BREAKING NEWS - Goncalo loses libel/damages trial and must pay damages

What an odd quote from Mitchell..

Mr Mitchell added: “Kate and Gerry remain very grateful for the continuing support from the Government and the Metropolitan Police but realise it cannot last. In a common sense and practical move they have kept some money back from the Find Madeleine Fund in case it is needed.”

Kept some money back....... eh?  What was the rest used for then if they kept some back for finding her? 

Mr Mitchell added: “Kate and Gerry remain very grateful for the continuing support from the Government and the Metropolitan Police but realise it cannot last. In a common sense and practical move they have kept some money back from the Find Madeleine Fund in case it is needed.”

In other words..please just close the case, we really don't mind and we can carry on doing our own thing, with sightings from Torremolinos to Timbuktoo and a host of brand new dodgy characters, that we will ask the public to look for, whilst never actually getting anywhere because we know that Madeleine is not there!

IMO they know that Grange is in the right track and they are terrified..

What about this for factual reporting and spelling of Madeleine twice  from the Leicester Mercury then..

Madeleine went missing in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz in 2007 while her parents were dining with friends at a nearby restaurant.
Gerry found Madeline was missing when he returned to the family's holiday apartment to check on Madeline and the couple's two young twins.

Read more: http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/Gerry-Kate-McCann-welcome-libel-payout-book/story-26410928-detail/story.html/

“The investigation will come to an end sooner or later and Kate and Gerry will use the official Madeleine fund and any awards made to them to continue their own search.’’


They seem very sure that SY and the PJ are not going to be finding Madeleine.
Ummmm.

It was announced right back when the fund was set up, wasn't it, that the money would be used to continue the search after the police had given up.

So yes, we have to ask how they knew that she wasn't going to be found.

Pat has made a lot of fair points but she is taking an empirical stance - that is, she is judging this case on her own personal knowledge and experience, and of course 'the state' she refers to is the USA. Whilst I agree one authoritarian state is much like another, there are enormous cultural and ethical differences. I prefer the much more open US system btw, but such is life.

The case of missing Madeleine McCann however is unique. Yes, I know there are other cases with many similar traits - the Jonbenet Ramsey case being a good example of rich, influential parents avoiding charges and redirecting the blame elsewhere. However, the parents of Madeleine became rich and influential, they are nouveau riche, the kind of people (secretly) despised by the landed gentry, those who have worked their socks off for their own fortunes, and of course the snobs. Welcomed into the inner circles at the height of their fame, their arguido status and bizarre behaviour has turned them into social pariahs. And lets call a spade a spade, they just aren't likeable. John and Patsy Ramsey were far more sophisticated and eloquent than Gerry and Kate, and they never had to rely on fundraising to keep their campaign going. From a psychopathy perspective, the UK version are hindered by their excessive love of the limelight - they simply can't keep their traps shut, and they can't help using interviews and photo shoots to gloat at their enemies. They are arrogant and reckless, it is only a matter of time before it all catches up with them.

As for Operation Grange, there appears to be no will to prosecute this case, it has dragged on far too long. However, the idea that 38 homicide detectives have spent 3 or is it 4 years covering up the death of a child is pretty hard to accept. I know it has been explained, they are all assigned different tasks etc, but they are human beings and they walk, talk and interact. In order for this to be a cover up, each and every one of those detectives must swear to some sort of lifetime pact, that they will never reveal their true agenda. I am not even going to bother listing all those higher up the chain of command, obviously they too must be in on it. But the ordinary cops? Seriously?

Presumably Pat hadn't seen the latest statement from Clarence Mitchell before writing her blog. He certainly seems to be thinking along the same lines, or has he made a slip up? The investigation will come to an end apparently, and the Fund will continue the Search? Does he know something we don't?

