Trials and Tribulations.../Thepottingshedder

marxman wrote:

platinum wrote:

marxman wrote:Correct me if i'm wrong but was GA's 'purgery' conviction
based on a legal technicality?
Did he give evidence which supported what was reported to
him by his subordinates without verifying same?
If this was the case, and he believed and trusted the testimony
of his subordinates, and he reported such to a court whilst
believing it to be the actual truth, then is this purgery?
Is it more to do with his lack of verification, thereby undermining
his subordinates as co-ordinator that is at the heart of this
charge?
Thankyou in advance.

Yes it is perjury because the court found him guilty of that perjury and sentenced him to a suspended prison term of 18 months. A higher court later confirmed that he was a perjurer and upheld the sentence.

Thankyou Platinum and apologies for my mispelling of perjury. However,
could you kindly answer my question as fully as you can please?

I don't have the court documents but my answer is very full. I presume that the judges and the appeal judges have a full grasp of what perjury is and have convicted him on that basis. Or are we to believe that all these judges are completely incompetent?

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:
I suggest you look at the way police who have perjured themselves are looked on in general. It usually means instant dismissal from the force here. But of course Amaral had resigned before he was convicted. Interesting.

No I can't quote them as many are friends and colleagues (some serving police officers in this country too) but I am sure you will take that as meaning that I am lying. Thats your prerogative. However I am not a convicted liar like Amaral it would just be your opinion.

I would ask also whether you truly believe that a police officer convicted and sentenced to a suspended prison term for perjury i the course of his duties is truly an honourable man who retains integrity and has behaved professionally. I would be interested in your answer.

You certainly are a liar. GA did not resign. He retired.

Oh is there such a difference? Resigning just means handing in your notice whether it is for early retirement, ill health or anything else. I am not a liar whereas Amaral is clearly a convicted liar in the course of his duties and in my book that means he is unprofessional and lacking in integrity.

Yes, there is a difference and you know it. And you and I both know why you chose 'resigned' instead of the truth 'retired'. And yes, you're still a liar (and a manipulator) in my book. And we can all see it, Platinum. We're just giving you rope. Got it?

There is no lie at all in that phrase. I chose the word "resign" which encompasses early retirement, ill health and many other possibilities. No lie at all. You can give me as much rope as you like but the fact is I am not lying.

And I repeat what kind of early retirement was it?

"When Gonçalo went out of the PJ door there was no one saying goodbye to him. No director. No one. After a life dedicated to the PJ, it was what most got him down," says Sofia.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id131.html

You can scream and kick as much as you like. My opinion on you (a liar) is still the same. The support GA needed after leaving the PJ was very clear in the trial that took place (which clearly annoyed Gerry). And I sense you will be able to witness it again soon. Call it a hunch. Now go on. I'll go back to my favourite role: watching.

marxman wrote:Snowflake??

Annaesse wrote:You're reminding me of someone, Platinum. Can't quite recall yet, but I'll get there!

Iris wrote:How much are the McTeam paying you, Sans Souci? Really?

This obsession with who I am is amusing but really nothing but an avoidance of the facts.

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

You certainly are a liar. GA did not resign. He retired.

Oh is there such a difference? Resigning just means handing in your notice whether it is for early retirement, ill health or anything else. I am not a liar whereas Amaral is clearly a convicted liar in the course of his duties and in my book that means he is unprofessional and lacking in integrity.

Yes, there is a difference and you know it. And you and I both know why you chose 'resigned' instead of the truth 'retired'. And yes, you're still a liar (and a manipulator) in my book. And we can all see it, Platinum. We're just giving you rope. Got it?

There is no lie at all in that phrase. I chose the word "resign" which encompasses early retirement, ill health and many other possibilities. No lie at all. You can give me as much rope as you like but the fact is I am not lying.

And I repeat what kind of early retirement was it?

"When Gonçalo went out of the PJ door there was no one saying goodbye to him. No director. No one. After a life dedicated to the PJ, it was what most got him down," says Sofia.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id131.html

You can scream and kick as much as you like. My opinion on you (a liar) is still the same. The support GA needed after leaving the PJ was very clear in the trial that took place (which clearly annoyed Gerry). And I sense you will be able to witness it again soon. Call it a hunch. Now go on. I'll go back to my favourite role: watching.

Screaming? Kicking?
You must need glasses because there is none of that from me.

And while you seem to suggest GA needed support after leaving the PJ it does seem odd to me that Sofia tells us on his final day there he got precisely zero support from them. Very odd.

