1.Everyone shall possess the right to freely express and publicise his thoughts in words, images or by any other means, as well as the right to inform others, inform himself and be informed without hindrance or discrimination 2.Exercise of the said rights shall not be hindered or limited by any type or form of censorship Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, Article 37.º

The McCanns' Injunction: Quotes by the Defence Lawyers

The following quotes come from notes taken in loco [on spot] at the 7th Civil Court, at Palace of Justice in Lisbon, on the day when the closing arguments were presented by the defence lawyers of the four entities targeted in this case and by the McCanns layer. The order of publication of the said quotes follows the order in which they were presented in court, firstly Dr. António Cabrita for Dr. Gonçalo Amaral’s defence, after Drª. Fátima de Oliveira Esteves on behalf of the Book publisher's Guerra and Paz, then Dr. Miguel Coroadinho for the Portuguese television channel TVI and finally Dr. Henrique Costa Pinto for Valentim de Carvalho movies.

The final allegations of Drª. Isabel Duarte, the last to present her arguments were particularly difficult to note down. From her over-the-top lengthy reasoning and between reading in full Kate McCann's letter in 2008 to the second PJ coordinator, Paulo Rebelo, and an opinion chronicle by Pedro Mexia, we draw attention to the fact that the McCanns lawyer accused the spectators, bloggers and media present, as well as the defence lawyers of being ‘vultures and vampires’. She also accused a PJ Inspector of being a ‘liar’, and did not refrain herself from trying to ridicule Dr. Gonçalo Amaral. The allegations made by this lawyer were already divulged by her own voice, in several interviews given to multiple TV channels as well as in the form of a press release (see here, here, here and here), not seeming to us necessary, therefore, to repeat them again.

January 14, 2010

Quotes from the final allegations of Dr. António Cabrita, Gonçalo Amaral’s defence lawyer

It is unhealthy the McCanns obsession about the child being alive, the refusal to admit that she may be dead.

The withdrawal of the book and DVD embody this obsession.

What should worry us is the court decision to forbid debate about the situation, of commenting or of giving opinions. Everyone, everywhere comments on everything, that cannot be stopped. The discussion of an archived case cannot be forbidden.

This matter is too serious to be treated lightly. You cannot forbid like in other times (reference books burned in the University of Berlin).

Why attack this book?

Other books were written on the case, for example “The McCanns' Guilt” or “Maddie 129”. Despite the first having on its cover, the word “guilt”, it was not attacked. Why? Why this book? Why Gonçalo Amaral?

Why ask for the seizure and destruction of the book after more than a year? At a time when it was being negotiated the translation and publication of this book in English.

Maybe because what is said in this book is dangerously close to that is the truth. Perhaps because Gonçalo Amaral is a renowned investigator, and has knowledge of many things.

António Cabrita regrets the subservience of the Portuguese: who do not even interpret, but accept the interpretation of others.

The whole process is ‘sick’ of provincialism, of atrocious subservience.

It is enough to read the book to understand that what is in here is the story of an investigation, and no one can erase it.

The archiving dispatch says, at page 4647, that “it was not achieved any evidence to formulate any hypothesis...nor to state ... alive or dead, as seems more likely”

The book says nothing but: 'it is likely that ...'.

But what offends the McCanns is the archival dispatch, which says “Considering the statements… contradictions ... reconstitution… following very important information ... Jane Tanner’s proximity in relation to Gerry McCann and Jeremy Wilkins when she saw someone, carrying the child ... the situation relative to the open window, the movement of the curtains ... required a reconstruction…the fact that it is very difficult to assemble the conditions for entering the apartment ... the fact that the denials ( or lack of solidarity from the friends) to do the reconstruction were not justified ... This prevented the investigation.”

The McCanns said they were watching the apartment every half hour, but on May 1st, the children cried for over an hour.

Kate left the twins alone in the apartment to go alert the friends, the twins never woke nor moved in the midst of the turmoil.

The distance and lack of visibility of the apartment from the restaurant.
It can be concluded that if she disappeared, and if in fact, it was not possible to find her, then it was not as they told.

Is there offense in the book?
Or at the archival dispatch?

Curiously, the dispatch was omitted in the request for the injunction.

It is the McCanns perverse understanding that since the archival no one can say anything that contradicts their thesis. It is not so in a democracy. Especially, when you tell stories that rely entirely on the facts of an investigation.

I am ashamed to be Portuguese.

On June 1, 2007, a British detective interpreted Gerry McCann’s testimony about the way his daughter was sleeping ... as a commitment to convey a positive image.

António Cabrita refers to and reads the «extremely confidential» report by Lee Rainbow from the «National Policy Investigation Agency» which recommends an investigation to the couple because of contradictions in their statements, “the family is a lead that should be explored” and considers that “one should investigate not only the kidnapping but as well the death of the child”.

To obtain a decision of censorship, based on assumptions, facts were omitted from the injunction. That is why the DVD [containing the investigation case files] was shockingly omitted.

It was always given to the press the idea that Gonçalo Amaral accused the couple of killing their daughter. However, the book does not accuse the McCanns of killing their daughter. It alleges simulation of abduction without mentioning by whom, and only suspicion of concealment of a cadaver.

The book is the story of an investigation, written by whom is endorsed to write it.

If the McCanns were constituted as arguidos it is because there were suspicions against them.

Gonçalo Amaral treated the couple with kindness; the British police was tougher with them.

António Cabrita speaks of the invasion of tourism in the Algarve, a land of fishermen and makes an analogy. Any tourist is treated as English, even if it is German, etc.. He then tells a story about a yacht owner who put his head out the porthole and made a fisherman say “what do you do at 6 am with a yacht around your neck”.

The accusation of violation of the secrecy of justice (because of the delivery of the manuscript to the publisher) acknowledges after all that what is in the book is what is in the process.

On July 21, 2008, it was announced in the press that the case would be filed.

The book was launched on July, 24. From September 2007 there was no longer secrecy of justice with the amendments made to the Criminal Procedure Code, Article 86, paragraph 6.

It was not the PJ or Gonçalo Amaral who called the media to publicize the disappearance of the child, it was the couple.

Since the archival dispatch, there is no longer secrecy of justice.

So the media could reproduce the case files and Gonçalo Amaral not?

Regarding the profits of Gonçalo Amaral with the book, it is a recurrent argument.

It is alleged that Gonçalo Amaral made abyssal profits, and that he wrote the book to pay off his debts.

Did anyone come here to work for free? Profit is a normal thing, where is the harm?

What is a shame is the fund that is supposed to help find Madeleine.

Citizens who have contributed to the fund have been defrauded.

They are curtailing Gonçalo Amaral financial possibilities, to make impossible his defence.

