22 February 2010

"A Mordaça Inglesa": Sessões de apresentação da obra



Calendário de eventos para esta semana, com a presença de Gonçalo Amaral:

23.02.2010, terça-feira – Faro
Local: Biblioteca Municipal de Faro, pelas 18h00

24.02.2010, quarta-feira – Fafe
Local: Biblioteca Municipal de Fafe, pelas 21h00

25.02.2010, quinta-feira – Guarda
Local: Auditório da Guarda, pelas 21h00

26.02.2010, sexta-feira – Coimbra
Local: Clube Parque de Campismo, pelas 20h00

27.02.2010, sábado – Viseu
Local: Palácio do Gelo, pelas 17h00




«Surge da minha indignação perante o peso da censura a estilhaçar os direitos fundamentais do ser humano. Não desejo o papel de vitima mas recuso-me a ser submisso. E não posso silenciar ou deixar cair no esquecimento valores universais que conferem ao Homem a sua verdadeira dimensão. E é por isso que a minha indignação não deve ser solitária. A luta contra a censura é urgente e nasce da vontade de todos.

Mais do que um protesto de um homem amordaçado, pretendo, sobretudo, defender a liberdade de expressão com o direito de formular livre e responsavelmente pareceres, conceitos e convicções. A história de um livro proibida precisa de ser contada. Em nome da liberdade e da responsabilidade.»

Gonçalo Amaral, in 'A Mordaça Inglesa'


95 comments:

  1. There's a lot of 'red tape' on the bookcover. I Don't suppose it's the same 'red tape' the Mc's were complaining about. =))

    Uil.

    ReplyDelete
  2. True colors. just look at that man's facial expression. Definitly in need of lots of 'red tape' to cover his face:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hc_uruLYWB0

    ReplyDelete
  3. Afinal, o amaral pode ou não falar no caso madeleine ou só pode falar da mordaça?

    Finally, is Amaral allowed to talk about the Madeleine case or can he only talk about the gagg?

    ReplyDelete
  4. By now, whole England, Scotland and Wales know the truth.
    Too much about has been written about this case.

    ReplyDelete
  5. O Cameron foi convidado?

    ReplyDelete
  6. :) I wish I could be there for Dr. Amaral but I will order a book or two from here.

    :| The BBC is breaking the news that the Portuguese government is to announce three days of mourning for the victims of the floods in Madeira. There is no mention that the mourning is also for the decision of Cunha Rodrigues' daughter on behalf of the McCann's - a decision that may well have attracted this flood of evil to Portugal.

    8-} An interesting finding:

    It seems that Cunha Rodrigues, the father of Gabriela - the young judge responsible for the controversial second injunction (nearly wrote injection!) is himself a judge in the European Court of Justice!

    Could the choice of his young daughter to handle Dr. Amaral's appeal suggest "behind the scenes" activity or was it all a mere coincidence?

    It does looks bleak I must say, unless father and daughter disagree with each other Dr. Amaral appeal to the EU Court of Justice may turn out to be another family affair...

    The source of the above is here albeit in Portuguese (nothing that Google translator will not handle). The relevant bytes are in the last paragraph.

    http://tsf.sapo.pt/PaginaInicial/Portugal/Interior.aspx?content_id=1035234

    ReplyDelete
  7. :( Sorry Astro. I am not sure I included the link to the Cunha Rodrigues (father) indiscretion. See below.

    http://tsf.sapo.pt/PaginaInicial/Portugal/Interior.aspx?content_id=1035234

    ReplyDelete
  8. CONFIRMED!

    ;)) Cunha Rodrigues, the father of Dr. Amaral's judge, is a judge in the European Court of Justice. It must have been a coincidence. Surely.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I wonder how many have left comments on Lift Consulting CN's 'article' that have been banned.

    ReplyDelete
  10. News on Express, 18 February last Thursday, Cameron talks about children in the UK too exposed to sex.
    On the 21st, he appears to have received the McCanns.
    No problem, we are already used to inconsistences.
    One more, one less, what is the difference?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I would not be surprised if Brown would have lost a part of his popularity because of the McCanns.
    Such a relationship destroys any political party.
    Even if Brown never received the couple personally, there were strong rumours about his pressure on Portugal, which I believe.
    He even called the PJ, asking if "that man"(Amaral) was already dismissed. You can read it on Amaral's book and if Amaral told it, it is because it is true.
    By supporting the McCanns, whose best friends are the Paynes, Brown probably destroyed a lot of his political party.
    Because people talk, people follow all sites, blogs, people are not stupid.
    Even if the British media are gagged, blogs are not.

    I hope the Labour party is going to lose, also because of the McCanns and that the party realises this.
    Well done, Brown, whom were you protecting?
    Are you another Jane Tanner, protecting other people and losing your chances in life?
    And this is a warning for Cameron.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Re Anon #5:

    Imagine the xenophobic firestorm in the British media if Sr. Amaral had won the case in a Portuguese court!
    The best thing would be he wins his case in the European court. That would take the pressure off the Portuguese judiciary.
    I also did rail against the "glam judge" but meanwhile I'm thinking different.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Does anyone know if the McCanns force this book off the shelf and whether they can or can't, can any proceeds from this book be added to the money the McCanns hope to obtain when the claim for around £1million reaches its climax.

    Also I was told that the Judge in Portugal reached her decision to uphold the McCanns request for Mr Amaral's book to remain off the shelf, behind closed doors. I was told it was illegal, because she used the Lisbon Treaty. I don't know if what I have been told is correct, because I am ignorant of the Portuguese law.

    All I feel is Goncalo Amaral, has been treated unfairly by the Portuguese Justice system. The Judge hasn't taken into consideration, that what is written in the book is in the files. She also seems to have accepted the word of the McCanns, that they only want this book banned, because people won't look for Madeleine.

    I wondered if the Judge, ever wondered why the McCanns, never looked for Madeleine, since she was discovered "missing. The Judge should have thought about the good people of Portugal who stayed off work for a week to look for Madeleine and the holiday makers, who gave up their leisure time, to look for Madeleine. If she had, she would have come to the conclusion that many of us did pretty quickly, that this book is not about Madeleine, but about the McCanns making more money out of Madeleine's situation.

    The situation the McCanns put Madeleine in, when they selfishly put their own needs, every waking minute of that so called Family holiday.

