McCanns/Amaral

LJC wrote:I agree with posters who say the McCanns would not want to go to Court. Can you imagine Mr Amaral and his wife and his two little daughters standing on the steps of the Courthouse surrounded by the photographers’ flashing cameras? The paparazzi would love it, filming his children for a change looking so ‘innocent’ and frightened for the whole world to see. This would not be the image that the McCanns would want to get out there because it would be absolute brilliant PR on the part of Mr Amaral without the need for any money grabbing expensive firm of PR consultants latching on like leeches to him. No words would need to be spoken in fact. A photograph would say it all. Newspapers and TV stations would be queuing up for photographs of a family torn apart. I’m sure it would not be something that Mr Amaral would relish as he values his family’s privacy and protection, but if he had really no choice, would anyone blame him if, for once, he put his own children’s future in the spotlight?

I think the British press will still be against Amaral even if he does win. There will be usual slagging off of the "obsese bungling ex-cop" The papers will be full of xenophobic BS for days on end, the Mccanns will make press conferences, saying how their lives have been ruined because of that awful man....It will just run and run.

I really hope that Amaral does get some serious support quickly from some one who can pay his legal costs and put up the best fight imaginable for him. he is the only person who has ttied to find out what happened, yet he is the only one that has been in a court room, it beggars belief!

So, this decision to pursue the Amaral family home was being played out during July and August. Is it entirely coincidental that this also fits with the timing of the resignations of John McCann and Douglas Skehan? Was this the point at which they said "Enough!"?

ashwil wrote:So, this decision to pursue the Amaral family home was being played out during July and August. Is it entirely coincidental that this also fits with the timing of the resignations of John McCann and Douglas Skehan? Was this the point at which they said "Enough!"?

You'd like to think so, wouldn't you.

I for one hope you are right and that, out of the whole sorry bunch, at least one McCann has finally discovered a conscience...

ashwil wrote:So, this decision to pursue the Amaral family home was being played out during July and August. Is it entirely coincidental that this also fits with the timing of the resignations of John McCann and Douglas Skehan? Was this the point at which they said "Enough!"?

Hi ashwil

Is it just a coincidence though - they all behave like each other so I can't imagine they would have any feelings in this respect. It may just be they are too busy with other business. Maybe we have all read too much into these resignations - maybe TM are having a good laugh at our expense - trying to read too much into it. When all the time they were planning this nasty scheme to 'get rich quick' and run off into the distance - having first confirmed with Teresa May that they wouldn't be pursued!

Angelique

When are they going to sue Sofia Leal for libel? She just said that they had paedophiles in their family circle.

That clinches it for me about David Payne by the way, and there being something more than just an accident involved in Maddie's demise. There is something very very dark The Amarals know a lot more than us about the case and for Sofia to say is (probably) more than just a dig because of the initial statements by the Gaspars.

I can't see Gerry's boss being the same as them. So he may have left through disgust

Wallflower wrote:When are they going to sue Sofia Leal for libel? She just said that they had paedophiles in their family circle.

That clinches it for me about David Payne by the way, and there being something more than just an accident involved in Maddie's demise. There is something very very dark The Amarals know a lot more than us about the case and for Sofia to say is (probably) more than just a dig because of the initial statements by the Gaspars.

Wallflower wrote:When are they going to sue Sofia Leal for libel? She just said that they had paedophiles in their family circle.

That clinches it for me about David Payne by the way, and there being something more than just an accident involved in Maddie's demise. There is something very very dark The Amarals know a lot more than us about the case and for Sofia to say is (probably) more than just a dig because of the initial statements by the Gaspars.

Spot on Wallflower!

Rep point on it's way.

Wallflower wrote:When are they going to sue Sofia Leal for libel? She just said that they had paedophiles in their family circle.

That clinches it for me about David Payne by the way, and there being something more than just an accident involved in Maddie's demise. There is something very very dark The Amarals know a lot more than us about the case and for Sofia to say is (probably) more than just a dig because of the initial statements by the Gaspars.

Agree with you, Wallflower. I'd say she must be pretty certain to come out and directly say that.

