McCann judgment that opposes the Gonçalo Amaral SUSPENDED

Sorry if I have missed it somewhere, but is this 6 months for an out of court agreement have to agreed by all parties?

Palmeras16 wrote:

Carolina wrote:
What capitulation are you talking about? This is a joke by Claudia and nothing more. I'm sure that GA would never even consider this possibility. He has waited this long and not given in so why now when the McCanns are the ones throwing in the towel and asking for a suspension and negotiation. If it had been the other way around, we would have been bombarded with press releases and probably a press conference.

Yes I agree Caroline, the five euros is a small joke by Claudia, it had slipped my mind that she could be such a bundle of fun on occasion. However the fact that GA is going to have to pay the McCanns compensation is not a joke. He has six months to agree settlement and I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't have to hand over at least half of his assets, which are currently frozen.

Its very interesting what times you show up and what threads you choose to post in.

SteveT wrote:Sorry if I have missed it somewhere, but is this 6 months for an out of court agreement have to agreed by all parties?

Of course. If it is an agreement it has to be agreed by all parties. It is not a case of the McCanns coming up with a settlement of let's say € 10.000,00 and GA has to accept it. He can say no till they're blue in the face. If after six months, a limit which is in accordance with Portuguese law, no agreement is reached then the case goes to court or the McCanns can withdraw their complaint.

i would love to see the mcanns up infront of a judge --they wouldnt go as far as that imo

cass wrote:i would love to see the mcanns up infront of a judge --they wouldnt go as far as that imo

Always thought the Americans would of sorted this...Grand Jury stylee

Carolina,

Probably should have worded my question better. For the court case to be delayed for 6 months, was it requested by the McCanns and did Mr.Amaral have to agree to this?

Carolina

I would respectfully request that you respond to
my earlier post, and I do not mind your usual rant
as long as logic embodies its purpose.

The trial that pits the McCanns Gonçalo Amaral, in which Madeleine's parents claim compensation of € 1.2 million for allegedly defaming the former PJ inspector, is suspended in an attempt to settlement. judicial source told Agence Lusa that the beginning of the trial, scheduled for 24 and 25 of this month, at 1. Civil Court of Lisbon, "was suspended because the parties are seeking an agreement"

It would appear that BOTH parties agreed to the delay. The McCanns because they have Tony to deal with, Kate to publish her new book and Amaral to give his new Lawyer time to acquaint himself thoroughly with the case . IMO the McCanns claims were always weak, his book did nothing to hinder the search for Madeleine, the latest sighting in Brazil will go the way of all the other sightings though .

marxman wrote:Carolina

I would respectfully request that you respond to
my earlier post, and I do not mind your usual rant
as long as logic embodies its purpose.

I'm sorry that you were offended by my post but I am sure that Gonçalo Amaral would be offended if anyone ever suggested that he would team up with the McCanns to put the blame on the PJ for their "sloppy investigation" in order to save his own skin. I found the suggestion insulting for a man who had stood up to the poisonous pair for years and even when his wife begged for him to come to an agreement. You seem to forget that GA was part of this investigation as a coordinator and has always been in agreement with the conclusions of the report signed by Tavares de Almeida from September 2007 otherwise he would never have written the book. He is a man of honour. My "rant" was perfectly logical.

Furthermore, you can't sue a police force for investigating you. You can get compensation for being wrongly jailed.

SteveT wrote:Carolina,

Probably should have worded my question better. For the court case to be delayed for 6 months, was it requested by the McCanns and did Mr.Amaral have to agree to this?

I'm sure that the judge has to agree but as to the other parties I really don't know but it does seem likely.

Carolina wrote:

marxman wrote:Carolina

I would respectfully request that you respond to
my earlier post, and I do not mind your usual rant
as long as logic embodies its purpose.