    Clarence Mitchell revealed in an interview the other day, that the money in the fund is not only assisting the McCanns, but the McCanns WIDER FAMILY. Its bad enough that this fund is being used to assist the McCanns and has done since day one, but for the fund to assist the McCanns wider family, is nothing short of criminal.

    The McCanns want to empty Goncalo's bank account of around a million pounds, they could be plunging Goncalo and his family into financial difficulties, so they can distribute his hard earned money, between their wider family.

    I hope the Judge who presided over Goncalo's appeal, is not the one who makes the decision re the McCanns £1million claim.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Of course, it doesn't necessarily follow that because his daughter judged in favour of the McCanns that her father, and it will be more than a coincidence if he is the presiding judge when this case reaches the European Courts, will come to the same conclusion as his daughter. However, I must admit it is a very worrying bit of news. This will make the McCann's day!

    ReplyDelete
  15. The freedom the McCanns enjoyed when gagging Dr. Amaral is no doubt the sort of freedom the Americans are fighting for.

    ReplyDelete
  16. It is on record what Sr Amaral's witnesses said in the recent court hearing.

    So why do we not know what people like Clarence Mitchell and the other witnesses said on behalf of the McCanns behind closed doors when the McCanns were making their case.

    Was the judge informed that Clarence Mitchell had been pointed out to be a liar by the PJ? Why should she be considering evidence from such a man?

    It is a disgrace, but that's the McCanns for you. How they manage to wangle all these special treatements is amazing.

    Or is it really some kind of sensitive issue going on here, so bloody sensitive we are not allowed to be told about it.

    I always thought the Courts were the People's Courts, meant to be places where justice can be seen to be done.

    Seems that does not apply where the McCanns are concerned.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The problem is and this is a fact the English will not learn another language. When abroad they expect everyone to speak English. I know people who have lived in Spain more than twenty years and they do not speak one word of Spanish. Had a lot of English learnt to speak French, which we were taught in school. The Mccanns maybe would not have been able to get this far..Books were available in several languages these could have been bought while on holiday and taken back to give to friends who of course also speak a little French or Spanish. Sadly the majority of English people do not have a computer or surf the net for information. How many ,if you asked in the street know about the police files? Who if anyone, knows about the Gaspar Payne statement?

    Children ,Spanish children speak fluent English by the age of 7 years, they are now going on to learn French. It is a weakness in the English and this was a great asset for the Mccanns.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Is the sensitive issue the Gaspar statements? Or indeed just one of their sensitive issues.

    The UK needs to be informed of these statements given by doctor friends of the McCanns, the lady doctor who was so worried when she heard of the disappearance of Madeleine that she had to inform the police about Payne and Gerry.

    There may be other people with more information to add to this if they knew about it.

    With the book ban still on, the only place it looks like it will come out is in the Court.

    If the McCann's lawyer can turn around and accuse one of Sr Amaral's witnesses of being a liar to his face and nothing done about it, why should this information from the book/Files not be mentioned in the Court.

    It is in the public interest they should know, though it may not be in the interests of Payne and McCann.

    How many other people may come forward with yet more information regarding this matter? It cannot be brushed aside as if it does not matter.

    ReplyDelete
  19. http://www.libelreform.org/

    An interesting read and there is a petition to sign.

    ReplyDelete
  20. @ 10 you are right about Brown losing some of the votes because of the cover up for the MCCANNS,as the first chance i get i will be voting for another party , i am from a history of Labour supporting family for years, but no way will he get my vote now and it is all down to the Mccanns, i was going to support conservative but i am waiting to see if Cameron starts helping them and if he does the green party will be getting my vote!!!! These two child neglectors(at the very least) have caused so much trouble for many people, that is why i cant stand to look at them when they come on TV or in the papers, his arrogant face and her cold-hard face make me sick.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Post 16. Ironside. Good point. The internet may also be a great asset in the long run?

    M. Nl

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ironside ≠16, while I agree that the British (not just the English) mostly can't speak any language but their own, I don't think it would have helped very much even if they could. I know various people who speak French or Spanish fluently but who have no interest in this particular case, probably because they know nothing about the files, as you've said, and they don't spend a great deal of time on the Internet.

    It might be different if GA's book was in the shops here, in an English edition, and promoted in the usual way. The court case has given some publicity to the book and many people (not just the linguists among us) might now be interested enough to buy it and read it. Failing that, I think what's needed is a book in English with the relevant files translated and, if clarification is needed for some points, explanations given. Such a book would be safe from the censors and safe from those with a penchant to sue, because it would be based solely on the official records that are available to anyone. Needless to say, the book would have to avoid drawing any conclusions, such as 'Madeleine is dead', but I think most people reading the relevant parts of the case files would be able to draw their own conclusions.

    If the press in the UK hadn't been told what to print about the case and if they hadn't been such abject cowards there'd be no need of such a book, people would already know about the contents of the case files. But the press took sides in this case and refused to keep their readers informed of both sides, so it's obvious other people will have to do their job for them. Impartiality is supposed to the hallmark of journalism, but there aren't any journalists left in the UK, just cowardly yes-men. Thank God though that there still is in most British people a well-developed sense of fair play and a natural inclination to champion the underdog - I think Team McCann when planning their celeb parties and launching their lawsuits for more than a million euros have forgotten about that.

    ReplyDelete
  23. :)]to Anon 14

    Absolutely. It could be some other judge presiding (indeed it would be an embarrassment to the EU if her father did preside to Amaral's appeal) but my impression is that all EU judges exchange views with each other and who ever will be presiding in Brussels is bound to ask her father: "Tell me Cunha-Rodrigues, what did your daughter, off the record, thought of this case?".

    Do you follow?

    :( There is more to it. Cunha-Rodrigues political pedigree seems to lean towards the Right. The fight he fought (and won) against the UGT (the Portuguese General Union of Workers)suggests he is not exactly a Left intellectual (or even Liberal) that would see through the McCann's cunning. Cunha-Rodrigues seeems deeply identified with the Portuguese elites'. My gut feeling is that he is most likely to be biased in favour of the McCann's. His daughter certainly was - and...and...as a young judge whom do you think she sought advice from? Me, you or her daddy? :D Exactly.

    True the McCann's may belong to another elite but Ideology works essentially the same way. It is like aristocracy. It defends the interests of the minorities that control us all. The kings of Das Kapital may have put on some pajamas but their naked objectives remain the same.