Pat is right of course in many of the things she says, and right now I feel torn. Operation Grange opened with a fanfare, and Scotland Yard have, I think, been transparent in telling the public the costs. If Clarence is correct and the investigation will end - they will have to produce a report on their findings, and simply saying neither the parents or their friends are suspects, just won't cut the mustard. They have spent around £10m, and they are a public service - they are accountable. OK, they may not be accountable to the extent of publishing their files online, but they will have to tell us the result, and how they got to it.

In comparing the Madeleine case to others in the US, Pat is overlooking the fact that an official investigation into this child's disappearance has been opened (top off worm can) and assigned 38 homicide detectives to work on this case and nothing else. That never happened with the Jonbenet case for example, it went cold, apart from the work of private detectives hired by the Ramseys to find a likely suspect (yes that too rings bells).

Operation Grange is an official investigation, sanctioned by the UK Government and carried out by public service employees of the UK Government, and contrary to popular belief, we still live in a democracy where questions can and should be asked in the Houses of Parliament. We are probably going about this all wrong, we should be tackling them individually and getting them to ask the right questions.

However, having said that, we haven't really got a clue what is going on. Operation Grange may be playing a very cool and calculated game, who knows. I have always been uncomfortable with Bennett sending off reams of bumf to Operation Grange and continually pestering them for answers to questions that are none of his bleddy business, the man's a menace.

Looking at the bigger picture, the case may well be dragging on because so many people are involved and perhaps cases must be made against each individual before any pouncing can begin. That is one possibility. The case of Jonbenet never went to trial, because the Prosecution simply wasn't convinced they would have enough evidence for a conviction, and if that happened the Ramseys would walk, and they could never put them on trial again.

If Scotland Yard have to abandon the investigation because they don't have enough evidence, it still won't be the end of it.

Oops, apologies, started here and finished in a blog.

Or, as I suggested a few pages back, 30-odd homicide detectives would surely want to find a body for their considerable efforts. Nobody else appears to be in danger from whoever or whatever caused M's disappearance, so there's surely no rush to make a case against anybody without that one crucial piece of evidence (the discovery of which would have all the pieces of the jigsaw falling into place in matter of days because it places the perpetrator at the scene of the hiding place)

Mr Mitchell added: “Kate and Gerry remain very grateful for the continuing support from the Government and the Metropolitan Police but realise it cannot last

Hey, what about the continuing support from the public? Or have you not got any of that now?
IMO

Has the amount of damages been confirmed by a reliable source yet?

Judging by the McCanns' statement on their website and Jerry Lawson's article, the McCanns have yet again misjudged the situation and are desperately scrabbling about for a way of showing that they are not just a pair of money grubbing vultures (I apologise for being so unfair to real vultures)

As for OG, I still can't see a whitewash (unless it's going to be the most embarrassingly inept cover-up in history - an abducted child becomes a murder investigation becomes a nothing to see here, move along please ) but, for the sake of argument, let's assume I'm wrong and it is a whitewash. The McCanns are never going to shake the suspicion that they were involved somehow. At best they are self-confessed child neglectors and people will always shun them although there is always the possibility that a random stranger will confront them. They'll wake each day wondering whether today will be the day that someone has an attack of conscience and reveals all. The glamorous lifestyle they craved just isn't going to happen. And then there is us - we won't let Madeleine be forgotten. Almost 20 years after JonBenet Ramsay was killed, and despite her parents being formally exonerated, there are plenty of forums dedicated to discussing the case and her parents' involvment. Whitewashing won't get rid of us, if anything it will create a groundswell of anger making us more vocal, and we are the ones the McCanns want to silence.

Poe wrote:Has the amount of damages been confirmed by a reliable source yet?

