Daily Express report on McCann bid for access to Police Files

Claudia79 wrote:

mossman wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

mossman wrote:If their application is refused that will speak volumes........

And if it isn't, it will scream volumes...

Absolutely.  Is it a chance they are willing to take ?  Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.  That is why I await with interest to see if the actually follow through with the process and formally make the application.

My bet: they will and it will be approved. Parents of abducted children are always 'assistentes'...

Hi Claudia, it seems a strange system, kinda like you don't trust your Lawyer to represent you properly so you do it yourself. BTW, Is Duarte no longer representing the McCanns?

Panda the McCs have different lawyers for different things. Duarte is a libel lawyer. they also have a criminal lawyer, and others as I understand

tanszi wrote:Panda the McCs have different lawyers for different things.  Duarte is a libel lawyer. they also have a criminal lawyer, and others as I understand

But Duarte hasn't been representing them at the libel trial for several days now.  Ricardo Afonso has.  I think Gerry's sacked her, over the cock-up with the witnesses.  Just like he did with Justine McGuinness.

In fact I wonder if Duarte has been trying to wriggle out of all of it for a while, and deliberately screwed up the witnesses in order to get the push! She did say that everybody in Portugal despised her and that she was having a tough time of it. Maybe she just finally had enough and wanted to go.

I reckon you are right Iris and that Isabel has had enough! Probably because she does not want to be anymore involved In the circus

I ask myself if I wanted to get the case reopened to look at any line of investigation, would I want the parents involved and arguidos and the answer is yes.

If abduction, the parents deserve to know & if it's usual that parents of abducted children have this assistant status then that's what you would do - and if they want to look at McCanns themselves then they would not get much cooperation from them unless they stated that the line of investigation is one where they are not the suspects.

Either way they have important information; this line of inquiry seems to indicate that McCanns would NOT have access to information against them, rather only to that pertaining to an abduction.

They could have the case reopened and be looking into many things they are not willing to tell the press or the McCanns.

I think the reopening is a good thing and if there's a pedophile ring in Portugal even if it has nothing to do with this case I would think the people there would welcome it - you want these people caught. Since porn goes all over on the Internet it's in the best interest of all kids that these evil people be caught regardless whose children they are preying on. They would have no market for their disgusting wares if there weren't people willing to purchase it, apparently at all walks of life.

Just saw something on facebook about a NY disc jockey who was caught in a sting, the guy is famous and was trying to get a mother of a 6 year old to bring her daughter to him and the things he was saying so matter of factly about it made my flesh crawl.

Thanks tanzi and Iris, Kate had Abreu when she refused to answer questions , don't recall who Gerry Had.

One thing is sure, there will be no money left in the Fund by the time this investigation is concluded , all in all this couple have wasted almost £3 million on legal fees, me , me and me again seems to be their mantra.

fuzeta wrote:I reckon you are right Iris and that Isabel has had enough!  Probably because she does not want to be anymore involved In the circus

Or maybe she's seen how badly this is going, and she does not want to be the one who "loses" the case.  Now she can say, "they lost because they sacked me" and it's Afonso who will have to carry the can when the time comes.

Iris wrote:

tanszi wrote:Panda the McCs have different lawyers for different things.  Duarte is a libel lawyer. they also have a criminal lawyer, and others as I understand

But Duarte hasn't been representing them at the libel trial for several days now.  Ricardo Afonso has.  I think Gerry's sacked her, over the cock-up with the witnesses.  Just like he did with Justine McGuinness.

In fact I wonder if Duarte has been trying to wriggle out of all of it for a while, and deliberately screwed up the witnesses in order to get the push!  She did say that everybody in Portugal despised her and that she was having a tough time of it.  Maybe she just finally had enough and wanted to go.

People may feel that this is about the right to free speech in Portugal and that should trump individual's right against being defamed; McCanns would put their own reputation as the priority.

One thing - if the argument is that Amaral's book prevented people from searching because they thought McCanns were guilty of doing something to her then this opens it back up for people to look, now, for a ten year old but I think if the parents refuse to cooperate (via their friends' refusal to reconstruct) then people feel they know something we don't. That's what closed the investigation, and it happened long before the book came out.

Panda wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

mossman wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

mossman wrote:If their application is refused that will speak volumes........

And if it isn't, it will scream volumes...

Absolutely.  Is it a chance they are willing to take ?  Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.  That is why I await with interest to see if the actually follow through with the process and formally make the application.

My bet: they will and it will be approved. Parents of abducted children are always 'assistentes'...

Hi Claudia, it seems a strange system, kinda like you don't trust your Lawyer to represent you properly so you do it yourself.   BTW, Is Duarte no longer representing the McCanns?

