Amaral V McCann trial

Is not the 'burden of proof' lower in a civil case?

That a case is closed after such a relatively short time. And such a grave matter as the disappearance and possibly death of a three year old child is very very strange. Why was the case closed. We are told there was no evidence. When there is no evidence is a case usually closed. Especially ones involving an extremely serious crime. Although are we not told there was no evidence of a crime being committed. It is really all very strange indeed.

curious george wrote:Is not the 'burden of proof' lower in a civil case?

Amaral must prove all he wrote in the book, if he fails to do so then he is in trouble....the McCanns would be there in the courtroom only as observers and would not be called to speak within the courtroom....this case means it will all be down to Sr Amaral to prove positive all that he wrote and also all that he implied is true.

Colonel Fabien wrote:

stellarose wrote:Fortunately, the only subject on trial here will be whether Amaral told the truth in his book...that is what this is all about and the only thing the judge will be interested in, I cant possibly see how he can prove it was the truth when even the PJ had to admit that, on releasing them from Arguido status that there was no evidence that the McCanns were involved with Madeleine's disappearance, so unless he knows something no-one else is privvy to, then I would think the PJ would want to know why he kept that information to himself, so I dont believe Amaral can win either way. Carter-Ruck offered their services and being the best, they dont back losers..thats my opinion for what it's worth. If Amaral does not settle out of court then I'm sure he will be advised what he may face in court.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Everything in Gonçalo Amaral's book is true, based on the police files of the investigation. How many times does one have to say this, he does not invent anything in the book, there are no fantasies, ponto final. Maybe, you would be interested to know that among the witnesses for GA's defense are PJ inspectors. The case was shelved due to political interference not for investigative reasons. This is the only time in Portugal that a case of a missing child has been closed. You can be sure that this was against the wishes of the police and the judge but was in accordance to what the parents wanted. They did not want a real investigation.

The McCanns' strategy was to force him to settle out of court by freezing his assets and the last thing they want to do is to face him in a courtroom.

I'm sorry, but I think the McCanns will welcome getting Sr Amaral into a courtroom, as I said, they have the very best legal representatives who do not offer their services without being very sure they can and will win.....but we dont have long to wait now to find out.

sans_souci wrote:

MaryB wrote:This is the trouble. Really the abduction theory is not very believable. That's the big problem certain quarters have to keep on and on addressing. And really as time goes on it is getting less and less believable. That is my opinion. And according to the Human Rights Act I am allowed one. Though not it seems the policeman orginally in charge of the investigation.

Of course you are allowed an opinion. And so is Amaral.

People here are terribly fond of quoting article 10 of the Human Rights Act in defense of their right to hold and express an opinion.

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

But a bit less keen on the second part:

The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

Article 10 is not carte blanche to say what you like - it is restricted where the rights of others are infringed. And in this case, Amaral has, in accusing the McCanns of various acts, potentially infringed their reputation and rights. Whether he has done so will be tested in a Portuguese court shortly.

To draw an alaogy - lets say you were accused of, say, shoplifting, possibly arrested, but no evidence was found, no charges brought, end of story. But the police officer concerned decided to write an article in the local newspaper saying that you were in fact guilty and had got away with it. Would you be content that he as simply exercising his human rights under article 10.......?

An excellent anology!

sorry, not a fitting analogy - woof, woof.

MilkyWay wrote:sorry, not a fitting analogy - woof, woof.

Woof! woof! indeed

Quite. I'd be worried if the police dogs starting barking at me.

In the scope of the process, a preventive order to seize goods was asked, yet unmet and awaiting the completion of diligences.

IMO the key line.

Failure to seize Dr. Amaral's assets is a huge setback for our celebrity bad parents because it means that they have failed to stop Dr. Amaral being able to defend the action. IMO making it impossible for Dr. Amaral to defend the action was an integral part of their strategy because the last thing they want is to appear in a court and have to give testimony under oath. If I hazard a guess I'd go for them withdrawing but that might be a bit expensive having had an injunction on book sales and copyright thus seriously damaging Dr. Amaral's and the publishers' business. Oh dear!