Judging by the McCanns' statement on their website and Jerry Lawson's article, the McCanns have yet again misjudged the situation and are desperately scrabbling about for a way of showing that they are not just a pair of money grubbing vultures (I apologise for being so unfair to real vultures)

As for OG, I still can't see a whitewash (unless it's going to be the most embarrassingly inept cover-up in history - an abducted child becomes a murder investigation becomes a nothing to see here, move along please  ) but, for the sake of argument, let's assume I'm wrong and it is a whitewash. The McCanns are never going to shake the suspicion that they were involved somehow. At best they are self-confessed child neglectors and people will always shun them although there is always the possibility that a random stranger will confront them. They'll wake each day wondering whether today will be the day that someone has an attack of conscience and reveals all. The glamorous lifestyle they craved just isn't going to happen. And then there is us - we won't let Madeleine be forgotten. Almost 20 years after JonBenet Ramsay was killed, and despite her parents being formally exonerated, there are plenty of forums dedicated to discussing the case and her parents' involvment. Whitewashing won't get rid of us, if anything it will create a groundswell of anger making us more vocal, and we are the ones the McCanns want to silence.

Unfortunately, it isn't just the McCanns that want us silenced. There is an undercurrent to the Star article posted earlier, and there will be in others like it that will follow, which is to brand anyone who doesn't follow the officially dispensed line a "vile sick troll". Cameron does the same thing over people who question the official line over 9/11 or 7/7 - he calls them "non-violent extremists" and says that they must be dealt with.

The truth is that the presentation of the McCann story is part of an ongoing campaign - to paint any media that isn't mainstream as a malign influence that needs to be silenced, and those that consume it as "sickos", "haters" and "vile" . In this sense, the MSM are not protecting the McCanns, although it sometimes feels like it. They are protecting their own power as a monopoly of information for the masses, information that can be twisted and manufactured to suit their own ends. The McCann story is just a means to an end.

There is a also corrupt symbiosis between press and state, and governments now use the power of the press to control the message that the masses hear. If I remember correctly, in the late eighties or early nineties, this was coined as "spin" . Unfortunately, due to the emergence of new media via the internet, and message boards like this one, the power to spin is waning and neither the press nor the powers that be are happy about it. It is this loss of power that lead to the false vilification and hounding to death of Brenda Leyland, which, I'm convinced, originated with Sky with the full knowledge and agreement of the government.

The McCanns want us silenced to prevent analysis of their contradictory and false statements and because they see it as a block to their complete exoneration. The press want us silenced because sites like this and independent blogs provide a much more reliable source of information so their ability to tell it like they want it to be is severely curtailed. As is their cash flow now that fewer people need them and more realise that what they print is nonsense. TPTB want us silenced so they can continue their rotten relationship with the press. With all that power behind a desire to shut us up I fear its only a matter of time before "vile trolls" and "non-violent extremists" become redefined as terrorists

Quote Cristobell : "and of course 'the state' she refers to is the USA. "

Of course it isn't and you are giving your critics ammunition by writing such things, Ros. Please take care -so much of what you write is so good and relevant, but this is wrong. Please read her piece again with the criminal justice system in mind.

AndyB wrote:
The truth is that the presentation of the McCann story is part of an ongoing campaign - to paint any media that isn't mainstream as a malign influence that needs to be silenced, and those that consume it as "sickos", "haters" and "vile" . In this sense, the MSM are not protecting the McCanns, although it sometimes feels like it. They are protecting their own power as a monopoly of information for the masses, information that can be twisted and manufactured to suit their own ends. The McCann story is just a means to an end.

Maybe that's all it was ever meant to be, Andy. I think "they" like to keep a few stories spinning, to be deployed as and when necessary.

I think in many ways that the Sarah Payne case was a proto-version of whatever the McCann case morphed into, but didn't have the same impact as the parents were not quite so, how can I put this politely, "media friendly".

