Sky Live Day 3 - 14/01/10

i agree that documentaries have an element of 'telling a story' however - the question why those words were not added to the film at any point is, most definitely, pertinent.

damn.

No Jassi, it's true that he says he didn't see Maddie's bed because it was behind the door, but how could the McCanns have known that he wouldn't look more closely.? of course, it's possible that McCann had already put Maddie's body somewhere and was hoping Oldfied would discover Maddie missing so he or Kate wouldn't have to..

oliver wrote:i agree that documentaries have an element of 'telling a story' however - the question why those words were not added to the film at any point is, most definitely, pertinent.

damn.

dont panic many of us feel something was lost in the translation

Beattie wrote:

The Famous Grouse wrote:Speaking and thinking in a language, and translating it to another language, are two completely different skills. They utilise different parts of the brain. Jon di Paolo is doing a sterling job for which I think we should ALL be grateful!

I certainly am and thank Sky for arranging this as well as jon. I was referring to an earlier post from T4two.

Absolutely, I think he's doing a great job, especially since he's writing the reports on the case on Sky too, I notice one appeared just after midnight last night so he's putting the hours in this week.

I was just saying that we probably shouldnt take every word so literally, as it is difficult to translate and tweet at the same time.

jesus - i am panicking big time...but then i have freedom of emotion

Just to clarify my posts about the interpreting. I'm not getting at anyone; the point I was trying to make is that one shouldn't perhaps get hung up on individual words because they may not always convey the true meaning of what has been said.

T4two wrote:

Beattie wrote:He obviously speaks fluent English and is only translating about one sentence in two minutes. Actually he works
for SkyLive and must put the same info on Twitter simultaneously.

IMO one shouldn't underestimate the difficulty of conveying the true meaning of what is said in a sentence even 'only' translating every two minutes. Unfortunately people often do.

Since I have just read your post saying you are a Translator, I stand corrected.

it is the style of which the first half of the day ended .....on that unfortunate finite statement - and also the fact that the judge put all and sundry in no doubt as to what this case is about this morning. seems she knows what will unfold today and how.

fedrules wrote:Ann Chovey, but if Maddie was already dead then, why would they let other people do a check? They might have noticed that she wasn't in her bed..unless they told their friends just to listen at the door, but, in that case, Oldfield disobeyed..

One problem I sometimes have is people believing their story, I do not believe for one minute that Oldfield made that check at all. There were lots of comments that each checked their own children, so why also this arsing about on this one night, it did not happen IMO.

I actually believe from a careful re-read of Payne's rog which was tedious, all 45 pages of it, that the OBs and the Oldfields were not leaving their kids at all. It seems to me that one of them was "sick" every night and we heard about Rachel being in the room the one night, therefore Maddie could not have been crying, er apparently. I believe they bunked Grace up with the other two OB girls and one of that foursome was looking after those kids every night. The Paynes took their monitor, the only kids that were being left absolutely were the McCanns. This was almost like two separate groups, the Paynes and the McCanns did not even travel on the scheduled flight with them. In fact Payne seems to imply that Gerry paid their additional air fares and the taxi on arrival.

I think it has to come back to what Stalker said a long time ago, they are hiding a terrible secret but they did not kill that child. Why would they all stick together and lie about so many things. Why would Rachel tell such a terrible tale at her rogatory to make out she was leaving a little baby who could have died covered in diarhorrhea? Why would the GASPARS be so upset about DAvid Payne being there? Why does he love to organise these group holidays for young families with children and bath them? Why is CEOP involved in this case? I just think people do not want to see what is pretty clear really? It is understandable in a way, far better that Maddie just died quickly.

T4two wrote:Just to clarify my posts about the interpreting. I'm not getting at anyone; the point I was trying to make is that one shouldn't perhaps get hung up on individual words because they may not always convey the true meaning of what has been said.

'
Quite agree. He is conveying the gist of what is being said, not a word for word translation.

fedrules wrote:No Jassi, it's true that he says he didn't see Maddie's bed because it was behind the door, but how could the McCanns have known that he wouldn't look more closely.? of course, it's possible that McCann had already put Maddie's body somewhere and was hoping Oldfied would discover Maddie missing so he or Kate wouldn't have to..