That's not what 'assistente' means. An assistente has a lot more rights, including having access to information which you wouldn't have access to if you weren't an 'assistente'. I ahve no indication that Isabel Duarte is no longer representing them. It is not unusual for lawyers' assistants to replace them when, for whatever reason, they can't be present.

Claudia79 wrote:

Panda wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

mossman wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:And if it isn't, it will scream volumes...

Absolutely.  Is it a chance they are willing to take ?  Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.  That is why I await with interest to see if the actually follow through with the process and formally make the application.

My bet: they will and it will be approved. Parents of abducted children are always 'assistentes'...

Hi Claudia, it seems a strange system, kinda like you don't trust your Lawyer to represent you properly so you do it yourself.   BTW, Is Duarte no longer representing the McCanns?

That's not what 'assistente' means. An assistente has a lot more rights, including having access to information which you wouldn't have access to if you weren't an 'assistente'. I ahve no indication that Isabel Duarte is no longer representing them. It is not unusual for lawyers' assistants to replace them when, for whatever reason, they can't be present.

Am I getting this wrong Claudia? From what have been reading the assistente is employed if you don't have too much faith in your Lawyer, so you have access to all the Files and cherry pick what you want your Lawyer to say.? Unless the McCanns have been taking lessons in Portugese how can they "help"?

Sorry, I'm just having a giggle trying to imagine an English Court , English Lawyers and English Judge , English witnesses, and the Portugese Plaintiff can get assistance from a Portugese couple who can't speak English or understand the Documents.

Panda wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

Panda wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

mossman wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:And if it isn't, it will scream volumes...

Absolutely.  Is it a chance they are willing to take ?  Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.  That is why I await with interest to see if the actually follow through with the process and formally make the application.

My bet: they will and it will be approved. Parents of abducted children are always 'assistentes'...

Hi Claudia, it seems a strange system, kinda like you don't trust your Lawyer to represent you properly so you do it yourself.   BTW, Is Duarte no longer representing the McCanns?

That's not what 'assistente' means. An assistente has a lot more rights, including having access to information which you wouldn't have access to if you weren't an 'assistente'. I ahve no indication that Isabel Duarte is no longer representing them. It is not unusual for lawyers' assistants to replace them when, for whatever reason, they can't be present.

Am I getting this wrong Claudia? From what  have been reading the assistente is employed if you don't have too much faith in your Lawyer, so you have access to all the Files and cherry pick what you want your Lawyer to say.? Unless the McCanns have been taking lessons in Portugese how can they "help"?

Sorry, I'm just having a giggle trying to imagine an English Court , English Lawyers and English Judge , English witnesses, and the Portugese Plaintiff can get assistance from a Portugese couple who can't speak English or understand the Documents.

No. That's not what it means. 'Assistente' is a title attributed to one of the parties involved when that part is also considered a 'victim'. Let's assume Madeleine was abducted and her parents had no involvement in what happened. Madeleine is the victim but her parents are too. If they request to become assistentes and that request is granted then they (and their legal team) will have access to a lot more information (documents, suspects, testimonies, diligences, etc) than they would if they were not assistentes.

Right, gotcha...thanks Claudia , so because Amaral suggested Madeleine died in 5a, it is suggesteed that the Parents were responsible ...which they were, not physically, but through negligence. I hope they are not granted that status on the grounds that they did not co=operate with the Portugese Police by not attending a recon,  answering questions , engaging a Private Investigator when this is forbidden under Portugese Law etc.

Panda wrote:Thanks tanzi and Iris, Kate had Abreu when she refused to answer questions , don't recall who Gerry Had.

One thing is sure, there will be no money left in the Fund by the time this investigation is concluded , all in all this couple have wasted almost £3 million on legal fees, me , me and me again seems to be their mantra.

Gee, if they had used that £3M on following up the MI5 leads supposedly handed to them - that now form the basis for SY new investigation, they could have been further forward. That was 2008 only a year into the abduction, clues and so forth would be easier to find, memories easier to recall than they will now 5 years later.

This was not fees paid to Carter Ruck, who worked on a pay if you win basis, these would have been to defense lawyers. But they "had to" use Madeleine's fund for legal fees right? that's the argument, that Amaral's book forced them to do this, rather than use it to search.

although at other times they have said their benefactor (Brian Kennedy?) paid their legal fees and all the money was used on the search. £3M is a lot, if you had those leads in the right hands - which by 2008 as "no one else was looking for Madeleine" would have been their own amply funded investigation.

What's up with that.

widowan wrote:

Panda wrote:Thanks tanzi and Iris, Kate had Abreu when she refused to answer questions , don't recall who Gerry Had.

One thing is sure, there will be no money left in the Fund by the time this investigation is concluded , all in all this couple have wasted almost £3 million on legal fees, me , me and me again seems to be their mantra.

