Pro bono or Conditional Fee Arrangement (CFA)?

[Vertigo Swirl]

You may be happy for falsehoods to be passed off, unchallenged, as fact, but I'm not.

Wow, you actually DO care!  Who knew...?

[Mr Gray]

Didn't Sean ask his parents why they had hidden Maddie?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jul/08/son-claims-hid-madeleine-kate-mccann-court

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10953524/Kate-McCann-my-son-asked-me-whether-we-hid-Maddies-body.html

I think the answer is no.....the  phrase used by the paper does not match what Kate is reported to have said in the article....and we have a fairly accurate account of what Kate said in the court transcript....and it doesn't support the claim you have made

[jassi]

Wow, you actually DO care!  Who knew...?

I don't care about much of the trivia that is argued back and forth, ( the title of this thread is a good example), but when the truth is known it should be recognised as such.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I don't care about much of the trivia that is argued back and forth, ( the title of this thread is a good example), but when the truth is known it should be recognised as such.

the thing is, a cite can be provided and then rejected for any number of reasons, eg:
1) it was is the Sun, lower than a snake’s belly.
2) it was in a tabloid - lower than a dog’s belly
3) it was in a newspaper - they are all in the pay of the McCanns anyway
4) it quotes unnamed sources - therefore obviously made up by a journalist
5) it was said by Andy Redwood and he’s not part of Op Grange anymore
6) it was said by a police officer but clearly they meant the opposite of what they said (read between the lines goddamit!)
7) it was said by a member of the Tapas Group - can’t be trusted, except when they are clearly telling the truth (depends what point you are trying to prove).
8) it was in Kate’s Book - soemtimes a reliable source, sometimes not depending on what you’re trying to prove at any given time.
ETC
IMO

[Mr Gray]

the thing is, a cite can be provided and then rejected for any number of reasons, eg:
1) it was is the Sun, lower than a snake’s belly.
2) it was in a tabloid - lower than a dog’s belly
3) it was in a newspaper - they are all in the pay of the McCanns anyway
4) it quotes unnamed sources - therefore obviously made up by a journalist
5) it was said by Andy Redwood and he’s not part of Op Grange anymore
6) it was said by a police officer but clearly they meant the opposite of what they said (read between the lines goddamit!)
7) it was said by a member of the Tapas Group - can’t be trusted, except when they are clearly telling the truth (depends what point you are trying to prove).
8) it was in Kate’s Book - soemtimes a reliable source, sometimes not depending on what you’re trying to prove at any given time.
ETC
IMO

Quite...the McCann's are not suspects in either investigation....a cite is given from senior policeman....but the cite us considered not acceptable...so what is the point in asking or providing a cite

[John]

I think the answer is no.....the  phrase used by the paper does not match what Kate is reported to have said in the article....and we have a fairly accurate account of what Kate said in the court transcript....and it doesn't support the claim you have made

From the libel trial transcript...

Kate Healy (McCann) - In October last year my son Sean asked me why did Mr. Amaral said that we had hid Madeleine's body. I told him that Mr. Amaral says many silly things.

Judge - How did he know about that?
Kate Healy (McCann)  I think he heard it on the radio, in the school bus.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4745.msg172157#msg172157

[Mr Gray]

There's no such thing, either the court is involved or it isn't.  In the McCann case, a writ was raised and served on the defendants.  The judge would hear both sides and ask them to go away and agree terms between themselves. They did that and came back to court where the agreement was made binding.

Could we have a cite to support your claim...the judge listened to both sides....then asked them to go away and agree terms between themselves...

Imo...the express capitulated before the hearing and the deal was already done

[Mr Gray]

From the libel trial transcript...

Kate Healy (McCann) - In October last year my son Sean asked me why did Mr. Amaral said that we had hid Madeleine's body. I told him that Mr. Amaral says many silly things.

Judge - How did he know about that?
Kate Healy (McCann)  I think he heard it on the radio, in the school bus.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4745.msg172157#msg172157

So Sean is saying why is amaral saying this....he is not questioning the McCann's account

[jassi]

From the libel trial transcript...

Kate Healy (McCann) - In October last year my son Sean asked me why did Mr. Amaral said that we had hid Madeleine's body. I told him that Mr. Amaral says many silly things.

Judge - How did he know about that?
Kate Healy (McCann)  I think he heard it on the radio, in the school bus.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4745.msg172157#msg172157

That was a few years ago. He will doubtless have been exposed to more than that since he went to secondary school

[Vertigo Swirl]

That was a few years ago. He will doubtless have been exposed to more than that since he went to secondary school

Are you rejecting this cite, on the basis it is out of date?  Add that excuse to the list above then.

[Mr Gray]

So there is no cite to support Sean from questioning the McCann's account but a cite questioning amaral account

[John]

Who judges if the cite is inadequate?  Isn't there a forum rule that says no one is obliged to answer any post, or to be constantly harassed?  If you think Davel hasn't provided a cite and it's that important to you (two weeks after what amounted to a fairly throwaway comment that has been seized on and blown up out of all proportion).

In the first instance the members decide, failing that it is referred to the moderators and if that fails an editor or admin will adjudicate.

[jassi]

Are you rejecting this cite, on the basis it is out of date?  Add that excuse to the list above then.

Did I say I rejected it?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Did I say I rejected it?

It would seem so, by commenting on the fact that it was a few years ago you seem to be suggesting that by now the situation will have changed, and that Sean will indeed be “questioning the whole sordid business” as claimed by Angelo. All IMO, feel free to deny.

[jassi]

It would seem so, by commenting on the fact that it was a few years ago you seem to be suggesting that by now the situation will have changed, and that Sean will indeed be “questioning the whole sordid business” as claimed by Angelo. All IMO, feel free to deny.

You seem to have a strange level of comprehension. Never mind, whatever make you happy.