Something like that maybe, Oldfield messed it up and only 'heard ' the twins breathing, and turning over in their cots. also in Amaral's book he describes how Oldfield went the long way round on his check. Either all or some of them are in on it. Funny how KM mentioned how she felt uneasy to FP? at dinner after the 'Mummy' where were you when we cried and then about GM saying 'oh they'll be fine'....and then voila! an hour later Maddy gets disappeared. Odd that....what are the chances really.

it was as if she felt yesterday was to be disregarded.

Just read this on another thread. The case will then be adjourned until a further session on February 10, when the judge, Maria Gabriela Cunha Rodrigues, will hear from two witnesses who were not available this week.

I was hoping for a conclusion this week.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/world/madeleine-claims-difficult-to-listen-to-says-kate-mccann-441905.html#ixzz0cagUPyK6

eddie wrote:

T4two wrote:Just to clarify my posts about the interpreting. I'm not getting at anyone; the point I was trying to make is that one shouldn't perhaps get hung up on individual words because they may not always convey the true meaning of what has been said.

Sorry T4two - I have just logged back on - what is this regarding?

Hi eddie. There was a bit of consternation about some of the things reported on Twitter to have been said by the last witness so I was trying to point out that the guy in the courtroom hasn't an easy job and perhaps we should not start worrying about individual words but rather use his commentary to gain an overall impression of what is happening.

T4two wrote:

eddie wrote:

T4two wrote:Just to clarify my posts about the interpreting. I'm not getting at anyone; the point I was trying to make is that one shouldn't perhaps get hung up on individual words because they may not always convey the true meaning of what has been said.

Sorry T4two - I have just logged back on - what is this regarding?

Hi eddie. There was a bit of consternation about some of the things reported on Twitter to have been said by the last witness so I was trying to point out that the guy in the courtroom hasn't an easy job and perhaps we should not start worrying about individual words but rather use his commentary to gain an overall impression of what is happening.

Oh ok, thanks. I was concerned that you were worried, that's all

All part of the scene setting for the 'abduction' in my opinion Ann Chovey. Putting the idea that something could happen into their friends' minds so their story would be believed. At least that's my suspicion. I agree it does seem like a huge coincidence...

vengefulangel wrote:

viv wrote:I place as much reliance on the cadaver scent and blood (which did not match Madeleine's) as the prosecutor does. 50 50 dead or alive, it is not reasonable to say with any degree of certainty.

So why are you a fan of GA then if there is an equal chance of MM being alive????? If she has been taken by child abductors or a nice family who couldnt conceive but could pay for a lovely little child, why are you scathing of the Mccanns???????

When did I ever say she had been taken by child abductors? There is no possible way any stranger abductor took Madeleine. I believe Gerry took Madeleine out of that apartment and handed her over to someone on a boat. The Smiths saw him. They said she appeared deeply asleep, drugged! That is why there is no evidence of any stranger in that apartment, one would expect Gerry's DNA to be there. That is why there is no sign of a breakin, all he had to do was walk out of the door with her. Much of what Goncalo reports in his book about the McCanns is absolutely correct and it is why they are clearly guilty in the disappearance of Madeleine. I just think that unfortunately he got stuck on the wrong theory and that is why he and Almeida were removed from the case so that the inquiry could move on and consider what else Gerry might have done. My thoughts about that odious man are utterly unprintable.

viv sometimes i wonder if there could have been a illegal adoptionon the mcanns behalf ? but then i think of what eddie and keela found... and i believe in them

fedrules wrote:No Jassi, it's true that he says he didn't see Maddie's bed because it was behind the door, but how could the McCanns have known that he wouldn't look more closely.? of course, it's possible that McCann had already put Maddie's body somewhere and was hoping Oldfied would discover Maddie missing so he or Kate wouldn't have to..

I agree that thats feasible,and that he was set up to find Madeleine missing, but I'm not sure he was even there - after all, this is the guy who browsed books on a non-existant bookshelf on his way to the bedroom.

