So what's next in the libel trial saga?

[Mr Gray]

SO protests’ arguing the issue is to consider the conclusions. He asks about the "death" theory.
MF says it is more likely that the child died. And he adds it is impossible that someone passed through the window with a child. He says the abduction theory then doesn't make sense. He observes that there are many possibilities, it's perfectly admissible for instance that the child went out to search for her parents. If the child died, it could have been outside of the flat or in the flat. But, he says, the disappearance never could have happened through the window, he insists that it is essential to understand that it is technically, humanly, impossible. The witness concludes affirming that all the hypotheses are possible, except for the abduction “through that window”.


This is the witness statement by Moita Flores. He states that all hypotheses are possible except for abduction through the window. So to all who claim abduction is not possible...Moita Flores has said it is.

[Alice Purjorick]

Amaral's witnesses were far worse than you admit...who was the one who said WTF am I doing here...or words to that effect when he thought no one was listening. Opinions of the witness performance will be very much coloured by which side of the fence you sit. Don't try to pretend you are giving an objective observation.

The whole trial has been farcical and a poor advert for the Portuguese judicial system

You just can't stop it can you? why do you persist in repeating what I have said like some demented Mynah Bird?
The first line of the post you replied to was :
The trial from the first day in court was a shambles on both sides and worthy of a comedy sketch.
What do you understand by both sides?
As for "my side" your perception of where I stand in this matter is defined entirely by your own prejudices.

[Alfred R Jones]

...and the last line was...It is just unfortunate that most of it was on one particular side.   so stop pretending. It is blatantly obvious which side of the fence you sit....so stop pretending

C'mon, surely Alice meant that it was unfortunate that most of the comic antics were on Amaral's side, which would of course be unfortunate for those who are backing him to win.

[Alice Purjorick]

...and the last line was...It is just unfortunate that most of it was on one particular side.   so stop pretending. It is blatantly obvious which side of the fence you sit....so stop pretending

Well if it worries you that much why not make two columns one for plaintiffs and one for defendants then list out all the funnies in each column then make a summation.
In my book it will add up to one side being as bad as the other.
In your book there must be a score of some sort whereby Dr Amaral can be seen to be losing which rather says a lot about you.

[Mr Gray]

Well if it worries you that much why not make two columns one for plaintiffs and one for defendants then list out all the funnies in each column then make a summation.
In my book it will add up to one side being as bad as the other.
In your book there must be a score of some sort whereby Dr Amaral can be seen to be losing which rather says a lot about you.

So now you are back to both sides being as bad as each other...

why speculate when hopefully we will soon have an indication of what eth judge thinks..and that's what counts.

I think amaral has lost for lots of reasons and I think that says a lot about me..such as I'm good at assessing evidence...I do it all the time, it's a scientific discipline

[Alice Purjorick]

So now you are back to both sides being as bad as each other...

why speculate when hopefully we will soon have an indication of what eth judge thinks..and that's what counts.

I think amaral has lost for lots of reasons and I think that says a lot about me..such as I'm good at assessing evidence...I do it all the time, it's a scientific discipline

I think that comes under the heading of argument by assertion.
Beware the self publicist.

[lordpookles]

Tell it to the judge ... she said it ... she is the expert ... so innocent it is.

I was responding to the SY statement - not persons of interest etc... Words to the effect of eliminated from the inquiry would eliminate all doubt imo...

No idea what the judge meant... Some here saying she meant it with a sense of irony... All I can say is there are always so many people with firm opinions claiming the opposite about anything pertaining to the McCanns that it is sometimes hard to know what to believe... Will be very entertaining to me to see what happens in Feb - win or loose, given everyone seems so convinced! It's like supporting a football team. Ridiculous.

[Alfred R Jones]

I was responding to the SY statement - not persons of interest etc... Words to the effect of eliminated from the inquiry would eliminate all doubt imo...

No idea what the judge meant... Some here saying she meant it with a sense of irony... All I can say is there are always so many people with firm opinions claiming the opposite about anything pertaining to the McCanns that it is sometimes hard to know what to believe... Will be very entertaining to me to see what happens in Feb - win or loose, given everyone seems so convinced! It's like supporting a football team. Ridiculous.

I was been ironic when I said the judge was being ironic :-)

[lordpookles]

Oh tbh I've scan read the last 10 pages as it seemed like the usual back and forth. So 'innocent' it is then. Or unless someone disagrees!

Edit: had a proper read back. Interesting question the judge asks. :) Let me do some straw clutching - maybe they are innocent in the eyes of the law as their arguido status was lifted, but have not necessarily been eliminated from the police investigation. Obviously what we would all like to know is have the parents been eliminated from the SY & PJ investigation. There is a distinction from not suspects to eliminated. Innocent = eliminated imo, so perhaps we have our answer.. Hope to see some conclusion reached soon in the trial.

[Miss Taken Identity]

I was responding to the SY statement - not persons of interest etc... Words to the effect of eliminated from the inquiry would eliminate all doubt imo...

No idea what the judge meant... Some here saying she meant it with a sense of irony... All I can say is there are always so many people with firm opinions claiming the opposite about anything pertaining to the McCanns that it is sometimes hard to know what to believe... Will be very entertaining to me to see what happens in Feb - win or loose, given everyone seems so convinced! It's like supporting a football team. Ridiculous.

The Judge was probably coming from word association to ask a question i.e  McCanns claiming to be 'innocent' of Amarals theory- therefor, the judge probably asked  if they were innocent blah blah. She cannot claim they ARE INNOCENT because they were never tried of any crime and found guilty or innocent!

Regards win or lose- the case was never made on the basis of hurt feelings or loss or reputations regarding the McCanns. They lost their reputations when they left their children alone in that apartment and have spent most of the money trying to PR various versions of account and to absolve themselves of ANY responsibility of their daughters fate: whatever that is/was.

And there was daftness on both sides during the case!

[ferryman]

It's like supporting a football team. Ridiculous.

A just rebuke for many of us, I would say.

That is, almost, the level we have reduced it to, almost obscene when you gravity of the real-life situation we all debate and speculate about so freely ...

[Mr Gray]

The Judge was probably coming from word association to ask a question i.e  McCanns claiming to be 'innocent' of Amarals theory- therefor, the judge probably asked  if they were innocent blah blah. She cannot claim they ARE INNOCENT because they were never tried of any crime and found guilty or innocent!

Regards win or lose- the case was never made on the basis of hurt feelings or loss or reputations regarding the McCanns. They lost their reputations when they left their children alone in that apartment and have spent most of the money trying to PR various versions of account and to absolve themselves of ANY responsibility of their daughters fate: whatever that is/was.

And there was daftness on both sides during the case!

a  court never finds a defendant innocent

[stephen25000]

a  court never finds a defendant innocent

Would you care to remind us of how hypothesis testing works in a court of law ?

[Mr Gray]

Would you care to remind us of how hypothesis testing works in a court of law ?

A court never finds anyone innocent...do you not understand the basics

[stephen25000]

A court never finds anyone innocent...do you not understand the basics

Dave, do you understand the principles of hypothesis testing in court systems ?