“I refuse to be subservient.”

He says that as a Portuguese citizen he feels ashamed.

The couple never thanked the efforts of the PJ and the population of Praia da Luz.

They just came to do their reconstruction.

He ends by asking the judge to return his pride of being Portuguese.

Gonçalo Amaral’s freedom of expression was limited by those who should thank him.

Quotes from Drª. Fátima de Oliveira Esteves, defence lawyer for Guerra e Paz [War and Peace], Publishers, SA

Their action is belated, the McCanns seems to have waited to see if the book would sell or not, and if there was an English version.

The McCanns used the Portuguese courts to prevent the divulging of the book.

They made an abusive misuse of the court's decision, with the French authorities, and German (Amazon), in an attempt to close sites (mentions Carter Ruck letter sent to pamalam’s site and the English version of the book that is on the Web).

The injunction was initially rejected for lack of legal basis, and continues to have no foundation.

The parents are the ones who are responsible for the moral and physical integrity of Madeleine, not Gonçalo Amaral, Guerra & Paz, TVI nor Valentim de Carvalho Movies.

So much interest the parents have, that they have reported nothing to the process regarding the sightings. They alone have used the media; the media have been abused and manipulated by the couple, which works only for the media aspect of the case.

When there is no reason, you shoot in all directions, referring to the McCanns lawyer.

The injunction does not have justification; the book adds nothing and does not alter the facts of the investigation.

Other books were published and nothing was done against them. Guerra & Paz published the book 'The McCanns' Guilt', only the title could have produced problems but the McCanns did nothing.

The publication of this book is comprised in the freedom of the press.

The book by Gonçalo Amaral contains an opinion based on an investigation. There is persecution in parallel proceedings against Gonçalo Amaral.

This is a case of purely personal persecution; the couple publicly denigrated the good name of Gonçalo Amaral.

She ends asking the lifting of the injunction, with all the consequences arising therefrom.

Quotes from the closing arguments of TVI's defence lawyer, Dr. Miguel Coroadinha

The case continues to exist, information continues to come in - but none from the couple, despite them telling the media that their private investigation continues to gather information.

The couple does not inform the PJ of anything, they do not ask for the reopening of the investigation. They merely manage the information in the media.

TVI tried to acquire the rights to broadcast Channel Four's documentary, in order to display both sides of the case. That did not happen because the couple stopped the transmission by TVI. The film was eventually broadcast by SIC.

TV ratings are important, but they are not everything. Obviously, companies have profits as an objective, but TVI intended to shed some light on this issue, in depth.

The behaviour of the couple is very different from TVI. The applicants [McCann couple] subjected themselves to, encouraged, benefited and even influenced the media circus surrounding this case. And the police investigation turned out to be constrained by those same media.

Everything is released by the couple to the media, but nothing is sent to the process. Even the lunch hour was used to give a ‘show’, and to publicize another action against TVI. The applicants make a planned media management, but nothing is investigated.

The McCanns want the media to reproduce only what they want to see debated, and they do not want to it to exceed a certain threshold.

He concluded appealing for the personal rights of the applicants to not prevail over freedom of expression.

Quotes from the final allegations of Dr. Henrique Costa Pinto, representative of Valentim de Carvalho Movies

The applicants, strangely, are more concerned with preventing the production of evidence.

The contradictions and evidence led the investigators to consider the thesis of death above the abduction one.

An archival dispatch does not innocent anyone, that happens at the proper place, in court.

The dispatch refers the lack of cooperation, and he refers  the process at pages 4638, “the arguidos lost the chance to prove their innocence”.

The proof in this case was not done; it is only general considerations and value judgments. Where is the offense? Where is a concrete violation of the personal rights of the applicants?

There is nothing. There are no facts of concrete violation in the book or in the video.

It is not possible that the documentary offends any right of personality of the McCanns.

Nothing was pointed out, in concrete as being false, mainly in the text of the main action.

The documentary and book are distributed worldwide. If someone divulges Gonçalo Amaral’s thesis, it is the McCanns through their media approach to the case.

This media festival is forced on us by the applicants.

He concludes with an appeal for the injunction to be lifted.

original in Portuguese here: Providência Cautelar dos McCann: Citações dos Advogados de Defesa


  1. "Why ask for the seizure and destruction of the book after more than a year?"


  2. Everyone here knows that they could have stopped the book as soon as it was off the printers press if they so wished, but they didn't and why?, well one year on and the bucks had rolled in by them............what you might call a tidy sum....something to pay the lawyers fees and still have lots of lolly left over

    Annon 1.............I echo your sentiments


  3. posts 1 & 2

    I agree


  4. The McCanns did to Amaral what they did to the Express Group and other newspapers. They didn't complain even when contacted by the PCC with the offer of help. Instead, they waited and then sued!

    It's all about the money and that may prove to be their undoing! Don't forget Halligen is fighting his extradiction to the States. Who knows what a cornered man might reveal in other to save his hide!

  5. the mccanns defence laywer was a horrid witch thats all

  6. Adding to my own post at no 2, I'd better cover all avenues just in case.


  7. Hi ShuBob

    They have been......almost too quiet about Halligan..haven't they?


  8. Why haven't they sued Kevin Halligen? He genuinely (allegedly) ripped them off.

    There is more to Halligen than meets the eye is the answer. They can't sue him or he'll tell the world what is REALLY going on.

  9. 5 minutes for coffee and I'll continue the translation...

  10. 8-} In my humble opinion there is a two-fold explanation of why the Meccanos went for Amaral.

    One is that the book made a lot of money (financial) the other because Amaral was the man in charge of the investigation. In terms of global impact his opinion stands above all others.

    From the Meccanos point of view, intent as they are in the beatification of their image, Amaral's thesis must be repressed, the book burned and he destroyed (financially at least).

    Now on the subject of rights of expression versus personality, I am surprised to see this young judge (Cunha-Rodrigues) overvaluing the latter.

    Certainly one is entitled to his/her good name. The problem is the Meccanos were not considered innocent beyond a shadow of a doubt. There are questions unanswered. Their good name as a result, is not that good.

    The Meccanos only got away with it because of "political correctnes", for being what they are, having two very young children that need to be looked after, etc. and a lack of CONCLUSIVE evidence - not because there wasn't any evidence as they would like us to believe.

    If the Meccanos are entitled to a good name so much more is Amaral -whose persona has been denigrated by the Meccanos and his character assassinated by the Brit pack (media).

    Amaral's personality is the one that deserves compensation.

    What the Meccanos should have done (if they had some decency) was to write a book giving their own views of the case. Having been allowed by the Portuguese to fly home without facing a trial, this was the very least they could have done to address public concerns but... they found "legal theft" much easier.

