LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Go down

LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  candyfloss on Wed 21 Jan 2015, 11:43 pm

With grateful thanks to Pamalam and Astro for their hard work.


http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/93jan15/Astro_21_01_2015.htm




Lisbon trial session 21 January 2015
HOMEPAGENEWS REPORTS INDEXRELATED ARTICLESNEWS JANUARY 2015
Original Source: Astro 21 January 2015
With thanks to Maddie case files
 
1. Gonçalo Amaral made the statements that are attributed to him under item Z)*?
*(item Z is the Correio da Manhã interview)
Proved
 
2. The cover price of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” in Portugal is
€ 13.80, including VAT? 

It is proved that the editor set the selling price at 13,33 euro, including VAT.
 
 
3. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the book “Maddie, A Verdade da Mentira” an amount that is not less than € 621.000,00?
 
 
4. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of editions in foreign languages of the book an amount that is not less than € 498.750,00?
 
(Items 3&4) It is proved that Gonçalo Amaral earned 342.111,86 euro from the sales of the book in the years 2008 and 2009. This information is based on data from the Portuguese Revenue Agency.
 
 
5. The book was sold in Brazil by defendant “Guerra e Paz, Editores, S.A.”? 
Not proved.
 
 
6. The DVD has a cover price of € 6,00? 
Proved that it was sold for 6,95 euro with newspaper Correio daManhã.
 
 
7. Defendant Gonçalo Amaral has earned from the sale of the DVD an amount that is not less than € 112.500,00? 
Proved that he earned 40.000 euro from DVD sales in 2008. Based on info from the Revenue Service.
 
 
8. The DVD that is mentioned under AN) has been edited and the edited copies have been sold by defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”? 
Proved.
 
 
9. Defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”? has already made the DVD, in an English version, available for immediate delivery via internet order? 
Not proved.
 
 
10. At least two million and two hundred thousand people have watched the programme that was broadcast on 13.4.2009? 
Proved.
 
 
11. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, the Polícia Judiciária stopped collecting information and investigating the disappearance of Madeleine MacCann? 
Not proved.
 
 
12. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, authors Kate MacCann and Gerald MacCann are completely destroyed, from a moral, social, ethical, sentimental, family point of view, much beyond the pain that their daughter’s absence causes them? 
Not proved.
 
 
13. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, authors Kate MacCann and Gerald MacCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear? 
Proved. 
The judge adds that this psychological state is pre-existent to the book, the documentary and the interview and was not caused by the book. Nonetheless, it cannot be reasonable to believe that the book, the documentary and the interview had no effect on the couple, i.e. It had an effect but that is perfectly normal.
 
 
14. Authors Kate MacCann and Gerald MacCann feel a deep shame and an indescribable ill-being because they are considered, by most people who know the theories of defendant Gonçalo Amaral, as having responsibility in the death of their daughter, being so cowardly that they have hidden her cadaver, simulating abduction, all of this to avoid criminal accusations?
 
Proved that the couple felt badly about being considered responsible over the hiding of their daughter's body and simulating her abduction by those who believe in Mr Amaral's thesis.
 
The judge states that it is not possible to determine what most people who have read or seen Mr Amaral's thesis actually think.
She adds that the plaintiffs failed to prove shame, even with Kate stating it was not shame that she felt.
The judge once more believes it is expectable that the plaintiffs would feel badly about being considered to be responsible for hiding the body and staging an abduction - not, the judge stresses, about being responsible for their daughter's death, as is commonly, and mistakenly, believed.
 
 
15. Authors Kate MacCann and Gerald MacCann live under enormous daily pressure due to the need to keep their younger children away from the knowledge of defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s opinions about their moral integrity?
 
Proved that the couple feels the need to keep their younger children from finding out about said thesis.
 
This fact also derives from common experience and was corroborated by David Trickey's testimony.
 
 
16. Namely because of defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s statements in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, author Kate MacCann is immerged in a deep and serious depression, which has already made her state publicly “I wish I was in a coma, to relieve the pain”? 
Not proved.
 
 
17. Sean and Amelie MacCann will soon become aware of the conclusions that are mentioned in J), because they will go to school?
 

It is proved that Sean and Amelie started school in August of 2010 and have not learned about Mr Amaral's thesis yet.
 