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:
Oh is there such a difference? Resigning just means handing in your notice whether it is for early retirement, ill health or anything else. I am not a liar whereas Amaral is clearly a convicted liar in the course of his duties and in my book that means he is unprofessional and lacking in integrity.

Yes, there is a difference and you know it. And you and I both know why you chose 'resigned' instead of the truth 'retired'. And yes, you're still a liar (and a manipulator) in my book. And we can all see it, Platinum. We're just giving you rope. Got it?

There is no lie at all in that phrase. I chose the word "resign" which encompasses early retirement, ill health and many other possibilities. No lie at all. You can give me as much rope as you like but the fact is I am not lying.

And I repeat what kind of early retirement was it?

"When Gonçalo went out of the PJ door there was no one saying goodbye to him. No director. No one. After a life dedicated to the PJ, it was what most got him down," says Sofia.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id131.html

You can scream and kick as much as you like. My opinion on you (a liar) is still the same. The support GA needed after leaving the PJ was very clear in the trial that took place (which clearly annoyed Gerry). And I sense you will be able to witness it again soon. Call it a hunch. Now go on. I'll go back to my favourite role: watching.

Screaming? Kicking?
You must need glasses because there is none of that from me.

And while you seem to suggest GA needed support after leaving the PJ it does seem odd to me that Sofia tells us on his final day there he got precisely zero support from them. Very odd.

Court, 'old friend'. Court.
Ciao!

Do you know this poster claudia? as i wasn't ever involved with 3A i never know whats going on in these threads when a pro gets involved

platinum wrote:

marxman wrote:

platinum wrote:

marxman wrote:Correct me if i'm wrong but was GA's 'purgery' conviction
based on a legal technicality?
Did he give evidence which supported what was reported to
him by his subordinates without verifying same?
If this was the case, and he believed and trusted the testimony
of his subordinates, and he reported such to a court whilst
believing it to be the actual truth, then is this purgery?
Is it more to do with his lack of verification, thereby undermining
his subordinates as co-ordinator that is at the heart of this
charge?
Thankyou in advance.

Yes it is perjury because the court found him guilty of that perjury and sentenced him to a suspended prison term of 18 months. A higher court later confirmed that he was a perjurer and upheld the sentence.

Thankyou Platinum and apologies for my mispelling of perjury. However,
could you kindly answer my question as fully as you can please?

I don't have the court documents but my answer is very full. I presume that the judges and the appeal judges have a full grasp of what perjury is and have convicted him on that basis. Or are we to believe that all these judges are completely incompetent?

I will not labour the point, but my understanding of perjury
is knowingly providing a court with false information, is it not?
However, if you believe certain information to be true and accurate
but it ends up false due to yourself being provided with false
information, can this be perjury?
GAs failure to verify his facts before court maybe what the
judges viewed and ruled as perjury, am I correct?

matthew wrote:Do you know this poster claudia? as i wasn't ever involved with 3A i never know whats going on in these threads when a pro gets involved

There are several 'old friends' who like to visit us once in a while, Matthew. And I sense that in the upcoming weeks, we will be visited by some.

Claudia79 wrote:

matthew wrote:Do you know this poster claudia? as i wasn't ever involved with 3A i never know whats going on in these threads when a pro gets involved

There are several 'old friends' who like to visit us once in a while, Matthew. And I sense that in the upcoming weeks, we will be visited by some.

ok thanks for the heads up...i think

just for my brain though do these friends go back to the 3 A days?

matthew wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

matthew wrote:Do you know this poster claudia? as i wasn't ever involved with 3A i never know whats going on in these threads when a pro gets involved

There are several 'old friends' who like to visit us once in a while, Matthew. And I sense that in the upcoming weeks, we will be visited by some.

ok thanks for the heads up...i think

just for my brain though do these friends go back to the 3 A days?

I wasn't a prolific poster on the 3 As. But some of them, without a doubt.

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

Yes, there is a difference and you know it. And you and I both know why you chose 'resigned' instead of the truth 'retired'. And yes, you're still a liar (and a manipulator) in my book. And we can all see it, Platinum. We're just giving you rope. Got it?

There is no lie at all in that phrase. I chose the word "resign" which encompasses early retirement, ill health and many other possibilities. No lie at all. You can give me as much rope as you like but the fact is I am not lying.

And I repeat what kind of early retirement was it?

"When Gonçalo went out of the PJ door there was no one saying goodbye to him. No director. No one. After a life dedicated to the PJ, it was what most got him down," says Sofia.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id131.html

You can scream and kick as much as you like. My opinion on you (a liar) is still the same. The support GA needed after leaving the PJ was very clear in the trial that took place (which clearly annoyed Gerry). And I sense you will be able to witness it again soon. Call it a hunch. Now go on. I'll go back to my favourite role: watching.

