Amaral's Debts

Some time ago, the Portuguese press one or two pieces about Dr Goncalol's financial woes; the original Expresso piece has been uploaded here:

http://regretsandramblings.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Amaral-Debts-Expresso.pdf

Translation of the 24 Horas piece here:

http://regretsandramblings.com/2011/08/29/blinkered-my-god-i-was-blindfolded/

Pedro who translated it originally for J4. Anyway, Morais posted his translation on her blog, without any complaints from her.





Original translation here:

http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/t2098-debts-of-goncalo-amaral-are-around-486-thousand-euros

24horas tried to get in touch with Amaral and his wife to clarify this situation. None of them answered the phone. Also none of them answered the written messages sent by 24horas.

Some things never change....

PDF of the 2009 24 Horas piece:

http://regretsandramblings.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/24-Horas-Amaral-Debts.pdf



I suggest his fan club take a good look at the dates. He did all this long before the McCanns had the misfortune to cross his path.

just to act as a reminder about gonçalo´s debts.

Gonc's debts and Court case

José Filipe Nogueira

Lawyer

Honorable Judgeof the Juvenile and Family Court for the District of Seixal

2nd CivilCourt

Process nº 3841/05.9TBSXL

António de Sousa Amaral, resident at Quinta da Mata nº4 3rd left, Corroios, holder of identity card nº 34142109 and bearer of contributor card nº 115780327, divorced, natural of the parish of Torredeita, Viseu county, is thus accessing to the invitation constant of dispatch of pages 64-66, presents, in the terms provided in the nº 3 of article 508º of C.P.C. new initial articulated for implementation of factual elements considered missing, which makes as followed and with the next elements:

1º
In the constancy of marriage between the defendant and Isabel Maria Costa Basílio (his former spouse) celebrated a contract of mutual with mortgage with Caixa Geral de Depósitos (a bank) by which gave them the amount of € 2.720.00$00 (€ 13.567.30) with the aim of acquiring by borrowers destined to residential property.

2º
As insurance guaranty of payment of mutual agreement mentioned, it was through he mentioned benefits created a mortgage about the urban property which was achieved by them, at the location of Ferreira de Castro street, lot F, 11º at Miratejo, Corroios parish, Seixal county, as presentation 07/310884, Av. 1 legally registered at Conservatory of Building Registration (Cfr. Doc. together with nº 1 with Initial Request of Injunction arrest which is added to these principal records which are here reproduced)

3º
Due to lack of fulfillment by those who agreed, not fulfilled the obligations of refund of the amount which assumed before CGD, the same presented in the day 25.06.1996 against those who agreed an executive action to collect the right amount (Cfr. Doc. which is added under nº1 and fully reproduced) which followed it´s terms through 2nd Civil Court of the Court of Seixal county, under the file nº 536/96.

4º
In the pendency of the mentioned mortgage execution, the defendant hired, with the author, his brother, which was reduced to a formalized contract of buying / selling celebrated in April 9th 2002, the purchase of the bonded property, being agreed that the price of selling to be paid by the author was equal to the amount that had to be paid to Caixa Geral de Depósitos, while as mortgage creditor (Cfr. Doc.added under nº 4 with Initial Injunction Arrest Request which is added to these main records and which are reproduced)

5º
It was agreed, that in the promise contract mentioned, which the defendant promised to sell the property identified in the article 2º which the defendant promised achieved it by the price due to Caixa Geral de Depósitos to allow this to grant the distrate of voluntary mortgage, with the extinction of executive mortgage which – as indicated – was instaured.

