I wonder why the Trial date has not been set

mossman wrote:UK Justice Forum has tweeted trial re-starts next week and that Judge is "bombarded" with questions from both parties.

Morning mossman, I'm saying nothing ....it was a tweet or facebook comment that said the Trial would re-commence on 25th Feb, then later rescinded the claim.

Maybe the Portugese have been reading this Forum and got their finger out.  

Hi Panda. I would say it is fasten your seat belt time. The Justice Forum are reliable with regard to their information in my experience. What's another week....

mossman wrote:Hi Panda.  I would say it is fasten your seat belt time.  The Justice Forum are reliable with regard to their information in my experience.  What's another week....

Fancy a trip to Portugal to watch this Trial????  No doubt this will be confirmed by the Portugese Press. Is it a Trial by Jury do you know?

I would love a trip to Portugal, have some very happy memories of visits there. As my brood increased I opted for ferry holidays as unlike super mum Kate I found flying with three babies more trouble than it was worth. A wonderful place to holiday.

It's resumption of the libel trial, so it's back with the Judge.

mossman wrote:I would love a trip to Portugal, have some very happy memories of visits there.  As my brood increased I opted for ferry holidays as unlike super mum Kate I found flying with three babies more trouble than it was worth. A wonderful place to holiday.

It's resumption of the libel trial, so it's back with the Judge.

Iv'e only been to Portugal once, with Friends, many moons ago when Albuferia was just being developed. We stayed in a small resort , can't remember the name and to get to the Beach you had to walk in water part of the way with your clothes etc raised above your head, then all of a sudden there was dry a sandy Beach .....wierd.!!!

Panda wrote:

weissnicht wrote:

widowan wrote:

interested wrote:There seems to be no end to the damage the McCanns have caused.  Just think about the havoc/disarray the freezing of Mr. Amaral's assets has done to his family to say nothing of the stress/emotional turmoil.  

That's the point isn't it? To grind him down - lawyers who suspect they will lose want to cause an out of court settlement.

Yes. Once they managed to freeze Amarals money, the delays are designed to ruin him, imo. Slowly. How evil is that.

Morning weissnicht......but Amaral is a Portugese Citizen being tried in a Portugese Court , not the Mccanns , who have been unhelpful , criticised the Portugese Police, caused havoc in PDL  etc

The delays have all come from mccann lawyer, who works, obviously...for kate and gerry.

It was said after the McCann/Amaral Trial where the Judge said the Books could not be sold that Duarte demanded the unsold books be placed in her possession. She really is a Harpie and because the Judge was only 23 yrs old, Duarte used all the histrionics in the Courtroom and the Judge was probably in awe of her. This judge is mature and apart from Duarte wanting evidence that the no books were sold before the ban was lifted.in this Trial,, I can't think of anything else causing a delay.. As you know Amaral contested the verdict and won, but it took a Court Order for Duarte to release the Books.

Let's hope the new date will not be altered .

Will not be holding my breath for next week but the JF has been pretty accurate regarding the libel trial against Amaral, the book publishers & the TV company...have the McCanns witnesses provided evidence that the book or TV documentary was anything but from official files? or that Amaral has knowingly lied about anything from the case files? I'm hoping the only viable result will see a big final push in the official investigations with a date at the Old Bailey to look forward to

matthew wrote:Will not be holding my breath for next week but the JF has been pretty accurate regarding the libel trial against Amaral, the book publishers & the TV company...have the McCanns witnesses provided evidence that the book or TV documentary was anything but from official files? or that Amaral has knowingly lied about anything from the case files? I'm hoping the only viable result will see a big final push in the official investigations with a date at the Old Bailey to look forward to

Who is JF matthew? I think it will all rest on the Final Report, there are 4 theories. 1. Madeleine was abducted 2. That Madeleine died in 5a......I can't remember the other 2, if someone could find them and post them here, mucho gracias.

Since there is no evidence that Madeleine was abducted, or that she died in 5a (unless the dogs evidence was used which I don't think was mentioned)
The Judge has a tough decision , especially now that Redwood has said he thinks Madeleine could be alive.

Hi Panda, FJ is Justice Forum   

But it is all a matter of opinion.  And if a policeman reaches an opinion in the course of his professional duties is he to be sued.  Is that the line to be taken from now on.

wjk wrote:Hi Panda, FJ is Justice Forum   

Thanks wjk, is this the same Forum that mossman said earlier has given a new date for the Trial.?

MaryB wrote:But it is all a matter of opinion.  And if a policeman reaches an opinion in the course of his professional duties is he to be sued.  Is that the line to be taken from now on.

Hi MaryB, I think it is because Amaral chose the theory from the Final Report that Madeleine died in 5a. This based on his dealing with the McCanns and that Kate had lied about the shutters, the blood spots behind the settee, I'm surprised he never mentioned the dogs. Would a jury consider these enough
to reach a verdict????In some cases people do get charged without a body , but then you have to ask why wasn't a Trial organised while the McCanns were still in Portugal, their arguido status was lifted., this is the point the McCann Lawyer, Duarte will make. A puzzle isn't it.  

