Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral

Thanks to UK.Justice forum and Anne Guèdes:

Libel trial Day 8 -witness 1- Mário Sena Lopes


http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2946.0

this is one for the Portuguese please if they know. The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one. just asking.

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

I believe so.

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

Not sure tanzi , but they are the Plaintiffs and Amaral is the Defense, so the McCanns can't be both Witness AND Plaintiff. They wanted to be
assistentes to the witnesses so maybe their Lawyer talked them out of it,

Panda wrote:

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

Not sure tanzi , but they are the Plaintiffs and Amaral is the Defense, so the McCanns can't be both Witness AND Plaintiff.  They wanted to be
assistentes to the witnesses so maybe their Lawyer talked them out of it,

The request to become assistentes has nothing to do with the libel trial. They want to become assistentes in the reopening of the investigation.

Claudia79 wrote:

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

I believe so.

 
Says it all really - the McCanns are not even willing to testify on how Amaral's book allegedly caused them distress to the sum of 1.2 million. Everything everyone else has said on their behalf has been hearsay, yet they cannot speak up for themselves when it comes to being questioned in a court of law. No surprises really, given that it has been their M.O. to use Clarrie and family members as their mouthpieces all along.

jinvta wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

I believe so.

 
Says it all really - the McCanns are not even willing to testify on how Amaral's book allegedly caused them distress to the sum of 1.2 million. Everything everyone else has said on their behalf has been hearsay, yet they cannot speak up for themselves when it comes to being questioned in a court of law. No surprises really, given that it has been their M.O. to use Clarrie and family members as their mouthpieces all along.

Can you imagine the liability Kate would be if she was asked some difficult questions?

It would be ridiculous for the mccanns to bring this action and not appear themselves in my view,but not surprising if they don't off course.

Claudia79 wrote:

jinvta wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

I believe so.

 
Says it all really - the McCanns are not even willing to testify on how Amaral's book allegedly caused them distress to the sum of 1.2 million. Everything everyone else has said on their behalf has been hearsay, yet they cannot speak up for themselves when it comes to being questioned in a court of law. No surprises really, given that it has been their M.O. to use Clarrie and family members as their mouthpieces all along.

Can you imagine the liability Kate would be if she was asked some difficult questions?

Yes, "Well, I know because I was there"!

There's no way the gruesome twosome will allow themselves to be cross examined.  No way in hell!  Their recent phoney macho posturing was a complete ruse! Just like everything they've said and done since May 2007.

The McCanns have got a b****y cheek, want to assist others but don't want to testify themselves.!!!

Amaral's Lawyer to Kate and Gerry McCann:" Your claim is that Sr Amaral's Book hindered the search for Madeleine , is that right?

McCanns: "Yes it did, because if people believed that they would not continue with the search"

Lawyer: "Could you elaborate on that and tell the Court what the Fund was doing to search for Madeleine "?

McCanns : We employed Mr Halligen at a cost of £300,000 who unfortunately was a fraud, then two retired Detectives with no experience in finding
missing children , and a Spanish Firm of Detectives whose experience turned out to be money laundering and Fraud

Lawyer : You claim Sr Amaral's Book affected the health of the whole family , yet it was printed in Portugese which you would have had to
have translated , did you let the twins read the Books? Do you have dated Certificates and Reports from your Doctor to confirm your
allegation. ?

McCanns Well, we did not think that was necessary.

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

jinvta wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

I believe so.

 
Says it all really - the McCanns are not even willing to testify on how Amaral's book allegedly caused them distress to the sum of 1.2 million. Everything everyone else has said on their behalf has been hearsay, yet they cannot speak up for themselves when it comes to being questioned in a court of law. No surprises really, given that it has been their M.O. to use Clarrie and family members as their mouthpieces all along.

Can you imagine the liability Kate would be if she was asked some difficult questions?

Yes, "Well,  know because  was there"!

 

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

jinvta wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

I believe so.

 
Says it all really - the McCanns are not even willing to testify on how Amaral's book allegedly caused them distress to the sum of 1.2 million. Everything everyone else has said on their behalf has been hearsay, yet they cannot speak up for themselves when it comes to being questioned in a court of law. No surprises really, given that it has been their M.O. to use Clarrie and family members as their mouthpieces all along.

Can you imagine the liability Kate would be if she was asked some difficult questions?

Yes, "Well, I know because I was there"!

 

I didn't even notice the typo! Correcting now!  

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

jinvta wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

I believe so.

 
Says it all really - the McCanns are not even willing to testify on how Amaral's book allegedly caused them distress to the sum of 1.2 million. Everything everyone else has said on their behalf has been hearsay, yet they cannot speak up for themselves when it comes to being questioned in a court of law. No surprises really, given that it has been their M.O. to use Clarrie and family members as their mouthpieces all along.

Can you imagine the liability Kate would be if she was asked some difficult questions?

Yes, "Well, I know because I was there"!

 

I didn't even notice the typo! Correcting now!  

I wasn't laughing because of your typo. I was just imagining Kate on the witness stand saying that!  

I want to see her take the stand and do her 'whooshing curtains' act where she waves her arms about.
Every time she does it it gets more dramatic and hilarious.
On Crimewatch I thought she'd have Gezza's eye out.

By the time she's perfected it for the Lisbon judge, she'll be taking off like a Harrier Jump Jet ...

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

jinvta wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

I believe so.