    These two are positively evil and you cannot condescend with Evil. You crush it.

    :(( Find Justice for Goncalo Amaral!

  11. Well you horrible pair of self confessed child neglectors I fear the neglect is a cover story for something worse as I suspect many others do.

    We are not living in the dark ages and even if we were hisory teaches us banning books doesnt work.

    António Cabrita states"It was always given to the press the idea that Gonçalo Amaral accused the couple of killing their daughter. However, the book does not accuse the McCanns of killing their daughter. It alleges simulation of abduction without mentioning by whom, and only suspicion of concealment of a cadaver."

    So based on only public evidence and drawing the conlusion the abduction was a cover story (most the poulation think that and on the evidence of the dogs and other indications) the policeman in charge believes Madeleine is dead. Hes not allowed to write that because us plebs cant think for ourselves?

    Congratulations McCanns you just secured the books place in history which waits to see the next outcome in this sorry excuse for modern justice.

    By the way tell that vulture Uncle John to get a real job and if he's unable to claim benefits and try living on those not whatever it is he does for the 'fund' -blogging perhaps?

  12. The McCanns are responsible for Madeleine's disappearance, because if she was taken, they weren't in the apartment.

    They lied re the shutter, the children's sleeping habits, the distance from the apartment to the Tapas bar, the checks.

    They didn't look for Madeleine when she was discovered missing, Kate McCann admitted that in a BBC television interview.

    To put it bluntly, the McCanns have committed a crime, by failing to take care of Madeleine. They left her and the twins in a dangerous environment, all but one night of that so called family holiday. They have not only walked away from that crime, but they are untouchable and they know they are untouchable, hence the smirks by Gerry McCann.

    There is nothing in Goncalo Amaral's book that isn't in the files and out in the media, yet the Judge has found in favour of the McCanns. I suspect she has found in favour of them, because she met with Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns lawyer and those witnesses behind closed doors.

    We all know what can happen when deals are done behind closed doors.

    If what I have read is true, the Judge also let the McCanns enter the court through her chamber. Does that mean she could have spoke to them before they entered court? Could she have already told them her decision and that is why they didn't attend the court, on the day the decision was made?

    The McCanns told the media that they were very sure the Judge would find in their favour.

    Who are the McCanns, that they can commit this terrible act on their little girl and walk away "Scott free"? Why did the British Government, bend over backwards, to get them out of Portugal, when they knew full well, that they were to blame for Madeleine's disappearance?

  13. Kathybelle, the McCanns entered the court building, not the judge chambers, through the magistrates door, instead of entering the Palácio da Justiça building like any other person. Preferential and VIP status given no doubt, in the words of Dr. António Cabrita, as a result of 'an atrocious subservience'.

    ps. a complaint was made to the proper authorities.

  14. I have an idea.
    If Tapas 3 refuses to pay Murat, he can request to re-open the process, in order to show the world what really happened to him and to get his money.
    His lawyer could talk to Cabrita, to the Ocean Club's lawyer and together they could re-start the process.
    I think Mrs. Martin would be prepared to make a new statement.
    By now she must know much more than she knew in May 2007.
    And who knows, the amount of people who have something to tell has increased a lot.

    Possibly Jane Tanner will chose for an agreement.
    She would be stupid by keeping protecting the McCanns.

    And what about Russel O'Brian who, imo, stayed in 5a in order to clean it?
    Will he continue protecting the rich McCanns while he himself can lose a lot of money?
    Come on, Russel, make an agreement with Murat too.
    It will not be easy but if you are not involved in Maddie's death, save yourself.
    Justice can forgive you, exchanging your information for your freedom.
    Make a deal with Justice.
    Sometimes Justice of a country accepts deals like that.
    Think of young vulnerable children living close to the offenders.
    And remember Martin Brunt's words:
    -"Whoever took Madeleine could strike again".

  15. Thank you Joana, for putting me right.

  16. "£86,000 for each of their twins Sean and Amelie, who could hear his allegations when they start school in September": Hewlett's children also could hear allegations of Mccann team in school, but they could'nt pay Carter Ruck.

    Kate has an emotionnel break down because of Amaral : not because of the lost of Madeleine???

    Anonymous 14 "Make a deal with Justice. Sometimes Justice of a country accepts deals like that." : I think Kate lied when she said Amaral wanted to deal with her "say you did it and only 2 years in jail. I don't think it's possible with portuguese law.

  17. 16. Agree. And also what about Robert Murat's daughter and the number of anonymous children frightened by this case?

  18. After reading this, I simply do not understand why the judge did not lift the injunction. She must have been leaned on. That fact that the McCanns were able to go through the judges' entrance is an example of the subserviance Antonio Cabrita speaks of. Perhaps the Tribunal de Relação will not be so servile.

    The lawyers should really go for the McCanns' jugular vein during the appeal. They should emphasise that this is all and only about money for the deadly duo. It is not about their daughter or their good name or their mental health. It is the money they want. Didn't they distribute "begging bowls" in different resorts in the Algarve just a few days after Maddie disappeared, claiming they needed money to find their daughter when the police were doing it for free? Money was always their priority. And it still is. But the money is not for the search, it is for their own needs such as paying mortgages.

    Maybe, Antonio Cabrita and the other defendants' lawyers should file a complaint about the misuse of the first injunction because Isabel Duarte had to know about it. I definitely remember her saying in an article last fall that the injunction prevented GA from speaking in any country in the world when she knew that this was not true.

    It's good to see that none of the defendants are giving up.


  19. Excerpt from the Expresso interview, 6th Sept. 2008, ( can be read in The McCann Files):

    "Mr Amaral's behaviour is a disgrace"

    (They have not read the book that is a best-seller in Portugal. And they don't spare the author and former PJ inspector)

    Q – Former inspector Gonçalo Amaral remains convinced of your involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. Did you read 'The Truth of the Lie', the book that he wrote?

    Kate and Gerry – No.

    Kate – Why would I?

    Gerry – I won't learn anything from reading it.

    Q – It was a success in Portugal.

    Gerry – Was it? How many copies did it sell?

    Q – Approximately 200 thousand. Next week, it is released in Spain.

    Gerry – That is what can be called illicit enrichment.

    Q – Your English lawyers already have a translated copy and they are analysing it. Do you intend to sue Gonçalo Amaral?

    Gerry – At this moment we are focused on what we can do to find Madeleine and not in suing anyone.

    Kate – All that I am going to say about this – because I'm not going to waste any time on Mr Amaral – is that as a professional and as a person his behaviour has been a disgrace.

    Q – Aren't you curious to know what the book says?

