.

4:55-- The mcanns' lawyer is taking an aggressive tone as she cross-examines mr paiva.

5:08-- Proceedings have ended for today.

5:11-- Some confusion here- that wasn't the end of proceedings, just a break before today's final witness.

5:29-- Ok, that's all we have time for. Back tomorrow morning.

[Benita]

UPDATE: Very short session today. Mário Sena Lopes (Editor) was questioned and explained how many editions the book had, how much the book was sold for, etc.

Paulo Sargento excused himself and will appear in what may be a mega session on Nov 27th.

After a 4 hour lunchbreak 2 witnesses for the other defendants (book and documentary) will be heard.

[John]

Anne advises that three witnesses gave evidence today.  Two witnesses were supposed to testify this morning but Paulo Sargento got married and might well be on his honeymoon in the Caribbean. Mario Sena Lopes, the editor of G&P eventually testified.

In the afternoon three witnesses were supposed to testify but one was dismissed and two appeared. Antonio dos Santos, director of an association which counters publishing fraud and Luis Froes, manager of Valentim de Carvalhos Filmes, who couldn't recall most of what he was asked.  The judge finally asked him to do some research and come back on the 27th November to answer the same questions.

Quite a day!

[Redblossom]

Many thanks John and Anne!
 

[Mr Gray]

Anne advises that three witnesses gave evidence today.  Two witnesses were supposed to testify this morning but Paulo Sargento got married and might well be on his honeymoon in the Caribbean. Mario Sena Lopes, the editor of G&P eventually testified.

In the afternoon three witnesses were supposed to testify but one was dismissed and two appeared. Antonio dos Santos, director of an association which counters publishing fraud and Luis Froes, manager of Valentim de Carvalhos Filmes, who couldn't recall most of what he was asked.  The judge finally asked him to do some research and come back on the 27th November to answer the same questions.

Quite a day!

These were supposed to be amarals super witnesses...what a farce