    Doctors (MDs or minor deities) are deeply associated with ideology. Remember Michel Foucault's "clinical gaze"...

    Ask yourself why on Earth a book like Amaral's is banned and how on earth Portuguese judges allow a case of defamation based on a book that is based on an official process to go ahead? They are trying to put Amaral in its "proper place".

    What we have here is the individual interests of the McCann's (ideology) against the interests of the public and not just the Portuguese public. The citizens of the World. The case is not against Amaral. It is against the right of the public to know. It is against us.

    Thanks to the McCann's wanna be a celebrity mind-set, Madeleine's disappearance is now of global interest. "Da people" wants to know, and Amaral is telling them what the facts of the investigation were telling him. No more no less.

    He is not saying the McCann's did it. He is telling us what the facts of the investigation were telling him.

    :(( FIND JUSTICE FOR DR. AMARAL NOW!

    We can help his defence by buying the book. I have ordered my copy for 10 Euros, less than a tenner here:

    http://www.bertrand.pt/pesquisa/pesquisa.php?tipo_pesquisa=titulo&categoria_pesquisa=&chave=a+mordaca+inglesa

    Bertrand, I found out, is one of Portugal's largest book outlets. Perfectly safe.

    ReplyDelete
  24. :)] to Kattybelle

    ;;) My perception is that if the McCann's win the follow up case later this year (defamation) the book will no longer be available in Portugal (at least). Whether the Spanish , French, etc. courts will comply remains to be seen. I very much doubt they would obey an order from a Portuguese judge with the same subservience the Portuguese showed to the McCann's cunning.

    The McCann's are asking for 1.2 million Euros (roughly £1 million) and that is "all". They cannot go on asking Amaral, TV stations, publishers, etc. for money to subsidize their celebrity lifestyle and "charity" cover-up pursuits for ever. That would create an armed insurrection in Portugal.

    That is 1.2 million and that is "all" - quite a heist don't you think?

    Yes, it is a great injustice to Dr. Amaral who is telling us what the facts of the investigation where telling him.

    If anyone now is hindering the search for Madeleine are Eddie & Keela - the dogs. Why don't they sue the dogs?

    :D The dogs have not written a best-selling book. They have no cash just a bone or two.

    :(( Help to find Justice to Dr. Amaral.

    We can help by buying his other book!

    Here: http://www.bertrand.pt/pesquisa/pesquisa.php?tipo_pesquisa=titulo&categoria_pesquisa=&chave=a+mordaca+inglesa

    Portugal's largest bookshop. Perfectly safe.

    ReplyDelete
  25. :)] To aacg

    Sorry I missed the link. Could you post it again?

    ;) Gracias!

    ReplyDelete
  26. Just put on twitter that have it on good authority that the mccans are now worried about the judges decision haha serves them rght

    ReplyDelete
  27. If every one on earth speaks your language and if the great majority of those who speak your language speak it "basic" (not as a second language but as a foreign language), not only is your superiority confirmed (ruling the world) but learning other languages isn't a need except for the intellectual one.
    The fact English is at the same time the official language of countries of the UE and (in a basic form at least) the common language in the UE is one of the reasons why the construction of UE is so difficult.

    ReplyDelete
  28. What have the McC's won? All they still have is a temporary injunction on Dr G A's book. Imo the McC's are passing this of as a victory as if this injunction is permanent and that the book is banned permanently. The sheeple UK Press/Media go ba ba ba to the UK public what they have been told at a pink conference by the McC's and Pinky. Do any of them actually know the Judge has rewritten the first injunction? Have any of them actually found out what the Judge has rewritten? The UK public once again gets treated like mushrooms in the dark being fed sho ! te by a pathetic Press/Media! Imo Dr G A has benefitted from his hearing. The Judge has rewritten parts of the first injunction. Does that mean this is a second injunction that is more favourable to Dr G A? The Judge has now allowed Dr G A to have a voice. A voice he is entitled to! Imo this hearing has done more damage to the McC's than Dr G A's book could ever have done. Damage that cannot be swept under the ever growing McPink rug!


    Imo this is a typical McC Britsh press conference:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HajJAkQj_HU&feature=related

    zodiaczephyr

    ReplyDelete
  29. For clarity (as there seems to be some confusion here) the European Court of Human Rights (deals with breaches of the convention) is not the same as the European Court of Justice - which is the EU court dealing with EU law.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I find this comment by anon 5 completely disgusting and out of order.

    ''The BBC is breaking the news that the Portuguese government is to announce three days of mourning for the victims of the floods in Madeira. There is no mention that the mourning is also for the decision of Cunha Rodrigues' daughter on behalf of the McCann's - a decision that may well have attracted this flood of evil to Portugal.''

    This sort of medieval nonsense should have no place in the 21st century. What kind of people can write such appalling things?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Speaking about judge Mercedes, I don't think she was influenced by anybody.
    Every law has gotten holes, with different possibilities of interpretations.
    It depends for wich hole the judge choses.
    The first judge chosed NO, the second and the third chosed YES, gagg this book!
    All based on the same law.
    The McCanns are very lucky that Madeleine died in Portugal, not in some other country.
    Judge Mercedes seems to be young but she received the legacy of the horror of lack of rights that the Portuguese had for decates.
    It is a paranoia in her country.
    Lucky McCanns!
    I regret that she did not order for reopen of the criminal process in Algarve.
    It is known that the McCanns let Amaral's book be translate immediately after it was published. They knew its contents.
    But they waited up till Amaral had made money out of it and they sued him.
    If they get money from him, the judge got to ask for the money that Amaral made AFTER their first request for injunction, not before.
    Because the couple had time and lawyers enough to gagg him immediately after the publication and they didn't.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Joana, could you please publicise the judge's veredict, even only in Portuguese or perhaps tell us where to find it?
    Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anon 15, the fact that the McCanns and Mitchell were heard behind closed doors seems to indicate that something very serious is being kept from the general public, otherwise why would they need to be heard in secrecy. The fact that Mitchell is also a government spokesman also seems to indicate that the government are well and truly imbedded in this appalling mess and someone very high up is being protected. The McCanns are obviously having very special who have been implicated by a European police force in the disappearance of their child, the whole thing stinks to high heaven.