Screaming? Kicking?
You must need glasses because there is none of that from me.

And while you seem to suggest GA needed support after leaving the PJ it does seem odd to me that Sofia tells us on his final day there he got precisely zero support from them. Very odd.

Court, 'old friend'. Court.
Ciao!

Still odd that Sofia tells us that none of his colleagues supported him on his final day before when he retired. Very odd that. When people I've known have taken early retirement there has always been a party or something.

marxman wrote:

platinum wrote:

marxman wrote:

platinum wrote:

marxman wrote:Correct me if i'm wrong but was GA's 'purgery' conviction
based on a legal technicality?
Did he give evidence which supported what was reported to
him by his subordinates without verifying same?
If this was the case, and he believed and trusted the testimony
of his subordinates, and he reported such to a court whilst
believing it to be the actual truth, then is this purgery?
Is it more to do with his lack of verification, thereby undermining
his subordinates as co-ordinator that is at the heart of this
charge?
Thankyou in advance.

Yes it is perjury because the court found him guilty of that perjury and sentenced him to a suspended prison term of 18 months. A higher court later confirmed that he was a perjurer and upheld the sentence.

Thankyou Platinum and apologies for my mispelling of perjury. However,
could you kindly answer my question as fully as you can please?

I don't have the court documents but my answer is very full. I presume that the judges and the appeal judges have a full grasp of what perjury is and have convicted him on that basis. Or are we to believe that all these judges are completely incompetent?

I will not labour the point, but my understanding of perjury
is knowingly providing a court with false information, is it not?
However, if you believe certain information to be true and accurate
but it ends up false due to yourself being provided with false
information, can this be perjury?
GAs failure to verify his facts before court maybe what the
judges viewed and ruled as perjury, am I correct?

As I said I have no access to the court documents but I am sure that these judges were perfectly capable of determining guilt. It is no excuse in law to be ignorant either is it? Especially not if you are a senior police officer.

Claudia79 wrote:

matthew wrote:Do you know this poster claudia? as i wasn't ever involved with 3A i never know whats going on in these threads when a pro gets involved

There are several 'old friends' who like to visit us once in a while, Matthew. And I sense that in the upcoming weeks, we will be visited by some.

There are some seriously rattled souls out there.

If I were at risk of being finally brought to Justice, I'm not at all sure I'd have my cohorts laying down smokescreens and distractions.

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

There is no lie at all in that phrase. I chose the word "resign" which encompasses early retirement, ill health and many other possibilities. No lie at all. You can give me as much rope as you like but the fact is I am not lying.

And I repeat what kind of early retirement was it?



http://www.mccannfiles.com/id131.html

You can scream and kick as much as you like. My opinion on you (a liar) is still the same. The support GA needed after leaving the PJ was very clear in the trial that took place (which clearly annoyed Gerry). And I sense you will be able to witness it again soon. Call it a hunch. Now go on. I'll go back to my favourite role: watching.

Screaming? Kicking?
You must need glasses because there is none of that from me.

And while you seem to suggest GA needed support after leaving the PJ it does seem odd to me that Sofia tells us on his final day there he got precisely zero support from them. Very odd.

Court, 'old friend'. Court.
Ciao!

Still odd that Sofia tells us that none of his colleagues supported him on his final day before when he retired. Very odd that. When people I've known have taken early retirement there has always been a party or something.

A Party? The Police?
You're hilarious! Go on, Platinum. Go on with your mission. This particular 'party' is over, ok?

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

You can scream and kick as much as you like. My opinion on you (a liar) is still the same. The support GA needed after leaving the PJ was very clear in the trial that took place (which clearly annoyed Gerry). And I sense you will be able to witness it again soon. Call it a hunch. Now go on. I'll go back to my favourite role: watching.

Screaming? Kicking?
You must need glasses because there is none of that from me.

And while you seem to suggest GA needed support after leaving the PJ it does seem odd to me that Sofia tells us on his final day there he got precisely zero support from them. Very odd.

Court, 'old friend'. Court.
Ciao!

Still odd that Sofia tells us that none of his colleagues supported him on his final day before when he retired. Very odd that. When people I've known have taken early retirement there has always been a party or something.

A Party? The Police?
You're hilarious! Go on, Platinum. Go on with your mission. This particular 'party' is over, ok?

Oh no sorry. Policemen would never party or have drinks or see their mates off socially. Never. I understand now.

