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

[Alice Purjorick]

I don't understand the obsession with Dr Amaral, old sticks.
Am I missing something?
If he was that much of a tw*t, grossly incompetent etc [fill in with any uncomplimentary remark you can dream up] why go banging on about him?
Some me included might think either you are worried or totally paranoid. The idea you can vote is scary.
In the nicest possible way of course 

[Jean-Pierre]

I'm not the one posting crap.

It's you and your fellows explain what his debts or expenditure have got the slightest to do with this  case ?

As to financial problems, in case you forget the McCann's had their own.

They got bailed out by the fund.

All because of their own friggin stupidity in the first place.

Now, I'll let you do one.

Could you just post up a cite to the McCanns application for legal aid? 

Or to state funding?

Thanks.

[Lyall]

I don't understand the obsession with Dr Amaral, old sticks.
Am I missing something?
If he was that much of a tw*t, grossly incompetent etc [fill in with any uncomplimentary remark you can dream up] why go banging on about him?
Some me included might think either you are worried or totally paranoid. The idea you can vote is scary.
In the nicest possible way of course 

Some people have the silly idea that if he hadn't written the book nobody today would be doubting the McCanns.

It's revisionist history. %£&)**#

[Alfred R Jones]

I don't understand the obsession with Dr Amaral, old sticks.
Am I missing something?
If he was that much of a tw*t, grossly incompetent etc [fill in with any uncomplimentary remark you can dream up] why go banging on about him?
Some me included might think either you are worried or totally paranoid. The idea you can vote is scary.
In the nicest possible way of course 

Do you understand the obsession with the McCanns, old stick?

[Mr Gray]

I don't understand the obsession with Dr Amaral, old sticks.
Am I missing something?
If he was that much of a tw*t, grossly incompetent etc [fill in with any uncomplimentary remark you can dream up] why go banging on about him?
Some me included might think either you are worried or totally paranoid. The idea you can vote is scary.
In the nicest possible way of course 

the so called obsession with amaral pales into insignificance when you see the absolute pathological obsession with the mccanns....posters on here dissect every aspect of their lives...every word they say...every facial expression...repeating the same phrases for seven years...day after day  ....50 tweets a day by Brenda, truly bizarre

[Brietta]

Some people have the silly idea that if he hadn't written the book nobody today would be doubting the McCanns.

It's revisionist history. %£&)**#

I think you've got that wrong, Lyall, unless you can come up with just one piece of misinformation that is not in the book or has been said by Mr Amaral in interviews etc which is not in the lexicon of the "doubters".

More propaganda than revisionist, perhaps.

[faithlilly]

Just catching up and as ever the faithful has shown yet again they really don't do irony.

Sofia said she and Amaral would never divorce. Was it because of the money ?

The McCanns said they would never leave Portugal without Madeleine. Was it because they were guilty ?


Amaral applied for legal aid by allegedly falsifying certain details on the legal aid application form.

The McCanns pay for legal representation with money they have gained by misleading donators.


Seems to me there's not a lot of difference.

[Lyall]

I think you've got that wrong, Lyall, unless you can come up with just one piece of misinformation that is not in the book or has been said by Mr Amaral in interviews etc which is not in the lexicon of the "doubters".

More propaganda than revisionist, perhaps.

Not sure I understand what you're saying in this post, but there's not actually that much in the book.

There's very little in it that wasn't already known, apart from the history of the investigation and Portuguese-British police relations etc. Evidence-wise it was all already known, or mostly-known.

If he'd never written it the progression of case discussion etc. over the years wouldn't have been greatly different.

[Mr Gray]

Just catching up and as ever the faithful has shown yet again they really don't do irony.

Sofia said she and Amaral would never divorce. Was it because of the money ?

The McCanns said they would never leave Portugal without Madeleine. Was it because they were guilty ?


Amaral applied for legal aid by allegedly falsifying certain details on the legal aid application form.

The McCanns pay for legal representation with money they have gained by misleading donators.


Seems to me there's not a lot of difference.

Obsession klaxon!

[Lyall]

It's fair to say his stand doubtless inspired some people to continue discussing the case, and some of those may have long ago stopped otherwise. But not everyone was ever in that camp.

[Mr Gray]

It's fair to say his stand doubtless inspired some people to continue discussing the case, and some of those may have long ago stopped otherwise. But not everyone was ever in that camp.

If amaral had said the McCanns were not suspects the obsessed would simply have cried cover up

[faithlilly]

Obsession klaxon!

How many posts have you posted in support of the McCanns now Davel ?

[Mr Gray]

How many posts have you posted in support of the McCanns now Davel ?

My posts are in support of the justice system as opposed to the lynchmob...that's noble ...my posts are in support of truth...not lies...that's noble....this evening we had Stephen trying to spread lies re Maddie leaving the apartment...that isn't noble

[Lyall]

If amaral had said the McCanns were not suspects the obsessed would simply have cried cover up

You're right, but that's because the evidence doesn't exist to say they aren't.

Or at least we haven't been shown it. I don't blame people for not believing Redwood because we were told all this in the papers in 2007: evidence exists; police know it; they're not suspects. All turned out to be false.

[Mr Gray]

You're right, but that's because the evidence doesn't exist to say they aren't.

Or at least we haven't been shown it. I don't blame people for not believing Redwood because we were told all this in the papers in 2007: evidence exists; police know it; they're not suspects. All turned out to be false.

As I have said I post in support of the justice system and you have just shown how you have no respect for justice...The Mccanns do not have to provide proof they are innocent..