    ReplyDelete
  34. The thing is Ironside, that the English don't really need to speak another language because when they holiday in Western Europe most people speak English anyway.

    It would be nice if they did, but it is not a necessity to them.

    Now if they were to go on holiday to Outer Mongolia then it would be a necessity. But how many people holiday there?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Ironside 16

    I dont speak another language and I dont think I am a scum bag!

    ReplyDelete
  36. Even if the British Government had the power to demand a review of the McCann case Britain could not afford to fund or imo justify a round in circles review of the case. The future for Britain looks bleaker than ever. The McC's can request their child's case to be re-opened all they have to do is agree to participate in a reconstruction or the mother can agree to answer her unanswered 48 questions. The British Government should be advising the McCanns to act in their child's best interest by requesting the re-opening of the case and by doing so they will have the right people investigating their child's disappearance. The McC's should be respecting their child's dignity. What is dignified about allowing archival of her case?


    The article below was too long to post here it is worth a read.


    http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?q=7007.5532.0.0

    Will Crisis Oust Britain From EU?
    February 23, 2010 | From theTrumpet.com
    The British economy potentially faces a worse situation than that of Greece. This places the future of the country at great risk. By Ron Fraser

    ReplyDelete
  37. @15
    I feel that the reason Dr Amaral spoke in open court was because he wanted to let the world know his testimony- he is after all a honest man who has a faith and dignity the McCanns cant compete with. Also and more importantly he is a professional despite his feelings (terrible threat of losing all) he would not endanger any future case by releasing any of the information held on the McCanns (the real evidence)for a future prosecution. There maybe something on the files that will one day fit in with some new evidence that comes to light and the case against the McCanns will be thought watertight and a prosecution will go ahead because theyve got them -then they'll tack the abandonment on the end as thats easily proved.

    Ironside although you are right it is regrettable we dont speak other languages better- at the end of the day its the McCanns themselves who come across- people turn off their sets or turn over the paper because we can all tell they are fishy(as the very english guy says on UTube "p***ed off with the McCanns" they reek from head to foot). Then the rest of the public are just sick of hearing about them theyre gaining as much popularity as the plague. With these sort of cases the gutter press can be as vindictive and racial insulting as it likes we British are made up of all creeds noone is comfortable with the libel prosecution of a policenan especially by those he was investigating and who refuse to prove their innocence.It was extremely stupid of them perhaps they thought it would all be hush hush who knows theyre not on the same planet as normal people.

    Nothing can sell this pair as others have said their credibility has gone theyre unmarketable even if they take every penny from Amaral(a disgusting thought) and stop his book everyone will know and the files are still there. As for the other books out there if they start going after those the negative publicity will start mounting.

    So theyre stuck -no donations (maybe a trickle;no celebrity status (increasingly unmarketable) and lengthy risky libel cases; what will they do for money? Kate might have to go back to work and face the world how different that will be to the protective bubble she's been living in - maybe then she will tell the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Off-topic, I know - and I apologise - but this just caught my eye and I think needs to be probed.

    Gerry McCann: "We're not naive, errr... but on numerous occasions the Portuguese police, errr... have assured us that they were looking for Madeleine alive and not, errr... you know, Madeleine being murdered and I don't know of any information that's changed that. Of course, errr... the information and the way the investigation's going is... is about thoroughness and ab... and making sure that everyone is as confident as possible that that is the case. Errm... Kate and I strongly believe that Madeleine was alive, errr... when she was taken from the apartment. Obviously what we don't know is what happened to her afterwards, who's taken her and what a motive is, and we're desperate to find that out." (From "Madeleine Latest As 100th Day Approaches" Sky News interview with Richard Bilton, Aug 7, 2007 ... thanks, mccannfiles.com)

    Pardon, Gerry?? Did you say "Kate and I strongly believe that Madeleine was alive, errr... when she was taken from the apartment." Now, was there reason to believe she might have been DEAD when she was taken from the apartment? And how can you be so sure as to STRONGLY BELIEVE that she was not DEAD if you were not there "AT THE MOMENT SHE WAS TAKEN"???

    Oh, you think you have some explaining to do Gerry! I mean, you just couldn't make it up!

    ReplyDelete
  39. Pode ser que me engane, mas ha muito tempo que acho que Goncalo Amaral tem sido usado como BODE ESPIATORIO, pelos responsaveis da politica e da justica, para pagar a factura do Segredo de justica e intimidar quem ousa desafiar os interesses instalados.
    Nao deixa de ser interessante ver a Procuradora Candida Almeida defender escutas a magistrados e Marinho Pinto imediatamente acrescentar... E a POLICIAS. Decididamente, ele tem uma agenda qualquer contra a policia ou contra alguns policias.
    E as escutas seriam para ser aplicadas a todos os magistrados e a todos os policias, ou so aos inconvenientes?
    E que tal incluir nesta proposta, escutas ao PGR, ao STJ, ao Bastonario da Ordem dos advogados e a Escritorios de Advogados?

    Talvez o pais ficasse a saber:
    -Porque e atraves de quem, o Aragao Correia chegou a Leonor Cipriano.
    -Porque e que o Marinho Pinto se constituiu assistente na acusacao de tortura aos policias que investigaram o caso Joana e nunca mais teve a mesma postura sobre outros casos envolvendo outros policias.
    - Porque e que a Providencia Cautelar interposta pelos Mccann, teve acolhimento no tribunal depois de ter sido recusada da primeira vez( penso que foi isto que aconteceu) e foi tao celeremente resolvida.
    - Porque e que uma advogada pode em tribunal acusar inspectores da policia judiciaria de mentirem e atrapalharem a investigacao, e nao lhe e exigida a apresentacao de provas que sustentem tal acusacao.
    - porque e que a discussao do caso Maddie e Tabu nos Media portugueses.
    - porque e que se censurou so o livro de Goncalo Amaral e nao se censuraram outros livros de outros autores, sobre o mesmo tema e alvitrando mais ou menos as mesmas conclusoes- IMPOSSIBILIDADE DE RAPTO, INDICIOS DE MORTE. Um dos livros e da autoria de jornalistas " Porque adoptamos Maddie" e nele alguns jornalistas apresentam uma visao suspeita sobre os pais. Interrogam-se sobre comportamentos que lhes parecem estranhos e inexplicaveis.
    - Porque e que de repente, o segredo de justica passou a ser o pai de todos os males da justica e a chave para resolver todos os casos?
    - Porque e que foram recusadas escutas aos Mccann e agora se defendem escutas a policias e magistrados?

