7 December 2009

McCanns will be at Gonçalo Amaral's book trial


The McCann couple will be present next Friday, in Lisbon, at the beginning of the trial regarding the prohibition of the sale of the book "Maddie, The Truth of The Lie".

Kate and Gerry McCann will be attending on Friday, in Lisbon, the beginning of the trial of the injunction prohibiting the sale of the book "Maddie - The Truth of The Lie", by Gonçalo Amaral, said today to News Agency Lusa a source close to the family.

On the sessions of the 11th, 14th and 16th of December, in the 7th Civil Court of Lisbon, at the Palace of Justice, the former Judiciary Police Inspector Gonçalo Amaral's defense will present the opposition to the arguments made by the McCanns which fundamented the temporary injunction proceedings decreed on the 9th of September.

Kate and Gerry McCann, represented by the attorney Isabel Duarte, argue that the book and video based on the work, divulge Gonçalo Amaral's thesis, considered by them unsustainable, for the parental involvement in Maddie's disappearance.

So they asked the court to withdraw from the market, albeit provisionally, the book and the video[DVD] produced after the documentary was broadcast by TVI.

The process, in addition to targeting the former PJ officer, is also aimed at the book publishing house "Guerra e Paz", the production company Valentim de Carvalho and TVI [Portuguese TV channel, owned by the Spanish Prisa], for the dissemination of Gonçalo Amaral's thesis; this is also attached to the main action, where the McCann family claims for protection of rights, freedoms and guarantees.

The parents of the English child, disappeared on the 3rd of May 2007 from an apartment bedroom in a tourist resort in Praia da Luz, Algarve have a another action [the main action] against Gonçalo Amaral, where they accuse him of statements deemed libellous, for which they claim 1,2 million euros.

Lawyer speaks about "offensive remarks"

According to the family's English lawyer, Ed Smethurst [on the left], Madeleine McCann parents argue that Gonçalo Amaral produced "continuously and offensive" statements in Portugal and abroad about the child's disappearance.

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

Gonçalo Amaral is accused by the McCanns of having profited from "obscene amounts of money by selling that theory through his book and in interviews" and to have harmed "donations, new leads, investigation, information and witnesses" about the child's disappearance.

Suspicions fall on parents

The book "Maddie, The Truth of The Lie", the same title of the documentary aired by TVI, was published in 2008 and casts the suspicion that the parents of the English child, who was on holiday with her parents and siblings in Praia da Luz, could have participated in the concealment of the corpse.

With the status of Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department of the PJ of Portimão, Gonçalo Amaral joined the team of investigators who tried to find out what happened to Madeleine.

After the constitution of Robert Murat as an arguido [defendant], Gerry and Kate McCann, who always maintained the position that Maddie was abducted, were made defendants in September 2007.

But like the Luso-British citizen, the English couple was acquitted in July 2008 for the lack of evidence to support the hypothesis advanced by the investigation to the accidental death of the girl.

The Public Ministry ended up archiving the process, which can always be reopened if new data considered to be consistent emerges.

In Expresso/with Lusa 7.12.09




128 comments:

  1. For the umpteenth time, clarification is needed, in face of certain propaganda: this is NOT a 'trial'. These are hearings of defence witnesses, in relation to the appeal ('opposition') that was filed by Gonçalo Amaral, against the injunction that was granted on the McCanns' request.

    This is NO trial, and any attempt to make it appear like one, is dishonest and erroneous reporting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wonder how much these lawyers are costing? Not cheap by the looks of it.

    All money that could be spent on searching for Madeleine.

    Is it money from the Fund, or is that all considered one and the same with their own money now, being as how it is a family fund for them to spend as they consider needed.

    If only the public who are donating knew that!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. But if these are only hearings of defence witnesses what will the mccanns be doing in Portugal? Do they have to be present during these hearings? Don't they have something better to do? So they couldn't be bothered to come for the reconstruction but they are coming because of this? Or do they need to be in Lisbon atracting all the attention for themselves while something else happens elsewhere, Praia da luz for instance?

    ReplyDelete
  4. You're right of course Astro, but this whole affair is a story of dishonest and erroneous reporting and it will no doubt continue however much we may try to put the record straight.

    Apart from that, I notice that the information is still coming from 'a source close to the family.' I wonder why it isn't coming from the spokesperson with too many teeth, or direct from the horse's mouth?

    Love the pic of Smethy. Captures the guy's character a treat :)

    T4two

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good point Anon at 3, they can come for this but they couldn't be bothered to turn up for the reconstruction, except Gerry for their own reconstruction of course.

    Do we have to conclude therefore that it's all about them, all about money.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hei guys,

    Did you read the same as I:

    "Gonçalo Amaral is accused by the McCanns of having profited from obscene amounts of money by selling that theory through his book and in interviews AND TO HAVE HARMED DONATIONS, new leads, investigation, information and witnesses" about the child's disappearance."

    How obscene can this get: GA harmed their DONATIONS. That's it! The fund's money is running low and Goncalo can help. This is freakin' dirty.

    ReplyDelete
  7. So the Mccanns accuse Mr. Amaral from profiting from "obscene amounts of money". That is the way I have often thought about the Fund - an obscene amount of money raised by soliciting from people who probably had to do without in order to contribute to cover their mortgage payments and legal expenses. Why would anyone have legal expenses because their child is missing? Unless, of course.................

    ReplyDelete
  8. McCann's are not obliged to attend. This is only a hearing of defense witnesses. Not trial. McCann's will be in Lisbon, they say. They dont say they will attend the court hearings. Because they dont want to get into the same court as Mr Amaral, thats for sure!
    I hope the McCann's go to the court, but I will believe it when I see it with my eyes.
    This infamy has to have an end.
    And it will.
    Justice for Maddie, Truth for Mr Amaral.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Now the source is Dra Isabel Duarte, the McCann lawyer. She is directing the portuguese media orchestra. Look out for many, many ridiculous articles over the coming days. Lies, distortion, manipulation is the name of the game.
    Astro, facts are not going to stop them from turning everything upside down.
    Lets hope Mr Amaral has some good witnesses. I have heard that one comes from England. Others are high profile witnesses from Portugal.
    Let the truth come out! For Maddie! Força, Gonçalo!

    ReplyDelete
  10. It's one thing for Portugal to have its name dragged through the mud by the McCanns. It's quite another for Portugal to invite them to do it all over again.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Oh so that's why the McCs needed a PR in Portugal. Thanks.
    I think the duo will have to prove that people didn't give to the fund because of Mr Amaral. I didn't give to the fund and it had nothing to do with Mr Amaral. Woof! Woof!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Speaking about obscene,

    Is David Payne also coming?

