So what's next in the libel trial saga?

[Carana]

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

That makes sense to me.

The parents are the subjects of alleged defamation.

Madeleine's rights are being infringed by asserting that she is dead without any evidence. If the public believe that she's dead and that her parents were involved, then no one will be motivated to be vigilant in helping to find her (alive or even deceased).

The twins also have a right to know what happened to their older sister and to lead as normal a life as possible without having to grow up under the shadow caused by the defamatory allegations against their parents, including the psychological, social and emotional effects of those claims.

[stephen25000]

Amaral did no harm to Madeleine or the 'search'.

The harm done to her siblings was done by what her parents failed to do.

I did read last week , the reason the McCann's gave in leaving their children in unlocked accomodation was because of the danger of a fire..............

So by that logic they would expect. the children all under the age of 4 would know what to do if a fire occurred.

There is no substitute for common sense.

[Mr Gray]

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

It looks as though the mccanns have succeeded in this...the book appears now to be out of print ..

[stephen25000]

It looks as though the mccanns have succeeded in this...the book appears now to be out of print ..

The only ascertainable effect which can be derived from what happened is simple and blatantly obvious and has nothing to do with Amaral's book.

I wonder if her two surviving children will read the 'choice language' of their mother, in years to come.

[faithlilly]

It looks as though the mccanns have succeeded in this...the book appears now to be out of print ..

But still on sale on Amazon in most European countries.

[Alice Purjorick]

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.

Ah right I see. We have shifted to "unlikely the Portuguese papers et al are wrong" rather than your original stance with Stephen that it is definitely a defamation trial?. The children's names being on the writ would suggest it is about a bit more than just defamation. Unless we know the precise wording of the writ we can have no accurate appreciation of what it is all about. We can but guess and no doubt some posters will pretend their guess is better than another posters, nonetheless it will remain a guess in ignorance of all the facts. What is the mechanism for me claiming damages from someone who has libeled my parents purely on the basis of that libel? If there isn't one why are damages being claimed on behalf of the children? Maybe there is someone on here who has the appropriate knowledge to explain it rather that pretending they have. Unfortunately thus far we do not have much more than the odd bod saying I am thick, wrong or whatever. So I guess fat chance of a reasoned response here.

[ferryman]

How did the inspection at the gym come about?

From The Book of Many Lies, we apparently learn that it came about like this:

At 8pm, Tavares de Almeida calls me to let me know that Mark Harrison requires another place because this one is not sufficiently clean.

- How do I find a place at this kind of time?

- Sort it out!

Julio Barroso offers us the new sports hall in Lagos which, finally, meets the required standards. The objects are once again laid out on the ground and the dogs can start. Eddie alerts us to a strong cadaver odour on some of Kate's clothes, but the CSI dog doesn't detect the slightest trace of blood.
 

So why, then, does Harrison summarise that search thus:

Later the same day PJ officers conducted a screening procedure involving items removed from the McCann’s villa.


That is Harrison's sole comment on that search. 

Harrison neither acknowledged UK involvement in the prior search of the villa ...

Strange ...

[Mr Gray]

But still on sale on Amazon in most European countries.

last few copies

[Mr Gray]

Ah right I see. We have shifted to "unlikely the Portuguese papers et al are wrong" rather than your original stance with Stephen that it is definitely a defamation trial?. The children's names being on the writ would suggest it is about a bit more than just defamation. Unless we know the precise wording of the writ we can have no accurate appreciation of what it is all about. We can but guess and no doubt some posters will pretend their guess is better than another posters, nonetheless it will remain a guess in ignorance of all the facts. What is the mechanism for me claiming damages from someone who has libeled my parents purely on the basis of that libel? If there isn't one why are damages being claimed on behalf of the children? Maybe there is someone on here who has the appropriate knowledge to explain it rather that pretending they have. Unfortunately thus far we do not have much more than the odd bod saying I am thick, wrong or whatever. So I guess fat chance of a reasoned response here.

So now you have shifted...Stephen said it was not a libel trial.....Montclair has said libel has been thrown out..there may well be other issues but libel is at the heart of this trial...Stephen and Montclair are wrong..whichever way to try to spin it.....

plus....the ruling overturning the injunction was just that....it did not rule on libel

[Mr Gray]

So the next thing in the libel trial is the decision...I don't think anyone can argue with that.

[stephen25000]

So the next thing in the libel trial is the decision...I don't think anyone can argue with that.

The one thing you can be sure of, the mccanns won't be getting any money from the libel trial now or in the near future.

[Mr Gray]

The one thing you can be sure of, the mccanns won't be getting any money from the libel trial now or in the near future.

which libel trial would that be stephen

[stephen25000]

which libel trial would that be stephen

Where does it say in the Portuguese Court, libel trial ?

and why are you so concerned the mccanns getting money ?

[Mr Gray]

Where does it say in the Portuguese Court, libel trial ?

and why are you so concerned the mccanns getting money ?

so which libel trial were you referring to...

[stephen25000]

so which libel trial were you referring to...

It's very simple, even for you.

Where does it say in the Portuguese Court, libel trial?