McCanns are suing the Times (no confirmation yet)

Via Joana Morais, who got this on Twitter -

Daniel Douglas @_dandouglas · 2h

Kate and Gerry McCann have filed a case against The Times in the High Court. Interesting. No details made public yet.

As I said, no confirmation yet, but I will post more details as I get them.

ETA the article in question has since been removed from the Times website, but it's here - www.mccannfiles.com/id466.html

It's about the suppressed e-fits.

Thanks Iris.
I'm trying to think of what has been in the Times recently that warrants CR's attention.

Thanks Iris. So they're after more money....

I wonder if its the Sunday Times and about the photofits that were hidden for 5 years?

Here we go again! When the food bill needs paying they come out and announce that they are going to sue someone. Yawn.

I do hope The Times don't cough up and cave in without it going to Court

wjk wrote:I wonder if its the Sunday Times and about the photofits that were hidden for 5 years?

I think it is. Probably the Exton e-fits

chrissie wrote:

wjk wrote:I wonder if its the Sunday Times and about the photofits that were hidden for 5 years?

I think it is.  Probably the Exton e-fits

Yes, thats all I can think of?

wjk wrote:I wonder if its the Sunday Times and about the photofits that were hidden for 5 years?

Yes, Exton, his TM-suppressed hypercritical report and e-fits is the one I was thinking of too.
Although the ST did make a partial retraction over the length of suppression time, the meat of the story still remained - that the whole report had been hidden for a period of time via a legal gag. Even SY had to request permission to receive it.

Lets hope the ST hold out for a court case. Get Exton in court, that would be very interesting.

Daniel Douglas ‏@_dandouglas 3m

Lots of interest in earlier tweet on Kate, Gerry McCann v @thetimes in High Court. Filed recently. Ref: HQ14D02886. No details yet. #mccann

They're perhaps getting a bit worried about Amaral's threatening to sue them and this is how they raise cash! Sue somebody!

Yet they've never sued the Telegraph for stating quite clearly that Maddie died of an overdose. The article's on the Telegraph website to this day.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1563090/Madeleine-McCann-died-from-overdose.html

Presumably the Times have got lawyers who read any McCann stuff before it gets printed?

Iris wrote:Yet they've never sued the Telegraph for stating quite clearly that Maddie died of an overdose.  The article's on the Telegraph website to this day.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1563090/Madeleine-McCann-died-from-overdose.html

Presumably the Times have got lawyers who read any McCann stuff before it gets printed?

In my opinion, the McCanns could never sue 'The Times' for stating that Madeleine died of an overdose, because they said that they believed the 'abductor' drugged Madeleine along with the twins, before he took Madeleine away.

It's just like the McCanns saying Goncalo Amaral harmed the search for Madeleine, when he wrote what he did in his book, when he has quoted passages from the PJ files.

I agree with others, that the McCanns are now desperate for money and I don't think they just want the money to pay for the lawsuit if the lose. I think they need money for their day to day living.

Perhaps they´ll sue NSY next followed by David Cameron, and then no doubt they´ll be able to come up with others they can sue, there seems to be no end to their suing. Perhaps they are addicted to suing, just as gamblers get addicted etc.

mara thon wrote:Perhaps they´ll sue NSY next followed by David Cameron, and then no doubt they´ll be able to come up with others they can sue, there seems to be no end to their suing.  Perhaps they are addicted to suing, just as gamblers get addicted etc.

Hi Marathon

I'm amazed the McCanns didn't file a complaint against Redwood, for stating that Madeleine may not have left the apartment alive. Redwood went from stating that Madeleine was either dead or alive, to stating that he believe Madeleine was alive, then finally stating Madeleine may not have left the apartment alive.

The McCanns didn't bat an eyelid, when Redwood stated that he believed that Madeleine's body was returned and buried in PDL.

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/06/maddie-case-searching-for-evidence-of.html

This is just ridiculous! Which article is this referring to?

We think it's the one about the suppressed e-fits Leia, but then again it might be the one of 20 May when they said that NSY were looking into who "killed" Madeleine. They very quickly changed that headline, but it was there for quite a while beforehand, no doubt someone somewhere has screencapped it.

Iris wrote:We think it's the one about the suppressed e-fits Leia, but then again it might be the one of 20 May when they said that NSY were looking into who "killed" Madeleine.  They very quickly changed that headline, but it was there for quite a while beforehand, no doubt someone somewhere has screencapped it.

Thank you.

It just beggars belief that these people just sue whoever they want, I wont be surprised if they get another massive payout.

What angers me most is that they have walked away from it all scot free, never taken responsibilty for their actions, and they continue to saunter around suing whoever they want. Why do they get away with it, ALL THE TIME!

It seems that's all they can think of. bet this is the final nail for some fence sitters.

They must be absolutely DESPERATE for money.

Murdoch is going to wipe the floor with them.

So they are now suing Snr.Amaral for his investigation and believing the dogs in that Maddie died.

And they are suing The Times for (possibly) releasing the efits to help find their daughter.

Unbelievable.

am I being thick here. Doesn't Murdoch own the Times.

They are desperate .



The sunday times ALREADY, in 2013, apologised to the Mccanns.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/corrections/article1357081.ece

Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund

The Sunday Times Published: 28 December 2013

In articles dated October 23 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."

Application for summons – Gerald and Kate McCann



After careful consideration, the request to issue a summons against Gerald and Kate McCann for alleged offences contrary to section 1 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 has been refused as it is clear that this court does not have the necessary jurisdiction.

All applications are considered in two stages. The first stage is whether the court has the jurisdiction to issue a summons the second is if there is sufficient evidence. As with this application, if the first stage is not passed the second stage is not considered.

Note for Editors


1.For further enquiry please contact Darren Horsman on 020 7073 4852.



http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/private_pros/