 
21. The criminal inquiry was reopened due to the appearance of new evidence? 
Not proved.
 
 
22. The attention of the media and of people in general diminished when defendant Gonçalo Amaral’s book was published? 
Not proved. 
 
 
24. The so-called “Maddie Case” has been profoundly treated within the Portuguese and foreign society, whether by the media, or through books, like those authored by Paulo Pereira Cristóvão, Manuel Catarino and Hernâni Carvalho? 
Proved.
 
 
25. The so-called “Maddie Case” was commented upon by Dr. Francisco Moita Flores, former inspector, writer, criminalist and commentator, in various media? 
Proved.
 
 
27. Are the facts that are reported by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book and in the aforementioned interviews, like he himself writes and said, facts that were established during the inquiry? 
 
 
28. Does the documentary only contain facts that are also in the inquiry files? 
(Both articles) It is proved that the facts in the book and in the documentary, concerning the investigation, are mostly facts that took place in the investigation and are documented as such.
 
The judge does note that some of the facts in the book are not complete, and some facts that are in the book are not in the case files, including Jane Tanner's "informal" recognition of Robert Murat.
 
 
36. The documentary was reproduced, and even subtitled in the English language, by third parties that published it on the internet, without permission and against the will of the defendant “V.C. – Valentim de Carvalho – Filmes, Audiovisuais, S.A.”? 
Proved.


Last edited by candyfloss on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 2:38 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________
  
   

Sometimes you will never know the true value of a moment until it becomes a memory.......... Dr Seuss
avatar
candyfloss
Admin

Posts : 12099
Join date : 2014-08-18
Age : 66

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Cristobell on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 10:39 am

Well I'm completely baffled, so will wait until it has been translated a wee bit more before commenting, but I don't think the McCanns will be walking away with £1m+.  I'm waiting to see what the news reports in Portugal say.
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 672
Join date : 2014-08-26

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Mimi on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 10:53 am

Does the Judge realise that it has never been proved that the McCanns are innocent. I think Judge Tugendhat said something along these lines during TB`s trial.

It seems this Judge is proceeding on the assumption that the McCanns version of Maddie`s disappearance is true and that they had nothing to do with her disappearance. This has never been proved.

I don`t see how any conclusions can be made until a court decides what actually happened to Maddie.
avatar
Mimi

Posts : 3524
Join date : 2014-09-01

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Guest on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 11:06 am

Astro is a star! that is such a neat list. Quite a few of the 'not proved' are not helpful for TM due to the explanation given by the Judge.

Yes, glass is over half full.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Guest on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 11:20 am

Most of the "PROVED"s aren't that helpful to them, either. For example, "PROVED" that the McCanns have suffered distress BUT it was from before the book came out!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  bluebell on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 12:33 pm


What actually happens now ? Do all the lawyers pore over the judge's decisions and then argue points of law ?

I would expect the McC's team to try to find wriggle room for some sort of damages due somewhere, but do both

sides then meet in court again to come to some agreement?

I am so confused about the progress of this and who determines who is at fault, and another thing - are costs awarded in

Portugal as in the UK ?

I would be so grateful if anyone can explain. confused

_________________
The pure and simple truth is rarely pure, and never simple.        Oscar Wilde
avatar
bluebell

Posts : 1677
Join date : 2014-09-01
Age : 101
Location : S/W UK

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Châtelaine on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 12:40 pm

As far as I know, there's no history in Portugal of millions paid out in court cases.
avatar
Châtelaine

Posts : 2497
Join date : 2014-08-27
Location : France

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  chirpyinsect on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 12:42 pm

A visitor from Leicester was just looking at Pamalam`s site. Hello Gerry! Maybe you should phone Brunt and tell him what "not proved" means.

