Re: GONCALO AMARAL WINS APPEAL! - HE MAY SUE THE McCANNS

chirpyinsect Sun 29 May 2016, 9:02 pm

Châtelaine wrote:There was no abductor ...

In the fairytale Chatelaine. I am trying to explain why they might deny seeing Jane. They wanted us all to believe in an abductor so why would they deny seeing her? You would expect them to back each other ( any guilty parties anyway) but C12 gave a good reason why Gerry didn't. I also think that might be why Jez didn't too.

Andrew Sun 29 May 2016, 11:13 pm

canada12 wrote:
chirpyinsect wrote:
canada12 wrote:
froggy wrote:Maybe Jane or Gerry was supposed to have done something at that time, but couldn't because of Jez being there.

I believe Gerry was supposed to jemmy the shutters around that time, but couldn't because Jez showed up.

And then when they concocted the Tannerman story, of course Jez wouldn't have seen Jane, because she wasn't there. So Gerry also said that he didn't see Jane.

If Jez had said that he didn't see Jane, and Gerry had said that he did, then Gerry would have had to have lied further, making the overall story more complex. He would have had to have answered questions, for instance, about what exactly Jane did, where she was standing, etc. Easier just to say he didn't see her.

If Jez is an innocent bystander then yes, you could be right C12. But due to the way his story changed about Rasta Man, the fact he and Bridget went back to sleep when there was a missing child, Bridget's sickly piece in the Guardian and the fact he was a film maker and she worked on Crimewatch makes me doubt they were.
Perhaps Jez didn't say he saw Jane for the same reasons you think Gerry might have denied it. But if one of them saw Jane then the other should have seen the abductor so another reason to deny all knowledge.

That's my other theory about this, Chirpy - and so I agree with you too... if Jez was NOT an innocent bystandier, did he arrange to meet Gerry outside - and Gerry was supposed to jemmy the window and pass Madeleine's body to Jez, who would have wheeled it away in the buggy... did Jez actually do that, but Gerry was somehow unable to jemmy the window?

Or was Gerry also unable to pass Madeleine's body to Jez for some reason - so nothing went according to plan - thus resulting in Smithman and Tannerman?

I think your first theory is pretty much bang on the money in my opinion.

Can't see how the JW being 'in on it' actually works.... If he was then he would of seen Jane. And he if really was in on it then he would of backed Jane up to say he saw the 'phantom abductor' as well... (of course Gerry could never of come out and said he saw it).

At the very least he would of collaborated timings etc. He didn't do any of that. Even a discrepancy of which side of the road.

Certainly don't think that after he had an earlier chat with Gerry, he agreed to wait outside with his own child's buggy, then further wait for a deceased Madeleine to be put in it so he could wheel it off somewhere.

Not a chance, Imo.

chirpyinsect Mon 30 May 2016, 6:52 am

Andrew said
"Can't see how the JW being 'in on it' actually works.... If he was then he would of seen Jane. And he if really was in on it then he would of backed Jane up to say he saw the 'phantom abductor' as well... (of course Gerry could never of come out and said he saw it).

At the very least he would of collaborated timings etc. He didn't do any of that. Even a discrepancy of which side of the road."

For the very reason that C12 thinks Gerry didn't confirm he saw Jane, neither did Jez but I do agree with you that he wasn't waiting to take the body away. I think he was there to provide Gerry with an alibi.
Jane was never there, so if you bear that in mind, both Gerry and Jez would have to conjure up a non existant memory. Not easy to get that right so better say nothing rather than make a mistake. Jez may well have agreed to say he spoke to Gerry ( and we only have their word for it that this happened) but wouldn't agree to lie about seeing Jane.
Jane was slotted in after the fact as a distancing mechanism because the Smiths saw Gerry. Doesn't actually matter at this point whether he was carrying M or a decoy. He was seen near 10pm. The only way they could diffuse that situation was to invent Tannerman. No Jane for Jez to see.
Do you not find his story a bit strange? Even the difference of opinion on which side they stood could be contrived. Gerry realised it had to be over the road to make any sense, Jez confused by that thinks not but here's a thought.
We see the scene in the Mockumentary. I don't think that would have been the first take or at least it would have been discussed before the cameras rolled. Leaving it in but Gerry getting his own way gives the impression of authenticity, not too " rehearsed"
Jez provided a map with a cross which showed where they stood. They didn't expect the files to be published or to be so well studied.