6º
Later, and at 29th November 2002, by granted attorney in the 2nd notary´s office of Faro, the defendant constitutes his representative the author, granted him powers to, in his name and representation, to concede the promised notary´s document of buying / selling the mentioned property, which both agreed, more stating that the person who ordered – the author here – was allowed to make business with himself and that the mentioned document, by recognizing and declare that it was written in the interest of the mandatory, couldn´t, without permission of this to be revoked or not expired due to death or disqualification of the mandatory, everything in agreement with the article 265, number 3175, number 2, both of Civil code, staying additionally the procurator instaured, fully dismissed of showing bills (Cfr. Doc.together under nº3 of Initial Injunction arrest Request which is added to the main documents here reproduced)

7º
Meanwhile, and because the 1st defendant married, at 6 July 2002, with the here 2nd defendant (Cfr. Doc.nº2 which is added and reproduced) expected the author of this authorization expressed for the celebration of promised contract which is about the same promise adjusted at 9th April 2002, permission which the same allowed through declaration certified through notary´s office (Cfr. Doc.together with nº6 of Initial Injunction arrest Request which is added to the main documents here reproduced)

8º
In compliance of what has been agreed at the promise contract of buying / selling, which the author proceed to the payment of the value claimed through CGD, the amount of € 59.850.75, value that the author deposited – through check nº 4523338150, through bank account of BCP, in the mutual institution (Cfr.Docs which, under numbers 3 and 4 are together and now reproduced)

9º
In the sequence of that deposit / payment, the Caixa Geral de Depósitos granted the distrate of mortgage and extinguished the executive action mentioned in 2º, by uselessness supervening (Cfr. Docs which are under numbers 5 and 6 together now reproduced)

10º
The defendant proceed the delivery of the property of the contract buying / selling which the author, delivering the keys, transmitted in favour of the author the possession of the property in price, possession which Because not to jeopardize other´s rights, and in any case the author is not aware, was in good-faith.

11º
Following knowledge, of the property´s owner, due to delivery of material through defendant and the keys were and have been symbolic expression, the author, in good-faith, proceed the repairs in the property with the cost of € 8.898.

12º
As truth, at the date in which was granted by the defendant to the author the possession of property, this property was in bad shape, whether paints on walls and the floor of several parts of the house, dishes, plumbers, kitchen, bathroom.

13º
Such destruction, due to it´s intensity, removed housing conditions.

14º
The mentioned repairs, carried through and with the cost of the author, namely electrical devices, locks in the doors, treatment of floor, general paints, new dishes, new bathroom devices, toilets, among others, as it is in the documents, numbers 8 to 20, together with Initial Injunction arrest Request which is added to the main documents here reproduced.

15º
The defendant, however, violated the obligations which freely assumed during the celebration of contract.

16º
With effect, at the day 26.07.2004, the defendants proceed to the sale of the property, object of that same contract to Patrícia Antunes Mamede, single, adult, resident at Bento de Jesus Caraça street, nº6 2nd right floor, Laranjeiro, Almada, which formalized through writing of both recognized at the notary´s office of Almada, in the sheets 34 to 36 of the several writings book nº 170-M (Cfr.Doc nº7 fully reproduced)

17º
Such alienation by the Defendants here came subsequently to be subject to final registration in the competent Conservatory of Registry Office, as registral presentation, made at 22/10/04 in favor of Patricia Antunes Mamede, single, adult, resident at Rua Bento Jesus Caraça, no. 6, 2nd right, Laranjeiro, Almada."

18º
It results from the exposed which, with the sale in favor of mentioned Patrícia Antunes Mamede, was definitively not fulfilled the contract which has been celebrated with the author, not being possible to obtain the specific execution of promise contract in the way in which the new owner will be third in good-faith.

19º
The 2nd defendant, actual wife of 1st defendant, intervened, also, in the sale of the property made to Patrícia Antunes Mamede.

20º
The 2nd defendant also knew that she also previously authorized the sale of the property to the author here, which, as her husband, here 1st defendant, promised the sale.

21º
Under the article nº 441º of Civil Code, all amount delivered by the buyer to the person who sold it, presumed that has character.

22º
So, being the price paid by the author (as buyer) to the defendant, the character of sign, has the faculty of demanding twice of what used, which is € 59.850.75x2= € 119.701.50

23º
To this amount also increases the value used by the author with repairs, corresponding the repairs needed to restore to the property housing conditions, which were at his cost conducted under article nº 216 Civil Code.