Gee, if they had used that £3M on following up the MI5 leads supposedly handed to them - that now form the basis for SY new investigation, they could have been further forward. That was 2008 only a year into the abduction, clues and so forth would be easier to find, memories easier to recall than they will now 5 years later.

This was not fees paid to Carter Ruck, who worked on a pay if you win basis, these would have been to defense lawyers. But they "had to" use Madeleine's fund for legal fees right? that's the argument, that Amaral's book forced them to do this, rather than use it to search.

although at other times they have said their benefactor (Brian Kennedy?) paid their legal fees and all the money was used on the search. £3M is a lot, if you had those leads in the right hands - which by 2008 as "no one else was looking for Madeleine" would have been their own amply funded investigation.

What's up with that.

Hi Widowan, apparently by Decemeber 2007 there was almost £2 million received in the Fund , and that was only 7 months after Madeleine disappeared. I don't think Brian Kennedy paid for anything, he did physically help , and his Son, Kennedy went to Morocco to check up on a reported sighting, his Son Patrick went to Portugal to check out another. Also, Kennedy has a few holding Companies which I suspect the McCanns used launder money, that was the forte of Metodo 3, Fraud and Money Laundering, I suspect they were recommended by Kennedy.

Well evidently they threatened to SUE their famous MI5 investigators for publishing their findings, which included the very same exact lead (smithman) that SY now thinks is critical.

So what it boils down to is....mr amaral didn't write a book which stopped people searching for Madeleine....it was the mccanns that hindered the search for their own daughter by stopping a e fit off the possible 'abductor' getting into Our domain for the past 5 years.

kitti wrote:So what it boils down to is....mr amaral didn't write a book which stopped people searching for Madeleine....it was the mccanns that hindered the search for their own daughter by stopping a e fit off the possible 'abductor'  getting into Our domain for the  past 5 years.

In a nutshell....yes. Oh and the Smithman is the man mentioned if GAs book, the man he wanted to return to Portugal, indeed had everything in place bar an hotel, for the visit, before he got sidelined.

What will the McCanns do with the libel trial now ? They surely will not want to give evidence but they have made the application.....oops.

What are the odds on them withdrawing altogether ? Clarries statement to say in order to respect Portugese Judicial Secrecy laws and in order for the couple to further concentrate on leaving no stone unturned, they have decided to withdraw from the proceedings.

Maybe the whole trial will be stopped on the grounds of secrecy. Or Mr Amaral will be preventing from saying what he intended to say because of secrecy. Who knows.

mossman wrote:

What are the odds on them withdrawing altogether ?

I'd say next to zero, because then they're gonna be stiffed with all the costs.
Although that might happen anyway, I suppose they have to take their chances that it won't.

Iris wrote:

mossman wrote:

What are the odds on them withdrawing altogether ?

I'd say next to zero, because then they're gonna be stiffed with all the costs.
Although that might happen anyway, I suppose they have to take their chances that it won't.

I hope you are right Iris, I really do. It has thus far gone well for Amaral and for the McCanns to drop it now would just leave an unfinished air about their allegations. Obviously not in the minds of those who have educated themselves about the case but GA deserves a proper resolution to this.

They've made the same mistake that despots and tyrants have made over many centuries - they chose to fight on too many fronts.

That's what megalomania does for ya ......

So why hasn't the Fundraiser in chief or the Tortoise been honest about this report which was critical of the McCs and had the efit in and was suppressed because of the private investigators ere under threat of being sued. SY really have got egg on their face with this one. They are protecting the McCs imo. bet they weren't expecting this to be in the Sunday Papers

I'm wondering about SY's role in this. They did say the e fits were from the investigators files, prepared 5 years ago. It bothered me at the time that they were relying on something prepared by investigators paid by the McCanns, that they did not get their own prepared. I thought whitewash attempt. Mr Smith is only in Ireland, not the other side of the world. Fr example if it were Mrs Fenn, obviously they would need to rely on older material.

So they were half honest and said where they came from, just not the other circumstances. Did they do this on purpose, are they that clever, trying to push people to talk ?

I know there are many arguments for what has gone on before to say don't trust Redwood et al, but looking at where we are now, is there just an outside chance SY know what they are doing and are trying to solve this ?

Perhaps the sudden out of character, complimentary burst towards the PJ from Commisioner Bernard Hogan Howe, was fear and desperation because the Met knew what was around the corner!

Wonder what McCann lover, Jim Gamble's saying on twitter?

almostgothic wrote:They've made the same mistake that despots and tyrants have made over many centuries - they chose to fight on too many fronts.

That's what megalomania does for ya ......

Great post, almostgothic.