    E QUE TAL COMECAREM POR DAR O EXEMPLO: QUE TAL ESCUTAS A CANDIDA ALMEIDA E AO MARINHO PINTO E AO PGR E A MAGISTRADA QUE DECIDIU CENSURAR UM LIVRO? Em nome da verdade e da transparencia, nao pode haver excepcoes.
    ESTES ARTISTAS DA JUSTICA SABEM QUE A FORMA COMO TEM RESOLVIDO OS CASOS MEDIATICOS, COMO O CASO MADDIE, NAO CONVENCE O PUBLICO. QUANDO UM CASO E MAL RESOLVIDO NUNCA FICA RESOLVIDO, TARDE OU CEDO, VOLTA A REACENDER A CHAMA E A SER DISCUTIDO, COMO CAMARATE.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Gerry McCann on 7 August 2007: "Kate and I strongly believe that Madeleine was alive, errr... when she was taken from the apartment."

    In other words, on 7 August 2007 Kate and Gerry did not strongly believe that Madeleine was dead when she was taken from the apartment. But when did Death enter the equation? Death was not seriously investigated until the Portuguese Police requested NPIA's assistance on 20 July 2007, which culminated in Mark Harrison's research. Mark Harrison's report "considers solely the possibility that Madeleine McCann has been murdered and her body is concealed within the areas previously searched by Police in Zone 1 around Praia Da Luz." 'Murder'...death.

    'Death'. What could Gerry have picked up on that might have indicated death was being investigated? And why take such a firm stance on Life or Death - rather than be open to the police's findings - if he and they were in no position to have known according to their own statements to the Police?

    1) Cadaver dogs were brought in and inspected Apartment 5A on 31 July 2007.
    2) On 1 August 2007, a search warrant for the McCanns' rental car, Renault Scenic 59-DA-27, was issued.
    3) On 1 August 2007, vestiges were being collected from Apartment 5A and would later be sent to the FSS Laboratory in Birmingham on 7 August 2007; the forensic report from the FSS was not issued until 14 August 2007.

    Again, why take such a firm stance on Life or Death just when death was being investigated - rather than be open to the police's findings - if he and Kate were in no position to have known, according to their own statements to the Police and were keen to know the circumstances surrounding her disappearance? Sounds very much like he wasn't open to the possibility that Madeleine had died in Apartment 5A, under whatever circumstances. Now why would that be, if you don't know how she disappeared and every clue might in fact lead to finding her?

    ReplyDelete
  41. 33 the decision on the ruling is not public

    ReplyDelete
  42. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HajJAkQj_HU

    UK British Press at Mccann conference...lol

    ReplyDelete
  43. 36 and 35...I have never called anyone a 'Scumbag' in my life.The fact remains as post 35 has just said 'We do not need to learn another language because everyone speaks English'...I rest my case.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Anon @ 41,

    Gerry sure makes it sound like he and Kate know the circumstances under which Madeleine was "taken from the apartment". But is this what he's been telling the Police or the exact opposite? It's near to impossible to not know how something happened and yet have 'very strong beliefs' about it, if you haven't witnessed the event or been told how it happened by the perpetrator 8-}

    ReplyDelete
  45. :)] to 30. Point taken. Still judges are likely to share the same cafeteria, library, restaurant... Your clarification does not invalidate the fact that the father could have advised her daughter. It comes down to the same (almost).:)

    ReplyDelete
  46. :)] I thought you might. I did too (at first) but when I learnt about Sheldrake (Cambridge)theory of morphogenetic fields and became acquainted with David Bohm (physicist) and his holographic model of the Universe I started thinking...

    Then when I read the story of the American Indian who went to Africa and made it rain against all odds. I thought: Hmmm...this is possible.

    It might not be so much that I am living in the Middle Ages but that you are too hooked on Newtonian physics...

    The very substratum of matter is consciousness!

    Start with the Erwin Schrödinger cat than come back to me ;;)

    PS Mind the dogs...

    ReplyDelete
  47. When I read the McCanns PR campaigns slogans, I just feel anger - those 2 neglected parents are teaching others what is right?

    "Imagine if she was your child, imagine the pain and grief, imagine if someone like you never came forward. If you stay quiet you are as guilty as those who took her." What's about leaving small children unsupervised? Who is guilty in that?

    "it is never too late to do the right thing" - Unfortunately for Madeleine, it is too late.

    ReplyDelete
  48. anónimo 32:

    o nome da juíza é Maria Gabriela Cunha Rodrigues

    ReplyDelete
  49. Anonymous 41, Their income and frequency of appearances in the media depends on the belief that the child is alive.

    Deviam acabar com o segredo da justica. O segredo da justica nao devia ser lei mas sim uma regra interna da policia. Se qualquer informacao chegar ao publico sem autorizacao da policia, entao a policia tem que lancar uma investigacao interna para determinar a fonte da fuga da informacao. O responsavel e depois castigado.

    ReplyDelete
  50. 44 Ironside.

    I actually dont think it necessary to speak all the languages of the countries I visit - and I think I'd feel that way if my mother tongue wasnt English in any case.

    It doesnt have to be arrogance you know, I am just not talented in that area!

    It is a fact that English is a widely spoken tongue and we can take advantage of that. Actually one of the most arrogant countries regarding language is France - and the French dont have the 'excuse' that French is widely spoken - they are just anti-English because we have a long history of being on opposite sides and killing each other!

    Dont forget, one of the McCanns isnt English in any case!

    The issue here isnt a generalised view of a whole nationality - this is about the arrogance of a class within a Nation - the same class as many media folk - i.e. professionals who dont really have time or the natural instincts to have or look after their children.

    So lets forget the whole distraction and focus on the McCann's and their friends - I certainly dont consider myself to be in any way comparable to them, yet I am as English as anyone else (though married to a German and with Scottish and German ancestry way back!).

    ReplyDelete
  51. 46 I wasnt really commenting on whether the young judge was influenced or could influence her dad!

    I'd seen a few people mixing up the EU court with the ECHR court, so thought I should correct the error.

