GONCALO AMARAL WINS APPEAL! - HE MAY SUE THE McCANNS

This was on twitter:

UK Justice Forum ‏@Justice_forum  29m29 minutes ago
Revealed: The Sunday Sun drops #Amaral "Dirty Secret' story over libel fears. #McCann

Had a quick look on that forum to see if anymore news on it, but couldn't find anything.

https://twitter.com/Justice_forum?lang=en-gb

04.25.2016I agree with popcorn  Andrew. I think if you could scratch them the majority of papers believe the same old crap. In the early days there was factual reporting ...that has yet to return. We constantly put Clarence into this "pink" one clown place where he is seen as a joke. I think he is far from a joke ( wont go into detail as Iam not out to be ridiculed at the moment!)I believe his roots are much more sinister and being treated as a bungling buffoon is just where he likes to be!

Sorry this a bit off topic....felt strongly!

Bampots wrote:04.25.2016I agree with popcorn  Andrew. I think if you could scratch them the majority of papers believe the same old crap. In the early days there was factual reporting ...that has yet to return. We constantly put Clarence into this "pink" one clown place where he is seen as a joke. I think he is far from a joke ( wont go into detail as Iam not out to be ridiculed at the moment!)I believe his roots are much more sinister and being treated as a bungling buffoon is just where he likes to be!

Sorry this a bit off topic....felt strongly!

Hiya - but after the 'early days factual' stuff, then team McCann were lawyered up to the hilt. So that all fizzled out because of the 'fear factor'. Fear of being sued (which some did) so the stance if you like was turned around.

Popcorn said "Increasingly, as I watch this case I think it's a way of the media saying to the powers that be 'Look - we can still control public opinion"

In regards to this case, then they can no longer can control public opinion. See comment section in the Sun. IMO, they have deliberately allowed that to stand. As I said, that would never of happened before (after the stance changed).

The general public are literally sick to death of them.

I agree that the 'Clarence' thing is strange. He seems a bit of a loner who is in it up to his neck with the McFarce, but still has the power and influence to put 'things' in the paper.

It does seem strange that he is not told to 'do one', I must admit.

I still think that all the papers will turn big time when the green light is on. At the moment we are on amber.

But that's just my take.

Would elaborate more but late (as usual) for a meeting.

candyfloss wrote:Thanks to all who bring us links, but I think we have to agree that Andrew works especially hard to bring us latest news

And it's a 'Cheers' from me Andrew.

I was sure I had posted this earlier this morning.

I think more of the public are suspicious and fed up with the Macs....but a lot don't care have no opinion or feel sorry for them even after all this time. I hope you,are right Andrew....i just cannot see them rolling over and dying!

Well looks like all the comments in the Sun article have now been pulled and whooshed.

Doesn't show up any more for me when I just had a look anyway.

Andrew wrote:Well looks like all the comments in the Sun article have now been pulled and whooshed.

Doesn't show up any more for me when I just had a look anyway.

Still on the sun facebook thingy so I'm told.

Heisenburg wrote:

Andrew wrote:Well looks like all the comments in the Sun article have now been pulled and whooshed.

Doesn't show up any more for me when I just had a look anyway.

Still on the sun facebook thingy so I'm told.

Not looked at that for a few days. The original article had about 330 something comments when last looked around lunchtime I think it was.

But all gone now it seems.

Well it was good whilst it lasted.

I have been reading the translation of the appeal on this link. Won't copy it in full as it is very long. It is a bit difficult to wade through due to the language used but there were several interesting points which I will quote.

http://pjga.blogspot.com.
The writing and the publication of the book , as well as the documentary and the above mentioned interview, are within the scope of the constitutionally guaranteed rights by the European Convention of Human Rights and the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, namely its articles 37 and 38.

– Such Rights, that under no circumstances, can be repealed by invoking any special reserve duty attributed to the appealing, just because he was an Inspector of the Judiciary Police , as it is proffered in the appealed decision.

– The respective content does not offend any of the fundamental rights of the Applicants (AA), being it in the reserve of their private life, within the scope and for the effects of articles 80 and 81 of the Civil Code, since it was actually the applicants that voluntarily limited/repealed that right by participating in multiple interviews and interventions in the media.

