What the papers say - Amaral V McCanns trial

Apparently the McCanns deleted a lot of the calls themselves. At one stage in the investigation the Portugese
Prosecutor asked if the information they had from the calls they monitored could be used in evidence. The Judge
refused on the grounds of privacy but said the triangulations could be used.

Thank you lili xxxxx

My pleasure!

Robert 'piss poor' Moore - ITN

Did anyone see this mans truly disgusting piece about yesterdays events on News at Ten last night?

It started with a quick word with 'The Laird of Rothley' who actually called him 'Bob' and acted as if they'd just come off the Golf Course, before going on to claim that the top cop had actually said in court that Maddie was defiantly still alive. Did this idiot actually sit in court? or even read a transcript?

It's pretty low to lie on national TV but then this is the McCann Show after all :-(

All I can think is that this so called journalist has lost all credibility as a news journo and must be Clarences' 'Bitch'... a total Patsy.


I noticed that the BBC didn't even mention the case on their 10 o'clock news.

The Soft Side of Goncalo Amaral?

Martin Brunt January 13, 2010 8:15 AM

* Recommend post (1)

There's a grim mural above the bench which shows a child about to be butchered in the biblical Judgement of Solomon.

Apart from that it's a dull court that offered little relief for those who had to sit there for nearly 10 hours of the opening day of the Amaral v McCann case.

The surly ex-cop Goncalo Amaral treats me and most of the British media like something he's trodden in, but he's a cool operator.

When his mobile went off halfway through the hearing he very slowly reached for his coat and fumbled for the phone until he eventually found it and switched it off.

At least it woke him up. as he had clearly been in danger of dropping off.

I thought his ringtone was a bit of local Fado music, but my Portuguese fixer assures me it was a song that is common enough here.

And it was in English...maybe old grumpy is warming to us after all.
http://blogs.news.sky.com/lifeofcrime/Post:e60496cc-7021-4c40-8103-5638a8a90d25

The BBC were probably ashamed of the appalling report done by their reporter O'Sullivan earlier who having passed over the hearing with the comment that nothing new was mentioned and very briefly interviewed the key player in the proceedings, Grenville, proceeded to devote the remainder of his piece to the appalling behaviour of a senior police officer who swore. Journalism at it's absolute lowest.

jjp wrote:The BBC were probably ashamed of the appalling report done by their reporter O'Sullivan earlier who having passed over the hearing with the comment that nothing new was mentioned and very briefly interviewed the key player in the proceedings, Grenville, proceeded to devote the remainder of his piece to the appalling behaviour of a senior police officer who swore. Journalism at it's absolute lowest.

It's all so depressing.

I don't think we can trust News Organisations about anything anymore.

thank you - huge work and much appreciated x

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/McCanns-Arrive-In-Court-To-Face-More-Cover-Up-Claims/Article/201001215520802?lpos=UK_News_Top_Stories_Header_1&lid=ARTICLE_15520802_McCanns_Arrive_In_Court_To_Face_More_Cover-Up_Claims

McCanns Arrive In Court For Day Two Of Trial

10:23am UK, Wednesday January 13, 2010

Hannah Thomas-Peter, Sky News Online
The parents of Madeleine McCann have arrived for a second day in court to listen to claims that they covered up their daughter's death.

First to give evidence this morning is former detective and Portugese criminologist Moita Flores.

Sky's crime correspondent Martin Brunt said: "It was pretty grim yesterday, and this morning is going to be particularly tough for Kate and Gerry McCann.

"Moita Flores is a somewhat high profile figure here. He writes a newspaper column and has been very supportive of the police investgation. He's also been quite critical of the McCanns."

Speaking outside court Gerry McCann told journalists: "This is the legal process we're going through to protect our daughter and our family.

"Anyone else with children would do the same."

Mr McCann said he had heard no evidence in court that Madeleine was dead.

During a three day trial former detective Goncalo Amaral is trying to overturn a ban on a book he's written that claims Madeleine is dead.

Mr Amaral initially led the Madeleine investigation but was taken off the case in October 2007 after criticising the British police in a newspaper interview.

Speaking outside court to waiting journalists, he claimed victory, saying witnesses he called on yesterday had borne out his argument.

In the book Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie, he says the little girl died in the family's holiday apartment and questions the McCann's account that she was abducted.

Yesterday a senior detective called as a witness by Mr Amaral told the court he believed Madeleine died in her family's apartment.

Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida claimed the main evidence for this was the findings of British police sniffer dogs sent to Portugal to examine the flat.

He said the animals detected traces of blood inside the dining room of the holiday flat and in the car the McCann's were using.

The McCann's lawyer Isabel Duarte challenged the claim, saying the sniffer dog results did not constitute proof.

Local public prosecutor Jose Cunha de Magalhaes e Meneses was also called as a witness. When asked if he believed Madeleine was dead, he said it was "50-50".

Madeleine was nearly four when she disappeared from a holiday apartment in the resort of Praia da Luz in May 2007.

Kate and Gerry McCann were made "arguidos" or formal suspects four months in to the investigation, but this status was lifted when the case was shelved the following summer.

In seperate legal proceedings in Portugal, the couple are seeking over £1m in compensation from Mr Amaral for defamation.

The McCann's have always strenuously denied allegations they were involved in their daughter's disappearance, and say they will never stop looking for her.

The trial continues.

fishie wrote:The Soft Side of Goncalo Amaral?

Martin Brunt January 13, 2010 8:15 AM

* Recommend post (1)

There's a grim mural above the bench which shows a child about to be butchered in the biblical Judgement of Solomon.