    There is a school of thought that thinks Sr. Amaral may inadvertantly have assisted the McCann's by not maintaining secrecy during the investigation - and maybe as a police officer he shouldnt write books about a current case. Im not saying I agree, but I think we should be aware that the judge may have been making a comment on 'professional position' rather than supporting the McCann's silly claim that discussing alternatives to the unlikely possibility of 'stranger abduction' was in some way damaging to 'the search' (though actually the claim that she was abducted is the basis of their fund, so it is damaging to their income rather than any 'search' to suggest she might not have ben abducted or to point out that abdcution is so unlikely!!).

    Thats why the Madeleine Foundation was told that calling her disappearance a mystery was liblellous, the McCann's dont want the fund income damaged (regardless of the fact that the income for a single theory wouldnt be effective if that theory were not the solution!).

    ReplyDelete
  52. Poster 50, yes, I think you are absolutely right!

    ReplyDelete
  53. I remenber Cunha Rodrigues when he was the PGR and how he handled certain facts, an OLD FOX indeed .

    ReplyDelete
  54. Murat suing those friends of the McCanns who tried to get him arrested and nearly did, is a turn up for the books.

    I bet the McCanns, and them, are thinking 'this wasn't supposed to happen'.

    What twists and turns there are in this case.

    ReplyDelete
  55. @ Anonymous 41
    Imagine, against GA's thesis, they're not lying and believe that M was taken alive from the apartment. WWhat can support that belief ? Common sense (why should an abductor take a corpse with him) ? Or something else ?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Dimsie (23)
    If I had the kind of book you're thinking about (one based on the one and only belief that 2 and 2 make 4 etc.), would you have a publisher ?

    ReplyDelete
  57. aacg

    What can support the belief that Madeleine was taken alive from the apartment?

    After the dogs spoke, nothing can!

    Those dogs have never been wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Annon 52

    Furthur to your comment

    Yes but now CM on the you tube video has stated that her disappearence is a COMPLETE MYSTERY.......oops! clarrie! I thought that was libellous

    ReplyDelete
  59. 56 aacg

    They are lying. Why else would Kate 'play act' as she did when explaining the door position of their 'documentary'?

    I wouldnt bother going down the road of trying to explain something that they could explain themselves. First they told us they cant explain due to restrictions of 'judicial secrecy', yet when that was lifted, they still have failed to explain!

    Kate speaks as a child does, you know, 'I know things you dont and I cant tell you how I know -its a secret'. Can't lose with that argument can you!

    ReplyDelete
  60. aacg 56, common sense would dictate that an abductor would not take a corpse, however there has been more than one journalist that has suggested that that's exactly what happened. It is the only way they could stick to the theory of abduction without dismissing the findings of the dogs.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Anonymous 52
    I agree with you about the judge.In fact she expressed (in January) a very theoretical point of view (excluding the context) that GA took advantage of the privileged position he had as a police inspector, instead of observing some sort of duty of reserve. I don't think she was convinced by ID and the death concept as killer of the search at all. There's no way for them to be innocent if the death thesis prevails.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Negligent parents instruct lawyers to try and permanently ban a book,which is based upon available evidence,(after the investigation was archived) that the evidence contradicts the parents abduction theory!

    First secret meeting to ban the book failed. Second meeting to temporary ban the book was successful.

    Investigative Court case in Lisbon to have the temporary ban lifted was unsuccessful, and behind closed doors the reason to keep the TEMPORARY BAN ruling in place is not made public.

    This is not Justice, after all Snr Amaral and his family have been put through.

    This decision although not permanent, shows itself to be in breach of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.

    An Englishman

    ReplyDelete
  63. @ Anonymous 60
    I'm pretty sure the door/window story is a lie (now the open window has become a red herring ! What for is a mystery). KM says she knows better because she has nothing plausible to say.

    ReplyDelete
  64. @ Guerra
    Suggestion that the abductor, after killing, remained an hour at least around thinking of Eddie and Keela ? Well there's kind of evidence, through Mrs Fenn, that one night the kids cried during more than an hour...

    ReplyDelete
  65. aacg @ #56,

    When you heard the news that Madeleine had been 'taken' - code for 'abducted' according to McCann...though I'm not so sure now that it means anything but "taken", did you stop to ask whether she had been taken alive or dead? I'm sure that if you automatically assumed 'taken' to be "abducted" the answer is 'no'.

    Why then does Gerry McCann, proponent of the abduction, consider it necessary to introduce the idea that Madeleine could have been taken from the apartment dead just as she could have been taken from the apartment alive? And if we are to consider the very thought of 'taken alive', 'taken dead', are we still talking about abduction?? It's all HIS doing, his very own words.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Poster 51. I think Ironside means that this fact was a great asset for the Mccanns. Maybe the reason why they want the book The Truth of the Lie to be banned. The book in other languages is not threatening. At least as I understood it. But perhaps that's because I'm Dutch. :))

    ReplyDelete
  67. If the Files that have been released are only a small percentage of the Files they have, then we are only getting a glimpse of what they have investigated.

    There may be other information regarding suspicion of one or more of the Tapas friends that will not be released to us.

    That the Gaspar statements got released is strange in itself, as no doubt the Gaspars would never have thought it would be put on record and released for the McCanns to read.

    So why was it?

    Also, was the information given in the Gaspar statements followed up by the questioning of Payne and Gerry? If so, are their answers amongst the Files not yet released?

    ReplyDelete
  68. If Kate was there in the apartment (according to the phone records), on the night that Madeleine was crying, why was Madeline crying for so long, and why did she then start screaming 'daddy, daddy' just before the door was heard to open and the crying stopped.

    Who was Kate phoning so many times?

    Why wasn't Madeleine crying for her mother, if her mother was there?

    ReplyDelete
  69. @ Anonymous 66
    I vaguely remember people on a (Belgian) terrible site trying first to make compatible abduction with dogs' findings and finally assuming that cadaver odour was planted by the PJ or some other kind of vampire, vulture etc.
    Now, about the use of "take", what would you say, if someone broke and entered your flat to get your jewels ? "they took my jewels ?" or "they stole my jewels ?"
    Suppose you forgot your cell phone in a coffee shop and when you come back the cell phone had gone, what would you say ? "they took my cell phone ?" or "they stole my cell phone ?"

    ReplyDelete
  70. 69 Id say that Kate might have been a little harsh in her discipline - Gerry got rid of the body.