    ReplyDelete
  13. If your loved daughter had disappeared during your vacations, and after lengthy investigations the police would tell you they were shelving the case, would you accept it? Without a fight? No, of course not, I'm 100 percent sure that your answer is NEVER. Shockingly, the McCanns were only too happy to see the case shelved. Strange? No, not at all because the police (read Goncalo Amaral) were stubbornly on the right track, and they couldn't dupe the ”stupid” Portuguese policeman, the famous ”sardine muncher”, despite trying hard. Hang on tight Goncalo, we are proud of you.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Astro, can the McCanns be requested by Amaral to be witnesses next Friday?

    ReplyDelete
  15. A source close to the family...

    Where is Mitchell?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Now I understand why the McCanns want that obscene amount of money.

    They are used to obsceneties.

    And they enjoy it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. It sounds like Dr Amaral's book has been a best seller in Portugal.

    Surely all those people are not going to allow the McCann PR spin to pull the wool over their heads after reading that.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This is NOT a trial ffs! x(
    Isnt anyone ever to get things right ffs????
    The obscene ones are who I think and they are even more obscene than ever to go after Dr.Amaral for such an " obscene amout of money".
    Ask for the RE OPENING of the case or shut up your obscene mouths for ever.
    I am wondering which obscenity they are going to puke out to avoid being present at the HEARING even though they are privately publicizing their presence.
    Lisboa is waitng for you mccann people :D

    ReplyDelete
  19. Let's also remember that Ed Smethurt's local council recently found him guilty of misrepresnting information in a planning application. The McCanns sure know how to choose 'em.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Such striking photos of the Drs McCann: "Welcome To The Dark Side" =))

    ReplyDelete
  21. Those pictures of the McCanns at the top of this page make them look sinister rather than serious.

    Whoever took them needs congratulating because they sure do capture their finer qualities.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I am told they have arrived in Portugal and Gerry has been shown in the news. Is this right and has anybody else seen this?

    ReplyDelete
  23. see Joana?
    what´s most important? that hearing of wirnesses or
    searching Madeleine in Praia da Luz/Algarve area????
    They have enough time for the hearing but looking for their daughter????

    ReplyDelete
  24. Astro, Joana, isso aí chama-se em Português "inquirição de testemunha?"

    ReplyDelete
  25. Another mistake or an intentional slip is saying in the article that the 3 arguidos were ACQUITTED!! Their arguido status lifted but it could be reinstated if the case was reopened. To be acquitted you must go to trial and they certainly were not tried in a court of law for the disappearence of Maddie!

    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  26. A notícia é sempre a mesma, no Expresso, no Diário de Notícias, etc. Escreve-se o que é desejável, segue para a agência noticiosa (talvez a Lusa) e depois a notícia é distribuída e publicada em todos os meios com targets diferentes mas sempre a mesma notícia, a mesma mensagem. O público só lê o que eles entendem, até porque não há outra leitura outra notícia outra abordagem feita pelos nossos jornalistazitos/ editores. Publica-se somente o que eles pretendem veicular. Bem diz o Gerry McCann: a mensagem é tal e tal... e é isto que se publica e nem mais uma linha marginal.
    Rasgava-me toda se fosse obrigada a colaborar nesta trafulhice. Há coisas que não têm preço e a dignidade está no topo da pirâmide. Mas a pirâmide é muito afunilada, nem todos chegam lá. Por outras palavras "a porta é estreia"

    Alexandra Correia

    ReplyDelete
  27. who has "profited from obscene amounts of money"?????
    the McCann's of course - they paid their mortgage, their PR team and their lawyers with it
    and money that was given from the goodness of people's hearts to help find a little girl who was already dead...

    McCann's are already in Portugal today - ready for the 11th... Dr. Amaral is ready for you

    ReplyDelete
  28. It seems Amaral will have 3 pj collegues as witnesses .I don't know if I understood it well but one of them is inspector Tavares de Almeida (the one who made the intercallary report)

    ReplyDelete
  29. 23, sim é o que vai acontecer no dia 11, inquirição de testemunhas.

    ReplyDelete
  30. So are they already in Portugal? If so, I doubt they'll be staying till Friday for the hearing. Which then begs the question, why are they there?

    ReplyDelete
  31. The story which Kate and Gerry McCann wanted to "sell" us was never very believable not even when the all thing happened. But now after all this time and everything, they don´t even try to disguise their true intentions - MONEY, lots of it and also to keep everyone misinformed about what really happened to the little girl that night.

    If you ask me their masks will soon be taken from them and then we will be able to see their real faces (even though their pictures in this post are already sufficiently elucidative).

    ReplyDelete
  32. I hope Sr Amaral and his witnesses bring along a few rabbits out of the hat.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Ainda não perceberam??

    Já agora escrevam em português.Não é disso que se trata???

    ReplyDelete
  34. 29, obrigada, Joana,
    que nervosia!
    Parece que são 7 testemunhas do lado do Amaral, li algures.
    O negócio é esperar.
    Estou esperando um milagre a qualquer hora.
    Será?

    ReplyDelete
  35. 28, is a detective of the police allowed to witnesse in such a case?

    ReplyDelete
  36. I read somewhere that it is up to the PJ as to who they make arguidos.

    So if the Attorney General will reopen the case on the basis of the information he has got that Madeleine is dead, (according to Sr Amaral he has this information), then the McCanns could have that status back on them again in no time.

    All for their own protection of course, as it means they don't have to answer incriminating questions if they don't want to.

    No wonder they don't want the case reopened.

    They can never be at rest on this one.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Those pictures give me the creeps...I wonder if that was the last sight that Madeleine saw?
    Why are they in Lisbon already, have they nothing better to do at this time of year, being the parents of 2 other small children such as the school nativity, putting up the christmas tree etc etc...but no they would rather have a few days in a luxury hotel!

    ReplyDelete
  38. I'm a celebrity - Get me out of this...

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

    Have I understood correctly that Dr. Amaral's assets weren't seized as they had wanted?

    If this is true it means that he is able to defend the action. I believe Carter Ruck tactics are to go for an injuction including seizing assets to make it difficult or impossible to defend a case.

    I know Carter Ruck are ostensibly not involved here but I'm sure they have given tactical advice. The failure to seize assets would be a major setback for McCann who can have little or no interest in fighting a case in court. Personally I don't think they'll appear in court on the 11th and if they are in Lisbon already or go later this week, it will be to confer with their lawyers about what to do next.

    IMO we are watching the first significant turn of fortune for McCann since their daughter disappeared and their celebrity campaign began.

    Bringing this action and appearing to be going all out to destroy Dr. Amaral, who is no doubt on his way to becoming a modern-day Portuguese folk hero, was the kind of huge error of judgement one might eventually expect from people who are used to feeling invincible.