    Kate – What for? It must be nothing but a load of rubbish. It is so secondary… It certainly won't help to find our daughter. My consolation is that on the cover he calls her Maddie, the name that the media have invented. We never called her anything like that.

    Q – But you do know the theory that Gonçalo Amaral defends: Madeleine accidentally died in the Ocean Club apartment and you concealed the body.

    Gerry – It really is a waste of time. And we need all the time that we can get to analyse the investigation's documents, which contain a lot of information that we didn't know about."

    They did not bother to read the book, it's all a waste of time,a load of rubbish, not important, they did not even have an idea how many copies had been sold!
    The hypocrisy of these two is unbelievable!
    Why sue a book for its contents when you never read it and therefore do not know what's in it? Oh, I see, your lawyers read it and told you it was libelous...but it is your names and the names of your children that are on the writ...did the twins read the book, did Madeleine, poor soul? Or were they briefed about the contents by C-Ruck too?
    What a shameful business this all is!

  20. #18 wrote:
    "Didn't they distribute "begging bowls" in different resorts in the Algarve just a few days after Maddie disappeared, claiming they needed money to find their daughter when the police were doing it for free?"

    Well, New Zealand wine is not cheap in Portugal, and they had the constant presence of all those members of their extended family to wine and dine...

  21. Good morning Pia, It's in the mccannfiles.com, that the fund to find Madeleine, was set up almost immediately to enable the McCanns to stay in PDL. I would like to know, how they knew Madeleine was not going to be found soon?

    The McCanns had only been in PDL for a couple of months, when they took two mortgage payments out of the fund. It was reported that they put the money back, but if they didn't have the money to pay their mortgage in the first place, they were hardly likely to be able to put this money back.

    A clause was put into the terms of the fund, which showed that the fund was able to assist the McCanns finances. Shortly before the McCanns left PDL for good, Brian Kennedy Kate McCann's uncle, stood outside their Rothley home and begged for more donations, to pay for the McCanns living expenses in PDL and their mounting bills in their Rothley home.

    Clarence Mitchell last week, revealed that the money in the fund was not only assisting the McCanns, but their wider family. How much more do the McCanns need to say and do, before someone says enough is enough and hauls them back to Portugal, to face the music?

    How many times, do the law abiding public from Portugal, the UK and other countries, need to point out the discrepancies in the McCanns and their friends stories, to the authorities, before they will listen? The authorities aren't blind, to what has happened. They are well aware that the recent case involving Goncalo Amaral's book, was not about Madeleine, but about money.

    It has been pointed out many times, that the McCanns waited until Mr Amaral had amassed a nice little nest egg, before the McCanns swooped. If they were so concerned about Madeleine, they would have demanded the book was taken off the shelf immediately, but then if they were so concerned about Madeleine, they would never have left her alone and would have looked for her as soon as they found her missing.

    If we can see all this, so can the relevent authorities, who keep turning a blind eye. Why? Who are the McCanns?

  22. 19 This should have been used in the injunction trial, as it proves the book doesnt bother them at all - quite the opposite of their claim in the court - can someone send this to Sr Amaral in case he hasnt seen it - surely it is a complete defence.

    It also shows that Gerry was only interested in the unit price and volume (i.e. the monetary value - not the impact at all!).

    I really seriously think this is a defence against their claims - it didnt have any effect on them, they say, so thats £200,000 slashed form their claim of damages at least!

  23. Why is preferential and VIP status given to this couple, I know we have asked this question a million times, and a million more times, not had any answers.

    Lets say there was a " pretendy abduction, oh hush ma mouth " and look at it from that point of view, they were wrong to leave their children alone, so in effect, the wrong was theirs from the start, yet they are the ones who scream and shout injustice, though " attack is the best form of defence " springs to mind here, yet they are treated with such reverence, and people, like Goncalo, Murat, et al, and others who strive for the truth, are castigated, belittled, jobs lost, life's ruined, yet on they go, from one attack to another, and allowed to get away with it, when is this going to stop.

    Reading the above, I cannot for the life of me understand why the injuction was not lifted, then for the life of me, I cannot understand the circus for the last nearly 3 years, and they are still free to smear and hurt, oh one day, please one day, let justice happen.

  24. Anon 19 - an interesting point, yes, how can they bring a case when they have never read the book - perhaps they are suing on the basis of the title. Didn `t ID question one of the defense team about the title and what he thought it meant?

    Also I `ve always wondered how Maddie can bring a case when she is a ward of court.


  25. Joana @ 13

    Who'd allowed them to pass through the Magistrate door?

    What does it mean? High level political interference or political corruption within the PT judiciary?

    Beggars belief that 3 years down the line they seemed still well connected and still have the clout do have everything their way?
    who's behind them or they were just incredibly lucky?

  26. The're to insist Maddie has come to no harm - what do they think the abductor took her for? Treat her like princess?

    They are not normal, in fact delusional!

  27. @ post 11, 14 and 19: EXCELLENT points.

    I have read up on here for some time now; great work Joana. So much of this is held back in the UK. I'm now thinking that this 'series of checks' is the real 'red herring' - and that there wasn't any checking at all. This is the 'red herring' KM talks about; not that open/ jemmied/ not jemmied window nonesense.

    WHY did some of their relatives/ friends state that the window had been jemmied? In my opinion, this was during phone calls BEFORE the police arrived. Once it was obvious that they COULDN'T damage the shutters when the police did turn up, they changed their story quick and said they left the patio door open.

    This is unbelievable behaviour from people who are obviously intelligent. It just isn't credible to believe they left a door unlocked with children/ possessions/ valuables inside.

    GM notes in his statement to the police that he messed with the shutters. Again, this is unbelievable behaviour from somebody who MUST have known and understood that forensically, a crime scene must NOT be disturbed. Any genuine 'Abductor' may have deposited crucial DNA on those shutters; and with GM tampering with them, it may have been destroyed.

    I believe the McCanns and their 'team' only peruse these types of forums. The 'suckers' who post on other forums 'believing' in 'Abduction' are probably rarely visited, other than to spew out their usual diatribe of 'no evidence of any harm' and all the other ludicrous assertions and to 'Put a dollar in the box-ah!' like some sort of religious convention.

    I wonder: Would it be possible for Goncalo Amaral to counter-sue over the fund? Perhaps find some wrongdoing in that fund and sue over misuse of public donations etc? In reality, our Authorities should be doing this: But the McCanns seem untouchable for some unknown reason? Some think a 'D' notice has been slapped in place. Personally, I find the Leicestershire Police and their silence interesting: Are they secretly working on this case? They seem reluctant to come out in force and defend their counterparts in the PJ. I sincerely hope things are building up in the background.

