Re: Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral

**fred** Mon 26 Aug - 8:37

I'm not sure I believe the date, why isn't it listed? There hasn't been anything in the Portuguese press as yet either.

**Panda** Mon 26 Aug - 8:52

fred wrote:I'm not sure I believe the date, why isn't it listed? There hasn't been anything in the Portuguese press as yet either.

Meanwhile disgraced detective Goncalo Amaral, who headed the original investigation, faces a libel hearing in Lisbon on September 9."

Morning fred....maybe Claudia will know or you could phone Isobel Duarty Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral - Page 2 294124

Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral - Page 2 294124

**kitti** Mon 26 Aug - 8:55

They just wanted to remind the British public about the 'disgraced' bit.....

**Panda** Mon 26 Aug - 9:08

kitti wrote:They just wanted to remind the British public about the 'disgraced' bit.....

Yes kitti, I noticed that. The mealy mouthed Press will probably report only the bits of the Trial which favour the McCanns.

BTW, while I was browsing the Mail and Express this morning there was a report that Knox will NOT be going to Italy. I couldn't find it after, maybe you or someone else can dig it out. ...ta.

**dutchclogs** Mon 26 Aug - 9:47

Karen wrote:http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/334653/New-Portuguese-cop-squad-hunt-Madeleine-McCann

TRIAL starts 9th Sepember 2013

OMG they are still at it "disgraced detective Goncalo Amaral, it makes me sick

**fred** Mon 26 Aug - 9:49

Wonder if he will be still disgraced when he wipes the floor with them? You can imagine the headlines in the media!

**cass** Mon 26 Aug - 10:05

9th of september - wasnt that the day they fled portugal - its my 50th birhday on the 9th whoooooo just got back from spain and i will be there again on the 9th -- hope it goes a head - but while theres this review i think by going ahead it will stop any chances of the mcs ever going to jail - unfair press and all that

Guest Mon 26 Aug - 10:08

I'm waiting with baited breath for Palmeras16's view on the subject as he or she is such a mine of inside information!

I look forward to the day (hope it's not a vain hope) when the word "disgraced" is used to describe all those who have covered up the facts of this case.

**fred** Mon 26 Aug - 10:21

cass wrote:9th of september - wasnt that the day they fled portugal - its my 50th birhday on the 9th whoooooo just got back from spain and i will be there again on the 9th -- hope it goes a head - but while theres this review i think by going ahead it will stop any chances of the mcs ever going to jail - unfair press and all that

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/sep/23/kate-madeleine-mccann-portugal

Palmeras16 Mon 26 Aug - 11:00

Not Born Yesterday wrote:I'm waiting with baited breath for Palmeras16's view on the subject as he or she is such a mine of inside information

I have never claimed any insider information NBY but, in my opinion, if there is a hearing scheduled for 9 Sept it is to formalise the settlement terms and release the funds held in escrow. However, if the rumour that the McCanns accepted Mr Amarals offer of compensation is erroneous then Mr Amaral will stand trial for libel.

**Carolina** Mon 26 Aug - 11:21

Palmeras16 wrote:
Not Born Yesterday wrote:I'm waiting with baited breath for Palmeras16's view on the subject as he or she is such a mine of inside information
I have never claimed any insider information NBY but, in my opinion, if there is a hearing scheduled for 9 Sept it is to formalise the settlement terms and release the funds held in escrow. However, if the rumour that the McCanns accepted Mr Amarals offer of compensation is erroneous then Mr Amaral will stand trial for libel.

Why would Gonçalo Amaral make an offer of compensation when it was the McCanns who asked for the suspension in order to come to an agreement? He fought this far, why should he have given up the fight now?

Palmeras16 Mon 26 Aug - 11:49

Carolina wrote:Why would Gonçalo Amaral make an offer of compensation when it was the McCanns who asked for the suspension in order to come to an agreement? He fought this far, why should he have given up the fight now?

I have limited knowledge of Portuguese law but I would surmise that only the plaintiff can withdraw a case or request an adjournment while an out of court settlement is discussed.

Guest Mon 26 Aug - 12:28

Palmeras16 wrote:
Not Born Yesterday wrote:I'm waiting with baited breath for Palmeras16's view on the subject as he or she is such a mine of inside information
I have never claimed any insider information NBY but, in my opinion, if there is a hearing scheduled for 9 Sept it is to formalise the settlement terms and release the funds held in escrow. However, if the rumour that the McCanns accepted Mr Amarals offer of compensation is erroneous then Mr Amaral will stand trial for libel.

Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral - Page 2 23324

In your dreams.

**AnnaEsse** Mon 26 Aug - 14:08

Palmeras16 wrote:
Not Born Yesterday wrote:I'm waiting with baited breath for Palmeras16's view on the subject as he or she is such a mine of inside information
I have never claimed any insider information NBY but, in my opinion, if there is a hearing scheduled for 9 Sept it is to formalise the settlement terms and release the funds held in escrow. However, if the rumour that the McCanns accepted Mr Amarals offer of compensation is erroneous then Mr Amaral will stand trial for libel.

Two pieces of info to bear in mind:

1) When Gonçalo Amaral took action against the lawyer, Marcos Aragao Correia, for defamation, the court found against Dr Amaral. The decision was based on the principle that if someone fully believed what he had said, then it wasn't defamatory.