    Interesting times ahead indeed.

    T4two

    ReplyDelete
  39. Espero que a PJ, incognita, siga passo a passo, estes Mccann e quem com eles vier desde a porta de casa em Rothley. Dia 13, os olhos do mundo vao estar no Palacio da justica e portanto vai ser um dia ideal para alguem visitar um lugar especial. A Kate nao vinha a Portugal sem um interesse MAIOR - OS EVENTUAIS EUROS DE AMARAL E ALGO MAIS....
    Com que entao o livro de Amaral gerou lucros obscenos e prejudicou donativos no Fundo??... E por isso, pingaram menos Euros no fundo... mas nao foi por causa do livro, foi porque muitos que se chocaram inicialmente com a tragedia de Maddie, chocaram-se depois ainda mais com o comportamento obsceno dos pais e com a forma obscena como exploravam a imagem e a tragedia da filha. NAO HA MEMORIA DE OUTROS PAIS DE CRIANCAS DESAPARECIDAS ENRIQUECEREM A CUSTA DO DESAPARECIMENTO DA FILHA. Suspeito... muito suspeito.
    O livro de G. Amaral custou uns miseros Euros a quem o comprou. Ridiculo este valor quando comparado com os donativos de Brian Kennedy, JC Rollings, os jornais processados e uma grande percentagem de cidadaos anonimos que erroneamente contribuiram para o Fundo, tocados pelo drama de Maddie e julgando que estavam a ajuda-la.
    Pegando nos posts de alguns que desconfiam que Murat os ajudou. Ha de facto comportamentos suspeitos por parte de Murat e da mae, alem dos ja amplamente descritos nos Media. A mae de Murat, segundo a imprensa na altura, montou uma barraca e dedicava-se a recolher informacao do Publico sobre o que sabiam do desaparecimento e das andancas da policia. Porque e que a senhora montou tal barraca? Aparentemente um servico paralelo ao da PJ?
    O tempo revelou que Murat nunca moveu qualquer processo contra quem o colocou na cena do crime, os Mccann e amigos, e a semelhanca dos Mccann, foi o unico que enriqueceu com o caso. Podera ter sido tudo previamente combinado, ou a apetencia que mostrou para prontamente ajudar a PJ tambem foi usada para ajudar os Mccann? Na altura tambem foi noticiado que ele teria alugado um carro. Se tinha carros proprios porque e que alugou um?

    ReplyDelete
  40. #28 wrote:

    "inspector Tavares de Almeida (the one who made the intercallary report)"

    I hope so. If he/they are in Portugal just now. I wonder if he/they will still be in Portugal on the 11th. UK Press/Media mCPhotoshoot pics of he/they in Portugal at the Lisbon court stating he/they are there for their face to face showdown trial. When perhaps not even showing a face in the court at the hearing! Time will tell.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Anon 3.

    The McCann's have got used to the limelight and are loving it. They are celebrities in their own right now and they also love the money for interviews that goes with it. All to help find Madeleine of course.

    There is no earthly reason they have to attend these hearings, other than to draw attention to themselves and try to give GA the evil eye. And of course you can bet our newspapers will say that Kate looks fragile and ill, when they all know she is as tough as old boots!

    ReplyDelete
  42. The McCanns are already in Portugal! Money is no object then!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Todos a MANIFESTACAO dia 11, contra a CENSURA, pela Liberdade e pelo Direito a Palavra, consagrado na Constituicao Portuguesa.

    Os Mccann difamaram Portugal e os portugueses de cada vez que abriram a boca para passarem a mensagem do rapto sem apresentarem qualquer evidencia. Aos olhos do mundo e partindo da boca dos Mccann e seus acessores, Portugal passou a ser classificado como um ninho de PEDOFILOS, RAPTORES, HABITADO POR GENTE INCULTA, FEIA E MA. NAO HA MEMORIA DE SE TER FEITO UM CARTAO DE VISITA TAO NEGRO SOBRE QUALQUER OUTRO PAIS ONDE DESAPARECEU UMA CRIANCA e ironia das ironias, Portugal e dos paises onde desaparecem menos criancas e onde mais criancas sao encontradas vivas.

    Estranhamente, nenhum politico e poucos actores da justica se indignaram com estas acusacoes, pedindo responsabilidades aos MCCANN. NUNCA LHES FOI EXIGIDO UM PEDIDO DE DESCULPAS E NUNCA LHES FOI MOVIDO UM PROCESSO POR DIFAMAREM UM PAIS E UM POVO INTEIRO.

    E TEMPO DOS PORTUGUESES SAIREM A RUA PARA DIGNIFICAREM PORTUGAL. ONTEM MUITOS SE JUNTARAM AOS ITALIANOS PEDINDO A DEMISSAO DE BERLUSCCONI. Espaeremos que dia 11, sejam milhares a encher amordacados, Lisboa. Que os advogados portuguesas sejam bafejados pelo cheiro da NOSSA VERGONHA!!!

    ReplyDelete
  44. Why should the McCanns be afraid of facing Mr. Amaral in a controlled situation? I believe they will appear in the court room because they hate the man for having exposed their character? The McCanns are now the hunters and Mr. Amaral is now the hunted, showing up in that court room will do wonders for their ego. The McCanns conduct in this case is classic narcissistic behaviour, they attribute their own flaws and misdeeds to the man they want to destroy.

    Miss Isabel Duarte, the only things that are unsustainable are the abduction theory and your love of money.

    ReplyDelete
  45. There are 3 days left before December 11.
    The person or persons who know what happened still have the chance
    to go to the police, as victims of manipulation of the McCanns'.

    If something leaks next week, the law will definitely see them as accomplices in a serious crime and not as victims of manipulation.
    The UK will believe they are all like Payne.
    They will never get a clean name anymore.
    Their children will have difficulties to make friends.Parents will be afraid of these persons.

    I believe Amaral and the PJ know a lot more about this case now.


    Those victims of manipulation can come forward now and tell who the offender is and where police can the find the body.
    Or at least an anonymous letter to the PJ.
    There must be a difference among people who are involved in this case.
    I can't believe they are all child sex abusers.

    ReplyDelete
  46. From post #28: "inspector Tavares de Almeida (the one who made the intercallary report"

    Hmm just thinking out loud. Is it it only GM who is Portugal? If so why only him? Hmm could it be to drop the case against GA? Perhaps the thought of Inspector Tavares de Almeida and his report being in the Press/Media would be too much to spin, too hard to keep out of the UK Press/Media. Perhaps it was never expected that GA would go to court. Hmm as I say just thinking out loud and remembering that they previously dropped a case in the UK didn't they and accepted 80/81 files.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Erm, so the Pope, Kate, Gerry and Madeleine will all be in Portugal on the 11th? :-o

    ReplyDelete
  48. Fernis -

    You really put your finger on it. Why would they roll over and accept the shelving of the case. Given what they say about their child still being alive, surely the only logical response is to say "We have been cleared - now reopen the inquiry and find out what happened to our child."

