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

[jassi]

oh dear ..you've got your facts wrong

So? merely a name.  I don't see what the big deal is anyway.

[Mr Gray]

So? merely a name.

no...you stated that the judgement was read out in court...they were not

[Montclair]

oh dear ..you've got your facts wrong

My mistake, was referring to his remarks last year.

[DCI]

were the findings read out in open court...it looks as they were not

NO!

[jassi]

no...you stated that the judgement was read out in court...they were not

Ok, so I got it wrong. What does it matter? The information is out there for all to see which is a good thing.

[Mr Gray]

My mistake, was referring to his remarks last year.

looks like it's me who's right again. So it is only amaral who has discussed the judgement. A judgement that the judge seemed to want to keep confidential. Not only that he has pre empted the judge's decision...
That doesn't seem very bright to me.

[Mr Moderator]

To clarify, last Wednesdays sitting was an informal gathering arranged by the judge so that she could hand out her statement of proof to the lawyers and offer them an opportunity to ask questions about it.  It was not a formal hearing and could very well have been carried out in an office had one been available.  Members must realise that proceedings in Spain and Portugal are often carried out in offices rather than in a courtroom.

[Carana]

Amaral's lawyer did speak.

As you seem to have contact with the three members of the public who were there, perhaps you could clarify if anyone obtained a written copy of the original document, or were they making notes of what was said in court?

[Mr Gray]

As you seem to have contact with the three members of the public who were there, perhaps you could clarify if anyone obtained a written copy of the original document, or were they making notes of what was said in court?

it seems nothing was said in court and the lawyers were given judgements to read...so does anyone know where published judgement has come from?

[Montclair]

As you seem to have contact with the three members of the public who were there, perhaps you could clarify if anyone obtained a written copy of the original document, or were they making notes of what was said in court?

I suggest that if you don't trust these reports you send someone yourself to attend the hearings. The people who bothered to go there don't have to satisfy you.

[Mr Gray]

I suggest that if you don't trust these reports you send someone yourself to attend the hearings. The people who bothered to go there don't have to account to you.

and we don't have to believe them...the official judgement will be released soon...that's what matters

[Montclair]

and we don't have to believe them...the official judgement will be released soon...that's what matters

That's your problem then.

[Mr Moderator]

From Anne Guedes' original report of Wednesdays proceedings...

When the judge left the room after distributing the document to the lawyers, as if the benches for the public were empty, looking literally through the three members of the public, I entered the “sacred” area and asked the clerk if I could read the document. The clerk looked embarrassed, hesitated but then said “no”, adding, as a justification, that it was “informal”.

As there was no journalist neither in the court room nor outside (only photographers expecting the McCanns like Vladimir and Estragon wait for Godot), as none of the defense lawyers would have misled the Press Agency Lusa to their disadvantage, the reader will need no hypothetico-deductive method to find out who grossly disinformed an institution that still plays a decisive part in the international circulation of the news.

Was Press Agency Lusa misled or did they put their own slant on it?
 

[DCI]

it seems nothing was said in court and the lawyers were given judgements to read...so does anyone know where published judgement has come from?

2 guesses lol. First news report was before 12pm by DN, I believe.

[Mr Gray]

That's your problem then.

I don't have a problem....you still haven't explained your bizarre post that I am worried....I'm not in the slightest worried ...why should I be