Thursday, April 30, 2015

Amaral to appeal McCanns' libel action

 The McCanns partially won their libel action against the author and former lead detective Gonçalo Amaral, but the matter is far from over.
Amaral intends to appeal. He said today: “I find that the court’s decision is unfair and questions my right and every Portuguese citizen's right to freedom of expression and of opinion. For that reason, I do not resign myself to the decision and I will appeal it until the very last judicial instance.”
Apart from Amaral’s assertion on the “unfairness” of the court’s decision, there were two remarkable features about the verdict and the way in which it was announced that got little or no mention in the international media coverage.
The first unusual aspect was the huge sum awarded. It may be normal in the UK, but not here. Amaral was ordered to pay the parents of Madeleine McCann half a million euros in damages, plus interest, currently calculated at €106,000 and rising.
Kate and Gerry McCann had sought a total of €1.2 million. In addition to €250,000 each, they claimed €500,000 for Madeleine and €100,000 for each of their twins. The judge ruled against the claims on behalf of the children.
The McCanns successfully claimed that Amaral’s book, Maddie, the Truth of the Lie, was libellous, causing them great personal distress. The judge did not agree, however, that the book had hindered the search for Madeleine or had caused damages to the twins.
 Should Amaral on appeal get the verdict overturned, or the compensation figure greatly reduced, the McCanns may lodge a counter appeal. The deadline for appeals is 40 days. The legal battle that has been going on for more than five years looks like continuing for some time yet.
A defiant Amaral supporter noted that, “a decision from a Portuguese court can only be enforced after all appeals are exhausted. No money will change hands until a final decision is reached by the very last appeals court.” With this in mind, other well-wishers are being urged to make donations to a Gonçalo Amaral defence fund.
The second oddity was the way in which the announcement of the verdict was handled. The judge’s ruling was not read out in court. It was contained in a 52-page report, which was received by the McCann’s Lisbon lawyer Isabel Duarte who swiftly passed it on to media organisations in Portugal and abroad.
Soon after the news appeared on media websites, Kate and Gerry McCann said they were “delighted” with the outcome.
In a statement issued by their spokesman Clarence Mitchell, they said the case had never been about money. “It was entirely focused on the effect of the libels on our other children and the damage that was done to the search for Madeleine.”
When contacted by journalists the same day, Gonçalo Amaral chose not to comment because neither he nor his lawyer, Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, had received a copy of the ruling. It was only sent to them the following day, by which time to many in the media it was old news.


posted by Len Port





http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.co.uk/

Should Amaral on appeal get the verdict overturned, or the compensation figure greatly reduced, the McCanns may lodge a counter appeal. The deadline for appeals is 40 days. The legal battle that has been going on for more than five years looks like continuing for some time yet.

A defiant Amaral supporter noted that, “a decision from a Portuguese court can only be enforced after all appeals are exhausted. No money will change hands until a final decision is reached by the very last appeals court.” With this in mind, other well-wishers are being urged to make donations to a Gonçalo Amaral defence fund.

So appeals then counter appeals probably, and no money for the McCanns for a long time?  How long can all this last??

Thank goodness for Len Port - a far more balanced piece of reporting.

Will our MSM reproduce it ?

Mimi wrote:Thank goodness for Len Port - a far more balanced piece of reporting.
Will our MSM reproduce it ?

I think you are old enough to know the answer to that one !

The Mccanns LOST 5:2, with the two counts deemed "Partial" by the judge
In addition they have to pay 58.7% of the costs, which also indicated what the judge thought.
The use of the words DISMISSED, FULLY REJECTED (3 times !), UNFOUNDED
gives a fascinating insight into the judge's assessment of the veracity of the McCans and their witnesses

Mimi wrote:Thank goodness for Len Port - a far more balanced piece of reporting.

Will our MSM reproduce it ?

Can't see that happening Mimi. It does look like the case could take some time to resolve. This has to be good news and has restored my optimism.

Sonia Poulton @SoniaPoulton  ·  2 hrs 2 hours ago
Wholeheartedly support #GonçaloAmaral 'fight it to the last instance'. #McCann His chances have been made even stronger given week's events.

PeterMac wrote:

Mimi wrote:Thank goodness for Len Port - a far more balanced piece of reporting.
Will our MSM reproduce it ?

I think you are old enough to know the answer to that one !