    But they haven't demanded the inquiry be re-opened and they haven't demanded that a full police investigation be launched by the UK Police - which is extremely odd given they have frequently implied she has been take across international boundaries for nefarious purposes. In those circumstances the UK Police actually have a duty to investigate, never mind what the parents say. But again - how strange - it seems the UK police have no interest in the case, can't even be bothered to run it through the HOLMES computer.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Censura no Destak online de todos os comentários desfavoráveis aos mccann

    ReplyDelete
  50. Kate will have to go into her 'grieving mother' role. Not sure that she will be able to sustain it for the whole period of this "trial"

    ReplyDelete
  51. Why, why, why are they subjecting themselves to this? Surely it´s a very risky game they are playing. Did they underestimate Amaral´s determination, or are they so well protected that they know no harm can come to them?

    ReplyDelete
  52. Vomit inducing stuff.......... I can't believe they can go to Portugal in an attempt to get yet more money, but they can't go for a reconstruction.
    Forca Goncalo!

    ReplyDelete
  53. Anon 51

    I believe the last part of your post is correct. I think that they not only have many well heeled people backing them financially, but also aspects of the government, and very importantly, the Masonic Lodge!! They can't lose, but I would be delighted if they did!

    ReplyDelete
  54. Money makes the mccanns world go around.
    When poor Madeleine is not bringing anymore money in for the "loving parents", who will be their next money making victim?

    ReplyDelete
  55. O teclado do número 52 também não tem c cedilha.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Fernis Comment 6

    I absolutely agree with you.

    'Gonçalo Amaral is accused by the McCanns of having profited from "OBSCENE amounts of money by selling that theory through his book and in interviews" and to have harmed "DONATIONS, new leads, investigation, information and witnesses" about the child's disappearance.'

    ----

    Peddling an 'abduction' theory without any proof or evidence that this happened, influenced I would say, OBSCENE amounts of money being donated to the McCann Fund, the McCann's profiting from this.

    Mortgage payments were made from this Fund I believe at one time?

    It is rather OBSCENE in my opinion that any parent whose child is missing would include as an item in any legal action that 'donations to their Fund having been harmed' Callous beyond words. This action rather tells us more about the McCann's than it does Sr Amaral.

    Also, 'obscene' is how I have described many times the amount of publicly donated money which the McCann's have spent (wasted) on dodgy PI's and t.shirts and wristbands (high quality of course)to be sold in a tacky online shop. Tasteless when at the heart of this is a missing child - their missing child!

    As for harm to:

    'new leads, investigation, information and witnesses" about the child's disappearance.'

    The above, I believe would be rather difficult to prove in a Court of Law. How does one, without a crystal ball determine that any new lead, witness or information has been thwarted by the content of this book?

    I doubt that the perpetrators of crimes against Madeleine read the book, or, maybe they have and that is the problem?

    It could be argued that others reading this book, became more shocked that the official investigation was halted without either Madeleine or the perpetrators being brought to justice, and that it gave more impetus/determination to the public to be on the 'look-out' keep their eyes peeled and report what beforehand, might have seemed, of little importance. This book may have in fact heighted public awareness and in so doing assisting the search for this wee girl.

    Madeleine, if alive, is not likely to be paraded in public by the perpetrators. The chances of a 'sighting' of this child I think we would all agree, is not likely either.

    Whether the child is dead or alive, I do not believe that any decent member of the public with information at all in relation to this crime, would be prevented from coming forward due to having read the book.

    To use a Clarence term - ludicrous!

    For those of you who believe that Madeleine is dead, or those of you who have read the book and agreed/disagreed with the content (lets face it, each will come to their own conclusions having read the book. McCann's are being presumptious in saying that ALL who read it believe it and would therefore not pass on information)would it stop you reporting, if you saw a child in the street who resembled Madeleine? Would it stop you from reporting anything you might hear in relation to this child's disappearance? I think not!

    I do not believe Madeleine is alive. If a child who I thought looked very like her was to pass me in the street, of course I would still take appropriate action. No book, or the opinion of others, not even, that I myself thought the child was dead, would stop me!

    I think the bottom line, tragically is MONEY!

    cntd
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  57. Again from the above article:

    'Suspicions fall on parents

    The book "Maddie, The Truth of The Lie", the same title of the documentary aired by TVI, was published in 2008 and casts the suspicion that the parents of the English child, who was on holiday with her parents and siblings in Praia da Luz, could have participated in the concealment of the corpse.'

    ----

    Not having read the book, I do not know what was actually said by Sr Amaral.

    In the above article it states that it 'casts suspicion' on the parents.

    Don't know Portuguese Law, but casting suspicion, through stating what is contained in the police files, is that the same as one having stated categorically that someone is responsible for a criminal act? Is it defamation?

    And back to the book. How can it be proved that ALL who read the book agreed with the content? Perhaps most slung it aside and said -bollocks! Is that not what the McCann's and those who believe in them think of this book? Perhaps the majority of people who bought and read it are in this category.

    As I say, I have not read it.

    More importantly, book or no book, I do not believe that any decent person holding information would not come forward.

    Too silly for words or money!

    Regards
    A.Miller

    ReplyDelete
  58. So if this book was based on extracts from the Police Files why is it being taken to court? Are they saying there are lies in theses files???

    ReplyDelete
  59. the biggest blunder by the PJ was to ever let the McCann's leave Portugal. Evidence was stacking up against the pair... but as soon as they left, they got their team in place & started systematically destroying the case.
    Remember, one of the provisions in leaving Portugal was that they agreed to return whenever they were asked by the PJ

    ReplyDelete
  60. Can someone please confirm if the couple or just Gerry is already in Portugal? Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  61. why the negative comments? Isn't this what everyone has been waiting for - the mccanns and amaral in court.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I believe that the McCanns are there in Lisbon because they are worried about Dr Amaral's witnesses and their testimonies. They will be begging their lawyers to help them. They wouldn't speak on the phone for fear of it being tapped, hence the meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Anon 51 I´m inclined to agree with you, but the one thing nobody seems able to explain to me is why these big supporters, who presumably are only helping the McCanns because they themselves have something to hide, didn´t put pressure on the couple to keep a low profile right from the very start. Had they done so the whole sad business would soon have been forgotten by most people, instead of which after nearly three years it is still making news, the last thing you want if you are trying to cover something up.