24º
The repairs conducted by the author, when he was owner legally, through definitive possession of title transmitted through brother, are, indeed, in the juridical concept of “needed repairs”, because it was indispensable to return housing conditions.

25º
Such repairs, which should be understood as needed, through which, the author returned housing conditions.

26º
Of the legal way it is understood that the concept of housing repairs needed as repairs and costs performed to ensure minimal maintenance / housing conditions, caused such costs.

27º
Under article number 1273 ex vi of the article 216, both Civil code, the owner of good-faith (as such the owner of bad-faith) as the right to be compensated, being calculated his compensation in the terms of unjust enrichment.

28º
The way the legislator tried to obtain is to avoid illegal enrichment from the owner of the thing at the expenses of it´s owner, being through direct effect of repairs with costs of the author, the property saw increased it´s value more than it costs, which is, € 8.898.

29º
Effectively, the defendant cannot benefit from the patently works in the property that were made and fully borne by the author, since this would lead to an enrichment at the expense of impoverishment as provided in the article 473 Civil Code.

30º
Moreover, the property having been - as argued above - sold by the defendant to a third party, which was established in its meeting held in good faith, is no longer possibleto proceed to the survey of any of the improvements, and indeed sure would not be configurable to raise the paintings throughout the property, or raise the overhaul of floors, sanitary ware and taps…

31º
In fact, it is a evidence that in the price of the property to Patrícia Antunes Mamede was with absolute certain that due to the aspect of the property, in which, following the repairs, she owned the property with the aspect it was found, with the conditions that only through repairs had been returned at the expenses of the author.

32º
The 2nd defendant is also responsible by the failure of the contract adjusted with the author and for the debt reclaimed under the article 1691 nº1 a) of the Civil Code, due to her consent to the promised achievement and with agreement through contract, intervened when the property had new owner, violating the contract and permission.

32º
So, the action should be judged and the defendants condemned in the request.

33º
Preliminary to this action, was decreed the arrest of the property at the Urbanização Cerro Azul lot 53, parish of Quelfes, Olhão county, measure that happened at the 3rd Court of Seixal county under process nº6420/04.4TBSXL

Terms which should the action be judged by proved being the defendants condemned to pay to the author:

a. € 119.701,50, twice the amount that the author used

b. € 8.989,00 refund of the costs used by the author

c. the interest accrued on amounts above from the date of service and effective until full payment.

alternative, and if so do not understand, should the defendants be ordered to compensate the author of the amount of the price, simple, disbursed by him (€ 59.850,75)
plus the value of the repairs (€ 9.898), where everything plus the interest accrued onamounts above from the date of service and effective until full payment.

it nevertheless pay the costs of this litigation.

board: seven copies legal documents and

value: € 129.599,50

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sentence received for the above
Judicial circle of Almada

Ordinary Process Action

Nº3841/05.9TBSXL

2nd Civil Court – Seixal

I

Report

António de Sousa Amaral, divorced, resident at Quinta da Mata, nº4, 3rd left, Corroios, started the present declarative action, of condemnation, under form of ordinary process, against:

Gonçalo Sousa Amaral and Alexandra Sofia de Sousa Manjual, married, residente at Urbanização Cerro Azul, lot 53, Olhão.

Invokes for both, essentially, that defendant Gonçalo, together with his wife, Isabel Basílio, celebrated with Caixa Geral de Depósitos (CGD) a mutual contract with mortgage, to achieve the property at the Ferreira de Castro street, lot F, 11º, Miratejo.

Because those who signed such contract have not fulfilled the benefits which they agreed, The CGD started against them, executive action. At the pendency of such action, Plaintiff and defendant celebrated promise-contract of buying and selling of mortgaged property, being the price correspondent to the amount through CGD and to be paid to CGD. Such promise-contract was authorized by defendant Alexandra.

In compliance of agreement the plaintiff proceeded to full payment reclaimed by CGD - € 59.850,75 – in the sequence of which was extinct the mentioned executive action and granted the distrate of mortgage

The plaintiff received from the defendant the keys of property and, due to deterioration and without the minimal housing conditions, repairs were carried which had the cost of € 8.898,00.