How on earth can these parasites keep getting away with what they are doing?I hope Goncalo spills the beans on these two low lifes very soon...

bootsy wrote:How on earth can these parasites keep getting away with what they are doing?I hope Goncalo spills the beans on these two low lifes very soon...

He did.....Look what happened??

The McCanns have to punish somebody for the fact that the PJ didn't lap up every lie they told. Dr Amaral was lead detective, but the conclusions of the investigation were those of the combined English and Portuguese police. However, they can't sue two police forces, so they're going for the man who led the investigation, who publicly rubbed their noses in it: too much for their arrogance to bear.

While all this is going on, isn't there even one member of their group of seven holiday friends with a conscience? Are they all so cowardly that they're going to sit back while the McCanns try to ruin the life of the only person who ever truly searched for their daughter? Shame on all of them, every one, and may Karma bite their bums with very sharp teeth!

contrary wrote:I can't see Gerry's boss being the same as them. So he may have left through disgust

Hi contrary

Or maybe it's because he belongs to the same club?

Angelique

As I understand it Goncalo was not the lead detective but the co-ordinator. I believe that there is a difference. Carolina or Col Fabien will be able to clarify ( sorry!!)

fred wrote:

bootsy wrote:How on earth can these parasites keep getting away with what they are doing?I hope Goncalo spills the beans on these two low lifes very soon...

He did.....Look what happened??

Something just occurred to me. I have always thought Amaral's theory was partly wrong, even though I have a lot of respect for him for speaking out. I just do not think it happened in that time period. To me, there is too much oddness on the 1st and 2nd, the strange aspect of no photos or apparent fake photos, the evidence suggesting an estranged relationship and possible issues before PDL (re. a few of the 48 questions). I think it is likely whatever happened, had happened before the afternoon / evening of the 3rd.

If G+K are guilty, but Amaral's theory is just far enough from the truth, this action from G+K might make sense. They must realize that the more they push, the more sympathy there will be for Amaral. They must realize that whatever financial gain they make, it will encourage more people to not believe them or their motives, which may push them towards Amaral's theory.

Now, if that theory actually takes focus away from some significant event that G+K want to stay hidden, the action against Amaral might ultimately work to their advantage.

DavidA wrote:

fred wrote:

bootsy wrote:How on earth can these parasites keep getting away with what they are doing?I hope Goncalo spills the beans on these two low lifes very soon...

He did.....Look what happened??

Something just occurred to me. I have always thought Amaral's theory was partly wrong, even though I have a lot of respect for him for speaking out. I just do not think it happened in that time period. To me, there is too much oddness on the 1st and 2nd, the strange aspect of no photos or apparent fake photos, the evidence suggesting an estranged relationship and possible issues before PDL (re. a few of the 48 questions). I think it is likely whatever happened, had happened before the afternoon / evening of the 3rd.

If G+K are guilty, but Amaral's theory is just far enough from the truth, this action from G+K might make sense. They must realize that the more they push, the more sympathy there will be for Amaral. They must realize that whatever financial gain they make, it will encourage more people to not believe them or their motives, which may push them towards Amaral's theory.

Now, if that theory actually takes focus away from some significant event that G+K want to stay hidden, the action against Amaral might ultimately work to their advantage.

but at what cost???????

DavidA wrote:

fred wrote:

bootsy wrote:How on earth can these parasites keep getting away with what they are doing?I hope Goncalo spills the beans on these two low lifes very soon...

He did.....Look what happened??

Something just occurred to me. I have always thought Amaral's theory was partly wrong, even though I have a lot of respect for him for speaking out. I just do not think it happened in that time period. To me, there is too much oddness on the 1st and 2nd, the strange aspect of no photos or apparent fake photos, the evidence suggesting an estranged relationship and possible issues before PDL (re. a few of the 48 questions). I think it is likely whatever happened, had happened before the afternoon / evening of the 3rd.

If G+K are guilty, but Amaral's theory is just far enough from the truth, this action from G+K might make sense. They must realize that the more they push, the more sympathy there will be for Amaral. They must realize that whatever financial gain they make, it will encourage more people to not believe them or their motives, which may push them towards Amaral's theory.

Now, if that theory actually takes focus away from some significant event that G+K want to stay hidden, the action against Amaral might ultimately work to their advantage.

