In Camera - Amaral seeks to have media excluded from libel trial.

[ferryman]

 This case is a discussion, as you say, on Amaral's right to say as he pleases and to justify his claims.

How can he justify his claim if (as his own legal representative concedes) it is possible Madeleine might be alive?

Amaral's claim is that Madeleine died in the aprtment as the result of a 'tragic accident'.

And a very large part of the investigation (under Amaral's control) devoted itself to exploration of the possibility that Madeleine had been murdered!

I think Dr Amaral is up against it (if he hasn't already caved in).

Still no update at The Times ...

[stephen25000]

This case is a discussion, as you say, on Amaral's right to say as he pleases and to justify his claims.

How can he justify his claim if (as his own legal representative concedes) it is possible Madeleine might be alive?

Amaral's claim is that Madeleine died as the result of a 'tragic accident'.

And a very large part of the investigation (under Amaral's control) devoted itself to exploration of the possibility that Madeleine had been murdered!

I think Dr Amaral is up against it (if he hasn't already caved in).

Still no update at The Times ...

Perchance, do you live on 'Fantasy Island' ?

[ferryman]

Perchance, do you live on 'Fantasy Island' ?

Which part of my post do you take issue with, and why?

[AnneGuedes]

The lawyer says : we do not know whether Madeleine is alive or dead.
That's a fact for "we", the public.
Nobody, except for the carrier the Smiths saw, can say he/she knows what happened to Madeleine on that night.
Mr Amaral never said he knew Madeleine was dead. He said everything pointed to it. When he was dismissed of the investigation, evidence was lacking, particularly a body to start with. Nobody knows if, had he be maintained as a coordinator of the investigation, no evidence would have been gathered all the same.

[Redblossom]

The lawyer says : we do not know whether Madeleine is alive or dead.
That's a fact for "we", the public.
Nobody, except for the carrier the Smiths saw, can say he/she knows what happened to Madeleine on that night.
Mr Amaral never said he knew Madeleine was dead. He said everything pointed to it. When he was dismissed of the investigation, evidence was lacking, particularly a body to start with. Nobody knows if, had he be maintained as a coordinator of the investigation, no evidence would have been gathered all the same.

Exactly, if there was no proof, then why get hot and bothered under the collar about it! and then spend sooooo much tme and energy tryng to trash cadaver dogs!!! and failing at every turn, their accolades included.Reminds me of the sayng protest too much...not sure where that saying came from shakespeare maybe

[stephen25000]

Which part of my post do you take issue with, and why?

Well let's try this.

Is it possible Madeleine had an accident and died in the apartment ?

Could therefore the Mccanns have covered it up ?

When did Amaral say he was considering murder ?

[ferryman]

The lawyer says : we do not know whether Madeleine is alive or dead.
That's a fact for "we", the public.
Nobody, except for the carrier the Smiths saw, can say he/she knows what happened to Madeleine on that night.
Mr Amaral never said he knew Madeleine was dead. He said everything pointed to it. When he was dismissed of the investigation, evidence was lacking, particularly a body to start with. Nobody knows if, had he be maintained as a coordinator of the investigation, no evidence would have been gathered all the same.

Point 1 of chapter 22 in Amaral's book is a categoric assertion.

[Mr Gray]

The lawyer says : we do not know whether Madeleine is alive or dead.
That's a fact for "we", the public.
Nobody, except for the carrier the Smiths saw, can say he/she knows what happened to Madeleine on that night.
Mr Amaral never said he knew Madeleine was dead. He said everything pointed to it. When he was dismissed of the investigation, evidence was lacking, particularly a body to start with. Nobody knows if, had he be maintained as a coordinator of the investigation, no evidence would have been gathered all the same.

When someone says "we" he is including himself and no amount of spinning on the forum will change that fact...good job on the reporting

[stephen25000]

When someone says "we" he is including himself and no amount of spinning on the forum will change that fact...good job on the reporting

Where is the rest of what the lawyer said ?

[Redblossom]

Related report


http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/09/defence-for-goncalo-amaral-goes-on.html

[Sherlock Holmes]

This case is a discussion, as you say, on Amaral's right to say as he pleases and to justify his claims.

How can he justify his claim if (as his own legal representative concedes) it is possible Madeleine might be alive?

Amaral's claim is that Madeleine died in the aprtment as the result of a 'tragic accident'.

And a very large part of the investigation (under Amaral's control) devoted itself to exploration of the possibility that Madeleine had been murdered!

I think Dr Amaral is up against it (if he hasn't already caved in).

Still no update at The Times ...

I'm not suggesting he will actually be able to justify his claims. Theoretically he would have to in order to defend himself.  In reality he will find it very hard to do so, as will the McCanns.

[Mr Gray]

In your dreams, why be such a drama queen about it? Fret not. The facts are


No one KNOWS for a FACT if she is dead or alive
The final CPS or in Portuguese the Public Prosecutors report stated she is more likely dead thou they dont  KNOW
Amarals lawyer stated the same yesterday
Mr Amarals police team concluded at the time this is where the evidence pointed as any police force investigation is entitled to do based on what they know and have and on past experience

BetteR to state facts as they are instead of imagined  facts ala Ms Duarte who stated last time round  their is PROOF Maddie is alive cos there have been *sightings*! Oh dear!

No reason to get all excited,  Im sure this lawyer is not stupid! And by all accounts he is a very good lawyer!

For anyone to  suggest he is now changingsomething to cover his back is ludicrous.

So dream on.

And what a gentleman too!

Eta end of the day the mccanns cant prove he was wrong!! They have no case....isabel duarte was reported to have said amaral has no case, err, actuallly, its the mccanns who brought the action, its THEM that have to have a case, duh

Are you saying that the McCanns have to prove amaral wrong...if so...to what degree of certatinty.

[Mr Gray]

Where is the rest of what the lawyer said ?

Doesn't matter about the rest. No amount of spin will change what he said. The important thing is that it is now accepted by Amarals lawyer that Maddie may still be alive. Where does that leave the dogs alerts. Iam not ribbishing the dogs, they are excellent at what they are trained for...finding evidence...at that they are brilliant. In this case they found none which would suggest none was present

[Sherlock Holmes]

When someone says "we" he is including himself and no amount of spinning on the forum will change that fact...good job on the reporting

'We':

You make a good point Davel, but what Anne draws our attention to is also highly significant.

The use of the word 'we' here is primarily theoretical, in that it refers to our collective knowledge (or lack of). 'We', or 'the world as a whole', do not know what happened to Madeleine.

In other words, there is a distinction, not necessarily a contradiction, between the statement 'we do not know..etc.'  and Amaral's assertion that he believes Madeleine to be dead. One refers to a state of affairs, and the other to a hypothesis yet to be substantiated.

So perhaps he wasn't contradicting himself after all.. will have to ponder this one

[stephen25000]

Doesn't matter about the rest. No amount of spin will change what he said. The important thing is that it is now accepted by Amarals lawyer that Maddie may still be alive. Where does that leave the dogs alerts. Iam not ribbishing the dogs, they are excellent at what they are trained for...finding evidence...at that they are brilliant. In this case they found none which would suggest none was present

Please get it right.

The forensics were inconclusive.

So it doesn't rule out something happened to Madeleine.

Now this is for you.

Do you concede the possibility MADELEINE DIED IN THE APARTMENT ?