Should the €500k plus interest have been confiscated by the State?

[Alfred R Jones]

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights says we are innocent until proven guilty. Nobody should be blamed for doing something until it is proven.

When people say we did a bad thing we have the right to show it is not true.

I don't know how anyone would show that an accusation is untrue, however?

When people say we did a bad thing the onus is on them to put up, shut up or face the potential consequences.

[G-Unit]

I don't know how anyone would show that an accusation is untrue, however?
When people say we did a bad thing the onus is on them to put up, shut up or face the potential consequences.

What consequences though? Is suing them the only option ?

[Alfred R Jones]

What consequences though? Is suing them the only option ?

No, there are other options, eg a punch in the face.

[Carana]

That isn't what it said in the judgement...that's why I question whether we have seen the full judgement

I just double-checked: she doesn't cite TdeA directly in relation to the dogs, but she clearly refers to his report in relation to other issues, and the dogs do appear in his report.

However, I see your point: where are "alínea AR" and "AS" of the undisputed facts?



5. The body, the existence of which has been confirmed by the EVRD and CSI dogs but also by the results of the preliminary laboratory analyses, cannot be found.

 6. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in the apartment 5A, Ocean Club [alínea AR) of the undisputed facts].

7. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in a vehicle rented by the claimants after the disappearance of MMC [alínea AS) of the undisputed facts].

(...)

 9. Pp. 2587-602 of the criminal investigation, 19.07.2007, chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida wrote a report in which the following section can be transcribed
:
"From all that was gathered, the facts point in the direction that the death of Madeleine McCann occurred, on the night of May 3rd of 2007, inside the apartment 5A, of the Ocean Club resort, occupied by the couple McCann and by their three children;" (...)

"From all that was exposed, it results from the Autos that :

A) The minor Madeleine McCann died in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort, on the night of May 3rd of 2007;

B) A simulation of kidnapping occurred ;

C) In order to turn impossible the death of the minor before 22H00, a situation of vigil of the McCann children while they slept was invented ;

D) Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the concealment of the cadaver of their daughter Madeleine McCann;

E) At the present moment, it seems that there are no strong clues that the death of the minor wasn't due to a tragic accident;

F) From what was obtained until now, everything points out that the McCann, in self-defence, don't want to deliver immediately and voluntarily the cadaver, existing a strong possibility that the same was transported from the initial place of deposition. This situation is susceptible to raise questions about the circumstances under which the death of the minor occurred.
So we suggest that the 'Autos' be sent to the Public Prosecutor for Lagos, in order to proceed to :

G) an eventual new questioning of the arguidos (formal suspects) Kate and Gerry McCann ;

H) the evaluation of the measure of restraint to be applied in this case;” (p. 2601 of criminal Investigation Autos)

(...)

This theory of the facts comes from the own investigation, it is shaped in the chief inspector Tavares de Almeida's report (No. 9), it was an avenue pursued by the investigation (paragraphs 10 and 11), it determined the constitution of the claimants Gerald and Kate McCann as arguidos and was put within the reach of the media, and soon of the general public through a copy of the inquest (paragraphs 65 and 66) .

One wonders then what is the difference between 1) asserting – as it was done at a certain step of the investigation or as many commentators do – that there are indices of accidental death, concealment of the corpse and simulation of crime and 2) supporting this view as did the defendant Goncalo Amaral in those three mediums.

There is one aspect that stands out in this comparison and it is the particular relationship between the defendant Goncalo Amaral and the investigation...

[G-Unit]

I just double-checked: she doesn't cite TdeA directly in relation to the dogs, but she clearly refers to his report in relation to other issues, and the dogs do appear in his report.

However, I see your point: where are "alínea AR" and "AS" of the undisputed facts?



5. The body, the existence of which has been confirmed by the EVRD and CSI dogs but also by the results of the preliminary laboratory analyses, cannot be found.

 6. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in the apartment 5A, Ocean Club [alínea AR) of the undisputed facts].

7. The British police dogs “Eddie” and “Keela” detected human blood and cadaver in a vehicle rented by the claimants after the disappearance of MMC [alínea AS) of the undisputed facts].

(...)

 9. Pp. 2587-602 of the criminal investigation, 19.07.2007, chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida wrote a report in which the following section can be transcribed
:
"From all that was gathered, the facts point in the direction that the death of Madeleine McCann occurred, on the night of May 3rd of 2007, inside the apartment 5A, of the Ocean Club resort, occupied by the couple McCann and by their three children;" (...)