_________________
Everything I write is my own opinion. Nothing stated as fact.
avatar
chirpyinsect

Posts : 4796
Join date : 2014-10-18

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  dantezebu on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 1:13 pm

The remaining points are now up on: http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic24300-10.html
avatar
dantezebu

Posts : 171
Join date : 2014-08-29

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Guest on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 1:28 pm

1. GA said some stuff in a CDM interview.
2. His book sold for €13.33 not €13.80 as claimed by the McCanns.
3 & 4. He earned €342k for the book, not €1119k as claimed by the McCanns.
5. No evidence that the book was ever sold in Brazil, as claimed.
6. DVD was sold with the paper for €6.95 - DVD cost €6, the paper cost €0,95.
7. GA earned €40k from the DVD not €112k as claimed.
8. VC Filmes sold the DVD.
9. No proof that VC Filmes have made a version in English, as claimed.
10. 2,200,000 people watched the documentary.
11. No proof that GAs documentaries or interviews stopped people looking.
12.  No proof that GAs documentaries or interviews "destroyed" the McCanns.
13. GAs documentaries and interviews  may have caused anguish etc to the McCanns, but that would be considered normal as the psychological effects were already there anyway, i.e. before the book came out.
14.  The McCanns might feel bad about GAs accusations, but again, that would be considered normal.  Also the Judge is not a mind reader and has no way of knowing what most people think.
15.  The McCanns feel that they need to keep the twins away from GAs theses.
16. No proof that GA is responsible for Kate's "depression".
17. No proof that the twins have heard any of GAs theses.
18. 63 thousand DVDs were not sold.
19. GA retired on 1/7/08.
20. The case was archived on 22/6/08.21.
21. No proof that any "new evidence" led to the reopening of the case.
22. No proof that GA's book stopped anyone being interested in the case.
23. There were several different selling agreements for the book.
24. Other people have publicly commented about the case.
25. Dr Flores commented on it as well.
26 not addressed
27, 28 - the book mainly contains facts from the official police investigation, but it omits some facts from the police investigation and it adds other things that weren't in the official files.
29. Establishes who owns VC Filmes.
30. VC Filmes give selling rights to VC Multimedia.
31. Only 1 edition of the documentary has been put on DVD.
32. Permission was given for it to be distributed with CDM newspaper.
33. Same as 32, more or less.
34. Classification process of the DVD was paid for by Presslivre.
35. The DVD was distributed with a paper in April 2009.

36. People nicked and subtitled the documentary and put it on the internet without VC's permission.

Nope, I STILL can't see this "McCann victory".  If anyone does see it, would they be so kind as to point it oout?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  dantezebu on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 2:16 pm

When a couple claim that the loss of their daughter was devastating but a book made that devastation worse there is a huge glaring flaw in their argument. They do not understand the meaning of devastation. Their partial devastation had now become complete. How ridiculous. They were expecting the judge to quantify their devastation of their initial loss as not being a complete devastation, just a percentage of it and yet leaving room for more devastation.

And yet the emotions that they demonstrated didn't even relate to devastation, only anger, arrogance and revenge.

The judge appears to have come to the only logical conclusions in all the points.
I agree Resistor there is no victory to be found in this for the McCann's at all.
avatar
dantezebu

Posts : 171
Join date : 2014-08-29

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Guest on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 3:49 pm

Mimi wrote:Does the Judge realise that it has never been proved that the McCanns are innocent.  I think Judge Tugendhat said something along these lines during TB`s trial.

It seems this Judge is proceeding on the assumption that the McCanns version of Maddie`s disappearance is true and that they had nothing to do with her disappearance.  This has never been proved.

I don`t see how any conclusions can be made until a court decides what actually happened to Maddie.

I disagree.

Afaik the judge must accept that until there is evidence to the contrary, the McCanns in law are presumed not to have been involved in their daughter's disappearance. The law presumes innocence until guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. It is not up to the Mcs to prove their innocence, but to a prosecuting lawyer to prove their guilt.

The issue here is not criminality, but whether the McCanns claims for damages have been proven, regarding the negative effects on them in varied respects caused by the book written by GA. Was his book the catalyst for harm, did it exacerbate any pre-existing harm or was there no harm at all caused?
It is common sense to say that they were distressed prior to the book's publication, because of events in Portugal. They must also have been distressed when made arguidos, that distress could have been due to guilt or innocence of course. Did GA's book do any more to harm them and the search? One could argue yes, because GA was producing the thesis that was shelved due to lack of evidence of criminality by the pair, but the judge seems to have concluded on another point that the writing was a factual account of the files and investigation . Maybe the points raised should be put in context along with others. She has decided that they have not proved that they suffer the distress that their [weak imo] witnesses spoke about. It seems she is saying that it is impossible to establish where the distress caused by the disappearance ends and that caused by GA's book starts. She has dismissed reputational damage, fear and a host of other claims. The McCann witnesses did not help their case here, being partial and personally involved with the couple.

