The Times of London ...

[ferryman]

It does seem as if there were proceedings on the Friday.

I haven't subscribed, so I don't know the details, but The Sun (now also pay-only) reported Friday's proceedings:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5135940/McCann-children-banned-from-internet-by-parents.html

[ferryman]

It turns out that David Trickey testified to damage that could be inflicted in the future from the legacy of Amaral's poision (and that of his disciples) in the future, rather than damage already done.

[Mr Moderator]

May I ask why some members are posting simplistic second-hand newspaper accounts when our own member has gone to the trouble of attending the Palace of Justice personally and has taken comprehensive notes on all the evidence?  This thread has no logic for me   8-)(--)

[Redblossom]

May I ask why some members are posting simplistic second-hand newspaper accounts when our own member has gone to the trouble of attending the Palace of Justice personally and has taken comprehensive notes on all the evidence?  This thread has no logic for me   8-)(--)

Agree

Nice piece here

Libel Diary–Weekend note
 

So straightaway to an apology to Anne Guedes for having said “we” were making a poor job of bringing the news from the Lisbon court. In fact M/S Guedes was writing up her multi-lingual notes and has now produced Part One of  her report.  Can I add my own thanks to those of others and also credit the sad refugee photos we carried  on Friday.

Her contribution, coming on top of Martin Brunt's woeful attempted tweets and even more woeful desertion, marks the day when the voluntarism of the last six years completed its victory over the compromised mainstream media. We are free of them in the McCann case: the  Kiersymmons MSM role is to make a good living filling the gaps between the adverts with packaged product for the ignorant. Let them get on with it.

M/S Guedes’s first report in PDF form is here: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2240.0;attach=2624


http://aninspectorcallsyou.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/libel-diaryweekend-note.html

It IS a mystery why skys crime correspondent Martin Brunt dropped the reporting for Friday mornng!
And why a very small section of UK/Irish media have printed dribs and drabs from that morning.

Wierd

[ferryman]

May I ask why some members are posting simplistic second-hand newspaper accounts when our own member has gone to the trouble of attending the Palace of Justice personally and has taken comprehensive notes on all the evidence?  This thread has no logic for me   8-)(--)

Fair comment.

I had read bits and pieces elsewhere from various, backwater, regions of the internet rather than Anne's posts, which I've only just caught up on.


Anne seems to have summarised most salient points fairly well, and I add my thanks for her efforts.

[Mr Moderator]

Fair comment.

I had read bits and pieces elsewhere from various, backwater, regions of the internet rather than Anne's posts, which I've only just caught up on.


Anne seems to have summarised most salient points fairly well, and I add my thanks for her efforts.

Thank you for clarifying this matter ferryman.  I wasn't too sure whether you had seen Anne's document but I can assure you there is plenty more to come.  I also believe it is very important for such a document to be impartial and Anne appears to have achieved this.  Full marks so far!

[stephen25000]

 

Thank you for clarifying this matter ferryman.  I wasn't too sure whether you had seen Anne's document but I can assure you there is plenty more to come.  I also believe it is very important for such a document to be impartial and Anne appears to have achieved this.  Full marks so far!

[Jazzy]

May I ask why some members are posting simplistic second-hand newspaper accounts when our own member has gone to the trouble of attending the Palace of Justice personally and has taken comprehensive notes on all the evidence?  This thread has no logic for me   8-)(--)

There is a credibility gap. The simplistic second-hand newspaper accounts aren't written by known [ censored word ]s.

[John]

There is a credibility gap. The simplistic second-hand newspaper accounts aren't written by known p......s.

You're right on one account, the reporter is driven by the need to embellish his or her story for cash rewards.

[Luz]

filed its one and only report of the libel trial at just after midnight on Friday.

This is it:

Published at 12:01AM, September 13 2013

The mother of Madeleine McCann wept in a Portuguese court yesterday at the start of a £1 million libel claim against the detective who led the search for her missing daughter.

Kate McCann, her husband Gerry and their twins Sean and Amelie, 8, are suing Gonçalo Amaral over a book in which he argues that Madeleine was killed accidentally and implicates her parents in her alleged death. The McCanns say that their daughter was abducted days before her fourth birthday from her bedroom in their holiday villa in Praia da Luz in May 2007.

Mr Amaral published Maddie: The Truth of the Lie three days after Portuguese police closed the investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance. They said there was no evidence that her parents were involved.