"From all that was exposed, it results from the Autos that :

A) The minor Madeleine McCann died in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort, on the night of May 3rd of 2007;

B) A simulation of kidnapping occurred ;

C) In order to turn impossible the death of the minor before 22H00, a situation of vigil of the McCann children while they slept was invented ;

D) Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the concealment of the cadaver of their daughter Madeleine McCann;

E) At the present moment, it seems that there are no strong clues that the death of the minor wasn't due to a tragic accident;

F) From what was obtained until now, everything points out that the McCann, in self-defence, don't want to deliver immediately and voluntarily the cadaver, existing a strong possibility that the same was transported from the initial place of deposition. This situation is susceptible to raise questions about the circumstances under which the death of the minor occurred.
So we suggest that the 'Autos' be sent to the Public Prosecutor for Lagos, in order to proceed to :

G) an eventual new questioning of the arguidos (formal suspects) Kate and Gerry McCann ;

H) the evaluation of the measure of restraint to be applied in this case;” (p. 2601 of criminal Investigation Autos)

(...)

This theory of the facts comes from the own investigation, it is shaped in the chief inspector Tavares de Almeida's report (No. 9), it was an avenue pursued by the investigation (paragraphs 10 and 11), it determined the constitution of the claimants Gerald and Kate McCann as arguidos and was put within the reach of the media, and soon of the general public through a copy of the inquest (paragraphs 65 and 66) .

One wonders then what is the difference between 1) asserting – as it was done at a certain step of the investigation or as many commentators do – that there are indices of accidental death, concealment of the corpse and simulation of crime and 2) supporting this view as did the defendant Goncalo Amaral in those three mediums.

There is one aspect that stands out in this comparison and it is the particular relationship between the defendant Goncalo Amaral and the investigation...

So the investigation said the child died and they concealed the body. Other commentators said it. Amaral said it. The difference being the particular relationship between the defendant Goncalo Amaral and the investigation.

[Carana]

So the investigation said the child died and they concealed the body. Other commentators said it. Amaral said it. The difference being the particular relationship between the defendant Goncalo Amaral and the investigation.

No. The investigation did not conclude that the child had died... that's precisely part of the problem - a report supposedly written by his chum Tavares de Almeida (it was at least signed by him) came to that conclusion, but that was back in the early months of the investigation. Presenting an early goal scored as a team having won the match is at the very least misleading, don't you think?

[G-Unit]

No. The investigation did not conclude that the child had died... that's precisely part of the problem - a report supposedly written by his chum Tavares de Almeida (it was at least signed by him) came to that conclusion, but that was back in the early months of the investigation. Presenting an early goal scored as a team having won the match is at the very least misleading, don't you think?

Please don't split hairs. It was said;

asserting – as it was done at a certain step of the investigation or as many commentators do – that there are indices of accidental death, concealment of the corpse and simulation of crime

[Carana]

Please don't split hairs. It was said;

asserting – as it was done at a certain step of the investigation or as many commentators do – that there are indices of accidental death, concealment of the corpse and simulation of crime

I'm not splitting hairs - the initial stage of the investigation doesn't equate to the totality of it. Otherwise, we're back to Hitler won the war.

[Eleanor]

Please don't split hairs. It was said;

asserting – as it was done at a certain step of the investigation or as many commentators do – that there are indices of accidental death, concealment of the corpse and simulation of crime

It sounds to me as though it is you splitting hairs.  Or deciding the end result on the half time score.

[G-Unit]

The investigation said it, others said it. I never said when they said it or why, and I never mentioned a conclusion so picking me up on that point is splitting hairs in my opinion. My main point was that Amaral was not allowed to say it in the judge's opinion because he had a certain relationship with the investigation.

[Mr Gray]

The investigation said it, others said it. I never said when they said it or why, and I never mentioned a conclusion so picking me up on that point is splitting hairs in my opinion. My main point was that Amaral was not allowed to say it in the judge's opinion because he had a certain relationship with the investigation.

You are wrong as usual...the investigation in the early stages gave accidental death as one of the possibilities...amaral stated it as fact...

[Carana]

The investigation said it, others said it. I never said when they said it or why, and I never mentioned a conclusion so picking me up on that point is splitting hairs in my opinion. My main point was that Amaral was not allowed to say it in the judge's opinion because he had a certain relationship with the investigation.

Yes. That appears to be the case.

[Mr Gray]

Yes. That appears to be the case.

Have we really seen the entire judgement?

[Carana]

Have we really seen the entire judgement?

I'm wondering about that - has anyone found these "alinea AR", "AS" and whatever others there may have been? I can't find them...

[Carana]

@ Davel

Clearly not all of the documents are online: there are apparently over 1000 pages related to the injunction and another 1000+ for the main trial.

http://pjga.blogspot.com/2015/05/proven-facts-in-civil-trial-english.html?utm_source=BP_recent