    You realise, of course, that the McCanns will never ever be held to account - too many influential and rich people have pinned their colours to the McCann's and they just couldnt be made to be fools!

    ReplyDelete
  71. 68 Mark Williams Thomas told me that the gasper statement had been fully investigated.

    Why would he tell me that if it werent so?

    ReplyDelete
  72. 49, thank you for correcting me. Not Mercedes but Maria Gabriela.
    Once I even thought it was Maria Dolores.

    68, as long as a process is not completely solved, the police do not release everything they know.
    Nowhere in the world.
    They always keep things for themselves and that is necessary in order to find out what happened.
    I assure you that extremely few people of the PJ know everything that is in the files.
    Details are very important in order to catch a offender.

    ReplyDelete
  73. aacg @70,

    "Stole my jewels" of course. Because only a thief with the intention of stealing would break in. But the cell phone in the coffee shop can't be treated equally: ease of access means that the staff could have simply put it away until it was claimed.

    Why the insistence on "taken" which seems rather vague compared to "abducted"? And in what various ways could she have been 'taken'?

    It certainly has me thinking she was definitely REMOVED (ie 'taken') from the apartment, but that 'abduction' is only one way in which anyone should consider she could have been so removed.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Exactly, Anonymous @ 74, the ones who broke your place "stole your jewels". But if your cell phone disappears from a table in a coffee shop and the waiter didn't see it, your hardly claim that someone stole it, but you easily say that someone took it !
    Now apply this to the MCs...
    When my son was 2/4, I took him every day to the park with a ball. Was he a bit clumsy ? Anyway many times the ball disappeared. One day I saw a boy taking the ball and said "It's not yours, why are you taking it ?" He replied "it was abandoned". Then I had an idea, I wrote my son's name on top of the ball. I still have the ball...
    It had stopped being anonymous...

    ReplyDelete
  75. Anon 72

    I don't doubt they were investigated, but investigated and what was the conclusion?

    Presumably that is in the Files that we are not allowed to see.

    ReplyDelete
  76. 72 MWT as been wrong in several accounts that he gave on the McCann case.

    ReplyDelete
  77. @52 If Amaral had written anything that wasnt already public I could follow your reasoning (or the judges) if Dr Amaral had still been a policeman I could also see some reasoning for that approach. The truth is he has been made a scapegoat- now there may be some other reason we are not aware of but on what we know that reasoning is not valid. If he had had someone with clout speak out for him he wouldnt have been in the position that he felt the only recourse was to resign- he wasnt far off retirement remember. I personally dont think the British government did anything other than protect the McCanns I think they were keeping them safe within the law- why their credit cards ect werent sent to PJ or Gaspars statement Ive no idea but think these were more likely individual interference paid for by the McCanns or there is some lawful reason we are not aware of.

    Dr Amaral was in a very difficult position perhaps his removal was to protect both him and the investigation though he should have been made aware of that and apparently wasnt. Of course the McCanns used that in their PR- the fact we cannot know the real reason.On top of that there were the disgusting racial and personal insults and threats in the press. The McCanns protection (ie from ambassadors/from airport) seems to be keeping them lawfully fit and safe until the police slap the cuffs on. I may be totally wrong with this reasoning but it seems to me three years or more isnt such a long time given the nature of the investigation and the abilities of the suspects- Aitkin took as long and he wasnt suspected of such huge crimes.

    As for the press it seems the McCanns have taken advantage of the police restrictions on reporting- something Im sure Gerry very easily worked out on his own. This was probably the reason for employing Mr Mitchell after the government withdrew their support after fufilling their duty in getting them safely home after the Portuguese said they could return. Mr Mitchell has the contacts in the media that he can use Im sure some elements of the press/media think that they are innocent and are being treated unfairly I doubt these so called journalist have bothered to read either the book or the files and probably just meet down the pub. You can be sure Gerry knows them too now.Im also sure there are some elements of the press playing them at their own game- as others have remarked certain phrases or product placements have made them laugh.One thing is for sure the McCanns are not in charge we just have to be patient and let the police do what theyre trained for.

    ReplyDelete
  78. @ aacg 75

    =)) But taking a ball which is seemingly without owner (has no name) and taking a child who might have been abandoned? Well that could have been a possibility...but we'd still be left with the riddle of the cadaver scent that followed them everywhere they went!

    :-o Erm, who died?

    ReplyDelete
  79. Anon #72,

    As far as I am aware MWT was not part of this official investigation. He would not know what was done and what was not.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Annon 78

    I think if this case shows nothing else....it shows just how restricted/gagged/compliant/subserviant/one-sided/McCann sided ..... call it whatever you like, the press have been, in all this.
    I for one will never purchase a newspaper again, nor believe anything spouted by them. There is not one truely independant/honest paper amonst them any more. To my way of thinking, if they had any balls they would all make a decision to be more equal in their reporting...publish and be dammed.....but of course they won't, they are the mouthpiece of their masters

    ReplyDelete
  81. @ Anonymous 79
    I know, it's tough, we have to rely on 6 British corpses... May be oldish ?

    ReplyDelete
  82. Joana 42. OMG whatever next!

    ReplyDelete
  83. Post 56. McCann once said in a TV interview (can't find a link) that "we are told everything anyway". KM seemed to look at him in horror. If the PJ mole told them there were PJ suspicions of the child's death, then that would put the idea in their minds to refute that theory, although they were too premature.

    ReplyDelete
  84. @ aacg 82,

    Thanks for answering that rhetorical question ;;)

    Though I tend to think the answer to that question might just be "Erm...."

    Lights out for me. You're too kind! Tomorrow!

    ReplyDelete
  85. #52,
    Mr. Amaral LEFT the PJ preciselly because he wanted to be free to express his views and defend his good name, both as an individual and as a police officer, since no one from the high hierarchy of the PJ came out in his defence througout the floods of mud thrown at him and his investigation. He could have stayed in the force, he was not "sacked in disgrace" as the british press sold to its readers, he was just removed from the case, he could have settled comfortably on his new post, forget the whole thing, dance to the tune, but no, his sense of honour and justified professional pride were not compatible with quiet accomodation. He bravelly decided that the only way he could defend himself from the vile accusations and suspicions, within legality and with honour, was by asking for early retirement, even if that meant a substancial cut in his the value of his pension. So, NO, he was no longer a police officer when he wrote the book (only in his heart he is and will always be a police officer), he was no longer legally bound to secrecy and silence, and once most of the files were made public he had no reason not to publish his work.
    I am sure he did not "help" the McCanns with careless "leaks", in fact, there was talk about the McCanns having a "mole" inside the PJ, and it was not Mr. Amaral, oh no! Mr. Encarnação( one of Mr. Amaral's "bosses") new only too well who it was, sort of his "protégé"...