– Also , with regards to their good name and image, that the applicants by having disseminated the case in the public sphere giving it worldwide notoriety and, hence , opening all doors to all opinions, including those that are contrary to theirs.


The court should note that all the witnesses are close to the AA, (family member, phycologist and lawyer) and that in their statements they clearly tried to minimise the theories predating the book and the documentary and, at the same time, naturally tried to give special emphasis to the impact of the book and DVD on the internet.

– This is especially so in relation to the witness Michael Terence Wright, who was in charge of assisting the Applicants (AA) in the dissemination of campaigns and monitoring/surveillance of some sites as well as of information present on the internet, after the disappearance of the minor Madeleine Beth McCann.

– This witness , during the process of summary and critical analysis of the main witness statements , was discredited (and correctly ) by the court since he brought hand written notes with him to court , where one can read, in an almost perfect chronological order , the topics for the replies to the questions that were put to him in the final audience.

– On the contrary, this witness’ declarations against the defendant (r) now appealing, must be specially considered by the court ,when the witness, quite displeased, accepts, that prior to the book and the documentary ,the theories adverse to the McCann’s were already in circulation.

____________________________________________

In the concrete case , after the injunction that determined part of the measures then granted , it had already been decided that : “The Injunction ordering the apprehension of the book must not be granted, the book has as its main motivation the defence of the personal honour of the police inspector in charge of the investigation of a certain crime, in which he convey his interpretation of the indicia gathered in that investigation and made public by the competent authorities , being that the petitioners voluntarily limited their right to intimacy by profusely disseminating the respective case via the media” – AC TRL, 14/10/2010,

___________________________________________________________________

The judgement also contains extracts from the archiving report which will be there for all time, for all to see, that the PJ considered the McCanns to be quilty of the following

From everything that was exposed from the AUTOS, we conclude that:

A) The minor Madeleine McCann died in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort, on the night of May 3rd of 2007;

B) It was performed a simulation of kidnapping;

C) In order to avoid the death [alarm] of the minor before 22H00, it was created a situation of the children's surveillance by the McCann while the children slept;

D) Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the occultation of the cadaver of their child Madeleine McCann;

E) At this moment, there seems that there aren't strong indicia that the death of the minor didn't happen due to a tragic accident;

F) From what was obtained until now, everything points out that the McCann, as self-defence, didn't want to deliver immediately and voluntarily the cadaver, existing a strong possibility that the same was transported from the initial place of deposition. This situation is susceptible to raise questions about the circumstances under which the death of the minor occurred.


So in the opinion of the 3 judges tge McCanns stuffed themselves by their media campaign and Michael Wright blew it for them in court.
Morning Michael. Well done.

And it's a good morning from me as well to @ Mickey Monitor.

Mr Wright will not be best pleased with this will he.......



This is especially so in relation to the witness Michael Terence Wright, who was in charge of assisting the Applicants (AA) in the dissemination of campaigns and monitoring/surveillance of some sites as well as of information present on the internet, after the disappearance of the minor Madeleine Beth McCann.

– This witness , during the process of summary and critical analysis of the main witness statements , was discredited (and correctly ) by the court since he brought hand written notes with him to court , where one can read, in an almost perfect chronological order , the topics for the replies to the questions that were put to him in the final audience.

– On the contrary, this witness’ declarations against the defendant (r) now appealing, must be specially considered by the court ,when the witness, quite displeased, accepts, that prior to the book and the documentary ,the theories adverse to the McCann’s were already in circulation.



Ooops


Ooops again changed for green ink.

Lol that's really funny. A witness so well prepared, that he even made the other side's legal argument.

All of the McCann witnesses played blinders, particularly Wright, Angus McBride and Alan Pike as they all based their testimonies in court as to why the McCanns were damaged by Goncalo's book on their reading and interpretation of the available on-line English translations.

You know, the one's Goncalo says are unauthorised and illegal. I.e., the ones he didn't write.

No chance of this being taken seriously by the Supreme Portuguese court,surely!

  End on Wed May 04, 2016 11:22 am


Not sure where to put this, so I'm putting it here.

