So what's next in the libel trial saga?

[Montclair]

it will be worth it

You seem so sure of the outcome. Bet you didn't see the book ban being overturned.

[ferryman]

A woman at the trial admitted literally, not ironically, that Amaral's book is largely made up.

Those of us who have read it, and also compared it with the files, concur ...

[jassi]

It all dependents upon what the judge thinks and says , not anyone else.

[faithlilly]

A woman at the trial admitted literally, not ironically, that Amaral's book is largely made up.

Those of us who have read it, and also compared it with the files, concur ...

The devil is in the detail ferryman. Read the context of the comment.

[Mr Gray]

The devil is in the detail ferryman. Read the context of the comment.

context is everything....practically every statement by the mccannns  is taken out of context

[Anna]

context is everything....practically every statement by the mccannns  is taken out of context

And the facial expressions. And their body language. God help them if judge is looking at them too, Eh! 

[ferryman]

From the ruling overturning the injunction on Amaral's book:

- this hearing is NOTHING to do with defamation or libel - which is the Principal Action to be heard at some date in the future. It limited itself to deciding which of two sets of fundamental rights in Portuguese Law should hold sway in the specific circumstance presented, which circumstance was that each rendition of the proposition of a dead child and the hiding of her body impeded the search for a live child, and this impediment caused additional suffering to the parents who are behind the conduct of that search.
 
The request was made solely to stop further renditions of that proposition in its various forms.

- the actions requested by the plaintiffs were not granted in the manner they wanted; they were all modified in execution.

The requested actions are shown as a) through f) on page 7, while the DECISION is shown, in the same order and lettering, on pages 15 a

There we have it: from the horse's mouth (the ruling overturning the injunction on the book), confirmation both that that hearing did not consider the question of libel, and that present proceedings is, indeed, a libel trial.

Further:

I would suggest, however, that any argument, opinion or comment as to the possible death of the missing child, or to the hiding of the body under such a circumstance, does not use either the book or the video as a foundation; rather, it should look to the content of the official case file.I reiterate that, in my understanding of it, this is not a judgement on defamation or libel, and my understanding of this is reinforced by the penultimate line 

[stephen25000]

Whose translation is this ?

Second, what will you do when the mccnns fail in their action against the three defendants ?

[ferryman]

Whose translation is this ?

Second, what will you do when the mccnns fail in their action against the three defendants ?

The translation is from Pamalam's site:

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/court_docs.htm

[ferryman]

Weaving her way deftly through many different considerations with we, the readers, 
being gripped firmly by the ring in our nose and led through two pages of cogitation to 
the rather abrupt conclusion on page 36 that the principal action [the forthcoming 
defamation/libel action which gave rise to these injunction hearings] is the appropriate 
place to get to the bottom of all the matters she raised.

[stephen25000]

Weaving her way deftly through many different considerations with we, the readers,
being gripped firmly by the ring in our nose and led through two pages of cogitation to
the rather abrupt conclusion on page 36 that the principal action [the forthcoming
defamation/libel action which gave rise to these injunction hearings] is the appropriate
place to get to the bottom of all the matters she raised.

and when the mccanns lose this action, what next ?

[jassi]

Best not to count chickens - the law can be very unpredictable in its application.

[ferryman]

Best not to count chickens - the law can be very unpredictable in its application.

That's not quite the point of (immediate) discussion.

Is the depiction, in certain quarters, of the libel trial as something other than a libel trial mere ignorance?

Or is it an attempt to mislead?

[Mr Gray]

That's not quite the point of (immediate) discussion.

Is the depiction, in certain quarters, of the libel trial as something other than a libel trial mere ignorance?

Or is it an attempt to mislead?

Excellent find Ferryman...This CONFIRMS what the more enlightened amongst us have been saying for some time.
Libel/defamation have not yet been decided...the overturn of the injunction DID not decide the libel question....that will be revealed shortly as a result of the present court proceedings

[slartibartfast]

There we have it: from the horse's mouth (the ruling overturning the injunction on the book), confirmation both that that hearing did not consider the question of libel, and that present proceedings is, indeed, a libel trial.

Yet another non sequitur, it says a future trial but doesn't say this future trial.