The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[Mr Gray]

In your dreams.

Do you enjoy trying to insult other posters ?

It's getting a trite boring and reveals your basic personality traits. >@@(*&)

Robert Murat wins slander case as Kate McCann visits Luz
by Brendan de Beer, in General · 09-05-2013 10:23:00 · 2 Comments

A Lisbon court has ruled national daily Correio da Manhã pay a total of 15,000 euros to Robert Murat who was dragged into the case of missing British toddler Madeleine McCann after volunteering to act as a translator between Portuguese authorities and the McCanns.

http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages

http://theportugalnews.com/news/robert-murat-wins-slander-case-as-kate-mccann-visits-luz/28371

[jassi]

oh dera another one...he won in a PORTUGUESE court

Indeed, which suggests that it might be easier to win in a Portuguese court - provided you have a valid case.

[Mr Gray]

Indeed, which suggests that it might be easier to win in a Portuguese court - provided you have a valid case.

yes jassi...easier than some posters are claiming

[Cariad]

Could some kind person clarify something for me? Did the Mccanns ask to testify as everyone else did, or just submit a written statement and avoid cross examination?

I've read different things in which both have been claimed. Does anyone actually know?

Sorry if it's a stupid question, I haven't kept up over the festive period....

[jassi]

I think they wanted to submit a verbal statement, but avoid cross-examination.

Unfortunately, the truth is so obscured that it difficult to be certain of anything, which of course, is the prime aim of some posters.

[Mr Gray]

Could some kind person clarify something for me? Did the Mccanns ask to testify as everyone else did, or just submit a written statement and avoid cross examination?

I've read different things in which both have been claimed. Does anyone actually know?

Sorry if it's a stupid question, I haven't kept up over the festive period....

Everything in the press say that they wish to testify.. Gerry actually turned up to testify but was refused...that makes things clear...posters I think have tried to spin the information to bash the mccannns by saying that they just want to give a written statement... I actually think they would have already given a written statement

[Mr Gray]

I think they wanted to submit a verbal statement, but avoid cross-examination.

Unfortunately, the truth is so obscured that it difficult to be certain of anything, which of course, is the prime aim of some posters.

 Is this just gossip from people trying to spread disinformation or do you have a source for this

[Cariad]

Everything in the press say that they wish to testify.. Gerry actually turned up to testify but was refused...that makes things clear...posters I think have tried to spin the information to bash the mccannns by saying that they just want to give a written statement... I actually think they would have already given a written statement

Yeah, me too. I would've thought that they would have supplied a victim impact statement at some point. I'm basing that on UK law mind, not Portuguese...

I think they wanted to submit a verbal statement, but avoid cross-examination.


Thank you both for replying. Is it possible to avoid cross examination on the stand?

Unfortunately, the truth is so obscured that it difficult to be certain of anything, which of course, is the prime aim of some posters.

[jassi]

Is this just gossip from people trying to spread disinformation or do you have a source for this

I'm not sure where it comes from. As I say, the truth is obscured into uncertainty.

However, as they and Amaral have been refused a voice,  it is really irrelevant what they wanted.  The verdict will be forthcoming in the fullness of time.

[Cariad]

I'm not sure where it comes from. As I say, the truth is obscured into uncertainty.

However, as they and Amaral have been refused a voice,  it is really irrelevant what they wanted.  The verdict will be forthcoming in the fullness of time.

Yes, I agree and it's my fault that we're discussing it. It doesn't matter what they or Dr Amaral wanted, it was just one of those little bits of conflicted information that I couldn't seem to get to the bottom of.

It really bugs me when there is disinformation. I don't think it helps anybody.

[Mr Gray]

Yes, I agree and it's my fault that we're discussing it. It doesn't matter what they or Dr Amaral wanted, it was just one of those little bits of conflicted information that I couldn't seem to get to the bottom of.

It really bugs me when there is disinformation. I don't think it helps anybody.

I  have always thought what would there be to condemn the Mccanns for if we were able to peel away all the myths and disinformation...

[Wonderfulspam]

I  have always thought what would there be to condemn the Mccanns for if we were able to peel away all the myths and disinformation...

Returning from holiday minus 1 child. That'll do for me.

[jassi]

I  have always thought what would there be to condemn the Mccanns for if we were able to peel away all the myths and disinformation...

Be careful what you wish for as it may come true 

[stephen25000]

as I have said before..posters are welcome to be rude ..abusive...whatever towards me...I don't care ...this is not the real world..in the real world I am admired and loved.

 

By the Mccanns. 

[Montclair]

I think they wanted to submit a verbal statement, but avoid cross-examination.

Unfortunately, the truth is so obscured that it difficult to be certain of anything, which of course, is the prime aim of some posters.

Plaintiffs and defendents in libel cases are not cross examined by the lawyers, only the judge can ask questions of them. The lawyers then can only ask for clarifications through the judge. AFAIK, the plaintiffs and defendents can only give statements if authorised by the judge. Obviously the judge, in this case, believes that she has enough evidence to make her decision.