I just think your theory Viv is a bit hard to believe. Death as the result of accident or abuse has always seemed the most plausible solution to me. It is also statistically the most likely. I can beleve that one of the McCanns 'lost it', particularly if they were drunk or that Maddie died from a botched sedation (especially as she'd been heard crying on a previous night), but I can't imagine them to be callous enough to sell their own daughter.

viv wrote:I just think people do not want to see what is pretty clear really? It is understandable in a way, far better that Maddie just died quickly.

Its interesting that Dr Amaral spends all of last summer accusing Payne & McCann of the vilest of crimes, and yet, Payne takes no action. The McCann's are claiming that GA's thesis is incorrect, so it'll be interesting if the McCann's witnesses mention the accusations of paedophillia. Lets face it, you wouldnt want to pass up an opportunity to set the record stright in a court of law would you ?

here you go the full morning session so it is easier to read and follow what was said by whom .
hope this helps

9:23 jondipaolo: Good morning. We're outside the courthouse for the third day of the mccann libel trial.

9:26 jondipaolo: We've had rain every day so far - but this morning the sun has come up and cast a rainbow over the court building. A good omen for someone?

9:35 jondipaolo: Cameras are out in force again outside the court today - interest in the trial shows no sign of waning.

9:53 jondipaolo: Kate mcann has arrived at court. She stopped briefly outside to speak to the waiting press pack.

9:53 jondipaolo: Mrs mcann said she was still confident of winning the case.

9:56 jondipaolo: Kate mccann: there were mistakes made in the investigation but we need to look forward really.

9:58 jondipaolo: Kate mccann: i believe this was the right course of action. i have confidence in the portuguese justice system.

9:59 jondipaolo: Kate mccann: we need to find madeleine. That's why we're here.

10:18 jondipaolo: We're back in court and proceedings are under way. Kate McCann is here, but Gerry has flown back to the UK.

10:20 jondipaolo: Mrs McCann is sitting on the front bench of the public seating with Fiona Payne, a close friend and member of the so-called 'Tapas Seven'.

10:21 jondipaolo: There are far fewer people in the court today. Journalists, campaigners and members of the public packed the benches for the past two days.

10:24 jondipaolo: There are only eight or so people other than Mrs McCann, Mrs Payne and the McCanns' translators.

10:24 jondipaolo: Another notable absentee is Goncalo Amaral, the former policeman whose controversial book sparked the libel action.

10:32 jondipaolo: The first witness is being called - Antonio Paulo Santos.

10:36 jondipaolo: Mr Santos is a lawyer and general manager for the video production association, a nationwide industry body,

10:38 jondipaolo: He is also an ex-investigator for Portuguese police, making him a colleague of Mr Amaral's, although they worked in different departments.

10:38 jondipaolo: Mr Amaral has arrived in court and has taken a seat in between two lawyers.

10:39 jondipaolo: Mr Santos tells the court he considers himself an acquaintance of Mr Amaral's.

10:42 jondipaolo: The judge has stressed that this hearing is separate to the action being brought by the McCanns for £1m in damages.

10:44 jondipaolo: She stresses that this trial is solely about the publication and distribution of the book and the documentary upon which it was based.

10:51 jondipaolo: Mr Santos is discussing the details of the contract between Mr Amaral and the makers of the documentary.

10:52 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: I read Mr Amaral's book and watched the documentary on television.

10:53 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: Mr Amaral never accused the McCanns of guilt, either in the book or the documentary..

10:58 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: Mr Amaral's personal honour prevented him from publishing the book before his retirement from the police force.

11:00 jondipaolo: The contract between the documentary maker, VC Films, and Mr Amaral was signed in March 2008.

11:02 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: While Mr Amaral was in charge of the investigation he came under attack from sections of the British media.

11:03 jondipaolo: Mr Santos is becoming quite impassioned and raising his voice as he gives his testimony.

11:04 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: Mr Amaral was given no support by his superiors in the Portuguese police.

11:05 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: Mr Amaral was pursuing the truth, and only the truth, no matter what conclusions it led to.

11:05 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: Mr Amaral was pursuing the truth, and only the truth, no matter what conclusions it led to.

11:06 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: Mr Amaral decided to publish the book to clear his professional reputation.

11:08 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: I am a father too. God prevent that I ever lose any of my children. I understand the pain felt by the McCanns.