With the PJ investigating murder and even SY talking about it now, I wonder how that will affect anything. Because you can't harm the search for MM if she is deceased, not that I think the book harmed the search; if anything, it probably helped increase awareness which is all the really mean when they say "search" - all the money on the search that didn't go to lawyers went to awareness campaigns. They weren't paying people to go look physically and I certainly hope weren't expecting that to happen since they didn't bother themselves after a few looks around the kiddie play area.

What is the libel law in PT anyone know? Is it like the UK where you just prove you harmed them, or do you have to show that the libelous statements are untrue, as well as harmful?

Panda wrote:It was said after the McCann/Amaral Trial where the Judge said the Books could not be sold that Duarte demanded the unsold books be placed in her possession. She really is a Harpie and because the Judge was only 23 yrs old, Duarte used all the histrionics in the Courtroom and the Judge was probably in awe of her. This judge is mature and apart from Duarte wanting evidence that the no books were sold before the ban was lifted.in this Trial,, I can't think of anything else causing a delay.. As you know Amaral contested the verdict and won, but it took a Court Order for Duarte to release the Books.

Let's hope the new date will not be altered .

It's impossible for a 23 year old to be a judge here. But she was a young judge, yes.

Claudia79 wrote:

Panda wrote:It was said after the McCann/Amaral Trial where the Judge said the Books could not be sold that Duarte demanded the unsold books be placed in her possession. She really is a Harpie and because the Judge was only 23 yrs old, Duarte used all the histrionics in the Courtroom and the Judge was probably in awe of her. This judge is mature and apart from Duarte wanting evidence that the no books were sold before the ban was lifted.in this Trial,, I can't think of anything else causing a delay.. As you know Amaral contested the verdict and won, but it took a Court Order for Duarte to release the Books.

Let's hope the new date will not be altered .

It's impossible for a 23 year old to be a judge here. But she was a young judge, yes.

I read that she was 23, thought it was young myself, but no one actually knew her age to respond.

Panda wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

Panda wrote:It was said after the McCann/Amaral Trial where the Judge said the Books could not be sold that Duarte demanded the unsold books be placed in her possession. She really is a Harpie and because the Judge was only 23 yrs old, Duarte used all the histrionics in the Courtroom and the Judge was probably in awe of her. This judge is mature and apart from Duarte wanting evidence that the no books were sold before the ban was lifted.in this Trial,, I can't think of anything else causing a delay.. As you know Amaral contested the verdict and won, but it took a Court Order for Duarte to release the Books.

Let's hope the new date will not be altered .

It's impossible for a 23 year old to be a judge here. But she was a young judge, yes.

I read that she was 23, thought it was young myself, but no one actually knew her age to respond.

I know she was young but she couldn't be 23. That's not possible.

Panda wrote:

wjk wrote:Hi Panda, FJ is Justice Forum   

Thanks wjk, is this the same Forum that mossman said earlier has given a new date for the Trial.?

Yes it is.

Panda wrote:

matthew wrote:Will not be holding my breath for next week but the JF has been pretty accurate regarding the libel trial against Amaral, the book publishers & the TV company...have the McCanns witnesses provided evidence that the book or TV documentary was anything but from official files? or that Amaral has knowingly lied about anything from the case files? I'm hoping the only viable result will see a big final push in the official investigations with a date at the Old Bailey to look forward to

Who is JF matthew? I think it will all rest on the Final Report, there are 4 theories. 1. Madeleine was abducted  2. That Madeleine died in 5a......I can't remember the other 2, if someone could find them and post them here, mucho gracias.

Since there is no evidence that Madeleine was abducted, or that she died in 5a (unless the dogs evidence was used which I don't think was mentioned)
The Judge has a tough decision , especially now that Redwood has said he thinks Madeleine could be alive.

Thinking isn't the same as demonstrating or proving, so the judge may well discount any opinion of Redwoods, even if she considers it.

jassi wrote:

Panda wrote:

matthew wrote:Will not be holding my breath for next week but the JF has been pretty accurate regarding the libel trial against Amaral, the book publishers & the TV company...have the McCanns witnesses provided evidence that the book or TV documentary was anything but from official files? or that Amaral has knowingly lied about anything from the case files? I'm hoping the only viable result will see a big final push in the official investigations with a date at the Old Bailey to look forward to

Who is JF matthew? I think it will all rest on the Final Report, there are 4 theories. 1. Madeleine was abducted  2. That Madeleine died in 5a......I can't remember the other 2, if someone could find them and post them here, mucho gracias.

Since there is no evidence that Madeleine was abducted, or that she died in 5a (unless the dogs evidence was used which I don't think was mentioned)
The Judge has a tough decision , especially now that Redwood has said he thinks Madeleine could be alive.

Thinking isn't the same as demonstrating or proving, so the judge may well discount any opinion of Redwoods, even if she considers it.