2) When the ban was overturned on Amaral's book, the judges stated that the McCanns' rights were not infringed.

Guest Mon 26 Aug - 14:16

"If the rumour is true" should tell you all you need to know. Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral - Page 2 23324

weissnicht Mon 26 Aug - 15:19

Iris wrote:
Palmeras16 wrote:
Not Born Yesterday wrote:I'm waiting with baited breath for Palmeras16's view on the subject as he or she is such a mine of inside information
I have never claimed any insider information NBY but, in my opinion, if there is a hearing scheduled for 9 Sept it is to formalise the settlement terms and release the funds held in escrow. However, if the rumour that the McCanns accepted Mr Amarals offer of compensation is erroneous then Mr Amaral will stand trial for libel.
In your dreams.

I really shouldn't laugh ..but..
Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral - Page 2 23324

**Carolina** Mon 26 Aug - 15:28

I don't know where the Daily Star got their information about the trial date because there has been no confirmation here and the parties involved would have been informed well before the date.

If there had been a settlement agreement as Palmeras would like us to believe the terms would then be decided between the parties' lawyers in their offices and there would no longer be any need for a trial or a hearing.

**Keela** Mon 26 Aug - 15:37

Carolina wrote:I don't know where the Daily Star got their information about the trial date because there has been no confirmation here and the parties involved would have been informed well before the date.

If there had been a settlement agreement as Palmeras would like us to believe the terms would then be decided between the parties' lawyers in their offices and there would no longer be any need for a trial or a hearing.

I can confirm this as I have been told by a friend who is also a very good friend of GA, that no date has been agreed.

**wjk** Mon 26 Aug - 16:01

Thanks keela, for clearing this up Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral - Page 2 Icon_flower

jeanmonroe Mon 26 Aug - 16:22

Carolina wrote:I don't know where the Daily Star got their information about the trial date because there has been no confirmation here and the parties involved would have been informed well before the date.

If there had been a settlement agreement as Palmeras would like us to believe the terms would then be decided between the parties' lawyers in their offices and there would no longer be any need for a trial or a hearing.

With the news of Lance Armstrong's 'settlement' with the Times how much will the McCanns possibly have to 'settle' for with the Express paper (Northern and Shell, I believe)?
They paid out over £1 million in 'damages' to the McS and 'friends' didn't they?
Armstrong sued the Times for £300,000 in 2004 and 'won' when they said he was using drugs.
A few days ago the Times sued HIM for the original payout AND costs and expenses since and they WON.
A rumoured £1 MILLION pounds!
Armstrong 'settled' out of court.

So, IF the McS, and others, are found to have been 'involved' how much will they have to pay 'back'?
And where will any possible 'settlement' money come from?
Hope the T7 haven't spent their 'damages' money! Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral - Page 2 294124

**Panda** Mon 26 Aug - 16:28

Where does the Press get this date from then, someone must have told them.

jeanmonroe Mon 26 Aug - 16:41

Panda wrote:Where does the Press get this date from then, someone must have told them.

Someone in the office 'missed' when playing 'pin the tail on the donkey' and stuck 'the tail' in a wall calender on the date September 9th, 2013?

interested Mon 26 Aug - 17:08

Having exhausted all their previous donations in their relentless search for Madeleine, no doubt the McCanns are working on setting up a new Fund to accept donations to cover the cost of all they will have to repay for the "damage$" they received.

kathybelle Mon 26 Aug - 17:40

jeanmonroe wrote:
Carolina wrote:I don't know where the Daily Star got their information about the trial date because there has been no confirmation here and the parties involved would have been informed well before the date.

If there had been a settlement agreement as Palmeras would like us to believe the terms would then be decided between the parties' lawyers in their offices and there would no longer be any need for a trial or a hearing.
With the news of Lance Armstrong's 'settlement' with the Times how much will the McCanns possibly have to 'settle' for with the Express paper (Northern and Shell, I believe)?
They paid out over £1 million in 'damages' to the McS and 'friends' didn't they?
Armstrong sued the Times for £300,000 in 2004 and 'won' when they said he was using drugs.
A few days ago the Times sued HIM for the original payout AND costs and expenses since and they WON.
A rumoured £1 MILLION pounds!
Armstrong 'settled' out of court.

So, IF the McS, and others, are found to have been 'involved' how much will they have to pay 'back'?
And where will any possible 'settlement' money come from?
Hope the T7 haven't spent their 'damages' money!

The Tapas 7 gave their damages to the Madeleine fund and we all know where the majority of that money has gone. None has gone on the searches for Madeleine, because none of the McCanns dodgy detectives, did any actual searching for Madeleine.

In my opinion, the Tapas 7 knew that they were not entitled to this money. If the newspaper groups, had grown backbones and let the case go to court, none of these people, including the McCanns would have got a penny. I know the newspaper group, paid the money directly into fund, but they might as well have given it to the McCanns, because they were allowed to use the money, in anyway they liked.

Guest Mon 26 Aug - 18:29

Panda wrote:Where does the Press get this date from then, someone must have told them.

Aye, the Pink Ponce, same as all the other rubbish in that "article" that he told them.

Sponsored content