The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.

[John]

With all these breaks in the schedule (I believe the hearing won't resume until Thur/Fri again next week) I cannot see how the tribunal can remain focussed and especially if the judge pisses off on a half day on a Friday.  It is beginning to resemble one almighty farce.

[AnneGuedes]

With all these breaks in the schedule (I believe the hearing won't resume until Thur/Fri again next week) I cannot see how the tribunal can remain focussed and especially if the judge pisses off on a half day on a Friday.  It is beginning to resemble one almighty farce.

The judge wanted to start again at 2pm, the lawyers asked for more time to have lunch. She said 2:15 would be her last word.
What happened ? Everybody was in the court room, lawyers included, waiting for the judge, then a lady appeared and made this announcement.
Anyhow the sessions are taped and the clerk might do more or less what I did.

[John]

Oh my, Is Anne telling porkies again?

Are you not being just a tad disingenuous DCI?

[John]

The judge wanted to start again at 2pm, the lawyers asked for more time to have lunch. She said 2:15 would be her last word.
What happened ? Everybody was in the court room, lawyers included, waiting for the judge, then a lady appeared and made this announcement.
Anyhow the sessions are taped and the clerk might do more or less what I did.

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?

[Mr Gray]

Implicit in the act of taking Amaral, given his high position in the PJ, to court, lies the suggestion that the PJ as a whole is corrupt. This is on top of the more explicit statements and suggestions made by the McCanns over the years to the fact that they regard not only the PJ but the Portuguese authorities as a whole as being below par.

There is a problem here, because one cannot on the one hand make claims against the integrity of a system, and at the same time, appeal to a court that is an embodiment of that system that it should somehow be the one to iron things out. Firstly, it is an affront to the court. Secondly, if the court and related institutions were below par as claimed, the court would not be capable of offering justice, and would continue to serve to protect only itself. There would be no practical gain in appealing to it.

The inherent contradiction in what the McCanns are attempting to do is an insult to the intelligence of the Portuguese in general, but apparently the McCanns believe that such ironies go unnoticed, because at the same time, the Portuguese authorities are being expected to co-operate with SY and restart the search for Madeleine in Portugal - which in order to be effective, would involve certain amount of co-operation from the Portuguese media as well.

It is hard to fathom where such bad advice comes from or what kind of 'logic' precedes it.

The object of the investigation is to find justice for Maddie and the fact that the Portuguese are hostile towards her parents should not come into it.

[stephen25000]

The object of the investigation is to find justice for Maddie and the fact that the Portuguese are hostile towards her parents should not come into it.

This trial is not about justice for Madeleine.

It's all about the greed of the mccanns.

They were never victims.

Madeleine was, because of their arrogant stupidity.

[Mr Gray]

The judge wanted to start again at 2pm, the lawyers asked for more time to have lunch. She said 2:15 would be her last word.
What happened ? Everybody was in the court room, lawyers included, waiting for the judge, then a lady appeared and made this announcement.
Anyhow the sessions are taped and the clerk might do more or less what I did.

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

[Angelo222]

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

 

[Carana]

Implicit in the act of taking Amaral, given his high position in the PJ, to court, lies the suggestion that the PJ as a whole is corrupt. This is on top of the more explicit statements and suggestions made by the McCanns over the years to the fact that they regard not only the PJ but the Portuguese authorities as a whole as being below par.

There is a problem here, because one cannot on the one hand make claims against the integrity of a system, and at the same time, appeal to a court that is an embodiment of that system that it should somehow be the one to iron things out. Firstly, it is an affront to the court. Secondly, if the court and related institutions were below par as claimed, the court would not be capable of offering justice, and would continue to serve to protect only itself. There would be no practical gain in appealing to it.

The inherent contradiction in what the McCanns are attempting to do is an insult to the intelligence of the Portuguese in general, but apparently the McCanns believe that such ironies go unnoticed, because at the same time, the Portuguese authorities are being expected to co-operate with SY and restart the search for Madeleine in Portugal - which in order to be effective, would involve certain amount of co-operation from the Portuguese media as well.

It is hard to fathom where such bad advice comes from or what kind of 'logic' precedes it.

I'm not following you on that, I'm afraid.

Who had a "high position in the PJ"? Amaral? He was the coordinator of a local police force prior to leaving it.

What are you saying? That individuals within a country's law enforcement should not be held to account?

[Mr Gray]

This trial is not about justice for Madeleine.

It's all about the greed of the mccanns.

They were never victims.

Madeleine was, because of their arrogant stupidity.

stephen..read the post.. I never mentioned the trial I said the investigation..pay attention

[Angelo222]

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?

Going by the comments I have read today on several sites they have lost a hell of a lot of support compared to what they had a few years ago. 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I'm not following you on that, I'm afraid.

Who had a "high position in the PJ"? Amaral? He was the coordinator of a local police force prior to leaving it.

What are you saying? That individuals within a country's law enforcement should not be held to account?

Amaral was in charge of a police force, albeit a small, local one. It was a position of some authority.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't be held to account. Not at all. I'm just saying that a certain realism is required with regard to how far a court can go in serving people's every need. A court is not the place for any and every kind of emotional damage or social injustice to be dealt with. Maybe it should be, but it is not. There are loyalties, prejudices involved which can skew any case even before it starts.

The McCanns are taking their grievances to the court of a foreign country, with the additional linguistic  and cultural obstacles that entails, and where they have a very bad public profile to boot. They are expecting a lot if they demand sympathy and justice, not to mention a lot of money.

There are many examples of injustices and grievances that people have expected courts to be able to handle, perhaps rightly. But examining a lot of these cases, it is often the case that the litigants constructed their case expecting the court to address all of their problems. Hence, things went awry. One has to be realistic about what it is that the court can actually do in a particular situation, and construct one's case accordingly.

The McCann's arguments, while reasonable at certain levels, are also a bit vague and emotion-based.

With these emotional cases, there are sometimes better forums than the court which entail a great deal less taxpayer's money and personal risk. One has to know what belongs in a court and what does not.

[Sherlock Holmes]

The object of the investigation is to find justice for Maddie and the fact that the Portuguese are hostile towards her parents should not come into it.

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?

[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?

in the early days the McCanns were supportive of the PJ even though they had reservations early on that they were incompetent. How can you be supportive of a police force that wrongly accuses you of a crime. if you support them you are endorsing their actions. the McCanns are not asking for Portuguese cooperation. SY are. it should have nothing to do with the McCanns

[Sherlock Holmes]

in the early days the McCanns were supportive of the PJ even though they had reservations early on that they were incompetent. How can you be supportive of a police force that wrongly accuses you of a crime. if you support them you are endorsing their actions. the McCanns are not asking for Portuguese cooperation. SY are. it should have nothing to do with the McCanns

I am not suggesting the McCanns should be supportive of the PJ, having accused them of terrible things.

The McCanns should not expect too much of a result here, precisely because of the terrible accusations that were made against them and the attitude to them of the Portuguese in general.

You make an important point, that strictly speaking things are to do with SY and Portugal. But the McCanns are interfering with that in making things more personal. They are the ones taking Amaral to court, not SY.