11:08 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: I don't think the book or the documentary increased the pain felt by Madeleine's parents.

11:09 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: There is no greater pain than losing a child.

11:10 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: If there is evidence that Madeleine has been seen, then the investigation will be re-opened.

11:11 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: But up to now, none of the information published by the media has been strong enough to make the police re-open the case.

11:14 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: The facts of the investigation can be found on the internet and are available to everyone.

11:17 jondipaolo: Mr Santos: Pirate copies of the documentary based on Mr Amaral's book were put on the internet and a copyright complaint was made to police.

11:25 jondipaolo: The McCanns' lawyer, Isabel Duarte, asks Mr Santos if he remembers the colour of the first page of the police investigation file.

11:25 jondipaolo: Mr Santos says he doesn't remember. Ms Duarte says she finds this strange.

11:30 jondipaolo: The judge is sitting slumped in her chair, her chin resting on one hand as she listens to the exchanges between Ms Duarte and Mr Santos.

11:37 jondipaolo: Mr Amaral has got up and left the courtroom without any explanation.

11:45 jondipaolo: Mr Amaral has left the court building through the back entrance.

11:47 jondipaolo: Carlos Coelho da Silva, TV director at VC Films, the production company behind the film based on the Amaral book, has taken the stand.

11:48 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva says he has a professional relationship with Mr Amaral.

11:49 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva: We reconstructed some scenes in order to facilitate the understanding of the events surrounding Madeleine's disappearance.

11:54 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva: It was crucial that Mr Amaral was involved in the production of the documentary.

11:56 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva: Mr Amaral's theory is that the McCanns hid Madeleine's body.

11:57 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva appears uncomfortable under the line of questioning he is facing.

12:02 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva: When we consider making a new film we think in terms of profits, as we are a commercial company.

12:07 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva: When we carried out a reconstruction I realised Mr Amaral's frustration at the McCanns' account of Madeleine's disappearance.

12:17 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva: In my opinion, the documentary does not provide the last word on the case. Its conclusion calls for further investigation

12:23 jondipaolo: Isabel Duarte asks Mr da Silva whether he has seen the official case files. He says no.

12:23 jondipaolo: Ms Duarte, the McCanns' top lawyer, then asks how Mr da Silva can say Mr Amaral's book was based on the case, if he hasn't read the file.

12:29 jondipaolo: Isabel Duarte: Why didn't you include the public attorney's verdict that the conclusions arrived at by the investigators were incorrect?

12:29 jondipaolo: Mr da Sliva: Because I was telling a story.

12:31 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva: Because I was telling a story.

12:32 jondipaolo: Mr da Silva has finished giving evidence and left the courtroom.

12:35 jondipaolo: Proceedings are breaking up for lunch.

fedrules wrote:I just think your theory Viv is a bit hard to believe. Death as the result of accident or abuse has always seemed the most plausible solution to me. It is also statistically the most likely. I can beleve that one of the McCanns 'lost it', particularly if they were drunk or that Maddie died from a botched sedation (especially as she'd been heard crying on a previous night), but I can't imagine them to be callous enough to sell their own daughter.

I agree, fedrules. viv's theory is purely hypothetical since there is no significant evidence to back it up.

In reality, none of us can say with any degree of certainty what happened.

and were off again !

Kate mcann outside court: it has been shown again that there is no evidence to support amaral's claims.

carlymichelle wrote:viv sometimes i wonder if there could have been a illegal adoptionon the mcanns behalf ? but then i think of what eddie and keela found... and i believe in them

Well you are entitled to believe in that darling and they may well be right. I have never discounted the death theory in fact a long way back I very much favoured it, it is just that as time has worn on and I have looked at it more and more I just find this one more likely particularly bearing in mind the British stance on it and the PJ suddenly just shelving the case, LP announcing they would have a meeting to decide how to proceed. To me it was obvious they took the case over, but that does not mean she did not die, either way LP taking it over makes perfect sense, the offenders are here and Maddie is English, Goncalo has himself said that gives us jurisdiction. He has also pointed out Pt never had jurisidction in relation to the obvious fraud because it originated in UK. SOCA investigate major fraud!