    What's so damned special about the McCanns? All I see are two self-infatuated, manipulative individuals who have no real interest in each other, let alone their children. At times, I feel sorry for GM: I think he is covering for KM and was roped into actions he didn't want to take. I believe Jeremy Wilkins picked this up in his statement. And on the 10th Feb outside the court in Lisbon, when the reporter laughed at 'abduction', GM looked very tired of it all. I think a wedge is forming between these two.

    Madeleine is the most famous missing child of all time. I don't see how Goncalo Amaral's book, based on the police files are damaging the 'search'. Why is it everybody else's 'job' to provide information to the McCanns? They haven't provided the PJ with all the information THEY requested.

    May the truth one day be known.

  28. I waa impressed with lawyer Dr Miguel Coroadinha, observations including,"The couple does not inform the PJ of anything, they do not ask for the reopening of the investigation. They merely manage the information in the media."

    This is what the UK press does not report, and it is the hiding of such opinions that has enabled this charade to be perpetuated for so long, and even to be supported by so many of the unsuspecting UK establishment. The Mcs never miss a trick, even their court lunchtime announcement about TV1 was to give the press something to print to distract from the condemning information in court.

    Reading these lawyers closing comments, makes the judges ruling to uphold an injunction seem even more bizarre, a disgrace for Portuguese justice.

    Thenkfully the wider world internet media can continue to report the facts and this will continue to seep into the conciousnesss of the UK media.

  29. Whether the McTwats like it or not, this isn't over and it's not going to go away, more and more info will come out during the libel case and the press will run with it. I believe like others that they thought Sr Amaral would settle out of court, i think this is more than about money, they did not want it printed in English and available in the UK, i am glad they are all appealing this. Justice is often slow but the truth will win in the end. They have no good name to protect, they threw that away when they left their children alone.

  30. Joana,
    Forgive me for asking what may be obvious to you but,
    as Gerry said quite clearly on the steps of the court that they were more than happy for the case to be reopened and that they would be willing to take part in a reconstruction, can a request be made to the Attorny General by someone such as yourself or Mr Amaral for the case to be reopened and the footage taken on the steps of the court then be offered as evidence of their willingness to take part in the reconstruction? The most important people to be present would be Kate and Gerry, if some of their friends refused to attend stand-ins could take their places.

  31. poster 19
    There is NO WAY they never read the book ,just another of their lies ,and the £ signs must have been spinning in their heads when they knew how many copies had sold ,think we will have a bit of that ! its all about the cash with these two

  32. thanks annon 19 did find the weasels answer interesting.

    "Q – Approximately 200 thousand. Next week, it is released in Spain.

    Gerry – That is what can be called illicit enrichment."

    A strange description especially from a supposedly grieving father as an english speaker I take that as speculation on Gerrys part of the value of the book- illicit enrichment I take to mean he talking about an earlier crime with unforseen profits.Seems he opened his mouth and said what he was thinking again. Others may disagree heres the dictionary description.

    "illicit –adjective
    not legally permitted or authorized; unlicensed; unlawful.
    disapproved of or not permitted for moral or ethical reasons."
    an act of enriching.
    the state of being enriched.
    something that enriches: the enrichments of education and travel. "

    Of course put those two together in the context of that sentence they take on a slightly different meaning.

    As any crime against Madeleine was committed by an unseen unidentified abductor or her refusing to cooperate with the police parents one thing is for sure Dr Amaral is not involved with Madeleine's disappearance; therefore how can he enrich himself by writing a book?

  33. And you will have to admit
    I'll be rich as sh*t
    I'll just sit and grin
    The money will roll right in.

    An old Fang classic, covered by Mudhoney, Nirvana and now the McCanns.


  34. :(( Hold tight! Here it comes:

    Posted in London last night (Evening Standard paper edition):

    "Three Google bosses were today convicted of violating the privacy of a boy with Down's syndrome in a ruling that could also affect websites such as YouTube and Facebook. The men received 6-months suspended sentences...Google said the ruling ....set a "dangerous precedent" (think: Meccanos book burning) and raised major questions..."This is the biggest threat to internet freedom we have seen in Europe" - said MP Tom Watson. Google (compare with Amaral's appeal) vowed to appeal, saying in a statement:

    "We are deeply troubled by this conviction, it attacks the very principles of freedom on which the internet is built".(excerpts only).

    :D Breaking News:

    The Meccanos are throwing up another advanced party to celebrate Judge Rodrigues endorsement of their plan to heist 1,2 million from Portuguese banks - to be implemented later this year.

    :(( "Ladies and Gentlemen please welcome on stage and give a round of applause to the Meccano's Jazz Trio (featuring Clarence Mitchell on drums). They are performing for us tonight their best selling hit: "Sex, Lies and No Videotape".
    The Meeeeccaaaaanooooos Jazz Triooooo! Ladies and gentlemen!


  35. @ 10
    Well said!

    * Can I ask where twitter has gone from Joana's blog?

  36. well i am hoping Mr Amaral has some evidence and a few tricks up his sleeve that he will bring out at the liable trial.I think he is a very clever man who in the end will out smart the mcconns.
    My mum always said you can get behind a thief but not a liar

  37. Hi Joana
    Can you tell me whether the Judgement of the Lisbon Judge is appealable. If Amaral can lodge an appeal how long will we have to wait. Will Amaral go straight to a European Supreme Court? How long will this take?

  38. Joana,
    Thank you so much for all your hard work with this case, and also Astro, Paulo Reis and Kazlux.
    I wish I could offer my own help with translations, etc, but I find the details repulse me so much que fico alterada! The more shít you uncover, the more angry I become, and I find it is best for my sanity to take a few steps back.
    Thank goodness there are people like you who won't let go, no matter what.

  39. The McConns are disgusting,they haven't sued the author Danny Collins who claims in his book titled Vanished that Madeleine died too,he believes that Madeleine woke up wandered out side and fell down a drain/shaft,but the difference between Collins and Amaral where the McConns are concerned,is that Collins has/is donating 15% of the monetary takings from the sale of the book,now i wonder if the McConns think Collins(by saying Madeleine is dead), has hindered the search for Madeleine,i guess not because money is their priority,i hope Goncarlo Amaral wins his appeal,the way the McConns and the British Press have slandered him is disgraceful,i hope when he is proved right about Madeleine he sues the McConns and the press.

  40. So the McCanns have been so seriously harmed by a book that they must sue the author for £1m. But their daughter they believe is in the hands of a dangerous child abductor and yet has come to no harm. But she is named as beeing harmed by a book. It really does not make any sense at all.