Judicial circle of Almada

Previously, defendant 1, authorized by defendant 2, proceeded to the sale of property to a 3rd person, incurring in a definitive failure of promise-contract celebrated.

It ends the request of condemnation of RR. In twice the payment of the amount delivered - € 119.701,50 – and the amount used with repairs.

When cited, both defendants contested, invoking, the nullify of promise-contract celebrated by defendants wife not allowed consent for it´s celebration. Such nullify of contract origins the obligation of restoring everything that has been used, which is, the amount of € 59.850,75.

Also contests the facts invoked by the plaintiff.

This presented replica, in which he reaffirms having the defendants woman authorized the deal. It also asks the condemnation of both defendants as litigants of bad-faith which invokes facts which they know contrary to the truth.

It has proceeded to the purification of the process in which was judged unfounded the exception of the nullify of promise-contract celebrated between Plaintiff and Defendant and appreciated the request of condemnation of both defendants, as litigants of bad-faith.

It was selected the substance of fact presented with relevance for the cause´s decision.

The injunction is still valid.

These are the next issues to be decided:

a) celebrated contract;

b) breach of contract;

Judicial circle of Almada

c) of compensation for improvements

II

Validity

A) of fact

From the evidence produced resulted these facts:

1 – the autonomous fraction designated by letters “AX”, corresponds to 11º floor, letter “A”, with storage in the basement of urban building in horizontal property regime, located at Ferreira de Castro street, nº9, Miratejo, registered in favor of Defendant Gonçalo de Sousa Amaral and Isabel Maria Costa Basílio Amaral, married in regime of communion of acquired – al.A)

2 – about the fraction described in A) was constituted voluntary mortgage in favor of CGD to ensure the loan of € 13.567,30, annual interest until 32,5%, expenditure of € 542,69, maximum amount assured of € 82.361,65 – al.B)

3 – in the sphere of ordinary execution which occurred in terms under the Nº 536/96, from the 2nd civil court, was registered in 17/2/99 pawn, carried in 19/11/98, to ensure the guarantee of € 61.039,87, in favor of CGD – al.C);

4 – in the pendency of execution mentioned in C), between plaintiff and defendant, in the quality of the divorcee, was adjusted in 9/4/02, which, by sentence told in the records of divorce, was decreed the divorce and dissolved the marriage between the defendant and Isabel Maria Amaral, adjusting the share of property described in A) which would be granted to R. granting that irrevocable power of attorney, allowing the fraction to be sold to a third, declaring that the Plaintiff promises to sell to defendant which declares to receive the fraction ,identified in A), by the value which adjusted with CGD to extinct the mentioned execution in C) and grants the distrate of mortgage, expiring the contract in case of not reached agreement with that entity, forcing R to restore to A. the amounts, which, due to price costs this had used in CGD – al.D);

Judicial circle of Almada

In the day 23/10/02, R. and Maria dos Anjos Batista, as procurator of Isabel Maria Basílio, adjusted the share of common goods of the couple, staying with fraction described in A) on which are the charges mentioned in B) and C), assigned to R. – al.E);

In the day 29/11/02, R. declared constitute his procurator A. to grant the notary´s contract of sold, receiving the adjusted price, of the fraction described in A), granted him powers to sell the property, free of onus or charges and for the price and conditions that he better understands, granted in name and representation of the principal and make business with himself, which could not be revoked by death or disqualification of the principal and being free of accountability – al.F);

Through written dated from 17/10/02, to defendant Alexandra Sofia de Sousa Manjua Leal declared authorize to defendant Amaral. to sell, receiving the adjusted price, of autonomous fraction written in A), authorizing yet the request of registrations documents or it´s canceling that showed needed – al.G);

In 23/04/02, The plaintiff made the deposit of € 59.850,75 for credit of account nº 0697515065730, of CGD, belonging to defendant, for payment of the amount reclaimed at the mentioned execution in C) – al. H);

