Libel trial day 14 - Statement of facts proved/not proved issued to lawyers.

[slartibartfast]

 I believe one of the twins have already questions the parents about this part of Amarals book, which they heard on the news.

It would be interesting to know why it was on the news? Maybe because of the McCanns suing GA. A bit if a circular argument.

[DCI]

Final claimant speech was 10th dec 2014
Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 13 – Final claimant speech

The hearing as it happened

(10.12.2014, 10 am)

All lawyers are present, except for Dra Isabel Duarte, substituted (no reason given) by her assistant, who therefore occupies her chair. Each lawyer will stand up while speaking (whereas up to this hearing they always remained sitting when speaking).
The judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro opens the session alluding to the 30 days that are granted to the plaintiffs to obtain from the High Court the authorisation to legally represent, in this trial, their missing daughter. After this time, the lawyers (all requested it) will have 10 days to hand written alegações de direito (allegations concerning points of law and their interpretation) over to the court (whereas the matter of fact concerns what happened and how it happened, the matter of law comes under the conformity to law and justice).
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Plaintiffs_10_12_2014.htm

That's last years Anna. It was supposed to have been in yesterday's report too. So if they had 30 days last year why didn't the judge do what she said she would do last July, if they failed to prove it, and acquit all defendants with regard to the claim made in Madeleine's name.

Anne Guedes yesterday.

The other issue was related to the WOC issue. From this day on, the claimants have 30 days to hand over the London Court's authorization to have Madeleine McCann represented by her parents in this trial. Meanwhile the trial is suspended. After the 30 days delay, which of course can happen to be shorter, the lawyers will have ten days to hand in their "allegations of law".

[Anna]

That's last years Anna. It was supposed to have been in yesterday's report too. So if they had 30 days last year why didn't the judge do what she said she would do last July, if they failed to prove it, and acquit all defendants with regard to the claim made in Madeleine's name.

Anne Guedes yesterday.

The other issue was related to the WOC issue. From this day on, the claimants have 30 days to hand over the London Court's authorization to have Madeleine McCann represented by her parents in this trial. Meanwhile the trial is suspended. After the 30 days delay, which of course can happen to be shorter, the lawyers will have ten days to hand in their "allegations of law".

That doesn't make sense really, does it?
Why would she say exactly the same, yesterday as she said in Dec last year?

The handing in of "Allegations of law" would surely be required before, The statements of proven facts, yesterday? Have I missed something?

[Angelo222]

That doesn't make sense really, does it?
Why would she say exactly the same, yesterday as she said in Dec last year?

The handing in of "Allegations of law" would surely be required before, The statements of proven facts, yesterday? Have I missed something?

The first stage of the allegations were delivered at the previous sitting.  Yesterdays little event was entirely the judges wherein she had to reveal what has been proven and what has not been proven.  From the little I have read she basically torpedoed the claim out of the water.  This explanation of Portuguese procedures should assist:

Bold text added by Editor.

At the end of the trial, attorneys will produce oral allegations on the facts presented in the trial, explaining which of them (and why) should or should not be considered proved. Afterwards the judge will pass a decision on the facts, explaining which facts (of the list prepared in the preliminary hearing) are considered to have been proved by the court, why and on which grounds.

The parties will subsequently be allowed to file written submissions containing their final legal allegations, through which they will describe their understanding of the law applying to the facts evidenced.

The court is then expected to render its award on the case. The court is bound by the facts alleged by the parties and by the relief sought, but is free to apply the law to the facts as it deems more correct; in particular, the court shall not be limited by any legal qualification given to the facts by the parties.



The book did not damage the search, the book was not responsible for Kate McCanns mental health issues etc etc ...

There is always Dicky Desmond and the Express' twisted interpretation in which the moon is made of whipped cream.

[ferryman]

That doesn't make sense really, does it?
Why would she say exactly the same, yesterday as she said in Dec last year?

The handing in of "Allegations of law" would surely be required before, The statements of proven facts, yesterday? Have I missed something?

Not so much missed anything, as found the diplomatic language that befits a moderator of communicating the message that certain folk are attempting to communicate a pile of crock ...

[Anna]

The first stage of the allegations were delivered at the previous sitting.   Yesterdays little event was entirely the judges wherein she had to reveal what has been proven and what has not been proven.  From the little I have read she basically torpedoed the claim out of the water.

Thank you Angelo, So the statement, re- Ward of court was not yesterday either, but December last year.

[stephen25000]

The book did not damage the search, the book was not responsible for Kate McCanns mental health issues etc etc ...

There is always Dicky Desmond and the Express' twisted interpretation in which the moon is made of whipped cream.

It would seem her 'health issues' were already present.

[Angelo222]

It would seem her 'health issues' were already present.

The judge appears to be of the belief that much preempted the publication of the book and dvd so Amaral cannot be blamed for them.   In fact has she made any ruling as to Amaral's culpability?

[Angelo222]

The judge has now decreed what has been proven under the law, the lawyers have one final opportunity to file written submissions containing their final legal allegations, through which they will describe their understanding of the law applying to the facts evidenced, and it is on that basis that her final decsion will be made.

[DCI]

It would seem her 'health issues' were already present.

Course they were, her daughter was missing. When did Amaral release his book?

[stephen25000]

Course they were, her daughter was missing. When did Amaral release his book?

Try further back.

[Angelo222]

I'm astonished that posters can be so blind to the true facts...we will just wait till the judge decides compensation.

   ..in yer dreams Mr Davel   

The main claims have been rubbished already, there's always the booby prize!

[Angelo222]

The Express got it wrong AGAIN!!   Surprising since all hearings in this case are conducted in public, the private audiences you will never hear about.

[stephen25000]

The Express got it wrong AGAIN!!   All hearings in this case are conducted in public, the private audiences you will never hear about.

I see that certain supporters of the McCann's are calling yesterday a victory.

 

[Angelo222]

I see that certain supporters of the McCann's are calling yesterday a victory.

 

They must be Express readers.