UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Admin on September 25, 2013, 01:52:12 AM
-
Just imagine if we didn't have our very own member at the libel trial in Lisbon. We would be left to peruse sensationalistic press reports from newspapers who have their own agendas. Other than the very odd tweet we wouldn't have a clue what is really going on, this in itself drives yet more speculation and rumour.
This forum has effectively been a vanguard in relation to these latest hearings if the number of people downloading the reports is anything to go by.
Anne's reports are not selected highlights but a hammer and blow running comment of the action as it happened. We are so grateful to her for taking the time to do this. Thank you Anne.
-
Just imagine if we didn't have our very own member at the libel trial in Lisbon. We would be left to peruse sensationalistic press reports from newspapers who have their own agendas. Other than the very odd tweet we wouldn't have a clue what is really going on, this in itself drives yet more speculation and rumour.
This forum has effectively been a vanguard in relation to these latest hearings if the number of people downloading the reports is anything to go by.
Anne's reports are not selected highlights but a hammer and blow running comment of the action as it happened. We are so grateful to her for taking the time to do this. Thank you Anne.
I will second that and add my thanks too. I know only too well from my own profession how time consuming these things can be. 8@??)( 8((()*/
-
Fantastic work!
Since finding Anne's transcripts I realise just how lopsided journalism is in this case. I've given up trying to read reports in the mainstream media. What they do tell us is so little yet they've manage to fill a whole page based on a few snippets. How is this possible? I just can't understand why they're so limited in what they do report on the libel trial.
Without Anne and Admin of this forum we wouldn't know the truth of what was said inside the court room.
Many thanks to Anne for being present at each day of the trial and all her hard work. Many thanks also to Admin for publishing the transcripts and making them available for download to the public. Very much appreciated.
Jaci x
-
Fantastic work!
Since finding Anne's transcripts I realise just how lopsided journalism is in this case. I've given up trying to read reports in the mainstream media. What they do tell us is so little yet they've manage to fill a whole page based on a few snippets. How is this possible? I just can't understand why they're so limited in what they do report on the libel trial.
Without Anne and Admin of this forum we wouldn't know the truth of what was said inside the court room.
Many thanks to Anne for being present at each day of the trial and all her hard work. Many thanks also to Admin for publishing the transcripts and making them available for download to the public. Very much appreciated.
Jaci x
Jaci has said it all for me
I just want to add my thanks
-
..... removed delete quote ....
I have already thanked Anne for her efforts on another thread and stated that they are by far the best record of the court trial we so far have.
But I have also made a suggestion/request on the trial thread which I believe would mean that what is available to readers would show an even fuller picture. I hope the request is treated seriously and not just dismissed automatically as "sniping" as I have seen already happen.
-
What a fantastic job you have done. I can't imagine the concentration and time this must all have taken.
I hope many people will take the time to actually READ the transcriptions.
Again, with thanks.
-
What a fantastic job you have done. I can't imagine the concentration and time this must all have taken.
I hope many people will take the time to actually READ the transcriptions.
Again, with thanks.
agree meadow and nice to see you 8@??)(
-
So you join a thread designed to offer appreciation in order to say you have none ?
the pros are such bitter stiff upper lipped people its sad isnt it they cant show any genuine emotion sounds like someone else we know too
-
the pros are such bitter stiff upper lipped people its sad isnt it they cant show any genuine emotion sounds like someone else we know too
Not bitter at all. Just have compassion and empathy for the family of a missing child.
-
I sent two pics of my notes to John, in order to satisfy some posters' legitimate curiosity. Unfortunately I'm the only one who can understand them, thanks to a memory that will be erased in a short time. John corrects my clumsinesses in English so that reading is easier for you. Sometimes, rarely, he's not sure about what I wrote or misunderstood and I reformulate it. After he edited, he sends the report back and I rectify before sending him again. Sometimes he again has doubts and sends me to check.
-
I sent two pics of my notes to John, in order to satisfy some posters' legitimate curiosity. Unfortunately I'm the only one who can understand them, thanks to a memory that will be erased in a short time. John corrects my clumsinesses in English so that reading is easier for you. Sometimes, rarely, he's not sure about what I wrote or misunderstood and I reformulate it. After he edited, he sends the report back and I rectify before sending him again. Sometimes he again has doubts and sends me to check.
you are doing wonderful keep it up 8@??)(
-
Sterling work, Anne and John
-
..... removed delete quote ....
I have already thanked Anne for her efforts on another thread and stated that they are by far the best record of the court trial we so far have.