The lack of photos would be due to the parents doing their own thing all holiday. They were not going away imo to keep snapping the children in happy holiday pictures. However, once the point had been made that there must surely be a last photo of Madeleine on holiday, they had to prove there indeed was. They always have to 'prove' a point.

Wallflower wrote:When are they going to sue Sofia Leal for libel? She just said that they had paedophiles in their family circle.

That clinches it for me about David Payne by the way, and there being something more than just an accident involved in Maddie's demise. There is something very very dark The Amarals know a lot more than us about the case and for Sofia to say is (probably) more than just a dig because of the initial statements by the Gaspars.

Wallflower, she didn't say the McCanns had paedos in their family circle. She just made the point that that Amarals don't! Quite clever really. You can't sue someone for libel just because others make an assumption - however obvious that assumption might be.

Mind you, I did have a wonderful picture in my head of Goncalo giving Sofia one of those "Gerry stares" as she made that comment! She undoubtedly knows everything that her husband knows and I think she has possibly given away something he may not have wanted to disclose at this time.

www.findmadeleine.com......connect to the site, then click on the left to the 'madeliene fund'



You cant read about the directors in english, lol

DavidA wrote:

fred wrote:

bootsy wrote:How on earth can these parasites keep getting away with what they are doing?I hope Goncalo spills the beans on these two low lifes very soon...

He did.....Look what happened??

Something just occurred to me. I have always thought Amaral's theory was partly wrong, even though I have a lot of respect for him for speaking out. I just do not think it happened in that time period. To me, there is too much oddness on the 1st and 2nd, the strange aspect of no photos or apparent fake photos, the evidence suggesting an estranged relationship and possible issues before PDL (re. a few of the 48 questions). I think it is likely whatever happened, had happened before the afternoon / evening of the 3rd.

If G+K are guilty, but Amaral's theory is just far enough from the truth, this action from G+K might make sense. They must realize that the more they push, the more sympathy there will be for Amaral. They must realize that whatever financial gain they make, it will encourage more people to not believe them or their motives, which may push them towards Amaral's theory.

Now, if that theory actually takes focus away from some significant event that G+K want to stay hidden, the action against Amaral might ultimately work to their advantage.

DavidA I agree with you 100% re the dates. Mr Amaral is a very very intelligent guy more intelligent then the whole of the Tapas neglectors put together, I have full confidence in him, I agree that the date he says it happened on doesn't sit right, I believe that Mr Amaral has deliberately put/said certain stuff publicily to lead the McCanns into a false sence of security that they feel so confident that they can take him on.
Mr Amaral would not be doing this if he can't win, yes certain posters will think NO WAY, but think about it............
The book been stopped, is this part of the plan, when he wins this case he will sell a 1000 times more then befor the ruling..............Mr Amaral has got time on his side the Mcs havent, Mr amaral has got intelligence on his side the Mcs haven't......

Imo he is going to tell everything when he gets he's chance in court,he dosen't need to threaten anyone, Team McCann seem to need to, if I was a betting person my money would be on Mr Amaral hands down

It does look a bit hysterical, in my view.

According to the same paper, a few months ago:
__________________________

Amaral seeks legal aid support and states he has no assets Jornal de Notícias

by Alexandra Serôdio
01 December 2009 - 00h30m
Thanks to Joana Morais for translation

Gonçalo Amaral asked for the help of the State in order to be able to defend himself against the case brought by the McCanns.

Citing economic insufficiency to pay the court costs, the former PJ coordinator saw the Civil Court of Lisbon preventively seize the earnings made from the sale of the book and of the documentary through a sole-proprietorship company in his name, as a way to ensure that there will be money to pay any compensation, whose pertinence can only be examined through the main action.

In the aid application document, dated 24 September, Amaral declared an annual net income of 39 thousand Euros, with a household of four people: himself, his wife and two little girls, of 11 and five-years-old. He also states that he does not own any real estate property.

According to a document from the Land Registry Office of Olhão, dated 21 September, to which the JN had access, Amaral, 'owns' a single-family house consisting of two floors, two terraces and a swimming pool, which is valued at more than 200 thousand euros.

