Michael Wright's testimony

[C.Edwards]

GA's lawyer, SO, interrupts asking the Judge to ask the witness what is the paper he is reading.

Yes... keep reading... come back to me when you see it ;-)

[icabodcrane]

I am surprised at the  forum's lack of interest in Michael Wright's detailed witness testimony

Can I take it that no-one here agrees with his assertion that when the Arguido status was given  to the McCanns it was just a matter of course and not related to anything 'in particular'  that had happened in the investigation    ?   

Do we all agree,  also,  that Wright  was mistaken when he claimed public opinion did not turn against the McCanns when they were made Arguido and that it only happened   (  the public turning on them  )   'after'  Amaral published his book  ? 

Was he a good witness for the McCanns in view of his errors ?   

[Montclair]

I am surprised at the  forum's lack of interest in Michael Wright's detailed witness testimony

Can I take it that no-one here agrees with his assertion that when the Arguido status was given  to the McCanns it was just a matter of course and not related to anything 'in particular'  that had happened in the investigation    ?   

Do we all agree,  also,  that Wright  was mistaken when he claimed public opinion did not turn against the McCanns when they were made Arguido and that it only happened   (  the public turning on them  )   'after'  Amaral published his book  ? 

Was he a good witness for the McCanns in view of his errors ?

So far, none of the witnesses have been good witnesses for the McCanns. I'm looking forward to hearing from the big bully coward Marinho e Pinto who tried to get out of cross examination.

[stephen25000]

w.r.t.  Mr. Wright.

Go to link if you wish.

http://aninspectorcallsyou.blogspot.co.uk/

[gilet]

Enough with the semantics already  !

Michael Wright thought he could walk into court with  'notes'  to refer to when answering under oath

He was challenged and his  'notes' were photocopied and dished out to everyone concerned

I was commenting that I think the Judge was spot-on in making  that decision

Don't you aggree  ?

I don't agree at all. It is perfectly normal for witnesses to have notes in civil and criminal cases.

It may be less common in Portuguese courts but is very common here.

[C.Edwards]

I don't agree at all. It is perfectly normal for witnesses to have notes in civil and criminal cases.

It may be less common in Portuguese courts but is very common here.

Oh really?  First I've heard of this!  Do tell more.

[Montclair]

I don't agree at all. It is perfectly normal for witnesses to have notes in civil and criminal cases.

It may be less common in Portuguese courts but is very common here.

In Portugal, a witness may have notes regarding dates or times but they are not allowed to have notes about feelings and emotions because testimony has to be spontaneous.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Another point raised by Wright's testimony which may be worthy of debate  is the claim that Amaral's book interfered with the investigation :

The Judge interupts and asks  whether the book was published before or after the archiving of the files

Michael Wright says after

The Judge  "Then how could the book interfere with the investigation ?

Michael Wright satys silent

The Judge repeats the question

Michael Wright says  It didn't  but it interfered  with the following investigations made by the private detectives hired by Kate and Gerry 

So the effect Amaral's book had on the investigation was limited to  the McCanns  hired  private detectives  ?

But he is not called upon to demonstrate how....

Didn't Metodo 3 make all sorts of claims that they knew where Madeleine was, and that she was alive and well in Morocco? Did they ever claim that their failure to find Madeleine in the end was due to Amaral? (They were of course running a fraudulent operation, but the point is that they never claimed, as far as I am aware, to have been deterred in their work by fallout from Amaral's book).

David Edgar testifies, in Anne's words, that it was 'difficult to know' if the book had a detrimental effect on his work or not, without going into any further detail. What was the point of this witness?

Surely, as the only paid investigators into Madeleine's disappearance since the official investigation was closed by the PJ (until Operation Grange), the various private investigators would surely have data on how Amaral's thesis had stymied their work.

[gilet]

Oh really?  First I've heard of this!  Do tell more.

I suggest you get out more or even in more. Have you never even heard of the copper referring to his notebook in court? Oh dear.

Perhaps a visit to your local court would let you see how real justice (as opposed to the online variety) is conducted.

[icabodcrane]

But he is not called upon to demonstrate how....

