Libel trial day 14 - Statement of facts proved/not proved issued to lawyers.

[Mr Gray]

amaral has encouraged the myths but has not been the initial source...the judge will decide just how much influence he has had

[Lyall]

Discussion is legitimate...stating the McCanns are liars...stating that they murdered Maddie and dumped her body in a bin...is not legitimate

You're right, stating that as fact is not legitimate.

But if this were a different case, one in which you aren't so passionately committed, you wouldn't be so horrified by discussion of each and every possibility, even those nobody wants to think could ever be possible anywhere.

[ferryman]

You're right, stating that as fact is not legitimate.

But if this were a different case, one in which you aren't so passionately committed, you wouldn't be so horrified by discussion of each and every possibility, even those nobody wants to think could ever be possible anywhere.

I believe you live in Portugal and I'm not sure how the rule stands in Portugal about libel by inference.

But certainly in England, discussion that the McCanns might, somehow, be implicated in something nefarious to do with Madeleine's disappearance (however you couch it) would be libel.

[slartibartfast]

If amaral had said the McCanns were not suspects the obsessed would simply have cried cover up

So you are saying he had no effect on opinion?

[Mr Gray]

So you are saying he had no effect on opinion?

no...he had an effect but the anti lobby would have still existed

[Angelo222]

As I have said I post in support of the justice system and you have just shown how you have no respect for justice...The Mccanns do not have to provide proof they are innocent..

To a police investigation they do.  Furthermore, it depends on what they are supposed to be innocent of and that includes rubbish parenting whilst on holiday.  So they just aren't as innocent as you would like us all to believe.

Whether they are innocent in relation to Maddie's disappearance is another issue altogether which is very adequately dealt with in the Portuguese Attorney General's Archiving Report.  An archive which I hasten to add could have been reopened at any time should the parents and their reconstitution-shy pals decided to cooperate.

[ferryman]

no...he had an effect but the anti lobby would have still existed

Indeed, it did exist, from way before Amaral wrote his book.

[Angelo222]

they do not have to supply proof of innocence to the police investigation.

Its called an alibi Davy.  Interesting that as many members believe the case will be dismissed as those who believe token damages will be awarded.

[Mr Gray]

Its called an alibi Davy.  Interesting that as many members believe the case will be dismissed as those who believe token damages will be awarded.

mccanns do not have to supply anything to the police...as for the survey...what does it matter what anyone on here thinks...the judge makes the decision

[misty]

http://pjga.blogspot.pt/2015/03/lisbon-trial-awaiting-verdict.html?m=1
13 Mar 2015
Lisbon Trial: Awaiting the Verdict


 Many of you who have been following the trial will be aware of the fact that the deadline for all parties to deliver their legal arguments to the court ended on the 26th of February.

 Legal arguments were delivered by several parties and now we await a verdict from the Judge.

Article 607 of the Portuguese Civil Process Code stipulates an indicative period of 30 days after the process is concluded by the Judge. While this is not a legal deadline but merely a recommendation, several jurists believe that this case will receive a relatively swift decision.

 Judicial holidays over the Easter period (March 29-April 6, dates are inclusive) mean that no verdict will be issued during this interruption of the Courts' work.

 We trust in Justice and serenely await the Judge's decision, in solidarity with Gonçalo Amaral.

 For your ongoing support, we thank you very, very much.

 astro     at  Friday, March 13, 2015