    ReplyDelete
  64. "harmed the donations"
    Less money to launder, sorry squander, on Metodo 3, Halligen, trips for the Keystone two, pay the mortgage etc...
    Pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  65. hurrah! new "hope" for mccanns!

    http://uk.news.yahoo.com/21/20091208/tuk-branson-unveils-his-spaceliner-6323e80.html

    Now all the private detectives can "work hard" in new area...

    ReplyDelete
  66. @ post # 65, lol. I thought just that when I saw the story in the news last night.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Actually, I thought he could take them into space and leave them there.

    ReplyDelete
  68. #47
    Pope will be busy with Vaticans money laundering scandal.

    ReplyDelete
  69. It looks for me mr.Branson and Kate Mccann are very look alike? What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  70. Post 63, for some reason the McCanns are determined to win the PR war at all costs, whereas as you say they could've just faded from the scene. My best guess is that they would like to advertise/endorse a product such as a child tracking device. Sounds crazy at first sight, but most parents if asked the question "Which is more important, your car or your kids?" would answer "our kids." Well, you'd put a tracking device on your car, wouldn't you? I don't mean microchipping kids like dogs, more like something that could be worn as a wristwatch or hidden in shoes/clothing. This idea first gained some popularity after the Soham murders, but never quite took off, and the Wells and Chapmans are not the sort to endorse products. Anyway, we shall see.

    ReplyDelete
  71. If the famous couple is already in Portugal, guess why so early?

    They read in this blog that they would have the adequate reception at their arrival. So, obviously they wanted to avoid the embarrassement....Better still, delay the embarrassement...;)

    ReplyDelete
  72. No meu post 39, nao e dia 13, e dia 11 claro!

    ReplyDelete
  73. Is Richard Branson still supporting this pair? I only ask because my Virgin broadband is very slow at the moment, due to a fault at their end. Perhaps Dickie would be better putting his money into sorting out his customers actual problems instead of throwing it at this lot.

    Anyway, my fingers are crossed for Mr Amaral , as are I am sure those of the majority of posters on here . Broadband willing I will be following things from my computer desk, but with him in spirit.

    ReplyDelete
  74. I agree with you A Miller.(nice to see you back)

    They are using GA's book to suit their own purpose - namely to continue appearing the innocent victims!

    ReplyDelete
  75. http://www.algarveresident.com/story.asp?XID=12984

    Before the Mccanns were made Arguidos and their 100% happiness with PJ.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Do these people want us to believe that nobody suspected the McCanns before the book was written? Why were they made arguidos then? Maybe it has to do with the fact that the PJ and the MP suspected that they had something to do with Madeleine's disappearence, after analysing the evidence? As far as I know Gonçalo Amaral wrote his book almost a year later.

    As I have said before, the thorn in the McCanns' side is that the police files of the investigation were made public for all and sundry to see. THE FACTS, THE FACTS, THE FACTS that they want to keep hidden.
    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
  77. Bar decision gone against Amaral?

    ReplyDelete
  78. Despite threats from Carter Ruck..Pamalam still on line..

    http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/32DEC9/POGO_07_12_09.htm

    ReplyDelete
  79. POst@ 70

    http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article1788169.ece

    Chipping children was being discussed 15th May 2007

    ReplyDelete
  80. Microchipping children? What a marvellous idea for the British chattering classes.

    Of course one microchips the car and the dog so why not the kids? I mean, I know most people don't leave their kid parked outside on the street or indeed the driveway admittedly, and their kid is not as quick to run away as say a dog or indeed be abducted, but nonetheless, what a good idea.

    All those hard-pressed modern 'me-time' parents looking for time to jog, workout down the gym or go out on the town without having to cart their pesky kids around with them or waste valuable 'me time' hiring babysitters and such. Splendid!

    I'm sure that newspapers such as The Guardian will positively drool over the idea. It will go a bomb in the UK especially in the Southeast. Can't see it becoming a huge export business though with foreign markets, especially those in southern European countries being almost non-existent. Well, they tend to look upon children as part of the family there and not as a kind of status symbol for middle-aged professionals, rather like a cross between a dog and a car.

    On the other hand... if we came up with the ideal couple, modern young professionals, "media savvy" as they say.... just trying to do their best not to let the kids get in the way of their busy lives, who better than those paragons of responsible parenting? Yes! you've caught my drift haven't you? I'm putting McCanns forward for the job; a kind of Posh & Becks of microchipping.

    I can just hear McCann's whiny voice proclaiming the benefits of microchipping, "if Margaret had been microchipped we could have stayed in the Tapas having a good drink for much longer without having to get other people to search for her. We'd simply have located her afterwards using the satnav."

    Give me strength!

    T4two

    ReplyDelete
  81. http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/madeleine-mccann-new-f27/jo-moreasse-campaign-t2141.htm just so you know

    ReplyDelete
  82. I would urge everyone to read Ironside's link at post 79. Thanks, Ironside.
    And T4two, imagine what might have happened had Maddy reappeared alive and well on her fourth birthday (e.g. left at a church by a swarthy abductor with a conscience) with all the TV crews in PDL etc (and it is my belief that this was the original plan). What a marketing dream K&G would have been, especially if they had endorsed a specific child-tracking product. Okay, they'd have had to eat humble pie about leaving Maddy in the apartment in the first place but humble pie is quite palatable when eaten like in your back garden.

    ReplyDelete
  83. When reading Rosiepops' stuff the trick is to keep in mind Eddie, Keela and Gerry's statement (a month after Maddy disappeared) about having the Elton John concert well in advance of the first anniversary.

    ReplyDelete
  84. When reading Rosiepops stuff the trick to keep in mind is the woman is deranged and possibly related to Bonny Braise.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Anon 82

    So when did it go wrong?

    The child died in the apartment; that is what the police, and not just the Portuguese but also the UK police believe (or in the case of the UK police, believed, as long as they were free to). The dogs indicated cadaver odour and blood in the apartment and cadaver odour in a flower bed and previously undetected forensic traces were found to substantiate them.

    There is no getting away from this. No way, as I am sure the forthcoming court hearings will make perfectly clear. So if it went wrong at some time before 22:00 hrs on the night of the 3rd, how do we explain the laughing faces for the media cameras and the world tour?

    T4two

    ReplyDelete
  86. T4two...It is worth reading through Mitchels role in all of this...Read very carefully what he is saying...Madeleine is not going to be found next week. The investigation could take up to a year.How could Mitchel know this? Mitchels wife lost their child when he was in PDL . Mitchel was seen crying ...was Mitchel ordered not to return to England?..It takes a hard man not to return home to his wife at a time like this. Not so hard ,if he was seen to be weeping.
    http://www.mccannfiles.com/id255.html

    ReplyDelete
  87. Hello Anon 85

    It was an English specialist who first suggested that Madeleine was dead. I am not aware of him being sued (perhaps because he doesn't have enough money to make it worth the McScams' while ...)