Dee Coy Mon 30 May 2016, 10:09 am

I think Jes Wilkins was an unwelcome addition to the cast on 3 May.

I also believe he was subsequently pressured into conforming to a certain line. I believe this because of the differences in the times of the encounter between his first statement of 7 May 2007 and his Rog of 8 April 2008.

His Rogatory suggests the encounter took place between 15 and 45 minutes after he left his apartment. Who is he trying to kid? You know if you are walking a quarter of an hour or three quarters of an hour - they are significantly different timescales, and walking aimlessly trying to get your child to drop off to sleep is a boring activity. He would KNOW if it was only 15 minutes or 45 before he met GM.

His first statement is open-ended. He states he left the flat between 8.15 and 8.30, but gives no specific time for the meeting. Reading his description of where he went and knowing the geographical size of the tiny environment, I reckon he was walking no more than 15 minutes before he met Gerry. This puts the encounter at 8.30 earliest, 8.45 latest.

No good for the official line, those timings. So he was leant on to push the meeting to around half an hour later in his Rog. This he does, but not wholeheartedly, as you can see from his disclaimer that he cannot give an exact time.

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic36.html

Just my opinion and interpretation.

chirpyinsect Mon 30 May 2016, 11:01 am

Good points. Didn't Bridget say he didn't like the methods of the Macs team in their approach to him?

dogs don't lie Mon 30 May 2016, 11:10 am

Nor that waitress who km kept texting...

Heisenburg Sun 04 Sep 2016, 12:25 pm

Just seen this referred to.

http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/milhoes-dos-mccann-reduzidos-a-72-mil-euros

Which translates to.

The financial capacity of Kate and Gerry McCann in the search for her daughter Maddie, who disappeared nine years ago in Praia da Luz, Algarve, is dwindling. The British couple even faces the possibility of soon be left with only 72,000 euros in the background 'Find Maddie', set up to finance the private investigation.

Read more at: http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/milhoes-dos-mccann-reduzidos-a-72-mil-euros
Since the second half of 2007, when the fund 'Find Maddie' was created, that Kate and Gerry have received nearly five million in donations, as revealed by the English press. The travel expenses and payment of detectives companies (such as Spanish Metodo 3) caused a depletion in the back. Late last year, the account had a balance of 890,000 euros, which is currently encrypt only 572,000 euros. In brief, there is the possibility that the bank balance undergo further reduction. The former PJ coordinator Gonçalo Amaral, who has this year seen the Lisbon Relationship give you reason in the process that he was moved by the McCanns, freeing him to pay 500,000 euros in damages, sued the couple for defamation. The amount that the former investigator asks is also half a million euros. If Gonçalo Amaral skirt winner, is expected to Kate and Gerry availing the background 'Find Maddie' to pay, leaving them with a balance of 72 thousand euros. For now, Maddie's parents try to reduce costs by eliminating the spokesman, Clarence Mitchell. The investigation of the Metropolitan Police, which received in April 113,000 euros from the British government, should also deplete the budget in October.

Read more at: http://www.cmjornal.pt/portugal/detalhe/milhoes-dos-mccann-reduzidos-a-72-mil-euros

bluebell Sun 04 Sep 2016, 12:38 pm

I would like to hear more about this, just in case something got lost in translation. Smile

Andrew Sun 04 Sep 2016, 10:30 pm

He (G.A) always said he was going to countersue didn't he. And rightly bloody so.

Poe Tue 06 Sep 2016, 12:16 pm

It reads to me that the McCanns are trying to spin the cost of losing the case to make it look like the court ordered legal fees etc. that they have to pay, rounded up to the nearest half-million, is Mr Amaral demanding compensation.