As consequence of mentioned payment in H), CGD granted the distrate of mortgage and execution extinct – al.I);

The Defendants. Gonçalo Amaral e Alexandra Leal married in 6/7/02, without antenuptial convention – al.J);

The defendat Gonçalo Amaral delivered the keys to thr plaintiff. the keys of fraction mentioned in A) – al.K);

In the day 27/4/04, at the 2nd notary´s office of Almada, the defendants declared sold to Patrícia Antunes Mamede, by the price of € 80.000,00 which declared received, the autonomous fraction described in A), accepting this the sold – al.L);

Judicial Circle of Almada

The property about the autonomous fraction described in A, can be found registered in favor of Patrícia Antunes Mamede since 7/7/2004 – al.M);

After the delivery of the autonomous fraction mentioned in K), Plaintiff now has used the property as if it was his own – art.2º;

And with knowledge of defendants. – art.3º;

Without the opposition of these or others – art.4º;

When the delivery of autonomous fraction mentioned in K), the same showed damages at the wall´s paint, floor, dishes and kitchen´s plumbing and bathroom – art.5º;

A spent € 91,74 in electrical stuff – art.6º;

And spent € 149,24 in locks, door handles and a new door – art.7º;

And spent € 687,66 in treatment and recovery of all floors – art.8º;

And spent € 239,78 in painting the rooms of the fraction – art.9º;

And spent € 257,00 in replacing the sanitarium / bathroom, taps and toilet lid – art.10º;

And spent € 266,25 in several material, drugstore products related with works mentioned in articles 6º to 10º - art.11º;

The materials and works described in articles 6º to 10º cannot be removed without causing damages in the fraction – art.12º;

And it´s removal removes to the autonomous fraction the correspondent value of the same – art.13º;

Judicial circle of Almada

B) of right

Checked the facts of the described form, it matters now to proceed with application of right

a) of contract celebrated

between the plaintiff and defendants. Was celebrated a promise-contract, which is a contract in which both parts are forced, at a later date, celebrate another contract. Once that the promised contract (the one in which both had been forced to celebrate) is buying and selling of property, which the first had been forced to buy and the second to sell, we are in presence of celebration of a bilateral, of buy / sell.

Through compliance by the formalism provided in the law – art.410º, of Civil Code, the mentioned contract is valid.

In agreement with the art. 405º, nº1, of Civil Code, which establishes the principle of contractual freedom, the parts have the faculty of including in the contracts the clauses they want.

Therefore, in the case, was established the price and with was agreed the immediate payment of it. This is an obligation from the contract, borne by the promisor-buyer, here A, which the same fulfilled.

The art.441º, establishes that, in the promise-contract and selling, presumes that it has character of all the amount delivered by the promisor-buyer to promisor-seller, although the title of anticipation or principle of payment of price.

What we have here is a presumption which, could be rebutted by the part the manifests interest. In the case, although the defendants had invoked that it was no intention of the involved to attribute the nature of signal to the amount delivered by the plaintiff , not demonstrating such fact (whose evidence, in general terms, provided in the art. 342º, of Civil Code, suited them).

Judicial Circle of Almada

Therefore, it prevails the presumption provided in art. 441º, in other words, imposes the conclusion which the totality of amount delivered by plaintiff, in function of celebration of promise-contract, the title of signal, stressing, to this purpose, that this could be of inferior value, equal or superior to the price agreed, not losing by any of those reasons its signal nature).

b) the breach of contract

according result of notion itself of any contract, its celebration implies the birth of rights and duties for each parts.

Effectively, in terms of art. 406º, of Civil Code, the contract should be punctuallyfulfilled, which means that it should not only fulfilled in the precise terms in which was celebrated, but also should be fulfilled in the moment agreed.

In the concrete case being the promisor-buyer paid the agreed signal, the main obligations, of both were to do the promised contract: Plaintiff to buy from the defendants the property and these to sell the same property.

However, the defendants have not fulfilled the contract, they sold the property, to a third person.