    Link to details on Anna Andress' blog:
    http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  88. T4two Have you actually ever read The Guardian, or does your perception of it come from things you have gleaned from comments by readers of the Daily Mail?

    It has its faults, but as far as I´m concerned it´s about the only decent British paper for an intelligent readership that still exists, and as a reader I certainly wouldn´t drool over the idea of my children being chipped.

    Incidentally, the Guardian has also been very restrained, and for the most part objective, in its reporting of the McCann circus.

    ReplyDelete
  89. T4two, I guess it was a case of "let's stick to the original plan", a miscalculation of course. What the police don't know is who took Maddy out of PDL that night. I would put a lot of the body language down to bad acting and overcompensating.
    I just don't think it possible for some combination of the T9 to put everything into action on the spur of the moment, try to imagine how difficult that would be. This, the four photographs and one to two other factors to me suggest pre-planning.

    ReplyDelete
  90. The plaques in front of them in the photos: Is it their name or their prison number, I quite can't make it!;)

    ReplyDelete
  91. 85.... Indeed how does anyone explain the smiley happy people leaving church that day, would some of the pro's please explain what they think they were so happy about?.
    Odd behaviour of the highest order throughout.
    Then I suppose most of their support comes from the type of people that would ban Christmas/hotcross buns etc. incase it offends muslims and think Shipman was just doing his patients a favour!, after all he was a doctor so he can't be bad can he.
    But would they have payne as their babysitter.

    ReplyDelete
  92. http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/madeleine-mccann-new-f27/jo-moreasse-campaign-t2141.htm

    There is not much intelligence there, eh?

    And who is this Jo moreasse? It's not as though your name is a secret....... really, really low intelligence......

    Glad they're not on the side of justice.

    Gerry, you really must choose more intelligent people to handle your forums... but then, maybe intelligent people don't fall for your crap story!

    ReplyDelete
  93. T4wo

    I think it was because by then they thought it was done and dusted.

    In the very early days there are pics of them where they are looking very grim, and then hey presto it is like a huge relief comes over their faces, this is within a few days of Madeleine being gone missing.

    But they were wrong it wasn't over.

    There had to be a rethink when they realised the suspicion was falling on them and not their big bad abductor.

    So why did they have to hire a car after so many days?

    Why such a bad smell in the back of the car, so much so that the door of the boot had to be left open day and night, and ice dropping out of it?

    No, it was not done and dusted. And it still isn't.

    ReplyDelete
  94. http://www.mccannfiles.com/id166.html

    How can we ever thank Nige at Mccannfiles..Read again the Diary of Kate Mccann and how her thoughts on the 4th of May are that Madeleine is dead. This is a normal thought of any mother. Read on and her thoughts are anything but of a normal mother. Manipulation is Kate Mccanns middle name.Kate Mccann along with her friends push the investigation towards Murat being the one who took Madeleine.

    ReplyDelete
  95. http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/4TH_BIRTHDAY.htm

    No matter how many times I look at these photographs ..I cannot understand the Mccanns and the loss of a child.

    ReplyDelete
  96. I think the Murat factor may be another of the reasons they didn't mention the Smith sighting, besides Mr Smith saying the man looked like Gerry.

    Let's face it Gerry could always have got his pals to say he was at the Tapas at the time. They can change their story with the wind, and who knows who was where and when.

    If the McCanns had pushed the Smith story then they would have to risk going public that the man that was seen with the child by the Smith family was DEFINITELY NOT MURAT, because Mr Smith knew who Murat was as he had met him in the past.

    And, if it had been Murat carrying the child I can't see a friendly Irishman not greeting him by name and stopping a few minutes to talk with him.

    As it was he tried to say a few words to the the man he didn't know by asking after the child, and the man ignored him and put his head down.

    Hardly surprising if it was Madeleine he was carrying.

    ReplyDelete
  97. No.96
    I always thought that if the man in the Smith sighting was Gerry, he would not have risked replying to Mr. Smith as he has a scottish accent, that would have been picked up on straight away and hey presto- a link straight to Gerry. No chance of the abductor being a big bad swarthy north African then.

    ReplyDelete
  98. http://www.deathonline.net/decomposition/body_changes/rigor_mortis.htm

    I still have a problem of Mccann walking through the streets with a dead Madeleine. I also ask what became of the blue bag?Posts @ 96-97 both have good points. I think we also have to take into account rigor mortis. I do not want to be morbid but after a certain time Rigor sets in and Madeleine would have been impossible to bend.(link explains in more detail)...Tanners observation of a man carrying a child in the way she described could be because Rigor Mortis had set in...I am not going anywhere with this it is just an interesting point.

    How unlucky for the Mccanns that Martin Smith knew Murat I would imagine they were not counting on that..I wonder what story they would have made up if this had not been the case.

    ReplyDelete
  99. IRONSIDE 98, which of course brings us back to the one of the most crucial questions, did Jane Tanner really see somebody? The reason I think this is so crucial is that if she is lying then this points to a conspiracy involving her and possible other members of the T9. If she is telling the truth then this points more to a conspiracy outside the T9. One thing I could never get my head around is why she said she saw Gerry too, talking to Wilkins, whereas Gerry denies seeing her. If Tanner and Gerry were in cahoots why would he deny seeing her?
    Didn't it say in Tanner's roggy statement that K&G didn't have much to do with her in the days following Maddy's disappearance?
    I appreciate her story may have changed but this could have been as a result of manipulation and at the heart of it maybe she DID see someone carrying Maddy away from the apartment. Then again we must also take into account her apparent unstinting loyalty to the McCanns..

    ReplyDelete
  100. Post 99, for "T9" read "T7"

    ReplyDelete
  101. Dear fellow Sleuths!

    Kate, in her diary, stresses taking a shower before going out on May 3rd. Answering the door, she put on a towel, she wrote. Enter and flourish the good dr Payne. For half an hour -said Gerry. For just three minutes, said Kate. Whatever: 3 or 30 minutes. Dr. Payne when questioned by the PJ told them that he did not remember what Kate had been wearing when she opened the door for him.

    Would any man worth his salt forget about a Kate coming out of a shower just wrapped in a towel? Indeed, the totally exposed and vulnerable way she looked walking up to the PJ station will be etched in memory for a long time to come!