Just read the update on the Maddie Fund site from K&G in response to Dr. Amaral's win. They say they will appeal to the Supreme Court. Does anyone know for sure if this has happened yet?...or is there a time period to do so? Thanks

costello on Wed May 04, 2016 11:36 am

End wrote:Not sure where to put this, so I'm putting it here.

Just read the update on the Maddie Fund site from K&G in response to Dr. Amaral's win. They say they will appeal to the Supreme Court. Does anyone know for sure if this has happened yet?...or is there a time period to do so? Thanks

I read they had 30 days to appeal the verdict, there must only be a couple of weeks left, if that.

Just moved last two posts here as on wrong thread.

IMO just 8 days to go ... IF it's 30 "working" days, it's a bit longer.

I read elsewhere that the deadline is the end of May / beginning of June

Châtelaine wrote:IMO just 8 days to go ... IF it's 30 "working" days, it's a bit longer.

Yes from what I have read it is 'working' days Chatelaine. The twitter news is we should know if the appeal has been accepted/rejected around the 1st of June. I can't see the appeal being accepted to
be honest.

Copied and pasted from Textusa:

Textusa6 May 2016, 10:57:00
Anonymous 6 May 2016, 10:06:00,

You're getting the appeals mixed up!

Timeline of Mr Amaral's appeal to the Appeal's Court:

- sentence, April 29;
- 1 day notification, April 30;
- filing of appeal, June 15 - 30 working days;
- decision to accept appeal, Sept 3 but in reality decision taken on or before Jul 10 - 25 days;
- notification of appeal, 1 week (the judiciary holidays interrupted this time)

What we suggest will be the timeline of the McCann appeal to he Supreme Justice Court:

- sentence, April 19;
- 1 day notification, April 20;
- filing of appeal, June 1 - 30 working days;
- decision to accept appeal, Sept 3 but in reality decision taken on or before Jul 27 - 26 days;
- notification of appeal, 1 week (the judiciary holidays interrupted this time) Jul 4.

These timelines can be changed, as nothing stops the McCanns from deciding to submit before the 30 working days, as well as the time to decide to accept (or as we expect to refuse) be shorter.

Also, note we haven't considered the hypothesis of the McCanns not appealing. If they miss the June 01 deadline then on that date the procedures to transit in judgement the sentence of April 19 will begin and the UK can finally act as there won't be a possibility to change anything anymore.

We haven't considered that possibility because we believe an appeal will be filed, even if everyone knows beforehand that it's pointless.

Our conviction is based on the fact that the archival hypothesis demands an appeal has to be filed, to be on record that it was filed as this hypothesis, archival, assumes the innocence of the McCanns.

We think things have gone too far for archival, especially with Mr Amaral being resolute in having the British know officially his side of the story and all the signs of lack of support the McCanns are getting.

However, it continues to be an hypothesis. A very stupid one but one that we shouldn't discard.

Unlike the patsy one, the 3 burglar whitewashing, which is just absurd.

costello wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:IMO just 8 days to go ... IF it's 30 "working" days, it's a bit longer.

Yes from what I have read it is 'working' days Chatelaine. The twitter news is we should know if the appeal has been accepted/rejected around the 1st of June. I can't see the appeal being accepted to
be honest.

***
So do I, costello.

Just seen this link on twitter,it seems to relate to criminal appeals's but surely civil would be the same?

How? Who to? What time limits apply?
By submitting an appeal to the Appeal Court (Tribunal da Relação) or to the Supreme Court. The time limit to submit an appeal is 20 days.

https://e-justice.europa.eu/content_rights_of_defendants_in_criminal_proceedings_-169-PT-maximize-en.do?clang=en&idSubpage=4

20 working days is 4 weeks = 1 calendar month

froggy wrote:20 working days is 4 weeks = 1 calendar month

19th April til 19th May?

Heisenburg wrote:

froggy wrote:20 working days is 4 weeks = 1 calendar month

19th April til 19th May?

I read on fb today we should know if the McCann's are successful in their appeal application by 1st June. However on twitter people are tweeting
Textusa's date of 4th July. Who know's Heisenberg.