The sensible thing for Mr Amaral to do at this point would be to wait until the McCanns have exhausted all possible appeals before deciding whether to turn the tables or walk away with his head held high. IMO.

**candyfloss** Fri 30 Dec 2016, 8:27 pm

I don't know if this is here but just come across it and don't remember reading before Article from last April....

Madeleine McCann: Amaral v The McCanns was an accident waiting to happen

by Anorak | 20th, April 2016

GONCALO AMARAL WINS APPEAL! - HE MAY SUE THE McCANNS - Page 23 Maddie-mccann-tabloids

Madeleine McCann – Anorak’s at-a-glance guide to press coverage of Madeleine McCann.

Goncalo Amaral is back in the news. The former Portuguese detective has won an appeal against his libel defeat to Madeleine McCann’s parents, Kate and Gerry McCann. The court order for him to pay the McCanns £395,000 in damages in April 2015 has been overturned. The Press pick up the story of Amaral and his 2008 book, The Truth of the Lie, in which he accuses the McCanns of “faking Madeleine’s abduction to cover up her accidental death in their apartment” (Star).

Daily Star (front page): “Maddie: Cop Wains Right To Accuse Parents”

“A banned book which accuse Madeleine’s McCanns parents of covering up her death will go on sale across Europe after a shock ruling by three appal court judge in Portugal yesterday,” writes Jerry Lawton. No shock here, at least not to Anorak readers. Back in 2010, AGW told you:

The media awaits the verdict of McCanns Versus Goncalo Amaral. Much depends on it. The McCanns have taken a risk in going against the former police officer in a foreign country. While it can be argued – as they have done – that any publicity for their missing daughter is good because it keeps her name alive in the voracious media.
But it does not keep us looking for the child. It just allows us to gawp at them, the distraught parents of a missing innocent:
YOU know when an accident is going to happen. They even have corporate speak phrases for it these days: “Risk Assessment” is one.
You know when a playing kitten is going to fall from the arm of the chair, you know when the child is going trip and fall, no matter how quick you are to try and get there.
Sometimes you see disasters being created and thundering, in silent-movie slowed down train-wreck style, toward you or others and there’s little you can do other than stand and watch horror-struck by the enormity of it all.
You know the accident’s about to happen and there is nothing you can do but perhaps wonder why you knew?
It has nothing to do with sixth senses, it is because the most powerful computer known to man, your brain, has gathered in all the previous experiences you have weighed in the balance and made a predictive analysis.
That is what is so strange about the current and past behaviour of the parents of the missing child Madeleine McCann.
They have started a court action defending their reputations in Lisbon because the former chief investigating officer Goncalo Amara, is accusing them of being involved in Madeleine’s disappearance. They have also started an action seeking a money settlement for the Portuguese equivalent of libel and in addition are taking on a Lisbon-based documentary production unit for reporting on the detective’s objected to book and the case.
Lisbon was never going to be a perfect spot for the McCann’s to start legal sparring and this week they were dealt what can only be termed a body-blow when the detective’s lawyers produced evidence the UK’s top criminal profiler has said there were “contradictions” in their statements and both should be treated as possible “homicide” suspects.
No arguments, no amount of reshuffling or clarifications can change that and the facts can not be forced back into the can of worms which the McCann parents themselves have allowed to be opened.
Damage Limitation
The background PR work after the Lisbon shocker has been impressive. The McCann lawyers strode from the courtroom and counter-claimed there were tens, hundreds or more sightings of the missing girl. The UK’s Red Tops dutifully followed the thread and reported the lawyer’s statement. My experience and training gave the brain the predictive text that this looked like a smoke screen, a damage limitation. The missing fact was all these sightings came after the McCann’s themselves had been released from Arguido, suspect, status. The case was archived. It was a cold, leading nowhere, case in the eyes of the top legal and police professionals in Portugal…the responsible authorities have no clues and have suspended work on the case.
It has already been said in these columns, taking on the Portuguese legal system was going to be a minefield but there is one question:
Who is taking the responsibility for the Risk Assessment for this McCann course of action?
Whoever it was needs to be replaced or kept out of the limelight.
Mass public opinion is turning. The McCanns are slipping lower and lower down the celebs’ to be seen with list, certainly no-longer A list and slightly embarrassing to be around according to some whispers.
The McCanns are innocent. No charges have been brought against anyone…except the Chief Investigating Police Officer, Goncalo Amaral.
Wake up!
A second question would have to be: Who on earth took the Risk Assessment decision Amaral was a buffoon an incompetent, bungling, Jacques Clouseau Pink Panther type of police officer?
Come on, wake up! Police officers do not rise through the ranks to positions of authority without being good thief-takers and being very good at spotting the wrongness of something.
Amaral is tougher than the baying section of Britain’s media has portrayed.
The McCanns are becoming battered and worn by this. Just look at their recent photographs. The child is still missing, lost, gone. Arguments still rage over the rightness or wrongness of it all.
Something is judgementally wrong in the Risk Assessments taken here. This week has been hugely damaging to the McCann’s and their cause. The information given this week in the Lisbon court can no longer be ignored or forgotten. It will have a high cost and one of the costs are potential new helpers and donations to the campaign of finding the child.