Is it this giving you cause for concern?

The judge states that it is not possible to determine what most people who have read or seen Mr Amaral's thesis actually think.
She adds that the plaintiffs failed to prove shame, even with Kate stating it was not shame that she felt.

The judge once more believes it is expectable that the plaintiffs would feel badly about being considered to be responsible for hiding the body and staging an abduction - not, the judge stresses, about being responsible for their daughter's death, as is commonly, and mistakenly, believed.
 


The fact is that the PJ did not close their investigation, the search was undamaged and that their arguido status was dropped and as far as we know they are still not suspects at the moment... so GA's book seems not to have had the effects on them or the search which have been claimed.
Her use of the word mistaken does not mean that she believes the McCanns version of events over the thesis of a staged abduction. She is distancing Amaral from the idea that the Mcs were responsible for Maddie's death, because that is a common theory for some researching the case, but Amaral is not responsible for that, His thesis was an accident, concealed by the couple by staging an abduction, which is in the files as part of the process.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Guest on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 4:03 pm

Here is something that you all might find mildly amusing.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  candyfloss on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 4:11 pm

lol!

This one is better......


Petronella Lazerelli @PetsyLz 2 hrs2 hours ago
Gerry #mccann is not the only one who can use Insert Chart on an Excel spreadsheet.



_________________
  
   

Sometimes you will never know the true value of a moment until it becomes a memory.......... Dr Seuss
avatar
candyfloss
Admin

Posts : 12099
Join date : 2014-08-18
Age : 66

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Guest on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 4:24 pm

Russian Doll wrote:
Mimi wrote:Does the Judge realise that it has never been proved that the McCanns are innocent.  I think Judge Tugendhat said something along these lines during TB`s trial.

It seems this Judge is proceeding on the assumption that the McCanns version of Maddie`s disappearance is true and that they had nothing to do with her disappearance.  This has never been proved.

I don`t see how any conclusions can be made until a court decides what actually happened to Maddie.

I disagree.

Afaik the judge must accept that until there is evidence to the contrary, the McCanns in law are presumed not to have been involved in their daughter's disappearance. The law presumes innocence until guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. It is not up to the Mcs to prove their innocence, but to a prosecuting lawyer to prove their guilt.

The issue here is not criminality, but whether the McCanns claims for damages have been proven, regarding the negative effects on them in varied respects caused by the book written by GA. Was his book the catalyst for harm, did it exacerbate any pre-existing harm or was there no harm at all caused?
It is common sense to say that they were distressed prior to the book's publication, because of events in Portugal. They must also have been distressed when made arguidos, that distress could have been due to guilt or innocence of course. Did GA's book do any more to harm them and the search? One could argue yes, because GA was producing the thesis that was shelved due to lack of evidence of criminality by the pair, but the judge seems to have concluded on another point that the writing was a factual account of the files and investigation . Maybe the points raised should be put in context along with others. She has decided that they have not proved that they suffer the distress that their [weak imo] witnesses spoke about. It seems she is saying that it is impossible to establish where the distress caused by the disappearance ends and that caused by GA's book starts. She has dismissed reputational damage, fear and a host of other claims. The McCann witnesses did not help their case here, being partial and personally involved with the couple.

Is it this giving you cause for concern?

The judge states that it is not possible to determine what most people who have read or seen Mr Amaral's thesis actually think.
She adds that the plaintiffs failed to prove shame, even with Kate stating it was not shame that she felt.

The judge once more believes it is expectable that the plaintiffs would feel badly about being considered to be responsible for hiding the body and staging an abduction - not, the judge stresses, about being responsible for their daughter's death, as is commonly, and mistakenly, believed.
 


