Author Topic: McCann v Gonçalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 14 Statement of facts.  (Read 1601 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline John

McCann v Gonçalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 14

Lisbon - Wednesday 21 January 2015

Todays session is not a hearing per sé, rather an opportunity for the honorable Judge,  Maria Emília Melo e Castro, to reveal to lawyers acting on behalf of the Plaintiffs and Defenders, those facts which she considers proven and not proven.

The Judge will present lawyers with a statement of the facts which they will be required to consider before submitting written comments and observations ahead of the final session.

The session is today being held in a courtroom as an accommodation since following reorganisation of the judicial system in late August, the judge no longer maintains an office within the Palace of Justice in Lisbon.

Lawyers in attendance today included Dr Ricardo Afonso substituting for Dra Isabel Duarte on behalf of the McCanns as plaintiffs. 
For the defence, Dr Miguel Cruz Rodrigues (Dr Gonçalo Amaral), Dr Henrique Costa Pinto (VCFilmes) and Dra Fatima de Oliveira Esteves (Guerra & Paz).  Dr Miguel Coroadinha (TVI) did not attend.

The lawyers were presented with a copy of the Judges statement of facts and were requested to read it thoroughly in case there were points requiring clarification or possibly points of objection. This document will form the basis of the Judges final decision in the case so it is important that all parties are fully cognisant of its content and its basis in Law.

The Judge then exited the room, leaving the lawyers to study the document.

Some fifteen minutes later the Judge returned and asked if any of the lawyers had any questions in relation to the document which had been provided to them.

Dr Henrique Costa Pinto made minor reference to the production of the DVD's but added that his comment was purely informal.  The Judge acknowledged this and explained that she took into account information gleamed from various sources in her deliberations.

The Judge then reminded the lawyer for the plaintiffs that they have a maximum of thirty days from today in order to provide to the Court formal authorisation from the High Court in London that they act in an official capacity and are legally entitled to act on behalf of their daughter, Madeleine McCann, who is a Ward of Court.

Following on from this period of thirty days, all lawyers will have a further ten days in order to deliver their alegações de direito or 'Allegations of Law" to the Court.

 
Session ended.
 
 

Important Notice
Readers are warned that this court Report is not a verbatim account of events but is merely a summary. 
As content is sourced via third parties and although checks are made, the forum cannot guarantee
its veracity.  All reports are made in good faith.

« Last Edit: January 23, 2015, 02:27:09 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 14

The Court offers facts proven and not proven as follows:

 1. Gonçalo Amaral made the statements that are attributed to him under item Z)*?

     *(item Z is the Correio da Manhã interview)

     Proved.


 2. The cover price of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” in Portugal was € 13.80, including VAT?

      It is proved that the editor set the selling price at 13,33 euro, including VAT.


 3. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” an amount that is not less than
      € 621.000,00?


 4. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of editions in foreign languages of the book an amount that is not less
      than € 498.750,00? 

      (Items 3 & 4) It is proved that Gonçalo Amaral earned 342.111,86 euro from the sales of the book in the years 2008
       and 2009. This information is based on data from the Portuguese Revenue Agency.


 5. The book was sold in Brazil by defendant “Guerra e Paz, Editores, S.A.”?
     
      Not proved


 6. The DVD has a cover price of € 6,00?

      Proved that it was sold for 6,95 euro with newspaper Correio da Manhã.


 7. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the DVD an amount that is not less than  € 112.500,00?

     Proved that he earned 40.000 euro from DVD sales in 2008. Based on info from the Revenue Service.


 8. The DVD that is mentioned under AN) has been edited and the edited copies have been sold by defendant “V.C. – Valentim

      de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”?

       Proved.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2015, 02:40:02 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

 9. Defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”? has already made the DVD, in an English version, available
     for immediate delivery via internet order?

     Not proved.


10. At least two million and two hundred thousand people have watched the programme that was broadcast on 13th April 2009?

       Proved.


11. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio
      da Manhã, the Polícia Judiciária stopped collecting information and investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?

       Not proved.


12. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio
       da Manhã, authors Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family
       point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them?

       Not proved.


13. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio
       da Manhã, authors Kate McCann and Gerald McCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability,   
       preoccupation and indefinable fear?

       Proved.

      The judge adds that this psychological state is predates the book launch, the documentary and the interview and was not caused
       by them. Nonetheless, it is not unreasonable to believe that the book, the documentary and the interview had an effect on the
       couple, i.e. It had an effect but that is to be expected.


14. Authors Kate McCann and Gerald McCann feel a deep shame and an indescribable ill-being because they are considered, by
       most people who know the theories of defendant Gonçalo Amaral, as having responsibility in the death of their daughter, being
       so cowardly that they have hidden her cadaver, simulating abduction, all of this to avoid criminal prosecution?

       Proved that the couple felt badly about being considered responsible over the hiding of their daughter's body and simulating
       her abduction by those who believe in Mr Amaral's thesis.
       
       The Judge states that it is not possible to determine what most people who have read or seen Mr Amaral's thesis actually think.