The End Is Nigh wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

matthew wrote:Do you know this poster claudia? as i wasn't ever involved with 3A i never know whats going on in these threads when a pro gets involved

There are several 'old friends' who like to visit us once in a while, Matthew. And I sense that in the upcoming weeks, we will be visited by some.

There are some seriously rattled souls out there.

If I were at risk of being finally brought to Justice, I'm not at all sure I'd have my cohorts laying down smokescreens and distractions.

Yes, but it is a recurrent behaviour. It happens every time something important comes up. And February is just around the corner. And if things don't go their way (although I'm sure there will be appeals from one side or the other) all hell will break loose because then the gates will be open for soooooo many things that they have no idea.

Claudia79 wrote:

The End Is Nigh wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

matthew wrote:Do you know this poster claudia? as i wasn't ever involved with 3A i never know whats going on in these threads when a pro gets involved

There are several 'old friends' who like to visit us once in a while, Matthew. And I sense that in the upcoming weeks, we will be visited by some.

There are some seriously rattled souls out there.

If I were at risk of being finally brought to Justice, I'm not at all sure I'd have my cohorts laying down smokescreens and distractions.

Yes, but it is a recurrent behaviour. It happens every time something important comes up. And February is just around the corner. And if things don't go their way (although I'm sure there will be appeals from one side or the other) all hell will break loose because then the gates will be open for soooooo many things that they have no idea.

February is the future. We will have to see what happens. Seems both sides think their horse is the odds on favourite.

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Screaming? Kicking?
You must need glasses because there is none of that from me.

And while you seem to suggest GA needed support after leaving the PJ it does seem odd to me that Sofia tells us on his final day there he got precisely zero support from them. Very odd.

Court, 'old friend'. Court.
Ciao!

Still odd that Sofia tells us that none of his colleagues supported him on his final day before when he retired. Very odd that. When people I've known have taken early retirement there has always been a party or something.

A Party? The Police?
You're hilarious! Go on, Platinum. Go on with your mission. This particular 'party' is over, ok?

Oh no sorry. Policemen would never party or have drinks or see their mates off socially. Never. I understand now.

Read what you wrote. I'm sure that you're not illiterate. What happened AFTER he left the PJ is know to those who know GA. I even remember a birthday party which got on the mad lawyer's nerves exactly because of the many 'heavyweights' who accepted the invitation.
It's always lovely to chat with you, 'old friend' but I do have to get back to work.

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

The End Is Nigh wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

matthew wrote:Do you know this poster claudia? as i wasn't ever involved with 3A i never know whats going on in these threads when a pro gets involved

There are several 'old friends' who like to visit us once in a while, Matthew. And I sense that in the upcoming weeks, we will be visited by some.

There are some seriously rattled souls out there.

If I were at risk of being finally brought to Justice, I'm not at all sure I'd have my cohorts laying down smokescreens and distractions.

Yes, but it is a recurrent behaviour. It happens every time something important comes up. And February is just around the corner. And if things don't go their way (although I'm sure there will be appeals from one side or the other) all hell will break loose because then the gates will be open for soooooo many things that they have no idea.

February is the future. We will have to see what happens. Seems both sides think their horse is the odds on favourite.

February is the future, uh? Quite a genius we have here. You have no idea what I think or what I know. And I hate horse races. I hate everything and everyone who puts children and animals at risk.

platinum wrote:

marxman wrote:

platinum wrote:

marxman wrote:

platinum wrote:

Yes it is perjury because the court found him guilty of that perjury and sentenced him to a suspended prison term of 18 months. A higher court later confirmed that he was a perjurer and upheld the sentence.

Thankyou Platinum and apologies for my mispelling of perjury. However,
could you kindly answer my question as fully as you can please?

I don't have the court documents but my answer is very full. I presume that the judges and the appeal judges have a full grasp of what perjury is and have convicted him on that basis. Or are we to believe that all these judges are completely incompetent?

I will not labour the point, but my understanding of perjury
is knowingly providing a court with false information, is it not?
However, if you believe certain information to be true and accurate
but it ends up false due to yourself being provided with false
information, can this be perjury?
GAs failure to verify his facts before court maybe what the
judges viewed and ruled as perjury, am I correct?

As I said I have no access to the court documents but I am sure that these judges were perfectly capable of determining guilt. It is no excuse in law to be ignorant either is it? Especially not if you are a senior police officer.