    ReplyDelete
  86. #54, my husband, who's very into political issues, always referred to Cunha Rodrigues as "Cunhas e Rodriguinhos"...I, who have an abhorrence of the political games, and stay blissfully ignorant of it all, never quite understood why...but now I'm getting the picture!

    ReplyDelete
  87. Important decisions taken behind closed doors. That sure looks like justice (not).

    Imagine if it had been reversed and the decision had gone in favour of Sr Amaral and his witnesses had been heard in private.

    THE MCCANNS WOULD HAVE BEEN SCREAMING THE ROOF DOWN!

    This is not justice. It is a disgrace.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Perhaps there is no write up of the decision of the ruling.

    Did the glamorous young judge just put 'ditto' instead?

    Or photocopy the ruling of the one who granted the injunction and simply change a few words here and there?

    I hope I am joking there and that does not happen to be true.

    Unbelievable that the public are not allowed to see why she reached the decision so that they could see justice done and not some shady dealings behind closed doors.

    What's betting Judge Judy would have made short work of this injunction of the McCanns and ruled in favour of freedom of speech.

    Being as how the book has been around for so long anyway and they did nothing, the McCanns should have had to prove their libel case first before stopping the book.

    To say it is bad for their reputation is nuts, what reputation do the McCanns have when they left their children every night alone in an unlocked apartment. People who neglect their children are not looked on as good parents in any society.

    Nobody would leave their valuables in such a way, so why leave their children who should be more valuable and precious than material possessions.

    Far from no harm coming to Madeleine as the McCanns keep trying to sell the public, TERRIBLE HARM came to her. Poor child. The dogs are telling us she is dead. Those dogs have never been wrong, so why should they be in this case?

    The comments left by the public show they think it is wrong the McCanns have got away with punishment for that, when poorer parents would not have.

    The Portuguese Prosecutor could at least have prosecuted the McCanns for leaving their children alone, so what was so special about them they were allowed to walk away?

    I hope the case gets reopened because it is certainly not closed and should not be shelved.

    ReplyDelete
  89. @ 17

    Relax...

    The law works in mysterious ways, and let us not be too critical of the Portuguese system, English Courst do some strange things too (take the family courts and super-injunctions to name but two).

    The ban on the book is still temporary. Let us wait until the full trail which will be in the open. We will then see who the witnesses are that support the McCann's version of events and they too will be open to cross-examination.

    Justice is a slow (and costly) process but I am sure we will get there in the end...

    Mr B

    ReplyDelete
  90. :)] To Anon 31

    Please read my reply to our comment above (47).
    Too farfetching? Read this. It happened last night!

    "Correio da Manha
    24 Fevereiro 2010 - 08h05

    Na terça-feira à noite
    Portimão: Mini tornado provoca estragos

    Um mini tornado em Portimão, no Algarve, na terça-feira ao final da noite provocou danos em restaurantes de praia e empreendimentos turísticos, tendo ainda derrubado árvores e postes de electricidade.


    O fenómeno terá durado menos de um minuto mas o suficiente para destruir montras, telhados e toldos. As autoridades não têm registo de vítimas e estão a apurar os estragos deste mini tornado."


    Use Google translator. It is about a mini-tornado that hit Portimao! of all places in Algarve, last night. 8-} Another coincidence, right?

    ReplyDelete
  91. The ruling of this judge : The injunction on the "Truth of the lie" HAS TO remain in place until the LIBEL trial- which if sources are correct should start early spring!

    The judge didnt really have an option!

    Tick tock !!! time is running out for the McScams

    ReplyDelete
  92. Anon @ 33
    Joana @ 42

    Rupial on Twitter seems to have some information about the judgement (http://twitter.com/rupial). I have tried to collect his comments into an easily readable format:

    Mr. Amaral defended a thesis for which he was unable to give a definitive evidence. However, Mr. Amaral has all the possibilities to express himself, once he has the Right of Freedom of Speech. But when put face to face two Constitutional Rights, The Freedom of Speech and The Right to Dignity and Legal Protection, and because Mr. Amaral was not able to give full and definitive evidence, the McCann vs Amaral's judge decided to prevail the Right to Dignity, because as Miranda states "no Right is absolutely stretched and every new Right has to coexist with all the other Rights, without breaking the system's unity".

    For this reason, and eventually others to which I can't access, the McCann vs Amaral's judge decided to keep the injunction.

    Hope I brought interesting information to this issue. Thanks again.

    Professor Jorge Miranda states: "The Fundamental Rights presumes power relations among them. :"The Rights of Personality presume equality relations among them". "The Rights of Personality are born with the individual" and “The Fundamental Rights are given by the State". "Therefore the Rights of Personality are above the Fundamental Rights".

    The Right to Dignity is applied to anyone, no matter what nation he or she comes from. As Mirana states: " The Right to Dignity is born with the individual" it is not given by the State. Other Rights are like Freedom of Speech. Freedom of Speech can be taken away in case of war, for example. Or can be limited as it was understood by the McCann vs Amaral judge, and explained in previous twitters.


    Mr B

    ReplyDelete
  93. Sr Amaral is only stating in his book what is already in the Files, so how come the judge is not banning the Files also.

    Or is that still to come as the McCanns advance on their suing the world to stop anybody knowing things the McCanns don't want known.

    That is nothing to do with dignity, it is to do with truth.

    ReplyDelete
  94. If this judge's reasoning were to be accepted as the rule then that would mean that anybody who writes a book that a person is offended by would be able to get an injunction and ultimate banning.

    And to hell with the truth!!

    It is a slippery slope.

    Robert Maxwell was always threatening to sue or getting injuctions to stop information about him coming out, and then it turned out that he had used up the Mirror pension Fund to pay for his lifestyle, amongst other things.

    Many had been trying to warn about him but were silenced by his money and his lies.

    The judges have a lot to answer for.

    ReplyDelete