The McCanns say the claims in the former chief inspector’s book have hampered the search for their daughter and poisoned Portuguese public opinion against them. They believe that Madeleine was kidnapped and is still alive. The McCanns, both doctors from Rothley, Leicestershire, had unsuccessfully tried to ban the book, which has been turned into a Portuguese television film.

Kate McCann, 45, who is not expected to give evidence, wiped tears from her eyes as the court heard how she broke down and wept when Madeleine disappeared.

Susan Hubbard, the wife of the Anglican priest at the church in Praia da Luz, told the court that Mrs McCann had been “devastated” by the claims in the book and film. She said that the actors who played the couple portrayed them as “crazy, heavy drinkers”.

Emma Loach, who made a Channel 4 documentary about Madeleine’s disappearance, said that Mr Amaral’s book and television programme meant the Portuguese public were deterred from helping to find the missing girl.

Ms Loach, the daughter of the film-maker Ken Loach, told the court: “Kate realised the people she needed help from now thought Madeleine was dead and [her parents] were implicated.”

Mr Amaral was removed from the Madeleine inquiry in October 2007 after he accused British police of helping her parents to cover up their role in their daughter’s death.

Scotland Yard said in July this year that it had identified 38 potential suspects in the case and opened a new international inquiry after a review of evidence ordered by David Cameron. It was reported yesterday that Scotland Yard had advised the McCanns not to appear in court to avoid antagonising the Portuguese authorities and public.

Mr Amaral, 56, will argue that under Portuguese law he is entitled to make the claims.

The hearing continues today.

The very last line: the hearing continues today.

But no further reports.

Why not?

Has Snr Santos' frank admission that Madeleine could be alive torpedoed Amaral's case?

Has he, in fact, caved in?

According to a witness that was always besides her since she arrived, Kate McCann never shed a single tear at the court. She merely contracted her facial muscles and made that well rehearsed look we all have seen now on several interviews.

The lawyer Santos de Oliveira didn't say the child was alive, he merely recalled that the book reproduces the conclusions presented in the final report:

«Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logic, of normalcy and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively – the most dramatic – to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.»

Republic’s Prosecutor (José de Magalhães e Menezes)/The Joint General Prosecutor (João Melchior Gomes) in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS - Volume XVII - pages 4645-4649 (Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch)»

[Mo Stache]

Luz - "The lawyer Santos de Oliveira didn't say the child was alive, he merely recalled that the book reproduces the conclusions presented in the final report."
I must have missed that part in the AG's final report where the McCann's are guilty of concealing Madeleine's body and placing it in a freezer, because that is what is concluded in Amarals book. Oh wait! IT doesn't exist. Because what the AG did said was > "b) The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
Article 277 number 3 of the Penal Process Code is to be fulfilled.
Under article 214 number 1 item a) of the Penal Process Code, the coercion measures that have been imposed on the arguidos are declared extinct. Portimão, 21.07.08, The Republic’s Prosecutor (José de Magalhães e Menezes), The Joint General Prosecutor (João Melchior Gomes)" which is NOT what is concluded in Amarals book. 

[Redblossom]

There is a credibility gap. The simplistic second-hand newspaper accounts aren't written by known p......s.

You will of course furnish the forum with the correct  court transcripts and show where these notes are false, in your own time, of course, meantime a little gatitude wouldnt go amiss!

 


In the meantime  you might want to ponder why the British press withdrew in the main from reporting in depth on day one and almost nothing on day two! Food for thought!

[Luz]

You will of course furnish the forum with the correct  court transcripts and show where these notes are false, in your own time, of course, meantime a little gatitude wouldnt go amiss!

 


In the meantime  you might want to ponder why the British press withdrew in the main from reporting in depth on day one and almost nothing on day two! Food for thought!

If I may venture a guess it may be because it wasn't looking good. We mustn't forget there is a 5 million pounds government founded investigation , supposedly, going on.

[John]

When Amaral's lawyer suggested to the court that the Press be ejected I believe they panicked and even approached members of the public to report for them such was their desperation for a juicy story.

[Redblossom]

If I may venture a guess it may be because it wasn't looking good. We mustn't forget there is a 5 million pounds government founded investigation , supposedly, going on.

Thats a good point!
They probably couldnt not report on it at all, but if they had in full, some of the goings on and statements in court would have seemed a little mindboggling.

Only some weeks ago the Mccanns were on TV sofas saying how happy they were with SY progress and how the search was being speeded up, SY had make breakthroughs etc etc...vast contrast to the tardis like going back in time now

I would imagine the case wouod have some impact on the SY/PJ/other  relations