Author Topic: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)  (Read 8206 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Meadow

Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #15 on: November 21, 2013, 06:57:09 PM »
I'm I right in thinking the TM fielded a defence based on hearsay, emotion and oh.... well that's how it was at the time.  The few professionals, gave almost non-professional opinions, occasionally outside their expertise, i.e. the consultant \ counsellor   who wasn't a psychologist, making psychological assessment etc.  And others, rather like the T9 timeline, prompted notes didn't help their cause.

GA team, was more factual and pragmatic and was able to draw conclusions between what was\is official documentation and GAs opinion.

Importantly, GA has demonstrated no malice. 

Knowing nothing about the law, either here in the UK or anywhere else.  One thing is apparent, the LAW is the law and there exists laid down criteria.  Just maybe at this point in time with witnesses not being heard, NO decision made with regard to hearing in person the McCanns or Goncalo Amaral, the judge has sufficient information & documentation within the NEEDS OF THE LAW, to make a decision.

The call for paperwork has been peppered throughout this hearing & the judgement has to show it's evidence and well as deliver a verdict.

But it is indeed still very puzzling.

Again thanks to everyone who have cared to share.


Offline DCI

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2588
  • Total likes: 2
  • Why are some folks so sick in the head!!!
Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #16 on: November 21, 2013, 08:31:53 PM »
Exactly.
G&P, TVI, and VC are the only ones who have to produce documents for specified periods. GA has nothing to produce.
ID seems to have knowledge of much more money. She's trying to prove it and it's coherent with the enormous amount of damages she required.
I don't think she's becoming a hate figure, nobody bothers, but she might fear they would and actually behaves low profile.

He made all this below in less than a year, just from G&P and VC. First payment to him of 22.500.00 was on the 16th July 2008, before his book was supposedly published, and before the files were released.

22.500.00

22.500.00

22.500.00

22.500.00

6.750.00

3.375.00

6.750.00

18.000.00

14.850.00

12.301.97

187.036.20

 4.837.50

---------------
343.900.67 TOTAL
Kate's 500 Mile Cycle Challenge

https://www.justgiving.com/KateMcCann/

Offline Meadow

Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #17 on: November 21, 2013, 08:43:22 PM »
DCI thanks, so reading between the lines, metaphorically speaking

''First payment to him of 22.500.00 was on the 16th July 2008, before his book was supposedly published, and before the files were released.''

This has nothing at all to do with money, has it?  But the technical position of legal niceties of dates, and ensuring said data is entered into evidence.

Offline Aletheias footsteps

Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #18 on: November 23, 2013, 06:56:36 PM »
He made all this below in less than a year, just from G&P and VC. First payment to him of 22.500.00 was on the 16th July 2008, before his book was supposedly published, and before the files were released.


There are four payments of 22,500.00 which suggests to me that these were 'advances' from publisher to author, which is a common enough practice.

I do not see where the monies Amaral made from his book have any bearing on the case except, as has been said, for assessing how much could be claimed in damages.

icabodcrane

  • Guest
Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #19 on: November 24, 2013, 05:13:03 PM »
There are four payments of 22,500.00 which suggests to me that these were 'advances' from publisher to author, which is a common enough practice.

I do not see where the monies Amaral made from his book have any bearing on the case except, as has been said, for assessing how much could be claimed in damages.

I don't understand why the amount of money made by Amaral is relevant to the case

I was of the understanding that any damages awarded would be commensurate with the level of damage suffered,  regardless of the financial ability of the accused to pay it 

Indeed,   libel damages are frequently awarded which are not,  and never will be,  actually  paid  ...  because the accused simply does not  have  it

The Judge in this case is being asked, by the McCanns,   to  award financial recompence equal to the level of damage suffered.   If she finds that the McCanns  have   been libelled she will award damages in accordance with already established benchmarks

In law it makes no difference if Amaral is a pauper or a billionaire  ..  it is the level of damage suffered by the McCanns that is being judged,  not Amaral's ability to financially meet any award made

That's why I don't understand why his personal wealth  ( or lack thereof  )  is being made an issue of at this point
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 05:14:44 PM by icabodcrane »

Offline Meadow

Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #20 on: November 24, 2013, 09:50:46 PM »
It certainly flags up a rather ambiguous questions, why the need to know the wealth generated by the books & transmissions etc.

Whatever the criteria of assessment of financial compensation, very little point in awarding zillions, if the ability to pay is pennies.

Therefore, this IMHO is not about money.  It's about timing.  Yes, as previously pointed out there are 'usual' advances to authors, but I think Durate is no fool.

If she can't get Goncola Amaral for the substance of libel, she will try breach of secrecy - therefore it's not about income\s but dates.

The judge may well find in favour of the McCanns, but award only pennies!!  There's nothing to prove they have suffered irretrievable damaged that can only be fixed with a boost to their bank account.

Likewise, should GA's team not inquire into the assets of the McCanns, as part of a counter claim for loss of income, costs and personal damage.

Wouldn't like to be in the judge's shoes.

Online Eleanor

Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #21 on: November 26, 2013, 09:53:36 AM »

I suspect that this might be more about monies made from Television and Newspaper Interviews, none of which are so far on record. And the people or organizations who aren't actually involved in The Trial proceedings.

Online ferryman

Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #22 on: January 27, 2014, 12:06:45 PM »
When will the libel trial resume?

Does anyone know?

Online ferryman

Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #23 on: January 28, 2014, 08:37:58 PM »
The 15th  (working!) day for submission of documents required by the judge was up yesterday.

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #24 on: January 28, 2014, 08:43:16 PM »
Just have to wait wont you like everyone else even i it gives you hernias lol

Online ferryman

Re: McCann v Gonšalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9 (No witnesses)
« Reply #25 on: January 30, 2014, 06:37:57 PM »
It certainly flags up a rather ambiguous questions, why the need to know the wealth generated by the books & transmissions etc.

Whatever the criteria of assessment of financial compensation, very little point in awarding zillions, if the ability to pay is pennies.

Therefore, this IMHO is not about money.  It's about timing.  Yes, as previously pointed out there are 'usual' advances to authors, but I think Durate is no fool.

If she can't get Goncola Amaral for the substance of libel, she will try breach of secrecy - therefore it's not about income\s but dates.

The judge may well find in favour of the McCanns, but award only pennies!!  There's nothing to prove they have suffered irretrievable damaged that can only be fixed with a boost to their bank account.

Likewise, should GA's team not inquire into the assets of the McCanns, as part of a counter claim for loss of income, costs and personal damage.

Wouldn't like to be in the judge's shoes.

The judge may well find in favour of the McCanns, but award only pennies!!

Robert Murat's pay-out in his action against Correia de Manaha was much more substantial than that, and his daughter was not abducted.