Apart from that it's a dull court that offered little relief for those who had to sit there for nearly 10 hours of the opening day of the Amaral v McCann case.

The surly ex-cop Goncalo Amaral treats me and most of the British media like something he's trodden in, but he's a cool operator.

When his mobile went off halfway through the hearing he very slowly reached for his coat and fumbled for the phone until he eventually found it and switched it off.

At least it woke him up. as he had clearly been in danger of dropping off.I thought his ringtone was a bit of local Fado music, but my Portuguese fixer assures me it was a song that is common enough here.

And it was in English...maybe old grumpy is warming to us after all.
http://blogs.news.sky.com/lifeofcrime/Post:e60496cc-7021-4c40-8103-5638a8a90d25

You stupid old Tw4t, wouldn't you treat somebody like that if you had to listen for the last 2 years the abuse you and your media friends have called him, watch out Brunty if Amaral wins this case he could be after you and your mates next!!!!!!!!!

By the way Crunty, the only reason Sr Amaral was having a kip is because HE HAS NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT, unlike you 2 little friends huddles up together, shi ting themselves, bet it stunk in that corner


TICK TOCK!!!

ha!
couldnt have replied to him better - bravo bb

And they printed that comment by Brunty did they. Oh well because the music he has music in English Dr Amaral must be warming to them. This man and many of his colleagues and the Portugese people spent hours, days and months because two selfish English people wanted to go out on the razz with their friends, rather than make sure their children were safe and well. I really didnt think this was about nationality, but maybe Brunty knows more than me. imo.

A few months after Madeleine went missing Matthew Paris wrote an article in The Spectator about how badly
the U.K. Press had been treated in Portugal, unable to interview the McCanns and having to rely on a daily briefing from Justine McGuiness and Clarence Mitchell. He said if the McCanns were ever found guilty of anything to do with Madeleine"s disappearance, the Press would show no mercy.

Not sure where to post this... but when I opened my Guardian this morning I found a very measured neutral report (no 'abduction' no 'disgraced policeman') with a Press Association byline, giving a brief account of the court events in Portugal which we have come to know so well from this website. I think this is a first. My daily paper, though in general it is a serious-minded, left-of-centre one, usually has a rather superficial: 'let's all support Kate and Gerry in their noble quest' slant when reporting anything about the McCann case, if they report anything at all.

Beattie wrote:...the Press would show no mercy.

hmm, that would a case of no stone unturned.

I couldn't believe the total and blatant LIES told by ITV on the 6.30 news. It was not even spin just total rubbish and lies. Like the prosecutor believed Madeleine was still alive. Did he say that. No he did not. Then why did they report this. Whatever the outcome of this case is we know now that some sections of the media cannot be trusted to report things truthfully.

So it was another case of British Press doing what it does best - twisting anything and everything to suit their own needs. They couldn't report on a snowstorm accurately. They ought to be ashamed of themselves. They really do deserve the title of gutter press. Who would want the job of a journalist!!!

Beattie wrote:A few months after Madeleine went missing Matthew Paris wrote an article in The Spectator about how badly
the U.K. Press had been treated in Portugal, unable to interview the McCanns and having to rely on a daily briefing from Justine McGuiness and Clarence Mitchell. He said if the McCanns were ever found guilty of anything to do with Madeleine"s disappearance, the Press would show no mercy.

Unfortunately Beattie the same Matthew Parris wrote in a later article in The Times that there was 'not a shred of evidence' against the McCanns and how the press had been so unfair to them. You pays your money and takes your choice I suppose. The only organisation reporting facts at the moment is surprisingly Sky. Perhaps Murdoch is a lot cleverer than the rest - just report the facts and let them speak for themselves - no danger from libel lawyers there. It is the UK media's obsession with taking sides and commenting on everything instead of simply reporting facts which makes it impossible for them to cover this case objectively.

lynn wrote:The McCanns are going to wish they had never taken on Amaral. They have opened a can of worms that will not go away and it is the best thing to happen as now there could be some cracks in their stories.

Can we say then that they are fooked??

sasha wrote:

lynn wrote:The McCanns are going to wish they had never taken on Amaral. They have opened a can of worms that will not go away and it is the best thing to happen as now there could be some cracks in their stories.

Can we say then that they are fooked??

Not quite yet. Let's be absolutely certain!

I'm still not convinced this will go the right way, they're not so stupid they wouldnt have known all this was going to be said, I'm not celebrating till we've heard their witnesses I'm afraid

It is on sky news now that the McCanns are going to give evidence today. Does that mean that Amaral's Lawyers will be able to cross-examine them?

Some good comments on the Daily Mail article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1242716/Madeleine-McCann-dead-abduction-faked-say-Portuguese-police.html#comments

Harvesmom wrote:I'm still not convinced this will go the right way, they're not so stupid they wouldnt have known all this was going to be said, I'm not celebrating till we've heard their witnesses I'm afraid

I'm thinking along the same line Harvesmom. I wonder what Clarrie has up his sleeve to counter attack the negative publicity.

dazedandconfused wrote:

Harvesmom wrote:I'm still not convinced this will go the right way, they're not so stupid they wouldnt have known all this was going to be said, I'm not celebrating till we've heard their witnesses I'm afraid

I'm thinking along the same line Harvesmom. I wonder what Clarrie has up his sleeve to counter attack the negative publicity.

Is Clarrie even there DazedandConfused (gonna call you D/C from now on lol)