    Whence the explicit mentioning of having no clothes on on the one side, and the forgetfulness about having seen just a towel on the other side? Could it be that the whereabouts of her discarded clothes have any bearing on the case, for instance because they were used for cleaning up one or more of the rooms in appartment nr 5a, or for covering or transporting the child? What had she been wearingbefore, and where did her apparel go to after the shower?

    Does anyone have any theory on this strange juxtaposition?

    ReplyDelete
  102. Anon at 99

    By Gerry saying he did not see her when she says she saw him and JW and the eggman all at the same time, it adds more credence to what she says, because if Gerry had said yes I also saw you when JW says he didn't see her, then it might look too much like they had hatched the sighting up together.

    As it is there stands Gerry looking oh so truthful because he denied seeing her, and at the same time continuing to roll JT out with the story. She is his alibi for the Smith sighting because that is the sighting that was concentrated on and the Smith sighting ignored, mainly because it was thought he was back at the Tapas by then.

    The truth is nobody appears to really know who was where when.

    By the way, by choosing to say she saw egg man at that time she also gives an alibi to her husband as being the man carrying the child.

    I think she is highly suggestible because she has changed her story so many times, who knows what she saw, if anything.

    She might even have seen a man carrying a child on a different night altogether.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Add to that Anon at 101, that neither of them appear to remember whether Gerry was there or not at the time, and no sense at all can be made of it.

    Gerry apparently can be two places at the same time, playing tennis and back in the apartment helping Kate.

    ReplyDelete
  104. 101, it's difficult to say. If the intention had been to get rid of all clothing with the cadaverine scent they didn't make a very good job of it. If the intention was for Payne to lie about what Kate was wearing, why make up the towel story, why not just put Kate in the same clothes she wore the morning after?
    Have to say if I went round to Kate's door right now and she answered wearing only a towel I'd remember.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Post 102, some good points, but it would've been very risky to rope friends in on the spur of the moment with false stories, false alibis, unless of course there was some feeling of collective responsibility. What I don't understand is why the PJ let Tanner leave Portugal if Amaral didn't believe her from the off.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Anon 101 who in their right mind would leave three children under four alone whilst taking a shower!

    ReplyDelete
  107. They should really scrap all the timelines and those witness statements as being factual. How can they be taken seriously when they were meeting with each other to put the timeline together knowing they were all guilty to some extent for leaving their kids that week.

    So why was the timing of the checking changed that night when it was different the other nights? Was it really different? Or did they say that to stop them getting into trouble for leaving the kids alone for lengths at a time.

    I think David Payne and Jane Tanner should be requestioned and not with kid gloves. Jane Tanner has changed her statement so many times that what she says has to be either accepted, or discredited and abandoned.

    As for David Payne, how can he have been given such a wide pass when there are those Gaspar statements saying what they do?

    And the names of the children at the creche are known so did they ever contact the parents and ask them whether they had photos of the children taken the day Madeleine was vanished.

    At the beach, or at the creche. Surely somebody took a photo of the kids.

    If so, was Madeleine there?

    ReplyDelete
  108. Right Janf, who would be able to do that, but there seems to be some confusion about whether they were 'sleeping like angels' or couldn't have been, because supposedly Gerry came back later (according to him), and helped Kate with all that, and as Gerry was at the tennis at the time having just spoken to DP, how could he have been there helping her.

    The whole thing is nuts! Very confusing to sort out what was really going on.

    ReplyDelete
  109. @ post # 108, remember Gerry himself said he was happy about the confusion!

    ReplyDelete
  110. Yes ShuBob, and he must have been cracking his side laughing at the confusion in this case.

    Let's hope he'll be laughing on the other side of his face soon.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Whenever I see articles in the british press about this case, and in particular about Dr Amaral's role, I frequently see the word 'botched' used. It really does drive me up the wall.

    What is the definition of 'botched' ? That the investigation did not recover Madeleine ? That it did not end in a prosecution ? In that case, there are a hell of a lot of botched investigations out there.

    If one looks at this case from the point of view of the police, where would you go ? What are - in Gerry's infamous words - the key drivers ?

    Evidence of forced entry to the premises - none.

    Forensic evidence pointing to an intruder - none

    Eyewitness evidence - only sighting is of a man carrying a child, no positive identification of Madeleine. Witness is a friend of the parents and changes her account several times

    Suspects - none. Finger pointed at Murat, but exhaustive searches reveal no trace of the child. Plus he has an alibi

    Sightings - no confirmed sightings. Anywhere

    House to house searches - reveal nothing.

    Leads - all come to nothing

    Forensic and other evidence - repeated indication by cadaver dog of the presence at some point of a body in the apartment; plus indications that several items, including the mother's clothing, has been in contact with a dead body

    Co-operation of parents and the group of friends - have co-operated in the main, but mother refuses to answer questions after being made an arguida, and group refuses to return to Portugal for a reconstruction

    Leaving aside for a moment such indefineable aspects as police instinct and experience, which direction would most observers expect the case to take ?

    Certainly, there may be insufficient evidence to launch a prosecution but surely given the evidence the investigators took the case in the only sensible direction ?

    And Amaral merely describes that process. Love to know how the McCanns think that amounts to libel.

    ReplyDelete
  112. Has Clarence Mitchell bitten off more than he can chew? Sky news don't appear to be toeing the party line with their coverage of the court case. Gone are the "they have been cleared of all suspicion" claim. Instead, here's what is written:

    "At one point Portuguese police made Mr and Mrs McCann, from Rothley, Leics, arguidos, or formal suspects, in their daughter's disappearance.

    They were questioned by detectives but their arguido status was later lifted and since then they have continued to campaign to find their daughter."

    http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Kate-And-Gerry-McCann-Launch-Portugal-Libel-Case-Over-Book-On-Madeleines-Disappearance/Article/200912215497036?lpos=UK_News_Top_Stories_Header_1&lid=ARTICLE_15497036_Kate_And_Gerry_McCann_Launch_Portugal_Libel_Case_Over_Book_On_Madeleines_Disappearance

    Oh dear! Add to that Martin Brunt's latest blog advertising Amaral's new book and it really isn't their day, is it Clarence?

    ReplyDelete
  113. Just reading between the lines of Clarence Mitchell's press statement today, I get the impression that they are not at all sure if they'd be required to attend more than one seesion of the hearing. So, it may not be as fleeting a visit as they want us to believe!

    ReplyDelete
  114. Corrupción política del perú -Gerry- Pederásta y Pedófilo Caso Maddie
    [why.jpg]
    Corrupción política del perú -Gerry- Pederásta y Pedófilo Caso Maddie
    El Fraude, Moneda Nacional

    En el pais de no me acueeeerdo ,
    doy tres pasitos y me pieeeeerdo
    se me cae, un billete y lo levanta el juez,
    “uy perdon” le digo y contesta “No importa, pase Ud.”