 
Says it all really - the McCanns are not even willing to testify on how Amaral's book allegedly caused them distress to the sum of 1.2 million. Everything everyone else has said on their behalf has been hearsay, yet they cannot speak up for themselves when it comes to being questioned in a court of law. No surprises really, given that it has been their M.O. to use Clarrie and family members as their mouthpieces all along.

Can you imagine the liability Kate would be if she was asked some difficult questions?

Yes, "Well, I know because I was there"!

 

I didn't even notice the typo! Correcting now!  

I wasn't laughing because of your typo. I was just imagining Kate on the witness stand saying that!  

I reckon she'd be arrogant enough to say that!  

almostgothic wrote:I want to see her take the stand and do her 'whooshing curtains' act where she waves her arms about.
Every time she does it it gets more dramatic and hilarious.
On Crimewatch I thought she'd have Gezza's eye out.

By the time she's perfected it for the Lisbon judge, she'll be taking off like a Harrier Jump Jet ...

 

AnnaEsse wrote:

almostgothic wrote:I want to see her take the stand and do her 'whooshing curtains' act where she waves her arms about.
Every time she does it it gets more dramatic and hilarious.
On Crimewatch I thought she'd have Gezza's eye out.

By the time she's perfected it for the Lisbon judge, she'll be taking off like a Harrier Jump Jet ...

 

Unless she has read Michael McLean's eBook in which he righfully points out that only one curtain could have whooshed because the window slides to the left and the only opening would have been on the right side closest to the wardrobe. I am sure that the PJ have done tests to show that there would have needed to be a succession of monumental gusts of wind to have first blown the door shut as Kate went to close it to 5 degrees, and then whooshed the curtain when Kate opened the door after it slamming.

http://freepdfhosting.com/9099bef539.pdf

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

jinvta wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

tanszi wrote:this is one for the Portuguese please if they know.  The McCs have asked to be heard as plaintiffs and not witnesses, does this mean that anything they say cannot be questioned by any one.  just asking.

I believe so.

 
Says it all really - the McCanns are not even willing to testify on how Amaral's book allegedly caused them distress to the sum of 1.2 million. Everything everyone else has said on their behalf has been hearsay, yet they cannot speak up for themselves when it comes to being questioned in a court of law. No surprises really, given that it has been their M.O. to use Clarrie and family members as their mouthpieces all along.

Can you imagine the liability Kate would be if she was asked some difficult questions?

Yes, "Well, I know because I was there"!

 

I didn't even notice the typo! Correcting now!  

I wasn't laughing because of your typo. I was just imagining Kate on the witness stand saying that!  

I reckon she'd be arrogant enough to say that!  

No doubt about that!

Libel trial - Day 8- witness 2: Luis Froes   ( thanks to Anne Guedes and John-UK justice forum)

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2967.0


McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel hearing witness Luis Froes

Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 8 Witness No 2


The testimony as it happened...


(05.11.2013, 2:45pm) Luis Froes is a Partner at Outsider Films Ltd. He was General Manager at Valentim de Carvalho Multimédia between April 2008 and September 2012, in which period the Amaral documentary was produced. His evidence relates to the background in which the documentary was produced...

Is this exhausted tripe so that she can't go to the Lisbon trial (is it 19/11). Remember the mockumentary when she was allegedly too frail to film in PDL? The actress who took her place ended up on the cutting room floor and was watched over by Clarrie to ensure she didn't talk to reporters!

Think that was the first performance she did of the whooshing curtains at home in Rothley and she didn't look too frail to me. How long did it take to let us know that that was how she knew Maddie had been abducted? For over 12 months she couldn't tell us because of judicial secrecy and then we got the billowing curtains because of some passing hurricane/typhoon etc

Libel trial being cited as the cause of frailty in the Star - by 'friends' and a 'close source'.

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/351048/Friends-fear-for-frail-and-tired-Kate-McCann

Zero sympathy from me.
They shouldn't have brought this libel case in the first place.
I'm not going to get my violin out for someone hell bent on destroying a man's life and taking from him everything he holds dear.
Let's hope the good judge calls their bluff and insists that they take the stand - with a warning of penalties if they don't.

This is certainly the laying of the groundwork to pull out of a Lisbon appearance.

Nearly seven years later we get these headlines and Kate looks wrecked. Neither of these events were apparent in the aftermath of Madeleine going missing. She was so distraught, she jogged.

Kate should jog off to Lisbon and tell the truth for once in her life. Have the courage of her convictions, tell her siðe. Let us hear from HER mouth what this has done to her, not from the tabloids paid to print it.

I had some sympathy and worry for her family members yesterday. Today I don't, I will never ever again feel a shred of sympathy for anyone connected with that family, they have the power to stop this and wont.

If my mother thought I was harming her beloved grandchildren in any way, shape or form she would have no hesitation in protecting them. I cannot understand why the Healy and McCann families are enabling this behaviour.

Mossman, I agree with you I think the fall out can affect those close to them much more. they have their own concerns and fears concerning the child and then they have their concerns and fears for the parents. it is an awful situation to be in, unfortunately on many occasions the sound bites they make tend to cause the hackles to rise. My parents would do the same if they thought harm was coming to their grandchildren, by whatever means and by whomever, they would step in and shield them.

Thanks to UK justice forum Anne Guedes and John:

Libel Trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel hearing witness Paulo Santos

Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 8 Witness No 3


The testimony as it happened...

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2980.0