But I have also made a suggestion/request on the trial thread which I believe would mean that what is available to readers would show an even fuller picture. I hope the request is treated seriously and not just dismissed automatically as "sniping" as I have seen already happen.
I am just getting around to reviewing these posts Gilet so will have a look.
-
What a fantastic job you have done. I can't imagine the concentration and time this must all have taken.
I hope many people will take the time to actually READ the transcriptions.
Again, with thanks.
Thank you Meadow and welcome to the forum.
It has been a struggle to get the tribunal Reports onto the forum but it has been very worthwhile because in the final analysis an almost word for word record of what was said combined with other Court events affords the reader a great opportunity to make up their own mind about the testimony.
This is especially valid since the events at the Palace of Justice are taking place in both English and Portuguese. I have just reviewed the numbers and one Report alone, that relating to Mrs Susan Hubbard, has been downloaded 890 times.
-
I sent two pics of my notes to John, in order to satisfy some posters' legitimate curiosity. Unfortunately I'm the only one who can understand them, thanks to a memory that will be erased in a short time. John corrects my clumsinesses in English so that reading is easier for you. Sometimes, rarely, he's not sure about what I wrote or misunderstood and I reformulate it. After he edited, he sends the report back and I rectify before sending him again. Sometimes he again has doubts and sends me to check.
I think it might also be worth pointing out that it is the English language that is being edited and not the actual meaning of the content.
Anne's notes.
(http://i.imgur.com/yYmhEnx.jpg?3)
-
I sent two pics of my notes to John, in order to satisfy some posters' legitimate curiosity. Unfortunately I'm the only one who can understand them, thanks to a memory that will be erased in a short time. John corrects my clumsinesses in English so that reading is easier for you. Sometimes, rarely, he's not sure about what I wrote or misunderstood and I reformulate it. After he edited, he sends the report back and I rectify before sending him again. Sometimes he again has doubts and sends me to check.
Nonetheless, the fullest understanding of the court case by the reader here would be achieved by reference to all the available documentation.
Having, personally, worked in the past on Mediaeval court financial records I know only too well that brief notes can be difficult to understand but when related forward to the financial reports which they predated, they were able to explain the direction of thought in a way which the report alone could not.
-
Nonetheless, the fullest understanding of the court case by the reader here would be achieved by reference to all the available documentation.
Having, personally, worked in the past on Mediaeval court financial records I know only too well that brief notes can be difficult to understand but when related forward to the financial reports which they predated, they were able to explain the direction of thought in a way which the report alone could not.
It is an offence to misrepresent a witness at trial. QED
-
It is an offence to misrepresent a witness at trial. QED
I presume you mean by QED, "Quo errat demonstrator"!
Because there is no logical proof that Anne's report is error free by reference to the fact that there happens to be a law which prohibits misrepresenting witnesses.
It may well be her intent to remain error free but the existence of the law and even the attempt to adhere to the law does not prove her reports have achieved that goal.
Without the full record of the writing of the reports we can not be sure how much was reliance on memory or notes and cannot be sure how much influence the editor had on the final document.
In the interest of full truth there would appear to be very good reason for allowing us to see all the documentation.
What would be the reason for refusal?
-
Is there any difference between Anne's notes and a report by a journalist in a paper, gilet?
I don't think there is.
I don't see the problem. >@@(*&)
-
I presume you mean by QED, "Quo errat demonstrator"!
Because there is no logical proof that Anne's report is error free by reference to the fact that there happens to be a law which prohibits misrepresenting witnesses.
It may well be her intent to remain error free but the existence of the law and even the attempt to adhere to the law does not prove her reports have achieved that goal.
Without the full record of the writing of the reports we can not be sure how much was reliance on memory or notes and cannot be sure how much influence the editor had on the final document.
In the interest of full truth there would appear to be very good reason for allowing us to see all the documentation.
What would be the reason for refusal?
Because you couldn't interpret them even if you wanted to.
-
I presume you mean by QED, "Quo errat demonstrator"!
Because there is no logical proof that Anne's report is error free by reference to the fact that there happens to be a law which prohibits misrepresenting witnesses.
It may well be her intent to remain error free but the existence of the law and even the attempt to adhere the law does not prove her reports have achieved that goal.
Without the full record of the writing of the reports we can not be sure how much was reliance on memory or notes and cannot be sure how much influence the editor had on the final document.
In the interest of full truth there would appear to be very good reason for allowing us to see all the documentation.
What would be the reason for refusal?
oh for heaven's sake stop it !