    Un campeonato ganado,
    otro arbritro comprado,
    Un cura que reclama ” Felices los niños”
    .. que yo abuse
    Y clarin siempre diciendo , La pura Verdad,
    que el presidente de turno quiere escuchar

    Compren, compren, se venden libertades,
    se venden al por mayor , abogados corruptos y fiscales tambien
    seis tiros en la cabeza que el dinero no pudo ocultar
    hay silencios que son muy caros pero mas caro es el hablar,
    algun medio pagara, esta excusiva de verdad

    Habilitamos lo que sea por un cafe y algo mas,
    digame lo que necesita, cualquier cosa se consigue
    el diego, lo podemos conversar

    Y hablando de Diego, pobre muchacho
    que fraude le hicieron, se parece al electoral ,
    por un punto mas de raiting una bebe queda sin hogar ,
    es que la TV es tirana y del Monstruo mejor ni hablar

    Ya para ir dejando el Verso que es moneda nacional,
    Cuanto vale esta patente que a todos va a curar,
    curar o currar? perdon me confundi,
    mas que a una madre o mas que a una padre ,
    si me lleno los bolsillos, que mas da
    si para nosotros el fraude la moneda nacional

    ReplyDelete
  115. Am I right in thinking that on Friday, the defence witnesses will be heard?

    If this is the case then surely their statements have to defend the McCann family`s assertion that the contents of the book and video regarding the parents` involvement in her disappearance are unsustainable. So Amaral`s witnesses have to prove the parents` involvement IS `sustainable`.

    Or, is it that Amaral has to prove that he has not harmed donations to the fund, or he has not stopped people looking for her. Its obvious he cannot defend the fact that they were `upset` by his book - anyone would be upset if they had been sussed.

    I would really like to understand exactly what it is he has to defend and whether his witnesses can do that?
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  116. It has just been reported on ITV news that the McCanns are flying out to Portugal tomorrow to face their accuser. They that it is now up to Amaral to prove what he said was true otherwise he faces having to pay a substantial amount of money to the McCann. It was also stated the Amaral has chosen that day to launch his book the gag. How extraordinary was the only comment made by the newsreader.

    Look out Portugal the media circus is about to hit town

    ReplyDelete
  117. @ post # 116, thanks for that. It looks like Clarence mitchell is on the back foot with this one!

    ReplyDelete
  118. Why are they in Lisbon already, have they nothing better to do at this time of year, being the parents of 2 other small children such as the school nativity, putting up the christmas tree etc etc...but no they would rather have a few days in a luxury hotel!

    ReplyDelete
  119. ShuBob (116 again) I did not know who the ITV reporter was talking to but it certainly was not Clarence Mitchell, which I must admit I found odd, Perhaps he has gone ahead of them to Portugal to set up the photoshoots. The interview was not very long and the only other thing spoken about was their recent appeal which he said had resulted in many new leads but unfortuntely at the moment nothing had come from them.

    Personally I think the McCann's are very confident of achieving their goal on this because unless Mr. Amaral can prove what he said I believe this will go in their favour. Whilst we all know Mr. Amarals book is only based on the PJ files and nothing else I think they probably have the libel law on their side on this. The only thing that could blow them apart is new evidence being presented at this hearing and it would have to be strong enough evidence to re-open the case and charge them.

    If we know nothing else, we know for sure that money is their top priority. There were many accusations suggesting members of the royal family were involved in the princess' death but I do not recall they found it necessary to take action. Says it all doesn't it, they consider themselves above royalty.

    ReplyDelete
  120. With other people speaking out and agreeing with Sr Amaral, this is going to be one in the eye for the McCann spinners who have tried to make him out to be some disgruntled crank, hell bent on destroying the McCanns with his 'absurd' story.

    So sit up and listen people, these witnesses of Sr Amaral are going to tell a different account that makes more sense than the fairy story abduction theory the McCanns want us to believe.

    How are you going to spin this then Gerry?

    Brain gone into overdrive yet?

    ReplyDelete
  121. Tried pointing out to Virgin Media that this isn't a trial. Their moderator doesn't seem to like that.
    But my goodness they have let some negative stuff through.

    ReplyDelete
  122. Comment No 1

    astro said... 1

    For the umpteenth time, clarification is needed, in face of certain propaganda: this is NOT a 'trial'. These are hearings of defence witnesses, in relation to the appeal ('opposition') that was filed by Gonçalo Amaral, against the injunction that was granted on the McCanns' request.

    This is NO trial, and any attempt to make it appear like one, is dishonest and erroneous reporting.

    07/12/2009 18:29




    At last I have found out what this is about. For me I was thinking it was a trial where Mr. Amaral had to defend himself, but it is a hearing just of the witnesses. So this will make no difference if he does not attend tomorrow anyway as he has not to give evidence.

    Thank you for clarifying this back on the 7th December Astro.

    ReplyDelete
  123. @ 121 got a link for the discussion on virgin please? i can nly find really old discussions on there via google... tia

    ReplyDelete
  124. Anon 121 - if you word it as unbiased as you can, it should get through. The one they `ve let through has let herself down by sounding as if she` sa bit twisted in the head - no one will take it seriously.
    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  125. Actually it did get through. They are just a bit slow.
    @123 The whole article seems to have been whooshed now.
    The comments weren't awfully supportive.

    ReplyDelete
  126. 123/125 - The article is still there at 19.16.

    Link for anyone who wants to write something positive - I`ve done my bit:

    http://latestnews.virginmedia.com/news/uk/2009/12/10/mccanns_set_to_attend_libel_trial?vmsrc=pamread

    Louise

    ReplyDelete
  127. The McCanns need stopping because they have peddled their abduction fairy story for too long.

    They don't want us to believe Sr Amaral, so why should we believe them either.

    Sr Amaral can relate facts and circumstances that point away from an abduction.

    What are yours McCann, what are yours??

    If you are using the Jane Tanner supposed sighting then forget it, because she can be discredited right off with all the changes in her story.

    As for Madeleine being missing, that is obvious.

    The question is, how did she get missing?

    You story does not hold water, whereas Dr Amaral's does.

    Until you can prove an abduction happened McCanns, do us all a favour and go put a sock in it.

    Alternatively, go look yourselves and put your own money into it, you have enough of it.

    That would be interesting to see whether you would be willing to do that. Have you even spent one penny of your own money on your 'search'? You know the saying 'put YOUR money where your mouth is'. So let's see you do it!

    I'm not holding my breath.

    ReplyDelete
  128. The truth will come out! Dont give up Goncalo Amaral!!!

    God bless you and your family

    Karin

    ReplyDelete