  41. So do we get to hear Duarte's comments too please?

  42. Eventually the chickens will come home to roost.

    What sort of a Judgment is it, that allows a temporary ban gained in secret to continue for a little while longer. This encouraged torment of Snr Goncalo Amaral and his family by a Portuguese Judge is disgraceful.

    An Englishman

  43. Astro, did you go to Guilhermino Encarnacao's funeral today?
    His death bothers me a lot.

  44. This makes for very interesting, enlightening reading which begs the question "why did the judge make the decision to ratify the injunction"? I sincerely hope that her decision was purely made purely in compliance with the strict rule of law rather than showing favouritism towards this couple or complying with the wishes of some unknown entity.

    Following on the same lines as my comments about Clarence Mitchell elsewhere on this forum, how can the Mccanns have the audacity to criticize the Portugese for showing a documentary based on Mr Amarals observations on the investigation, when they flew over to the country in order to film their own 'documentary' and distorted version of the truth without any repercussion? In my opinion this makes them more culpable than Mr Amaral, firstly for presuming to use Portugal for their 'reconstruction' and secondly for using the opportunity to cement their fabricated version of events. Is this not perverting the course of justice? How can we be expected to condone their actions on the one hand and yet vilify Mr Amaral for his actions on the other? Which is the true version of events, that presented by the case coordinator and his team of detectives along with British detectives or clan Mccann and their distorted, contradictory falsehood? I know who I prefer to believe.

    We must never forget that they and their friends refused to return to Portugal for a reconstruction because it did not suit their agenda!

  45. Unless the British Tax start thouroughly investigating this "fund",they will cary on free and happy as can be....avoiding to re open the case,looking for people to sue around.Normal circus.
    Money is their Achilles Tendon".
    Now in regard of this farce of a court case,injunction my conclusion is this judge is an other simpleton...
    I am not worried for GA.
    He won.He won: the truth is in the open and many more people do not doubt anymore but they do question an awful lot more

  46. Anon 40
    Me too!! When the first hearing was posponed owing to illness, I feared there may be some sudden deaths of major players. Maybe I'm just being paranoid, but this case has shown us that nothing is normal, and we can trust nobody.
    My condolences to his family, and I sincerely hope I'm just leaping to all sorts of crazy conclusions!

  47. 43 I aqree, and I would also point out that the McCanns as police suspects were hardly going to be objective and should never have been allowed to present their own version in an effort to clear themselves.

    It is clearly a perversion of justice and I am staggered that they were not prevented by ofcom or some other state agency from showing the 'documentary'.

    They did, however, spend an inordinate amount of airtime playacting a debate about which side of the road Gerry was talking to Wilkins on, before the 'detective' announced that it was of no consequence! If it was of no consequence, why have the debate in front of the camera?

    Was it necessary in an effort to explain why Gerry and Wilkins didnt see Tanner whne she says she saw the mysterious figure who metamorphasised into a Hewlitt look alike (even down to his striding pose in a photograph!).

    By placing Gerry and the abductor into the same scene, they eliminate Gerry as a suspect - as he couldnt be the abductor then, could he!

    Additionally the 'documentary' exposed Kate McCann's story of finding the door open. Instead of her first instinct being to check her children, incredibly, she admits to having gone to close the door. Her play acting would not have won her a BAFTA either.

    So the documentary has provided evidence which casts considerable doubt on the McCanns, instead of clearing their names as they had clearly intended. Is this a case of giving them enough rope to hang themselves with?

  48. SB, #43 said:
    "I sincerely hope that her decision was purely made purely in compliance with the strict rule of law rather than showing favouritism towards this couple or complying with the wishes of some unknown entity."

    The problem is (one among the many problems that curse the portuguese justive system), that unfortunately, judges in Portugal are given a huge slack to apply their own interpretation of the law, sentences for the same offence can differ a lot, it all depends on the judge, his/hers own beliefs, feelings, inclinations, and so on. Some judges are very strickt, others more lenient, and that many times influences the outcome of the trial and the fate of the defendant. It's kind of a lottery, really.

  49. I understand Guilhermino Encarnacao was buried in Lisbon or near Lisbon and not in Alagarve.

  50. We don't know what kind of sob story has been given to the judges behind closed doors that have made them go along with this injunction.

    I don't think the decision has anything to do with the law.

    More like a pull on the heart strings by the sound of it. Fragile, thin Kate and all that, can't eat, can't sleep, bleat, bleat, bleat, etc. We have heard it all before.

    No doubt backed up by doctor's reports. What can these judges do in the face of that?

  51. 41 can you read? Can you follow links? Duarte's allegations were already translated on this blog.

  52. Just read ttw4 mccann unravels and dont always agree with it but there is something in that story imo it will be interesting to see what becomes of murat v tanner. he was obliged to sue to clear himself. also would serve as a diversionary tactic for the main players. This case was always about disinformation and obfuscation?? cant spell...

  53. Besides attempting to argue that no libel was comitted against the McCanns, perhaps Sr Amaral's lawyer would do well to also attack the truthfulness of the McCanns if he wants to find a way to defeat them.

    Also try to raise the issue of the lies told by Clarence Mitchell, who speaks on behalf of the McCanns, and was said by the PJ 'to lie through every tooth in his head'. Mitchell was a witness, behind closed doors, on behalf of the McCanns.

    Was the judge told about this accusation by the PJ about CM? Was she aware that he had been called a liar?

    The findings of the dogs also need to be constantly referred to. These dogs that have never been wrong. The McCanns don't want them mentioned and people reminded about them. That is why the dogs are very important. People trust the dogs.

    Lying and spinning has been continued throughout the investigation, and the judge needs to be informed and examples given.

    Sadly, I really don't think the outcome of this case is going to be based on the law. If it were Sr Amaral would not have an injunction against his book in the first place.

    It is integrity and honesty that needs to be attacked to stand a chance of winning.

    May I also point out that if the McCanns are so broke up about Sr Amaral's book they sure didn't look it at the recent celebrity do they were at. Perhaps a few photographs of the McCanns would not go amiss, you know the ones, the laughing ones, and the glamorous ones of Kate McCann.

    Isable Duarte was firing in all directions.

    So should Sr Amaral's lawyer.

  54. I think that the lawyers should point out that the McCanns alledge extreme emotional distress due to Gonçalo Amaral's book, but that they did not experience any of this same distress when their daughter Maddie disappeared. They suffered no insomnia, no lack of appetite, no anxiety, etc during their stay in Praia da Luz. There are photos, videos and interviews to prove it.

    Gonçalo Amaral's book is supposed to be harmful to their daughter, but not the paedophile abductor who supposedly is holding her captive.

    I do not think it would be too difficult to tear them apart during questioning in a libel trial.

