Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral

I too have no sympathy for them ...bet they would think twice about this.. if the airfare was coming out of their pockets.

Krisy22 wrote:I too have no sympathy for them ...bet they would think twice about this.. if the airfare was coming out of their pockets.

Amen Krisy!  

They let all that other peoples money go to their heads.

pennylane wrote:

Krisy22 wrote:I too have no sympathy for them ...bet they would think twice about this.. if the airfare was coming out of their pockets.

Amen Krisy!  

They let all that other peoples money go to their heads.

Agree Pennylane x Its easy peasy doing stuff on the spur of the moment air fares ..accommodation when funded by others.

Panda wrote:

the slave wrote:You sympathizing with Gezza now, Panda?
 

No, I'm just being fair here , let's be honest we would all be miffed if we had not only the expense but the travel , work arrangements altered etc yet no one knows what exactly the Lawyers' family health problem is/was. It happenedd to me a long time ago over a friend of mine being charged for illegal parking of her car. Since I was with her on the day in question, I was to be her witness, we both took time off work and when we got to the Courthouse were advised the case was dropped.

I took time off work once to drive all the way from Aberdeen to Birmingham to appear as a witness.  Once I got to Birmingham I was informed that the defendant had changed his plea to guilty.  So I went all the way home again without having to appear.  I was hopping mad, but understand that these things happen all the time.

Gerry McCann wasn't even called as a witness in the first place.  He went out there on the off-chance that the Judge might agree that he could speak.  He knew that before he went.  If there's any inconvenience or expense then it's a problem of his own making.  Nobody can seriously expect yet another child to be sidelined to make way for The Great McCann.  It doesn't matter what the surgery was, it could be an ingrown toe nail for all I know or care.  The point is that the Judge clearly thought it was more important than anything Gerry McCann had to said, and as others have said here, tough titties.  The sun does not shine out of G McCann's arse.

I see in the Star it says GM was seething! Any normal person would be concerned about the person undergoing surgery and send their best wishes. These things happen and they will have to deal with it.

quickfingers wrote:I see in the Star it says GM was seething!  Any normal person would be concerned about the person undergoing surgery and send their best wishes.   These things happen and they will have to deal with it.

Isn't he always seething, or in a fury?  Must be unbearable to work with.

jassi wrote:

quickfingers wrote:I see in the Star it says GM was seething!  Any normal person would be concerned about the person undergoing surgery and send their best wishes.   These things happen and they will have to deal with it.

Isn't he always seething, or in a fury?  Must be unbearable to work with.

There was a thread on the old 3As about "The Anger Of The McCanns". Somebody had detailed every single report that spoke about their anger, fury, rage etc etc at the police, internet "trolls", the government, and Uncle Tom Cobbley and all. It was a pretty long and substantial thread IIRC.

They live with each other or are supposed to! Can you imagine the anger and fury going on it that house all the time? I bet they hate each others guts now

fuzeta wrote:They live with each other or are supposed to!  Can you imagine the anger and fury going on it that house all the time? I bet they hate each others guts now

At least they only spoil one household  

jassi wrote:

fuzeta wrote:They live with each other or are supposed to!  Can you imagine the anger and fury going on it that house all the time? I bet they hate each others guts now

At least they only spoil one household  

This is true jassi.  Imagine if they had not found each other! They could have made two other people's lives miserable

There is already a long list of people whose lives they have affected in a negative way.

Claudia79 wrote:We don't need to know exactly what the health problem was. In fact, we don't need to know anything. The only person who needs to know is the judge. She was given the documents she needed to see and she decided. And she couldn't have decided any other way really since one of the sessions was stopped because the judge had 'personal issues' to deal with. And we didn't get to hear what they were.
As for GM, if he didn't want to waste a day, he should have waited to see if his intentions were going to be accepted. The session could have gone ahead and he still most likely wouldn't have been heard as all the participants would have to agree and I doubt the defence lawyers would agree to the hearing without having time to prepare themselves properly.

I can't see why GM thought he would give evidence anyway. According to the Guardian ID submitted an application for him to give evidence but the respondents have 10 days to agree or otherwise. That would suggest he would have been unlikely to be in the witness box even if the hearing had gone ahead.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/sep/27/madeleine-mccann-father-gerry-goncalo-amaral-libel-trial

I've been thinking that by the time we finally get the result of this libel case it will be close to the deadline for filing the Fund accounts for the year to 31 march 2013.