Again, thankyou for your reply, so, as you quite rightly point out,
it was GA's ignorance of the law and that by relying on the
professionalism and integrity of his subordinates that he found
himself on a legal technicality for perjury.
I would suggest that many, if not all senior police officers rely,
as courts do, on the honesty and integrity of what is being
provided upwards. Of course, I maybe wrong.

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

Court, 'old friend'. Court.
Ciao!

Still odd that Sofia tells us that none of his colleagues supported him on his final day before when he retired. Very odd that. When people I've known have taken early retirement there has always been a party or something.

A Party? The Police?
You're hilarious! Go on, Platinum. Go on with your mission. This particular 'party' is over, ok?

Oh no sorry. Policemen would never party or have drinks or see their mates off socially. Never. I understand now.

Read what you wrote. I'm sure that you're not illiterate. What happened AFTER he left the PJ is know to those who know GA. I even remember a birthday party which got on the mad lawyer's nerves exactly because of the many 'heavyweights' who accepted the invitation.
It's always lovely to chat with you, 'old friend' but I do have to get back to work.

Old friend? Now thats news to me.

Doesn't explain what Sofia said does it?
And would that be the lawyer Correia who took the paper that reported him to court and it was shown to be a pack of lies? Not the best example of behaviour on the part of CdM or GA actually.

marxman wrote:

platinum wrote:

marxman wrote:

platinum wrote:

marxman wrote:

Thankyou Platinum and apologies for my mispelling of perjury. However,
could you kindly answer my question as fully as you can please?

I don't have the court documents but my answer is very full. I presume that the judges and the appeal judges have a full grasp of what perjury is and have convicted him on that basis. Or are we to believe that all these judges are completely incompetent?

I will not labour the point, but my understanding of perjury
is knowingly providing a court with false information, is it not?
However, if you believe certain information to be true and accurate
but it ends up false due to yourself being provided with false
information, can this be perjury?
GAs failure to verify his facts before court maybe what the
judges viewed and ruled as perjury, am I correct?

As I said I have no access to the court documents but I am sure that these judges were perfectly capable of determining guilt. It is no excuse in law to be ignorant either is it? Especially not if you are a senior police officer.

Again, thankyou for your reply, so, as you quite rightly point out,
it was GA's ignorance of the law and that by relying on the
professionalism and integrity of his subordinates that he found
himself on a legal technicality for perjury.
I would suggest that many, if not all senior police officers rely,
as courts do, on the honesty and integrity of what is being
provided upwards. Of course, I maybe wrong.

No that is not what I point out at all. I was clear that I have no idea because I have not seen the court records why they judged Amaral to be a perjurer and gave him a very stiff sentence.

If GA had used the defence that he was ignorant it is no defence at all is what I actually said. As a senior police officer it is his duty to check and take responsibility. I would hope that an honourable officer who realised that he had lied to the court would simply admit it and resign were it to be over a case lies about torture. Clearly that didn't happen here. So maybe that wasn't his defence.

There is nothing to indicate this was a technicality at all. Can you provide anything to suggest that other than some kind of suppostition? If you haven't then I would hope we both agree that the court ruling was valid and the sentence proportionate to his the lies he told.

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Screaming? Kicking?
You must need glasses because there is none of that from me.

And while you seem to suggest GA needed support after leaving the PJ it does seem odd to me that Sofia tells us on his final day there he got precisely zero support from them. Very odd.

Court, 'old friend'. Court.
Ciao!

Still odd that Sofia tells us that none of his colleagues supported him on his final day before when he retired. Very odd that. When people I've known have taken early retirement there has always been a party or something.

A Party? The Police?
You're hilarious! Go on, Platinum. Go on with your mission. This particular 'party' is over, ok?

Oh no sorry. Policemen would never party or have drinks or see their mates off socially. Never. I understand now.

I'm somewhat confused and a little bemused: Is this sarcasm, as opposed to concentrating only on facts?

The End Is Nigh wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

Court, 'old friend'. Court.
Ciao!

Still odd that Sofia tells us that none of his colleagues supported him on his final day before when he retired. Very odd that. When people I've known have taken early retirement there has always been a party or something.

A Party? The Police?
You're hilarious! Go on, Platinum. Go on with your mission. This particular 'party' is over, ok?

Oh no sorry. Policemen would never party or have drinks or see their mates off socially. Never. I understand now.

I'm somewhat confused and a little bemused: Is this sarcasm, as opposed to concentrating only on facts?

It is a direct riposte to the comment above it which I think is very silly. Simple really. No need to be confused at all.

platinum wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:
You certainly are a liar. GA did not resign. He retired.

Oh is there such a difference?

Are you suggesting you don't know the difference between resigning and retiring?

Stop playing games.