No shock.

Daily Star Page 7: “Maddie SHOCK”

The Portuguese appeal court judges “ordered” the McCanns to pay “full legal fees of the three-year hearing”. The McCanns have “instructed lawyers to appeal against the new ruling”. But the judges call Amaral’s book a “legitimate exercise in the right to express an opinion”. Portugal was once a police state. Free speech is enshrined. The lawyers’ appeal looked doomed.

We then get a rapid-fire vox pop. The McCanns deny Amaral’s claims. A “pal” says they are “seething”. Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell says, “It is a matter for Kate and Gerry’s lawyers to deal with .”

The Sun (front page): “MADDIE: Agony for McCanns as cop wins libel case”

Page 4: “Hunt Hit By Cash Crisis – Maddie £430k Libel Loss Blow – Tec wins against McCanns”

The payment “deprives the Maddie Fund o9f cash to keep the nine-year search going”. Private cash. But not public purse monies. That continues to be spent on the search.

Daily Mirror (Page 7): “Bungling cop in libel triumph over the McCanns”

Is every policeman who fails to solve a case a bungler?

And then we get to the money. The cash Amaral was ordered to pay the McCanns never left his account. All payments – £360,000 and £76,000 in interest – was held until the appeal judges had ruled. The money never came out of the Maddie Fund, did it? It was never in the Fund.

Daily Express (Page : “McCanns ‘seething’ as Maddy detective overturns book ruling”

We finally hear from the McCanns’ legal aide. Their Portuguese lawyer, Isable Duarte, “said she was ‘disappointed’ but not surprised” at the ruling.

Daily Mail (Page 30): “McCanns suffer £395k libel loss”

Page 30. The story continues – but less and less people are listening to it.

http://www.anorak.co.uk/429939/tabloids/madeleine-mccann-amaral-v-the-mccanns-was-an-accident-waiting-to-happen.html/

Mimi Fri 30 Dec 2016, 8:31 pm

You got me going there for a minute Candyfloss. Thought it was today`s news.

**candyfloss** Fri 30 Dec 2016, 8:38 pm

Mimi wrote:You got me going there for a minute Candyfloss. Thought it was today`s news.

Haha sorry Mimi, Embarassed

have enlarged date to make it clear it was from April.

Helenmeg Sun 22 Jan 2017, 5:18 pm

Last night I actually read a translated version of 'The Truth of The Lie'.. I dont think I'd really sat down and read it properly before - just little snippets.

I just CANNOT comprehend why this case is still going on ... well... I can - it is totally down to political interference. It has to be. The english police
were totally convinced that the body had been concealed and had died in the apartment... and yet... the Mc Canns were allowed home. This case must never
be forgotten or left in an archived status. I'm so glad we are here, playing a role in that.

Sponsored content