I am more interested in hearing what Amaral's witnesses have to say in his support. I hope it is open to the public and widely reported.

It could just be that Amaral planted the odour and blood behind the sofa to collaborate his theory. Cadaver fluid is available for dog training purposes, but, of course, this wouldn't explain the alerts to the car and the red t-shirt, items which had been in the McCanns' possession.Otherwise, I find it impossible to see how anyone can dismiss the alerts of two highly- trained and reliable dogs.

McCann's claims that cadaver dogs are unreliable is nonsense IMO.

Guten Morgen (hier regnet es ohne Ende), good morning to all of you ,

It is - unfortunately - possible that the government wants to silence Dr. Amaral.
With all its - perhaps illegal - powers.
I hope I am very wrong.

It´ll be interesting to see how the court-dates will end.

My feelings are mixed, extremely mixed.

fedrules wrote:It could just be that Amaral planted the odour and blood behind the sofa to collaborate his theory. Cadaver fluid is available for dog training purposes, but, of course, this wouldn't explain the alerts to the car and the red t-shirt, items which had been in the McCanns' possession.Otherwise, I find it impossible to see how anyone can dismiss the alerts of two highly- trained and reliable dogs.

McCann's claims that cadaver dogs are unreliable is nonsense IMO.

Good morning fedrules ,
I think the McCanns told us the dogs are unreliable because the dogs are THE bombshell. They must tell us such untrue things. It is soooo laughable...
In his interview with Sandra in London Gerry appeared nervous to me.

I hope that Dr. Amaral found dog-experts who are able to enlighten the court/judges regarding top-sniffer-dogs and their success and reliability.
He should present plenty of cases which the dogs have helped to solve.

Yes I'd like to see an exposure of the sniffer dogs' reliability Lilemor,particularly that of the actual dogs involved. However, I fear it could be that their 'failure' in Jersey will be brought up ...
Was wet here too yesterday, but bit brighter today.

fedrules wrote:Yes I'd like to see an exposure of the sniffer dogs' reliability Lilemor,particularly that of the actual dogs involved. However, I fear it could be that their 'failure' in Jersey will be brought up ...
Was wet here too yesterday, but bit brighter today.

Do you know if they investigated the "coconut"?

I would like to know if there is a report about the coconut-cells.

stellarose wrote:

curious george wrote:Is not the 'burden of proof' lower in a civil case?

Amaral must prove all he wrote in the book, if he fails to do so then he is in trouble....the McCanns would be there in the courtroom only as observers and would not be called to speak within the courtroom....this case means it will all be down to Sr Amaral to prove positive all that he wrote and also all that he implied is true.

The point is, the level of proof needed is considerably lower than that in a criminal court. A cadaver dog can be wrong once, maybe twice but ten times and only with objects linked to the McCann's? Hmmm.

And don´t let us forget.
TWO top sniffer dogs - SAME places!

The big problem I assume is "only" the FSS...

But couldn´t Dr. Amaral bring the fact that the laboratory has a bad record?
Several scientists/workers left the FSS. They did not loger want to work fur such a institution.

Good Morning Lilemor and all,

When they said 15 of 19 markers matched Madeleine"s DNA, Stuart Prior said that would be sufficient in the
U.K. to charge the McCanns. A second Report by the FSS refuted the first report and said the DNA could have been that of any Family Member.

With all Madeleine"s clothes etc in Apartment 5a, why did Gerry have to go home to get a pillowcase from
Madeleine"s bed to provide a sample of her DNA.

yes why indeed? Do we know whether he went through the VIP section (I believe they did when they did a runner at the end) and whether he had to go through any form of security?

keepingmum wrote:yes why indeed? Do we know whether he went through the VIP section (I believe they did when they did a runner at the end) and whether he had to go through any form of security?