Didn't Metodo 3 make all sorts of claims that they knew where Madeleine was, and that she was alive and well in Morocco? Did they ever claim that their failure to find Madeleine in the end was due to Amaral? (They were of course running a fraudulent operation, but the point is that they never claimed, as far as I am aware, to have been deterred in their work by fallout from Amaral's book).

David Edgar testifies, in Anne's words, that it was 'difficult to know' if the book had a detrimental effect on his work or not, without going into any further detail. What was the point of this witness?

Surely, as the only paid investigators into Madeleine's disappearance since the official investigation was closed by the PJ (until Operation Grange), the various private investigators would surely have data on how Amaral's thesis had stymied their work.

It appears to me that the  'damages'  suffered by the McCanns have only been alluded to and not  'proven'  in actual evidence

Kate McCann's  suicidal depression is  'alluded'  to  ...  but no psychiatric report written by mental health professionals is produced in evidence

The damage to the McCann's private investigation is  'alluded'  to  ...  but no statistical or even anecdotal evidence is produced by the private detectives themselves

It really does seem,  so far,  to be the old story   ...   "it's true because we say so" 

[Redblossom]

I am surprised at the  forum's lack of interest in Michael Wright's detailed witness testimony

Can I take it that no-one here agrees with his assertion that when the Arguido status was given  to the McCanns it was just a matter of course and not related to anything 'in particular'  that had happened in the investigation    ?   

Do we all agree,  also,  that Wright  was mistaken when he claimed public opinion did not turn against the McCanns when they were made Arguido and that it only happened   (  the public turning on them  )   'after'  Amaral published his book  ? 

Was he a good witness for the McCanns in view of his errors ?

Public opinion had turned quite quickly after May 07 IMO..Michael Wright has presented no facts or figures to back up what he is saying that Amarals book caused this in 2008...it had become so bad as they were made arguidos and before (and no Michael Wright is wrong to say they became such just because the parents are normally first suspects, Murat was made first suspect) that some agency set out to work with the media to turn around the reporting to more positive stories and they won an award for it, the name escapes me though

ETa this one, thanks to a kind fairy that reminded me
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id275.html


Also when in April May 2008 the  Mccanns went on a round of interviews in UK and Portugal they were asked some awkward questions....long before Amarals book
 
He also is skating on extremely thin ice, if it didnt crack instantly, that Mr Amarals book was responsible for some obscure nutter or two to post threats on some forum. Even in their own first documentary, One Year On, in April 2008 they had a special box for letters from nutters who wished them ill and blamed them etc....they laughed and shrugges tthem off....said documentary is now deleted from youtube

The assertion that their private investigators work were interfered with by the book can also be proven to not be so true, all you have to do is read Gerry Mccanns blogs for 2009 to see how much support and how much information they were flooded with after their documentaries and appeals that year and Dave Edgars appeal to find Victoria Beckham lookalike

He apparently seems to have a problem with dates anyway

From the court evidence

The first witness of the session is Michael Wright, an administrator, whose wife is Kate McCann's cousin. He has known Kate since she was ten years of age and Gerald McCann since 2001. They used to have regular contact."
 
From his rogatory interview
 
My wife is Kate's cousin and I have known Kate since she was 8 years old. She used to spend holidays on Isle of Man where I lived. My wife's and Kate's families are quite close. I have known Gerry since 1997 when he was going out with Kate before they married.


Just a few quick observations

[AnneGuedes]

It really does seem,  so far,  to be the old story   ...   "it's true because we say so"

That's how it started, and that's how it will never finish..

[Angelo222]

As far as I can see all the witnesses appear to be singing from the same hymn sheet.  Some of the words they are using seem rehearsed??

[Redblossom]

As far as I can see all the witnesses appear to be singing from the same hymn sheet.  Some of the words they are using seem rehearsed??

Obviously

[icabodcrane]

As far as I can see all the witnesses appear to be singing from the same hymn sheet.  Some of the words they are using seem rehearsed??

And yet the man who's job it has been to  'represent' the McCanns,     Clarence  Mitchell,  is noticably absent

Why didn't Mitchell take the stand on the McCann's behalf  ?  ...   was his testimony considered to be of no value  ?