       She adds that the plaintiffs failed to prove shame, even with Kate stating it was not shame that she felt. The Judge once more   
       believes it is not unreasonable that the plaintiffs would feel badly about being considered responsible for hiding the body and
       staging an abduction - not, the Judge stresses, about being responsible for their daughter's death, as is commonly, and mistakenly,
       believed.

15. Authors Kate McCann and Gerald McCann live under enormous daily pressure due to the need to keep their younger children away
       from the knowledge of defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s opinions about their moral integrity?

       Proved that the couple feels the need to keep their younger children from finding out about said thesis.

       This fact also derives from common experience and was corroborated by David Trickey's testimony.


16. Namely because of defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s statements in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio
       da Manhã, author Kate McCann is immerged in a deep and serious depression, which has already made her state publicly,
       “I wish I was in a coma, to relieve the pain”?

        Not proved.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2015, 03:11:09 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

17. Sean and Amelie McCann will soon become aware of the conclusions that are mentioned in J), because they will go to school?

        It is proved that Sean and Amelie started school in August of 2010 and have not learned about Mr Amaral's thesis yet.


18. 63,369 copies of the DVD were not sold, having been destroyed afterwards?

        Proved.


19. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral retired from the Polícia Judiciária on 1st June 2008?

       Proved that he retired on 1st July 2008.


20. On 22nd June.2008, the Attorney General’s Office published a note for the media, announcing the archiving of the inquiry until new
       evidence was found?

        It is proved that such a note was issued on the 21st July 2008; the note also informed that the case could be reopened if new 
        evidence appeared and prompted relevant diligences.


21. The criminal inquiry was reopened due to the appearance of new evidence?

        Not proved.


22. The attention of the media and of people in general diminished when defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s book was published?

       Not proved.


23. The sale of the books was made on consignment, being subject to devolution for various reasons, like handling, manufacturing defects
        or their non-transaction?

       Proved that the book was partly sold on consignment, and partly sold on a sale or return basis for various
       reasons.


24. The so-called “Maddie Case” has been profoundly treated within Portuguese and foreign communities, whether by the media, or through   
        books, like those authored by Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, Manuel Catarino and Hernâni Carvalho?

      Proved.

« Last Edit: January 23, 2015, 03:19:14 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

25. The so-called “Maddie Case” was commented upon by Dr. Francisco Moita Flores, former PJ Inspector, writer, criminalist and
       commentator, in various media?

        Proved.


26. Have authors Kate McCann and Gerald McCann hired communication firms and spokespersons through the Madeleine Fund?
       (for some unknown reason, the Judge makes no reference to this point)


27. Are the facts that are reported by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book and in the aforementioned interviews, like he himself
       writes and said, facts that were established during the inquiry?


28. Does the documentary only contain facts that are also in the inquiry files?

       (Items 27 & 28) It is proved that the facts in the book and in the documentary, concerning the investigation, are mostly facts
       that took place in the investigation and are documented as such.

       The Judge does note that some of the facts in the book are not complete, and some facts that are in the book are not in the case files,
       including Jane Tanner's alleged "informal" recognition of Robert Murat.


29. The social capital of defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.” is held, in 60%, by the firm “Estúdios Valentim
       de Carvalho, Gravações e Audiovisuais, S.A.” and, in 40%, by the Fundo de Investimento para o Cinema e o Audiovisual?

       Proved.


30. Has defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.” ceded the rights to sell, distribute, exhibit and broadcast
      all of the cinematographic and audiovisual work that it creates, develops and produces to the firm “Valentim de Carvalho
      Multimédia, S.A.”?

      Proved that VC Filmes agreed to give VC Multimedia the rights to sell and distribute several works that were to be produced
      within 5 years.


31. Until today, has the documentary been reproduced only once to be edited, published and sold in Portugal under video format, in
       this case a DVD?

       Proved.


32. The reproduction and edition of the documentary in video format have been authorised by “Valentim de Carvalho Multimédia, S.A.”
       to firm “Presslivre, Imprensa Livre, S.A.”, the owner of the Correio da Manhã newspaper, according to a contract between both?

       Proved.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2015, 03:22:16 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

33. Under which [contract], the DVD, its covers and packages would be, as they were, manufactured on behalf of, under order of and
       under the responsibility of Presslivre, in order to be distributed and sold together with newspaper Correio da Manhã?

       Proved.


34. And the entire process of registering and classifying the video edition (DVD) of the documentary with ICAG would be, as it was,
      developed by Valentim de Carvalho Multimédia, a process whose cost would be carried by Presslivre, as it did?

       Proved.


35. The distribution for sale took place in conjunction with the distribution for sale of the newspaper Correio da Manhã’s   
       edition of 24th April 2009?

       It is proved only that the documentary was distributed for sale with the newspaper.


36. The documentary was reproduced, and even subtitled in the English language, by third parties that published it on the internet, without
       permission and against the will of the defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”?

       Proved.


37. That illicit diffusion damages not only the rights that are held by defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais,
       S.A.” over the documentary, but also its commercial exploration, because any citizen can watch the documentary, also only one
       “click” away?

       Proved.


End of statement.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2015, 03:27:20 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. John Lamberton exposes malfeasance by public officials.
Check out my website >   http://johnlamberton.webs.com/index.htm?no_redirect=true     The truth never changes with the passage of time.