So what's next in the libel trial saga?

[ferryman]

When was the libel proven or admitted?

Libel was proven or admitted at the point Santos made his plea that proceedings be in secret to protect Madeleine lest Madeleine be alive.

Perhaps you need a refresher on the final chapter of Amaral's book if you doubt that.

[Carana]

This display of disgust for this rather vile individual would be a lot easier to stomach if it wasn't coming from posters who dismiss as unimportant semen found on an eight year old missing child's pants.

There's a discussion on that topic here:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3050.msg128945;topicseen#msg128945

[Mr Gray]

What facts are there dave ?

Accidental death remains a possibility in the apartment.

Now try adding 2 + 2

As to the trial, let's leave it to the judge and the subsequent appeals, the mccanns will get FA in terms of money, don't you agree in the short or long term ?

the court is not interested in possibilities...just facts...fact...nature of crime undetermined...there's one.....

[stephen25000]

the court is not interested in possibilities...just facts...fact...nature of crime undetermined...there's one.....

So accidental death is a distinct possibility and so does the possible cover up of that as well ?

Wouldn't you agree ?

[Anna]

Please adhere to the Topic....or, off topic posts, will be deleted shortly

[Alice Purjorick]

You may wish to try to muddy the waters but the FACT that Portuguese papers refer to the trial as  a defamation trial is pretty conclusive

I am not muddying the waters old chap merely stating the obvious. Until you have had sight of the entire writ what you actually know is three fifths of five eighths of Felicity Arkwright.
We know, courtesy of The Daily Mirror and the court proceedings, that Madeleine's name and those of the twins are on the writ seeking damages. Damages for what ? they have not been libeled have they?

[jassi]

I look forward to this trial ending and the I might finally understand what it was all actually about. 

[Mr Gray]

I am not muddying the waters old chap merely stating the obvious. Until you have had sight of the entire writ what you actually know is three fifths of five eighths of Felicity Arkwright.
We know, courtesy of The Daily Mirror and the court proceedings, that Madeleine's name and those of the twins are on the writ seeking damages. Damages for what ? they have not been libeled have they?

I know that the Portuguese papers are referring to it as a defamation trial...would you like to point out to everyone where I am mistaken in that statement?

[Mr Gray]

I look forward to this trial ending and the I might finally understand what it was all actually about. 

couldn't agree more...I'm sure that some will still try to pretend it wasn't a libel trial

[Alice Purjorick]

I know that the Portuguese papers are referring to it as a defamation trial...would you like to point out to everyone where I am mistaken in that statement?

So the Portuguese papers refer to it as a defamation trial, but are they correct? Your proposition is that because it is the news papers it must true? You who constantly ridicule any thing Portuguese. A bit of a ground shift there isn't there?
You haven't addressed the issue of on what basis have the children have been libeled or defamed. Do you wish to ignore that because it is convenient to do so?
So regardless of what the papers say do you Mr Davel believe that all names on the writ are there because they have been defamed?

[ferryman]

So the Portuguese papers refer to it as a defamation trial, but are they correct? Your proposition is that because it is the news papers it must true? You who constantly ridicule any thing Portuguese. A bit of a ground shift there isn't there?
You haven't addressed the issue of on what basis have the children have been libeled or defamed. Do you wish to ignore that because it is convenient to do so?
So regardless of what the papers say do you Mr Davel believe that all names on the writ are there because they have been defamed?

Of course it is correct.

It is a basic legal tenet that damage is paid in respect of what would be referred to by English law as tort.  Civil libel (in England) is a tort, and I'm sure, in Portugal, is similarly classified distinct from criminal law.

You don't get damages paid for nothing.

[Anna]

An old article, but it quotes the McCanns.......I hope it gives some clarification to the defamation claims.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a statement sent to Lusa in London, the McCann family says the legal action was prompted by "continuous and coarse defamatory statements [Gonçalo Amaral], uttered in various media in Portugal and abroad, that Madeleine is dead and that her parents were somehow involved in the concealment of his corpse. "

The main objective, still, is' to prevent further publications of coarse and defamatory book Gonçalo Amaral "Maddie - The Truth of the Lie", his alleged television documentary, and any repetition of his deeply offensive thesis that we are, somehow involved in the disappearance of our very beloved daughter Madeleine ".

The McCanns complain about the "negative effect of their absurd and extremely damaging statements, searches and other actions that remain, to find Madeleine."

"We can not stand still to do as Mr Amaral tries to convince the world that Madeleine is dead. We can not allow this injustice to Madeleine and attempts to find her, continue 'justified.

As to whether the children were also complainants, the reason is the "negative effect that such statements will undoubtedly have in their future lives."

http://www.tsf.pt/PaginaInicial/Vida/Interior.aspx?content_id=1235045

[Carana]

Please adhere to the Topic....or, off topic posts, will be deleted shortly

I hadn't realised you've become a mod. Good luck! 

[Anna]

I hadn't realised you've become a mod. Good luck! 

Thank you Carana

[Mr Gray]

So the Portuguese papers refer to it as a defamation trial, but are they correct? Your proposition is that because it is the news papers it must true? You who constantly ridicule any thing Portuguese. A bit of a ground shift there isn't there?
You haven't addressed the issue of on what basis have the children have been libeled or defamed. Do you wish to ignore that because it is convenient to do so?
So regardless of what the papers say do you Mr Davel believe that all names on the writ are there because they have been defamed?

You are wrong again...I have not said it is true because of the papers...what I am saying is that it is unlikely that all the Portuguese papers...all the quality English papers and Joanna morais...have got it wrong.