So what's next in the libel trial saga?

[Eleanor]

Really?

You said the main damage was done in Portugal, so i asked why fill the court with Brits with no knowledge of the damage done in Portugal.

Not silly at all is it? You just didn't grasp the logic did you?

So what could these people offer? They couldn't offer any evidence to support the damage done in Portugal (which is where you claimed the main damage was done) and they could only put forward an opinion that it bothered the McCann's.

That's hardly compelling and damning evidence, is it?

The damage done to the search in Portugal, and to The McCann's wellbeing.

And don't question my logic. 

[Eleanor]

Who said she was exceptionally good ?

Let's face it Amaral has had several changes of lawyer and the outcome of the case clearly worries the McCann's.

That is why  they have been calling extra witnesses for some time.

So what was wrong with Amaral's Lawyers?  All useless, were they?  Or perhaps they thought he was on a hiding to nothing.

[stephen25000]

So what was wrong with Amaral's Lawyers?  All useless, were they?  Or perhaps they thought he was on a hiding to nothing.

Well as I said, he doesn't appear to have lost the case, anbd neither have the other defendant's.

[Albertini]

The damage done to the search in Portugal, and to The McCann's wellbeing.

And don't question my logic. 

Damage done to what search? Can you now or did the Mccann's in the trial provide any evidence that the decision of the PJ to shelve the case or indeed choose not to reopen it was as a direct result of the contents Amaral's book?

Where was the proof of their well being? The definitive proof? Where's the evidence in the book of the damage to well being caused by Amaral's book?

It's built on straw.

[ferryman]

I'll keep persevering until it goes in at your end and you accept the facts.

From the Judges:

I'll keep persevering until it goes in at your end and you accept the facts.

From the Judges:

Quote

The contents of the book does not offend any of the applicants’ fundamental rights.

The fact is that the judges were wrong.

It's as simple as that.

Why do you find that so hard to understand?

ETA: What sort of a country do you think Portugal would be if it were the case that falsely accusing a couple of killing their own daughter, disposing of a body and launching a fraudulent fund in their daughter's name did not amount to an infringement of the couple's rights?

Is it the sort of country you would like to live in?

[Jean-Pierre]

Well don't try and be glib by throwing silly comments at the end of posts.

Damage done to what search? Can you now or did the Mccann's in the trial provide any evidence that the decision of the PJ to shelve the case or indeed choose not to reopen it was as a direct result of the contents Amaral's book?

Where was the proof of their well being? The definitive proof? Where's the evidence in the book of the damage to well being caused by Amaral's book?

It's built on straw.

You do seem to be getting very exercised over this, and determined to "win".  Which is a little odd, to my mind.

First of all this is a forum for discussion and debate.

Second, the matter (the real one) is in the hands of the court, and whatever we say on here will matter not one jot.

[Carana]

Yet AGAIN ferryman.

The nature of Madeleine's disappearance, HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED.

We know that. The nature of her disappearance hadn't been established when Murat won on appeal against CdaM, either. However, there seem to be legal differences between the two cases, which is why I'm not sure how this case will go.

We won't know what the judge has taken into account or not until next year, anyway.

[ferryman]

Well don't try and be glib by throwing silly comments at the end of posts.

Damage done to what search? Can you now or did the Mccann's in the trial provide any evidence that the decision of the PJ to shelve the case or indeed choose not to reopen it was as a direct result of the contents Amaral's book?

Where was the proof of their well being? The definitive proof? Where's the evidence in the book of the damage to well being caused by Amaral's book?

It's built on straw.

Damage done to the search for Madeline from a book which declares that Madeleine is dead, and the McCanns caused her death and covered up her body is inescapeable and blindingly obvious.

If people think she is dead andtheMcCannsdunit, no one will look for Madeleine.

And you really don't need to labour hard to establish the extent of the toll such baseless accusations will have on those accused.

[stephen25000]

We know that. The nature of her disappearance hadn't been established when Murat won on appeal against CdaM, either. However, there seem to be legal differences between the two cases, which is why I'm not sure how this case will go.

We won't know what the judge has taken into account or not until next year, anyway.

I doubt very much Carana that anything will be resolved by the judges decision next month.

I have this gut feeling it will roll on for years to come, and the only ones to profit in the end will be the lawyers.

[stephen25000]

Damage done to the search for Madeline from a book which declares that Madeleine is dead, and the McCanns caused her death and covered up her body is inescapeable and blindingly obvious.

If people think she is dead andtheMcCannsdunit, no one will look for Madeleine.

And you really don't need to labour hard to establish the extent of the toll such baseless accusations will have on those accused.

People can make up their own minds, in case you haven't noticed.

Your second sentence above is quite frankly absurd.

[Eleanor]

Well don't try and be glib by throwing silly comments at the end of posts.

Damage done to what search? Can you now or did the Mccann's in the trial provide any evidence that the decision of the PJ to shelve the case or indeed choose not to reopen it was as a direct result of the contents Amaral's book?

Where was the proof of their well being? The definitive proof? Where's the evidence in the book of the damage to well being caused by Amaral's book?

It's built on straw.

Ask Paiva.  He was the one who said that Amaral's "Thesis" put a stop to any other hypotheses.

The McCanns, like anyone else, had to produce New Evidence, of which at the time, there was none.

It is not possible to produce definitive proof of lack of wellbeing.

[Jean-Pierre]

I doubt very much Carana that anything will be resolved by the judges decision next month.

I have this gur feeling it will roll on for years to come, and the only ones to profit in thge enbd will he the lawyers.

Amazingly I agree.  Plus ca change and all that.....

[Matthew Wyse]

The libel trial is about assessing damage, both to the reputations of the McCanns and the search for Madeleine caused by a book and a video that both assert (contrary to truth) that Madeleine was established as dead by the shelved enquiry, that the McCanns know she is dead and covered up the fact of her death and that the McCanns launched a fraudulent "appeal" in their (dead) daughter's name.

I assume most would agree that Isabel Duarte knows a thing or two more about Portuguese law than anyone here, and she believes the McCanns have a very good chance of succeeding.

Damages sought are high by the standard that is usual in Portugal, I admit that.

But is there a (Portuguese) precedent for a book and a video published in several countries of one continent that peddles such falsehood on such a scale?

I bet there isn't.

Duarte and Afonso will get paid their fee regardless of the outcome.

[ferryman]

We know that. The nature of her disappearance hadn't been established when Murat won on appeal against CdaM, either. However, there seem to be legal differences between the two cases, which is why I'm not sure how this case will go.

We won't know what the judge has taken into account or not until next year, anyway.

I would say the key difference between the Murat case and the McCann libel trial is that the McCanns have been able to disprove huge swathes of the allegations against them.

[ferryman]

Duarte and Afonso will get paid their fee regardless of the outcome.

Duarte will.

But Afonso?