Travelling on Easyjet I presume they would have gone through Customs. What I do find intriguing though
is Michael Wright, married to Kate"s Cousin drove a Van back to the U.K. loaded with the McCanns possessions.
They had enough visitors during their 5 month stay who would have brought changes of clothes and taken
stuff back, so why hire a Van? They wouldn"t be buying Furniture or Ornaments because they were broke, that"s
why they had the Fund pay their Mortgage for 2 months.

Let's try another analogy:

Suspects hamper a criminal investigation from the very beginning, using their political connections to close a case against them. The ex-coordinator writes a book based on the police files already made public. The suspects than sue the policeman for speaking the truth and exposing a great miscarriage of justice because their goal is to keep the public from knowing what really happened.

For the McCanns the TRUTH must be banned at all costs.

Carolina wrote:Let's try another analogy:

Suspects hamper a criminal investigation from the very beginning, using their political connections to close a case against them. The ex-coordinator writes a book based on the police files already made public. The suspects than sue the policeman for speaking the truth and exposing a great miscarriage of justice because their goal is to keep the public from knowing what really happened.

For the McCanns the TRUTH must be banned at all costs.

Maybe, just maybe, they have gone too far this time. Demanding 1.2million Euros is obscene and to claim that
Amaral has made money from Madeleine"s disappearance is like the pot calling the kettle black

Didn't they have their own investigation of the hired car while it was in Geraghty's garage? Did this ever take place, or did we see the results somewhere?

Christine wrote:Didn't they have their own investigation of the hired car while it was in Geraghty's garage? Did this ever take place, or did we see the results somewhere?

WHO examined the car for the McCanns???
I hope not the FSS!
Perhaps "their private results" are the results in the files?

Please mods move if you wish.

Google translation:

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/1 ... +Morais%29

Freedom of expression is an inalienable constitutional right, by which the Portuguese people fought hard and can not be questioned, especially when exercised responsibly and within the law.

On 9 September 2009, Portugal became aware through the media, a serious occurrence in this country that fought so hard for democracy: an act of censure against a book.

The book "Maddie: The Truth Lies" was subject to an injunction that targeted not only the suspension of sale of the book and DVD based on the work, but also of any release of the argument conveyed by Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, book author and former coordinator of the Judicial Police on the case 'Madeleine McCann'.

With this act, banned not only written work, but every one thought: the expression of an opinion based on facts of a police investigation, a reasoned, responsible and mature.

However, this injunction was only the tip of an iceberg. In the main action that regards, Madeleine's parents seek to extort Dr. Gonçalo Amaral the sum of 1.2 million - an astronomical value and out of all proportion, it is legal is ethical.

A second injunction would also seize goods and salaries to the defendant, binding to its ability to respond in financial terms as the court process and are indexed to the value required in the main. Thus, unable to free speech and economically stifled, we complete the siege of a man who has sought, at great cost personal and family solely for the reopening of proceedings, so that we can conclude an investigation that many feel they have fallen short of its potential.

Dr Gonçalo Amaral can not talk. But we, Portuguese citizens, can speak for him.

We can talk, and we can act.

Acting in defense of freedom of expression, constitutional inalienable understand that, especially when it is exercised in a responsible and mature.

Acting in support who is deprived of means to defend themselves legally, as a result of deliberate moves by the person who seeks its destruction, personally and professionally.

Act today because the victim of the gag of censorship is Dr. Gonçalo Amaral - tomorrow may be any one of us.

This project aims to action and support to those seeking justice. Citizens that initiate this movement, will be joined in a free, independent and apolitical, united in defense of freedom of expression and mutual respect.

For the enjoyment of free, strong and responsible, not to remain silent. Join us!

The next day December 11th from 9:45 in front of the Palace of Justice, Lisbon, at the top of Parque Eduardo VII, 7th Circuit - 2nd Section. Bring a gag.


Organization: Citizens for Defending Rights and Freedoms - Project Justice Gonçalo Amaral