You don't want to see Anne's notes or John's editing process in the 'interests of full truth' ... you want to take it back to the nasty forums where it can be picked over by vultures, with lots of rolling on the floor smilies as Anne's less than perfect English is ridiculed and laughed at
Why can't you just accept that this forum has managed to obtain exclusive detailed information, and be grateful that it is being generously shared with others
-
There is no problem, those who wish to take Annes reports as 100% accurate are free to do so...and those who think their may be errors are also free to do so
-
There is no problem, those who wish to take Annes reports as 100% accurate are free to do so...and those who think their may be errors are also free to do so
Who is claiming they are 100% accurate? Who claims a report by a journalist is?
Historians will tell us there's no such thing as 100%.
-
There is no problem, those who wish to take Annes reports as 100% accurate are free to do so...and those who think their may be errors are also free to do so
A good summation, davel.
-
I presume you mean by QED, "Quo errat demonstrator"!
quod erat demonstrandum
-
quod erat demonstrandum
Don't mention The Quo, Anne!
"Down down, deeper and down...."!!
-
quod erat demonstrandum
Not in this case it wasn't.
That is precisely why I changed the wording to demonstrate that it was not QED.
Did you not read the post?
There is no way that stating there is a law which forbids misrepresentation of witnesses can be claimed as proof that the reports on this forum are accurate.
Only a verbatim record can be considered accurate.
All other reports are less than accurate and the more stages they go through the less accurate they become.
Notes, drafting from notes and adding sections from memory alone, followed by editing of the draft by a second person and errors are bound to occur no matter how much effort is put into the work, how expert the people are at the work (and court reporting is a very specific skill as is document editing).
My point that the reports are the best available stands, as does my further point that the reader would benefit from a fuller picture by seeing the notes and the original draft.
-
Who is claiming they are 100% accurate? Who claims a report by a journalist is?
Historians will tell us there's no such thing as 100%.
A pernickety historian will, quite rightly, state that even a verbatim report is not a 100% accurate record of a trial as facial expression, vocal expression, body movement etc all should form part of that record for it to be 100% accurate.
-
A pernickety historian will, quite rightly, state that even a verbatim report is not a 100% accurate record of a trial as facial expression, vocal expression, body movement etc all should form part of that record for it to be 100% accurate.
Dont be so silly, Annes notes and reports of what went on in court is not going to be any bloody historical document!!!!
@)(++(*
Feel free to forensically examine her notes though instead of just LISTENING!!!
@)(++(*
-
I'd just like to add my thanks too. The time and effort that it must take is remarkable. I'm very grateful to you Anne for all the hard work!
Cariad.
-
Dont be so silly, Annes notes and reports of what went on in court is not going to be any bloody historical document!!!!
@)(++(*
Feel free to forensically examine her notes though instead of just LISTENING!!!
@)(++(*
Your sad attempt at humour does not disguise the fact that the reports are neither a verbatim record, nor do they give any real impression as to what took place in the court room beyond the mere words.
-
Your sad attempt at humour does not disguise the fact that the reports are neither a verbatim record, nor do they give any real impression as to what took place in the court room beyond the mere words.
Just re read the statements.
Where are the judges summing up for each of the court days, Anne?. Or didn't she do any summing up?
They all appear to end very abrubtly, with evidence ends!
-
As a new member who has been reading here for some time, I would also like to give my thanks to Anne, for the time and trouble she has gone to, with these court reports. I'd have loved to have been there myself, but this is the next best thing, given our own Media's response. 8@??)(
-
Just re read the statements.
Where are the judges summing up for each of the court days, Anne?. Or didn't she do any summing up?
They all appear to end very abrubtly, with evidence ends!
Most of the sessions seem to end in mid-flow.
-
@ gilet
I wonder if a supporter, intelligent enough to do what Anne has done ( if there is such a thing ! ) had posted similar reports whether you would have questioned their accuracy ?
-
@ gilet
I wonder if a supporter, intelligent enough to do what Anne has done ( if there is such a thing ! ) had posted similar reports whether you would have questioned their accuracy ?
no but 100% Stephen and the rest would have
-
There is no problem, those who wish to take Annes reports as 100% accurate are free to do so...and those who think their may be errors are also free to do so
Get your butt over there and do the reports yourself.
-
Get your butt over there and do the reports yourself.
Should that not be get your but over here? You are in Portugal aren't you?
Maybe it's the language barrier thingy again?
-
no but 100% Stephen and the rest would have
Why wouldn't you have questioned them ? Surely there would be just as much room for error as you claim there is with Anne's reports ?
-
When there's no more question, nor from the defence nor from the complainants, then the Judge thanks the witness and tells s/he's free to leave.