What's the key issue here - whether writing a book about the parents harmed their reputation (yes,) or harmed the SEARCH for their daughter which is what they want to claim - do they have to prove that what Amaral was writing was not true (ie true recounting of the investigation) or only that it was damaging?

It is mind boggling that in the media circus around this case a judge would find a factual account of the investigation libelous regardless if it harmed them or not. Everyone who can hold a pen has weighed in and many have made money from it!

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:

wjk wrote:Hi Panda, FJ is Justice Forum   

Thanks wjk, is this the same Forum that mossman said earlier has given a new date for the Trial.?

Yes it is.

Thanks mossman , discussing the case now , it really will be a hard one to call. The McCanns have claimed that.:

1. Amaral's Book suggesting Madeleine died in 5a hindered their search for her .......rubbish, continual sightings around the World were reported until recently .

2. The Book affected the health of the Parents and twins.....will they produce Reports from Doctors confirming this. ?

3. The Book was published in Portugese and not for sale in the U.K. so how could the twins see it or read it?

4. The only way the Parents could read it is by paying to have it translated, although translated copies appeared on
youtube which could be said to upset the McCanns.

That's a point, if the next meeting is to close the Trial , why havn't the McCanns been questioned????? All we have had are witnesses from both Parties , no Kate, Gerry or Goncarlo in the Witness box.

widowan wrote:With the PJ investigating murder and even SY talking about it now, I wonder how that will affect anything. Because you can't harm the search for MM if she is deceased, not that I think the book harmed the search; if anything, it probably helped increase awareness which is all the really mean when they say "search" - all the money on the search that didn't go to lawyers went to awareness campaigns. They weren't paying people to go look physically and I certainly hope weren't expecting that to happen since they didn't bother themselves after a few looks around the kiddie play area.

What is the libel law in PT anyone know? Is it like the UK where you just prove you harmed them, or do you have to show that the libelous statements are untrue, as well as harmful?

I stand to be corrected but I understand the law in Portugal is opposite to the UK. The onus is on the McCanns to prove their case.

It's gone on so long, I have forgotten what the original basis for the action was - is it harming the search for a live child and upsetting Kate and Gerry? If anyone has a link setting this out I'd be grateful.

mossman wrote:

widowan wrote:With the PJ investigating murder and even SY talking about it now, I wonder how that will affect anything. Because you can't harm the search for MM if she is deceased, not that I think the book harmed the search; if anything, it probably helped increase awareness which is all the really mean when they say "search" - all the money on the search that didn't go to lawyers went to awareness campaigns. They weren't paying people to go look physically and I certainly hope weren't expecting that to happen since they didn't bother themselves after a few looks around the kiddie play area.

What is the libel law in PT anyone know? Is it like the UK where you just prove you harmed them, or do you have to show that the libelous statements are untrue, as well as harmful?

I stand to be corrected but I understand the law in Portugal is opposite to the UK.  The onus is on the McCanns to prove their case.

It's gone on so long, I have forgotten what the original basis for the action was - is it harming the search for a live child and upsetting Kate and Gerry?  If anyone has a link setting this out I'd be grateful.

If it's about the search I suppose K&G could say that they had to use money for lawyers to defend themselves because of the book so they didn't have it available to do more widespread searching.

however Amaral's BOOK did not cause K&G to retain attorneys. They had Auguste Pinochet's extradition attorney on tap before they ever left Portugal, they had the free Carter Ruck and they had someone else paying their legal fees - Brian Kennedy? They didn't wait to hire attorneys and have said in print their attorneys' fees did not come out of the Fund. Besides which it's the case itself not Amaral's perspective on it that would cause them to need attorneys.

I wish I knew more about their laws in this area.

mossman wrote:
I stand to be corrected but I understand the law in Portugal is opposite to the UK. The onus is on the McCanns to prove their case.
------------------------------------------------------------

No need to be corrected, you are absolutely RIGHT,

The Mccanns HAVE to PROVE their claims.

And with all the 'laughing' pictures of them from day after 'Madeleine' went 'missing' thru Amsterdam and LK sofa they are going to have a problem in PROVING they are so 'constantly distraught and devastated'

IMO.

eta: I AGREE with them being 'social outcasts'!

I wouldn't want to 'socialise' with people that diliberately, consciously, put their 3 kids in 'danger', to god knows what, night after night, by leaving them all alone in an UNLOCKED, UNSECURED, out of sight, apartment!

ADMITTED to, by the McCanns THEMSELVES!

What could possibly go 'wrong'?

You see I think the angle is because of the suggestion that Madeleine died, the world stopped looking for her. Then of course, the book was not an ode to the wonderful parenting skills of Kate and Gerry therefore they got upset...more money for that and the twins and, rather strangely, Madeleine.

I think Amaral has questioned their right to seek damages on behalf of Madeleine, given she is a Ward of Court.

As I say though, it's so long ago now my brain is scrambled so I could be talking rubbish.