The verdict

Is it possible to have a 'compromise' type of verdict? What I mean is, in my humble view, the title of the book may be described as libellous as he is categorically saying that the McCann's have lied. Could the judge say that he has to change the title in some way, and possibly remove some parts of the book, but allow it to be sold with these changes?

I understood that this hearing was simply to determine whether the injunction banning sale of the book should continue till the defamation trial later this year. Surely all the judge can do at this hearing is say whether Amaral can continue to sell the book or not for the next few months?

Not certain of this but that is what I understood.

What I want to know is when will we get the verdict? I assumed we would know when the court finishes, but someone said to me today that sometimes it can take up to a month before a verdict in a case like this comes through. Is this true does anyone know?

jjp wrote:I understood that this hearing was simply to determine whether the injunction banning sale of the book should continue till the defamation trial later this year. Surely all the judge can do at this hearing is say whether Amaral can continue to sell the book or not for the next few months?

Not certain of this but that is what I understood.

Yes I understood this too, that it was a hearing to decide whether to lift the injunction. However, if Amaral
wins it will be difficult for the McCanns to win their Libel case because the Judge at this hearing would have
judged the book to be non libellous effectively, if you know what I mean.

Monday, Clarry said that G & K would be there for the Hearing and would be there until the end (obviously Clarry didnt relise Gez was going to do a runner when the going got tough!) and said that he thought the hearing would go on until Thursday, and expected a verdict by Friday.

IF the verdict goes amarals way can/should he sue the mccanns (not the fund) for loss of earnings the sale of his book could have made ? maybe thats why gerrys done a runner so he can get his name down on the council house list?

the one and only big_l wrote:IF the verdict goes amarals way can/should he sue the mccanns (not the fund) for loss of earnings the sale of his book could have made ? maybe thats why gerrys done a runner so he can get his name down on the council house list?

oh my big l your so funny,
can you imagine them in a council house?
i think they would rather die,
theyre too full of self importance,
not that i have anything against council houses and people which live in them.

I too think there might be some kind of compromise verdict. Some parts of the book should be amended. But what's to stop them just repeating what was said at this trial. Because repeating people's statements - can that be libel. If the police aren't allowed there opinion as there is no evidence. then the McCanns can't be allowed theirs. That means no more chat shows, no more fund, no more daft sightings that everyone knows are going to be fake.

lea wrote:

the one and only big_l wrote:IF the verdict goes amarals way can/should he sue the mccanns (not the fund) for loss of earnings the sale of his book could have made ? maybe thats why gerrys done a runner so he can get his name down on the council house list?

oh my big l your so funny,
can you imagine them in a council house?
i think they would rather die,
theyre too full of self importance,
not that i have anything against council houses and people which live in them.

lea, yeah i can imagine a lot of anti social neighbours complaining about them being moved in to the estate, hey maybe they might get karen mathews old house

I am not sure. There seems to be some point being made that Amaral wrote the book before the process was shelved and that may be a breach of confidentiality. He did not write it from the public records but before the records were available. Don't know if that is a problem. Could end up banned on a technicality.

Whatever the remedy it is too late. The cat is out of the bag and lots of luck getting it back in.

so c

the one and only big_l wrote:

lea wrote:

the one and only big_l wrote:IF the verdict goes amarals way can/should he sue the mccanns (not the fund) for loss of earnings the sale of his book could have made ? maybe thats why gerrys done a runner so he can get his name down on the council house list?

oh my big l your so funny,
can you imagine them in a council house?
i think they would rather die,
theyre too full of self importance,
not that i have anything against council houses and people which live in them.

lea, yeah i can imagine a lot of anti social neighbours complaining about them being moved in to the estate, hey maybe they might get karen mathews old house

i can imagine that also,

It says something about the simmering undercurrents that this 'hearing' does seem once more to have thrown the mccanns into the frying pan.It confirms to me that there is an overwhelming desire to get the mccanns on trial.
Like it or not the mccanns have not been found guilty of anything (yet) in a court of law so in the eyes of the law they are innocent till proven otherwise.So if Amaral has accused them of any crime then he's commited libel and the 'temporary ' injunction would have to be ratified,i cant see how the judge could come to any other conclusion.Its interesting that witnesses and cross examination is being allowed,maybe the teflon is wearing thin,that said i shall be suprised if Amaral wins this one.

Infact i would go as far as saying that if the judge were to find in favour of Amaral it would be the best suggestion yet that the judiciary in PT think there was something up with the original prosecutors findings and that a judicial revue would then be apropriate (or whatever the equivalent in PT is ?)

Lioned wrote:It says something about the simmering undercurrents that this 'hearing' does seem once more to have thrown the mccanns into the frying pan.It confirms to me that there is an overwhelming desire to get the mccanns on trial.
Like it or not the mccanns have not been found guilty of anything (yet) in a court of law so in the eyes of the law they are innocent till proven otherwise.So if Amaral has accused them of any crime then he's commited libel and the 'temporary ' injunction would have to be ratified,i cant see how the judge could come to any other conclusion.Its interesting that witnesses and cross examination is being allowed,maybe the teflon is wearing thin,that said i shall be suprised if Amaral wins this one.

I don"t think Amaral accuses the McCanns directly, just says he thinks Madeleine died in Apartment 5a. The
evidence is overwhelming that there was no abduction and Flores said a couple of times about Freedom of
Speech . The McCanns went OTT in demanding all the books are burned and insist Madeleine is alive. Here we
have the conundrum, neither party can be right because there is no body to prove Madeleine is dead. The Judge
will have to weigh the evidence and testimony and decide whether Madeleine is alive, the Fund rests on her
decision . One thing which may sway her is the World Wide search for Madeleine which has not had one real clue, the cost of hiring all these bogus Agencies out of donations from all over the World. Also, that the
timelines don"t add up ., Kate refusing to answer questions and the Tapas 9 refusing to attend a recon.

I thought Amaral had accused them of 'staging' an abduction ? And then presumably of concealing the body ? (or am i reading too many redtops)

Does seem the judge is giving him every chance,so lets just hope things have turned.

Lioned wrote:I thought Amaral had accused them of 'staging' an abduction ? And then presumably of concealing the body ? (or am i reading too many redtops)

Does seem the judge is giving him every chance,so lets just hope things have turned.

I think it was the first day of the Hearing the Judge asked for certain files and someone had to go and bring them to the Courthouse. Also, the Judge stepped in when Duarte tried to say one of the Witnesses had been
charged with beating Cipriani which was untrue. It won"t go unnoticed that Gerry had to return to the U.K. for
work, rubbish.!!!!! Also, outside the Courthouse he was still proclaiming that Madeleine is alive.