I'm sorry that you were offended by my post but I am sure that Gonçalo Amaral would be offended if anyone ever suggested that he would team up with the McCanns to put the blame on the PJ for their "sloppy investigation" in order to save his own skin. I found the suggestion insulting for a man who had stood up to the poisonous pair for years and even when his wife begged for him to come to an agreement. You seem to forget that GA was part of this investigation as a coordinator and has always been in agreement with the conclusions of the report signed by Tavares de Almeida from September 2007 otherwise he would never have written the book. He is a man of honour. My "rant" was perfectly logical.

Thankyou Carolina for your reply, I was indeed
offended by your post, because I never intended
my words to imply that GA would 'team up' with
the mccanns against the PJ. I was trying to suggest
that if GA received the full backing of the PJ, with
all it's resourses, it would make for a formidable
and proper defence against charges of libel. As you
correctly say, GA has represented the views and
conclusions of the investigation. Therefore, IMO,
he should not be left on his own to 'carry the can',
but to carry the full support and blessing of the PJ.
This, i was implying that GA may agree with.

Friends now Carolina?

marxman wrote:

Carolina wrote:

marxman wrote:Carolina

I would respectfully request that you respond to
my earlier post, and I do not mind your usual rant
as long as logic embodies its purpose.

I'm sorry that you were offended by my post but I am sure that Gonçalo Amaral would be offended if anyone ever suggested that he would team up with the McCanns to put the blame on the PJ for their "sloppy investigation" in order to save his own skin. I found the suggestion insulting for a man who had stood up to the poisonous pair for years and even when his wife begged for him to come to an agreement. You seem to forget that GA was part of this investigation as a coordinator and has always been in agreement with the conclusions of the report signed by Tavares de Almeida from September 2007 otherwise he would never have written the book. He is a man of honour. My "rant" was perfectly logical.

Thankyou Carolina for your reply, I was indeed
offended by your post, because I never intended
my words to imply that GA would 'team up' with
the mccanns against the PJ. I was trying to suggest
that if GA received the full backing of the PJ, with
all it's resourses, it would make for a formidable
and proper defence against charges of libel. As you
correctly say, GA has represented the views and
conclusions of the investigation. Therefore, IMO,
he should not be left on his own to 'carry the can',
but to carry the full support and blessing of the PJ.
This, i was implying that GA may agree with.

Friends now Carolina?

No problem. My interpretation was that you wanted GA to team up with the McCanns and was very surprised.

oh Marxman i have to apologise to you too. i had similar thoughts to Carolina, so my apologies for misunderstanding your post.

Carolina wrote:

marxman wrote:

Carolina wrote:

marxman wrote:Carolina

I would respectfully request that you respond to
my earlier post, and I do not mind your usual rant
as long as logic embodies its purpose.

I'm sorry that you were offended by my post but I am sure that Gonçalo Amaral would be offended if anyone ever suggested that he would team up with the McCanns to put the blame on the PJ for their "sloppy investigation" in order to save his own skin. I found the suggestion insulting for a man who had stood up to the poisonous pair for years and even when his wife begged for him to come to an agreement. You seem to forget that GA was part of this investigation as a coordinator and has always been in agreement with the conclusions of the report signed by Tavares de Almeida from September 2007 otherwise he would never have written the book. He is a man of honour. My "rant" was perfectly logical.

Thankyou Carolina for your reply, I was indeed
offended by your post, because I never intended
my words to imply that GA would 'team up' with
the mccanns against the PJ. I was trying to suggest
that if GA received the full backing of the PJ, with
all it's resourses, it would make for a formidable
and proper defence against charges of libel. As you
correctly say, GA has represented the views and
conclusions of the investigation. Therefore, IMO,
he should not be left on his own to 'carry the can',
but to carry the full support and blessing of the PJ.
This, i was implying that GA may agree with.

Friends now Carolina?

No problem. My interpretation was that you wanted GA to team up with the McCanns and was very surprised.

That was my interpretation too. Oooops!