The sole-proprietorship company in Amaral's name, created for the marketing of the book, has a car registered, of the Jaguar brand. The registration of that property was made in May, this year.
_________________________

It could quite simply be that Amaral wanted to put the property into his wife's name and the land registry were not prepared to play ball.

buildersbum wrote:

DavidA wrote:

fred wrote:

bootsy wrote:How on earth can these parasites keep getting away with what they are doing?I hope Goncalo spills the beans on these two low lifes very soon...

He did.....Look what happened??

Something just occurred to me. I have always thought Amaral's theory was partly wrong, even though I have a lot of respect for him for speaking out. I just do not think it happened in that time period. To me, there is too much oddness on the 1st and 2nd, the strange aspect of no photos or apparent fake photos, the evidence suggesting an estranged relationship and possible issues before PDL (re. a few of the 48 questions). I think it is likely whatever happened, had happened before the afternoon / evening of the 3rd.

If G+K are guilty, but Amaral's theory is just far enough from the truth, this action from G+K might make sense. They must realize that the more they push, the more sympathy there will be for Amaral. They must realize that whatever financial gain they make, it will encourage more people to not believe them or their motives, which may push them towards Amaral's theory.

Now, if that theory actually takes focus away from some significant event that G+K want to stay hidden, the action against Amaral might ultimately work to their advantage.

DavidA I agree with you 100% re the dates. Mr Amaral is a very very intelligent guy more intelligent then the whole of the Tapas neglectors put together, I have full confidence in him, I agree that the date he says it happened on doesn't sit right, I believe that Mr Amaral has deliberately put/said certain stuff publicily to lead the McCanns into a false sence of security that they feel so confident that they can take him on.
Mr Amaral would not be doing this if he can't win, yes certain posters will think NO WAY, but think about it............
The book been stopped, is this part of the plan, when he wins this case he will sell a 1000 times more then befor the ruling..............Mr Amaral has got time on his side the Mcs havent, Mr amaral has got intelligence on his side the Mcs haven't......

Imo he is going to tell everything when he gets he's chance in court,he dosen't need to threaten anyone, Team McCann seem to need to, if I was a betting person my money would be on Mr Amaral hands down

I am not sure about this theory. I do not think Mr Amaral would deliberately say something misleading, as he may trip himself up. It is the McCanns who have said things which are deliberately misleading and they have, time and again, shown how inconsistent they are in their stories.

Also, I do not think the McCanns would want to see him in Court personally.

I think it is what Mr Amaral is not saying that worries them. I think there may be games of bluff and double bluff going on, with neither side willing to budge.

ashwil wrote:

Wallflower wrote:When are they going to sue Sofia Leal for libel? She just said that they had paedophiles in their family circle.

That clinches it for me about David Payne by the way, and there being something more than just an accident involved in Maddie's demise. There is something very very dark The Amarals know a lot more than us about the case and for Sofia to say is (probably) more than just a dig because of the initial statements by the Gaspars.

Wallflower, she didn't say the McCanns had paedos in their family circle. She just made the point that that Amarals don't! Quite clever really. You can't sue someone for libel just because others make an assumption - however obvious that assumption might be.

Mind you, I did have a wonderful picture in my head of Goncalo giving Sofia one of those "Gerry stares" as she made that comment! She undoubtedly knows everything that her husband knows and I think she has possibly given away something he may not have wanted to disclose at this time.

She was contrasting the behaviour of herself and husband directly with the McCanns'.

She said we did not abandon our children and let paedos into the circle.

I'm sure her lawyer could argue as you have though

i'm not convinced that this anything more than the portuguese or european version of a mareva injunction...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mareva_injunction

...so it would be a big help if anyone can acertain exactly what is happening before this thread, which is already attracting attention, goes a little too far.

thank you.

LJC said....
Also, I do not think the McCanns would want to see him in Court personally.

I think it is what Mr Amaral is not saying that worries them. I think there may be games of bluff and double bluff going on, with neither side willing to budge.



I agree with this but Mr Amaral doesn't need to bluff or budge he aint quite has desperate as the McCanns are, re the inconsistances with them right fronm the 3rd May 2007.