The Mccanns LOST 5:2, with the two counts deemed "Partial" by the judge
In addition they have to pay 58.7% of the costs, which also indicated what the judge thought.
The use of  the words DISMISSED, FULLY REJECTED (3 times !), UNFOUNDED
gives a fascinating insight into the judge's assessment of the veracity of the McCans and their witnesses

Someone over there has just put into words what has been bugging me. If the McCanns were claiming 250K each from the outset and the judge only found part of that claim true, how come she has awarded the full amount claimed? It doesn`t make sense. I don`t know the percentages but they certainly did not prove everything they claimed and the one that was proved had a caveat that it was not worse than the day they found their daughter.....missing.
1 clever judge?
Does anyone remember seeing something that states that there is more stuff that can be brought into evidence in an appeal than in the original claim? Sure I read it yesterday.

PeterMac wrote:

Mimi wrote:Thank goodness for Len Port - a far more balanced piece of reporting.
Will our MSM reproduce it ?

I think you are old enough to know the answer to that one !

The Mccanns LOST 5:2, with the two counts deemed "Partial" by the judge
In addition they have to pay 58.7% of the costs, which also indicated what the judge thought.
The use of  the words DISMISSED, FULLY REJECTED (3 times !), UNFOUNDED
gives a fascinating insight into the judge's assessment of the veracity of the McCans and their witnesses

I wish you would go on twitter - you come up with some enlighning one liners sometimes.

Did anyone notice that in the court report it stated GA was married.  I hope it`s true and he has found happiness again and has a good woman at his side.

"GONÇALO DE SOUSA AMARAL, married, resident in the urbanization Cerro Azul, lot 53, Quelfes, Olhão."

chirpyinsect wrote:

PeterMac wrote:

Mimi wrote:Thank goodness for Len Port - a far more balanced piece of reporting.
Will our MSM reproduce it ?

I think you are old enough to know the answer to that one !

The Mccanns LOST 5:2, with the two counts deemed "Partial" by the judge
In addition they have to pay 58.7% of the costs, which also indicated what the judge thought.
The use of  the words DISMISSED, FULLY REJECTED (3 times !), UNFOUNDED
gives a fascinating insight into the judge's assessment of the veracity of the McCans and their witnesses

Someone over there has just put into words what has been bugging me. If the McCanns were claiming 250K each from the outset and the judge only found part of that claim true, how come she has awarded the full amount claimed? It doesn`t make sense. I don`t know the percentages but they certainly did not prove everything they claimed and the one that was proved had a caveat that it was not worse than the day they found their daughter.....missing.
1 clever judge?
Does anyone remember seeing something that states that there is more stuff that can be brought into evidence in an appeal than in the original claim? Sure I read it yesterday.

It's almost as though the judge is asking for an appeal by awarding so much. If it had been 25K each, maybe GA would think twice before appealing.

Message from Goncalo

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/

A Message From Gonçalo Amaral



I find that the court's decision is unfair and questions my right and every Portuguese citizen's right to freedom of expression and of opinion.

For that reason, I do not resign myself to the decision and I will appeal it until the very last judicial instance.

If I am able to continue counting on your support, I will continue to fight within the judicial system for the Truth and the achievement of Justice.

Thank you.




We would like to add a few words of our own.

This week's verdict is the result of a long, drawn-out trial. It is far from over, as we now enter the appeals phase.

Your ongoing support - both moral and financial - has been key to Gonçalo Amaral's ability to defend himself.

There are no words that can adequately express our gratitude, as we have witnessed so many acts of solidarity over the last five years. It has been a humbling journey; a journey of learning and of sharing.

Now we need to reach the end of it.

Thank you.
Posted by astro at Thursday, April 30, 2015 1 comment:

@chirpy
I have been reading tweets today, seemingly the amount of payment the Judge has awarded the McCanns is the highest ever recorded in a Damages Trial in Portugal. This is considered a highly excessive amount and would be an enticement for Goncalo Amaral to appeal. From what I have read other information can be used as evidence in the appeal. This information is not factual just what I have read today.

Probably reaching here, but has anyone else read a comment somewhere (on a blog?) stating that there was a meeting with DCI Wall, Ambassador and others that took place in March?

I wonder if that could be connected in any way in how this trial verdict has been presented?