The fact is that the PJ did not close their investigation, the search was undamaged and that their arguido status was dropped and as far as we know they are still not suspects at the moment... so GA's book seems not to have had the effects on them or the search which have been claimed.
Her use of the word mistaken does not mean that she believes the McCanns version of events over the thesis of a staged abduction. She is distancing Amaral from the idea that the Mcs were responsible for Maddie's death, because that is a common theory for some researching the case, but Amaral is not responsible for that, His thesis was an accident, concealed by the couple by staging an abduction, which is in the files as part of the process.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Thanks Russiandoll for making that clearer.  I was in two minds as to the word "mistakenly" in that sentence and how to interpret it, but you've made it crystal clear now.  Phew![/quote]

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Châtelaine on Thu 22 Jan 2015, 4:51 pm

Amaral is going to win. Or rather not to loose. And get his life back. IMO, of course.
avatar
Châtelaine

Posts : 2497
Join date : 2014-08-27
Location : France

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Ixta on Sun 25 Jan 2015, 9:58 am

What happened to the requirement to prove they could represent Madeleine in court as she is a ward of court? Or is that also not proved?
avatar
Ixta

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-11-07

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Guest on Sun 25 Jan 2015, 10:03 am

Ixta wrote:What happened to the requirement to prove they could represent Madeleine in court as she is a ward of court? Or is that also not proved?

They have 30 days from the 21st just gone.

This report was written and authorised by Anne Guedes to be hosted by Pamalam

Original Source: Anne Guedes

In a civil court, the facts that were gathered and considered as evidence by the judge, within the limits fixed for a trial, are normally not publicised, whereas in a penal court they have to be stated publicly.

This morning's session, which was no hearing, happened to be open to the public (reduced to 3 persons, me included, no journalist) just because, due the restructure of the juridical system that occurred end of August, the judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro has been nominated to another section and doesn't belong to this civil court anymore, having therefore no office in the Tribunal Civil de Lisboa. So she needed a court room to release to the lawyers the document she elaborated.

Only four lawyers were present :

For the claimants, Dr Ricardo Afonso (representing Dra Isabel Duarte)

For the defence, Dr Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, Dra Fatima de Oliveira Esteves, Dr Henrique Costa Pinto. Dr Miguel Coroadinha (TVI) was absent.



The Judge asked the lawyers to read the document in case they needed clarification on some points or had any objection, suggesting it wasn't definitive. In fact it is on this document that the lawyers who solicited it at the last hearing (all of them) will build their "allegations of law", i.e indicate how they would interpret the law on these topics. The judge left the court room, leaving the lawyers at their reading.

And so it happened.

A quarter of an hour later, the judge entered the room (through the witnesses', clerk's and lawyers' entrance and not through the judge's special entrance) and asked for observations.

The only lawyer who intervened was Dr Henrique Costa Pinto (Valentim de Carvalho Multimedia).


He found some contradiction concerning the green light given for the DVD’s production. He underlined that he was mentioning this issue informally. The judge explained that she took various sources into account and that commercializing is one thing and selling another. Therefore she thought it wasn't contradictory, but admitted that without the context it might let one think it was.


The other issue was related to the WOC issue. From this day on, the claimants have 30 days to hand over the London Court's authorization to have Madeleine McCann represented by her parents in this trial. Meanwhile the trial is suspended. After the 30 days delay, which of course can happen to be shorter, the lawyers will have ten days to hand in their "allegations of law".




When the judge left the room after distributing the document to the lawyers, as if the benches for the public were empty, looking literally through the three members of the public, I entered the “sacred” area and asked the clerk if I could read the document. The clerk looked embarrassed, hesitated but then said “no”, adding, as a justification, that it was “informal”.
As there was no journalist neither in the court room nor outside (only photographers expecting the McCanns like Vladimir and Estragon wait for Godot), as none of the defense lawyers would have misled the Press Agency Lusa to their disadvantage, the reader will need no hypothetico-deductive method to find out who grossly disinformed an institution that still plays a decisive part in the international circulation of the news.



This note is obviously my last contribution to the trial reports, as the sentence will be notified to each lawyer by mail.

Analyzing the terms of the sentence is another chapter.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Ixta on Sun 25 Jan 2015, 3:10 pm

Thanks for the clarification on that.
avatar
Ixta

Posts : 22
Join date : 2014-11-07

Back to top Go down

Re: LIBEL/DAMAGES TRIAL SESSION 21 January 2015 - Judge ruling

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum