Libel trial-8 july 2014-Kate McCann's deposition-Anne Guedes/Pamalam

interested wrote:"Was taken" and "She's gone Mum" (spoken late at night to her mother in another country) suggests to me Kate knows Madeleine is not coming home.

I think those words are very significant too and Kate knows that she'll never see Madeleine again. Why not "she's disappeared, we can't find her" or something along those lines. Both the phrases Kate uses are things said when referring to someone who has died without actually using the word "dead".

Iris wrote:

weissnicht wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:The day the book was on sale here in Portugal, I posted a large summary of it on my blog.

http://proud-of-the-pj.blogspot.pt/2008/07/ouch.html

k8: She read it completely around the end of 2008.

That's right, and it wasn't on Anna's site until at least Feb 2009.  So she must have read it in Portuguese.  Hang on... why read it on the internet then, she's been back to PdL many times, "walking the streets", couldn't she just have bought one in a bookshop and charged it to the fund?

Where did Kate McCann read Gonçalo Amaral's book, "The Truth of the Lie" in 2008? As far as I know mine is the only complete English translation on the internet.
When the French edition became available, my daughter ordered it for me via Amazon France. Bourin Editeur 2009. I posted each chapter as I completed it, simultaneously on my blog and on MM forum. So, since chapter 1 is on MM forum Feb 21st, even though I re-organised consecutively on my blog early 2010 and lost original dates, I know it was started Feb 2009.

Now, since I was working full-time, there is a good chance that I finished the translation and posted it somewhere around the end of April/beginning of May. Coincidence that the McCanns stated they would sue Amaral on May 16th, 2009?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id244.html

AnnaEsse wrote:

Iris wrote:

weissnicht wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:The day the book was on sale here in Portugal, I posted a large summary of it on my blog.

http://proud-of-the-pj.blogspot.pt/2008/07/ouch.html

k8: She read it completely around the end of 2008.

That's right, and it wasn't on Anna's site until at least Feb 2009.  So she must have read it in Portuguese.  Hang on... why read it on the internet then, she's been back to PdL many times, "walking the streets", couldn't she just have bought one in a bookshop and charged it to the fund?

Where did Kate McCann read Gonçalo Amaral's book, "The Truth of the Lie" in 2008? As far as I know mine is the only complete English translation on the internet.
When the French edition became available, my daughter ordered it for me via Amazon France. Bourin Editeur 2009. I posted each chapter as I completed it, simultaneously on my blog and on MM forum. So, since chapter 1 is on MM forum Feb 21st, even though I re-organised consecutively on my blog early 2010 and lost original dates, I know it was started Feb 2009.

Now, since I was working full-time, there is a good chance that I finished the translation and posted it somewhere around the end of April/beginning of May. Coincidence that the McCanns stated they would sue Amaral on May 16th, 2009?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id244.html

Good morning AnnaEsse

I remember the McCanns being asked if they had read Goncalo Amaral's book, they said they had and it was a load of rubbish. Sorry I can't find any link to this interview, but I have found a link in the McCann.com website, where they call the book rubbish.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id308.html

It's plainly obvious, that the McCanns have a vendetta against Goncalo Amaral and in my opinion, it is because they know that if he, along with his team had been allowed to investigate the case without interference from the British and Portuguese Governments, he would have brought the case to a rightful conclusion, which would have seen them prosecuted.

The McCanns  know, that there is nothing in Snr. Amaral's book  that isn't in the PJ files, they know that if there was, the Supreme Court Judge, would have overturned the decision the Appeals Court Judge made, when he over turned the ban. I can't believe that the McCanns who are supposedly doctors, took out a lawsuit, based on Snr. Amaral's book, when the book is back on the book shelves. The only places the book is not back on the book shelves, are places where the publishers are McCann friendly. How anyone can be McCann friendly, when they know they are the root cause of Madeleine's disappearance, is beyond me.

I recently but the link below on here, you may or may not have seen it.

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2010/02/goncalo-amarals-defense-reveals-npias.html

The link contains information stated by Goncalo Amaral's previous lawyer António Cabrita, he explains that others have wrote similar books and the McCanns have not 'gone after' them. More proof that the McCanns have a vendetta against Goncalo Amaral and even more proof is, the McCanns have not 'gone after' the authors of the PJ files, especially the damning report of Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

I'm on a training course this morning, but when I get back I'm going to check on Site Meter to see when a particular Leicester IP address was cropping up as I was posting the translation. I remember noticing it. I think I may have a record there of when Kate McCann read the book.

I would also check for IPs from Skipton whilst I was about it.

Iris wrote:I would also check for IPs from Skipton whilst I was about it.

Thanks Iris. Will do!

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/09/mccanns-in-expresso-interview.html

This blog of Joana's is dated 6 September 2008.  It lists an interview that the McCanns had with Expresso magazine, in which they state quite clearly that both of them HAVE NOT read the book, and imply that they have no intention of reading it, although it does say that their lawyers have a "translated copy".  (It does not specify the language that it is "translated" into.)

It also has the quote where Kate says it's "rubbish", that we were looking for earlier.

Q – Aren’t you curious to know what the book says?
Kate – What for? It must be nothing but a load of rubbish. It is so secondary

Maybe the topic of Kate's book reading should have a thread of it's own.  I think this might be important.  It might mean that both of the McCanns have provably lied to the court - again.

Thanks for finding that iris as that was my recollection but I didn't know where I read it!

In a previous post I suggested that the McCanns had a vendetta against Goncalo Amaral, because they haven't taken out lawsuits against others who have written similar books to his. It is good to see that the Judge has made Gerry McCann aware that she knows these books exist and that she is aware that he and his wife have never shown any interest in the books, even though the books will be as damaging to the search, their health or their remaining two children's health, as they say Goncalo Amaral's book is.

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/07/palacio-de-justica-8th-of-july-2014.html

Good job the judge did make him aware of these books and authors as GM seems more than a little vague on the subject.

He should certainly have heard of Manuel Catarino (Editor in Chief of Correio da Manhã and author of 'A Culpa dos McCann'), as he was a witness on Day 7 of this very same trial.

And yet he says: I don't remember that name.

Tsk tsk tsk ......  

Kudos to the Judge    for reminding Gerry McCann of these facts, which were brought to her attention in the early days of the lawsuit. I'd love to have seen his face, I bet he wished the ground would swallow him up.

The judge is clearly having difficulty agreeing that the McC's reputation has been damaged, given that Kate has been made an ambassador for a national Missing Children charity, they have thousands of people turning out to support and pray for them and the support of major public figures.

The judge seems to have also noted that Sean doesn't appear to have been dissatisfied with the response he got to his question, given that he hasn't asked further questions.

The standard advice from child psychology experts regarding how to respond to difficult matters with children is to allow them to lead the subject, ie. ask their questions when they're ready, which should be answered in an age-appropriate straightforward and honest manner. The child then needs time to go away and process the response... and may return with more questions, which should be answered... etc.

This may seem like common sense, but a lot of parents/adults think that when a child asks a question, they're ready for and asking to hear a detailed explanation of the whole subject. (Children can only understand things at their own pace). Interestingly, for all that Kate claims she's following the advice of experts, by responding to Sean's question with 'Mr Amaral says a lot of stupid things' she was not offering a straightforward and honest answer and her reply could not have helped Sean understand things better (that's if he even asked this question). Assuming the McCanns are innocent, a straightforward and honest answer might, for example, be, 'I have absolutely no idea. Perhaps because they can't find the person who abducted Madeleine, he wants to blame us, but it's not true'.