    I had to laugh at the interview when Gerry found out how well GA's book was selling. You could almost see the dollar signs flashing in his eyeballs: money, money, money.


  55. Poster @54 ,nor were they "harmful"to their daughter when they chose to abandon her night after night,it is due to their sheer neglect that Maddie isnt here today ,but did they even get charged with child neglect? no they didnt ,its disgraceful

  56. Anonymous 25, you asked: «Who'd allowed them to pass through the Magistrate door?» That is something that should be asked to the person who asked a favor in, in order to allow the McCann couple to enter the court through that door - perhaps their lawyer asked for that 'favor' so the McCann couple didn't have to face the demonstrators who were there supporting Gonçalo Amaral and Freedom of Speech - however we were very few and even kind to the McCanns, we even offered the couple a reminder of our liberation day, a bunch of red carnations. Is this terribly important, the fact that they entered through the magistrates door instead of entering the court building? No, it is not - but evidences a preferential treatment that should not be given to anyone, Justice should be blind, that is, there can't be two different sets of measures, one for whomever has to attend the court and another for the McCann couple.

    You also asked: «What does it mean? High level political interference or political corruption within the PT judiciary?»

    In my opinion means that someone asked for a favor so the couple could be protected from the few demonstrators outside the court, not interference but more subservience. A wrong permission allowed on the first days of the court and changed on the last days after a complaint was made.

  57. 37 you asked:« Can you tell me whether the Judgement of the Lisbon Judge is appealable. If Amaral can lodge an appeal how long will we have to wait. Will Amaral go straight to a European Supreme Court? How long will this take?»

    At present time, Mr Amaral is appealing the McCanns injunction to the Appeals Court - TVI, Guerra e Paz and Valentim de Carvalho as well. It is impossible to know the outcome of that appeal, and whether further appeals, to even higher instances, will be needed. As you probably know, Mr Amaral has vowed to take this case up to the European Court of Human Rights, if necessary.

    There are, furthermore, two main actions filed against him by the McCanns. When those will be tried, what the outcome will be, and whether new appeals will be needed - your guess is as good as mine.

  58. 35 you asked «Can I ask where twitter has gone from Joana's blog?» I removed the twitter gadget from the blog because it has become too spammy with various old articles and unrelated cases being posted with the '#mccann' hashtag.

  59. Joana: So, during the last days of the hearings, the McCanns were not allowed to use the magistrates' entrance?

  60. Joana, Do you know if Mr Amaral intends to counter sue? There is plenty of material to sue about, for example, how is Mrs McCann allowed to say about Mr Amaral 'As a proffessional and as a person he is a disgrace'. Going on Mr McCanns logic, that is an unproven thesis , not a fact. Can she prove the fact that he is a disgrace? No, it is merely her opininon. According to Gerry if she can't prove it she should not be saying it. Mr Amaral is not allowed to voice an opinion, why should she. I am sre there are many examples of libel, the McCanns could find themselves dragged through the courts for years. They will not win every case, their luck will run out. They have more to lose than Mr Amaral- he has already been vilified and lost his position, he will keep fighting to get it all back. I beleieve he will win in the end. It is such a shame though that this will mean the case is no longer about a small child and what happened to her. John Corner (Whatever happened to him?) once warned the McCanns that the story would soon be about them and not Madeleine, they can't say they were not warned but continued down this path. They are now so far along it there is no turning back.

  61. Anonymous @ 53,

    You say "Sadly, I really don't think the outcome of this case is going to be based on the law. If it where Mr Amaral would not have an injunction against his book in the first place".........

    I don't know anything about Portugese law so forgive me if I appear foolish, or more to the point drifting into the realms of fantasy. I have recently made a suggestion elsewhere on this blog with regard to this subject that I consider to be feasible, if not probable. Could it be possible that this judge is working in conjunction with Mr Amaral? The recent hearing caused a great deal of embarrassment to the Mccanns, showing them up to be exactly how the public perceive them to be. Through their arrogance they nonchantly appeared within the court room which turned out to be a complete mistake from their point of view! The hearing produced undeniably adverse information against them so in that respect alone it was a victory for Mr Amaral. So, if we follow the decision of the judge to continue the book ban etc, Mr Amaral has made it perfectly clear that he intends to appeal against the decision and if that fails to refer the matter to the court of human rights. The judge therefore knew Mr Amarals intentions before hand but still carried the ban forth for an undisclosed period.

    This brings me to the main point! - The action taken by the judge in this instance could be a deliberate move to assist Mr Amaral, knowing full well that the case will be taken further and thus introduce other opportunities to disseminate the Mccanns subterfuge and to produce before a court of law substantiated evidence against them. Whether or not they will be in attendance remains to be seen but with their level of audacity I should not be at all surprised - they think they have been victorious with this decision so they would revel in another opportunity to gloat!.

    Within the foreseeable future, it seems unlikely that they will be brought before a criminal court so to expose them in this way would be a worthy alternative if for no other reason it will cause them further embarrassment and the more obstacles put in the way of their subterfuge the more likely they are to eventually hang themselves. The big problem with this couple is their obvious complaisance and arrogance which I feel will eventually lead them into big trouble!

    Perhaps this is all wishful thinking - I hope not!

  62. SB...61

    Here Here!!! I agree. To get the Mccanns into a court of law whichever way - has been a work of art... All and tremendous credit to Mr Amaral. Because of their sheer audacity and greed they think they have won 'round one' which is as you say subterfuge to make sure they don't drop charges and avoid going back to court for 'round two'. When, Finally given enough rope they will hang themselves!

  63. Annon 61 and 62

    Not of course forgetting that the more exposure they have, the more information about them, their very odd behaviour and the greedy law suits is spread to the general populas...... and the more that happens.......the less money is donated

  64. Anonymous @ 62

    Sometimes this case brings on a degree of insanity therefore I forget to mention certain points.

    Yes, this is all down to the dexterity of Mr Amaral. Clan Mccann obviously truly believed Mr Amaral and the Portugese police to be the 'bungling cops' as described so eloquently by the British tabloid press - aided and condoned by Mitchell! Just shows you, you should never underestimate anybody unless you know exactly who you are dealing with.

    In this respect and all others, I rather think they bit off more than they can chew!

  65. I doubt the judge is working with Sr Amaral. Far from it.

    If she was working according to the law she would have found in favour of his argument to remove the injunction.

    More likely it was what was said behind closed doors by the McCanns and their witnesses that has swayed the decision in their favour. What exactly did that bleat of theirs amount to??

    If non of the McCanns' arguments and witnesses heard behind closed doors were allowed to be challenged in court, then it is a disgrace masquerading as justice.