Kate promised in the truthful bewk that the accounts would be open and transparent whatever it cost.

Whats the betting that these accounts which no doubt will be filed at the last minute will tell us how much was spent in the year on LEGAL costs (as opposed to searching for madeleine)?

The McCanns were negotiating Jan 2013 onwards to try to get Sr Amaral to settle - must be some big legal costs in the accounts. if the McCanns lose, as we all hope, before the accs are filed, the Directors report in the accs should record this and give an indications of the costs involved, which should be substantial as they will have to pay Sr Amaral's costs.

Claudia79 wrote:

Panda wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:We don't need to know exactly what the health problem was. In fact, we don't need to know anything. The only person who needs to know is the judge. She was given the documents she needed to see and she decided. And she couldn't have decided any other way really since one of the sessions was stopped because the judge had 'personal issues' to deal with. And we didn't get to hear what they were.
As for GM, if he didn't want to waste a day, he should have waited to see if his intentions were going to be accepted. The session could have gone ahead and he still most likely wouldn't have been heard as all the participants would have to agree and I doubt the defence lawyers would agree to the hearing without having time to prepare themselves properly.

When you think of the Court Officials , the other Witnesses, opposing Counsel Claudia, not to mention the time it is taking 2 months with big gaps
inbetween hearings it is manna to the McCanns since they wanted to have a videocam hearing.

I don't give a damn and no one here does if they like it or not. It's our system and if we have to deal with it so have they. It was their choice to start the procedings so they have tu
o put up or shut up. If they don't like it they can give up and go back to where they came from.

Well said  Claudia   

I have a sneaking suspicion he never really expected to be 'heard', and that the entire excercise was contrived purely for PR reasons.

When asked what he would say to the Judge, ID jumped in with 'nothing' before GM could blink.

The whole thing was as staged as the night of May 3rd 2007, IMO

I wonder when he decided he would apply to speak.  If it was intended from the start or a last minute decision.  But I don't expect we'll ever know.

wantthetruth wrote:I have a sneaking suspicion he never really expected to be 'heard', and that the entire excercise was contrived purely for PR reasons.

When asked what he would say to the Judge, ID jumped in with 'nothing' before GM could blink.

The whole thing was as staged as the night of May 3rd 2007, IMO

Too right it was staged!
He knew, and ID surely knew, that no way would he be allowed to take the stand just because he turned up on the day!
Cheap little PR stunt and he was hoist by his own petard when fate stepped in and p*ssed on his chips.

Apparently, steven birch has said that Correio de Manha, the Portuguese newspaper, is supposedly behind the dig and trying to negotiate with Murat.


Don't know if that's true

wantthetruth wrote:When asked what he would say to the Judge, ID jumped in with 'nothing' before GM could blink.

I found that moment very peculiar.

Did she perhaps think the journalist asked 'what did you say to the Judge?'

Wintabells wrote:

wantthetruth wrote:When asked what he would say to the Judge, ID jumped in with 'nothing' before GM could blink.

I found that moment very peculiar.

Did she perhaps think the journalist asked 'what did you say to the Judge?'

I think it is probably more the case that ID was telling him to keep it zipped and save it for the court (if he gets heard).

Snipped from Panda's post..

Panda wrote:Since nobody knows what really happened to Madeleine the Judge will centre on the "damage" Amaral's Book caused to the health of the Family and whether it hindered the search for Madeleine.

I don't know how the Judge can make a decision on the McC's health when they haven't called their doctor as a witness. Surely, he/she would have been the best expert to call for this kind of evidence. If they had suffered as thy suggest, wheres their doctor to confirm all this??

wjk wrote:Snipped from Panda's post..

Panda wrote:Since nobody knows what really happened to Madeleine the Judge will centre on the "damage" Amaral's Book caused to the health of the Family and whether it hindered the search for Madeleine.

I don't know how the Judge can make a decision on the McC's health when they haven't called their doctor as a witness. Surely, he/she would have been the best expert to call for this kind of evidence. If they had suffered as thy suggest, wheres their doctor to confirm all this??

Yes, where is their medical evidence?

There is NONE, Anna, is there?

wjk wrote:There is NONE, Anna, is there?

Claiming harm to health should require medical evidence from a registered physician, not just statements from friends and relations.

They're so used to being believed by the fawning British media without providing any proof of what they say.

Thank goodness that's not how it works in Portugal.