    How much in favour of one side can so called justice in Portugal get?

    Sr Amaral's witnesses were allowed to be questioned and lambasted by that loud mouthed lawyer of the McCanns. So why didn't Sr Amaral's lawyer get the opportunity to do the same with the McCanns' witnesses?

    And in open court too.

    Sr. Amaral had nothing to hide, yet the decision still came out for the McCanns.

    Just what was said behind closed doors that they don't want heard?

    Why did the judge allow that?

    Was that yet another concession to the McCanns, with Clarence Mitchell (a liar, according to the PJ), giving evidence as a witness on their behalf?

    Why wasn't this 'LIAR' Clarence Mitchell allowed to be challenged about what he had to say!

  66. SB 61...

    I know exactly what you mean!! So many twists and turns it's hard to keep up let alone make sense of it all!! One minute you think that's it the truth is about to come out justice will be done - then, yet again complete silence from the press.

    Anon 63... Quite so! It has shown the Mccanns in their true light the money grabbing liars that they are for all to see!

    Anon 65... Irrespective of the reasons Why the recent appeal of the temporary injunction failed - I'm sure Amaral was secretly not too disappointed because he's looking at the bigger picture. If this is what it will take to bring about justice for Madeleine so be it! Look at all the positives Mr Amaral achieved in this fist court hearing - already there's open talk all over the media about a re-opening of the case. Which would have seemed impossible a month or so ago! If the Mcccanns had lost the hearing they would have most probably dropt charges and pulled out. They can't do that now, they know we are all watching their every move. They have no choice since they bought this action against Mr Amaral. They have to take this case to it's conclusion. Well done Mr Amaral!!

    Anon 62

  67. Anonymous @ 65,

    "More likely it was what was said behind closed doors by the Mccanns and their witnesses that has swayed the decision in their favour".

    Do we know for certain that anything was said 'behind closed doors'?
    What witnesses? The Mccanns do not have any witnesses, excepting their group of friends who are a major part of this conspiracy of silence - as far as I am aware they were not in Portugal during this hearing, except one who flew out to support K. Mccann after her husband did a runner!

    Clarence Mitchell may be all things to all mankind but he has absolutely no jurisdiction as a witness for the Mccanns, except perhaps as a character witness. He is incapable of maintaining his own credibility so I fail to see how any judge could take him seriously.

    Apart from the action itself brought against Mr Amaral by the Mccanns I don't think they have any 'argument' to put forward behind closed doors or otherwise. Their only argument throughout this farce is the claimed abduction, the lack of evidence to implicate them and the fact that there is no evidence to suggest that their child has come to any harm!!!!

    If I am wrong in my supposition perhaps you could confirm your comments with a positive source of information that I have obviously missed.

  68. Verdict on Goncalo Amarals Book and DVD - extracts from Mccann statement.

    By upholding the injunction against Goncalo Amaral's book and DVD, the judge has rightly agreed that there has been significant, ongoing damage to the search for our beloved daughter. We are grateful to the judge for accepting that this injustice must not continue.

    Do you have documented confirmation of this interpretation from the court, or are you misconstruing words to suit your own agenda?

    The court case has demonstrated, once again, that there is no evidence that Madeleine has come to any harm. . The motives of those who have tried to convince the world that Madeleine is dead, and who've disgracefully and falsely tried to implicate us in her disappearance, need to be seriously questioned.

    If we follow your line of argument it follows likewise that there is no evidence to suggest that Madeleine has NOT come to any harm. The fact alone that she has been taken from her family, be she dead or alive, can only be considered 'harm' of the worst imaginable kind. Again following your logic, those who have tried to convince the world that she is ALIVE and has come to NO harm must also be seriously questioned. I have seen no evidence to suggest that anyone has FALSELY tried to implicate you, but there is an undeniable need to further investigate indications of your involvement - would you not agree?

    Our primary focus has always been, and always will be, to find Madeleine through our own best investigative efforts. It is still incumbent upon the British and Portuguese authorities to ensure that every credible lead has been investigated.

    Your own investigative efforts appear to have restricted to the employment of private detectives at great cost to benefactors. Would it not serve your best interest for official law enforcement officers, i.e. the police to carry out the best investigative procedures, at nil cost to you or fund donators?

    We must and will keep looking for Madeleine and those responsible for her abduction.

    NEVER before have you spoken a such a profound statement of fact!

  69. S.B at 67

    If you kept up to speed and actually read what had been written previously you would not be asking these questions.

    I don't see why I should have to go back and trawl through all the postings for you.

    I have not pulled this information out of the air so do yourself a favour and go read.

    It has been said that Clarence Mitchell was a witness for the McCanns and their hearing was behind closed doors. No way do I question this.

  70. Anonymous @ 69....

    With respect, I intended absolutely no offence to you so there is no need for you to be acrimonious, nor am I asking you to 'trawl' through postings for me. I was merely asking you to provide a link to verify your comments as if they are factual as I said "I have obviously missed something".

    I have no knowledge of Portugese law or language so it is possible that I have misunderstood or misinterpreted something that relates to the court proceedings. Nor can I remember everything I have read so if you put the my comments into perspective there is no necessity for you to be obtuse!

    Otherwise, I do not retract my post!

  71. FATIMA PORTUGAL. Twice now I have seen this in a dream. The statue of The Virgin Mary...AND THE NAME FATIMA, PORTUGAL, The religous connection of Fatima fits with Kate's sudden religous behaviour. FATIMA, PORTUGAL ...I just know THIS IS WHERE THE DETECTIVES SHOULD BE INVESTIGATING.
    Joana could you post the above on all your blogs, please. It will get people thinking and maybe something positive can come of it.

  72. The McCanns really are the most horrible money-grabbing, narcissistic couple imaginable. It has always been about them, never to do with Madeleine. It makes you wonder what the purpose of the trip to Portugal was in the first place. Gerry being his charming self on the airport bus telling everyone to 'f*** off - I'm not here to enjoy myself'. I am beginning to suspect that Madeleine's disappearance has deeply sinister undertones. The whole sordid affair has been a scandal from beginning to end. Perversion of justice hardly begins to describe the deeply depraved series of events in which the disappearance of an innocent child can line so many vulture's pockets.

    At least Amaral and his team saw through the McMuppet show. I am actually ashamed to be British when I see this hideous couple playing out this macabre media and legal circus. McMitchell, McMurdoch - all happy to stick their hands into the trough. Disgusting.

  73. You can actually find several law firms who can provide legal assistance to the individuals who are in charged of criminal cases. Best Lawyers USA can help the people who are facing such problems by defending their clients effectively in the court.


Powered by Blogger.