The non compliance of obligations may take one of the three ways, the lack of definitive fulfillment, the delay and defective performance.

In the present case there is no doubt that we are in presence of a situation of definitive failure, through fact attributable to defendants. The fulfillment of contract is no longer possible.

Judicial circle of Almada

So, in the promise-contract, the signal assumes not only a function of insurance guarantee of fulfillment but also the nature of element determine the value of compensation of contract celebrated.

c) Compensation for improvements

Although the signal, single or double, as foreseen in nº2, of art. 442º - assumes the nature of compensation in indicated issues, it doesn´t prevent the creditor of demanding another compensation in general terms, if he has fundament for such.

So, in the concrete case, the plaintiff could also asks for the condemnation of the defendants in the payment of the amount he handled, about the repairs.

Let´s see.

When the realization of promised-contract, the defendants delivered the key to the plaintiff. which used it freely, as if it was his own, with the knowledge and without their opposition.

Became the sole possession of the property, which did it publicly, with good faith and peaceful way – arts. 1251º, 1260º, 1261º and 1262º, all from Civil code.

By assuming the possession of the autonomous fraction this showed damages in the walls, floor dishes and pipes of kitchen and bathroom, and the plaintiff performed the repairs.

The repairs assumes the category of needed as appears defined in art.216º, nº3, of Civil code. In agreement with the art. 1273º, nº1, of same diploma, the owner of good faith has the right of being compensated due to the repairs.

Proving itself, as it has been proved, that the cost amounted to € 8.898,00, it assists the plaintiff the right of being compensated of such amount.

III

Decision

Judicial circle of Almada

Through the expose, judges the presented action, proved and, in consequence, condemn the defendants to:

a) Pay to the plaintiff the amount of € 119.701,50, due to the value of twice signal in the promised-contract celebrated by both parts;

b) Pay to the plaintiff the amount of € 8.898,00, due to the value of improvements performed by the plaintiff in the building, written at the same promise-contract.

Expenses being paid by the defendants

Register and notify

Seixal, August 25th 2009

Signature of :

----------------------------------

Judicial circle of Almada

c) To pay to AA. legal fees, about amounts indicatedin points a) and b), since the date of citation and until full fulfillment;

d) In the payment of penalty, corresponding to 12 UC, by litigation in bad faith

(…).

The decision is integrant part of sentence given in these proceedings.

To be noted in its right place.

Notify

Seixal, November 13th 2009


Signature:


(Carla Oliveira Alves)


Judicial Circle of Almada

Conclusion: 30 / 09 2009

CLS

A. requested, to pages 266, following correction of clerical errors contained in the known sentence:
the omission about the condemnation request of the defendants, payment of legal fees;

the omission about the condemnation request of the defendants as litigants of bad faith, which appears at the report of same sentence whose issue was appreciated in the dispatch, which, effectively didn’t happened.

Notified, the contrary part made no comment.

Appreciation is requested.

There are no doubts that the reason assists AA.

Effectively, the Court didn’t answered the request of fees made, as a mistake, only defended the first petition presented – which such request is not there – and not to the one presented in the sequence about invitation of thejudge.

About the second issue, it is also shown that the request of litigation with bad faith wasn’t appreciated.

Actually, it is a mistake of the Court, for which has no justification.

The art.669º, nº2. point B of Civil Code shows, that any of the parts can request the review of sentence when:«appears in the process documents or any elements, which, implies necessarily decision different from the decision presented and the judge, through mistake, have not taken it in consideration».

It is precisely the situation in appreciation, because the judge, as mistake, have not considered the request of fees, contrary to what was told in the report, wasn´t presented decision about condemnation request of the defendants as litigants of bad faith.

So, it proceeds the correction of sentence about such issues, in these terms:

Fees request:

The simple fee, in agreement with the art. 804º, nº1, constitutes the indebted in the obligation of repair damages caused to the creditor. This norm deals with obligation of reimburse the creditor about damages received. The respective compensation doesn’t replace the provision, but increases her.

Therefore the defendants should be condemned not only the payment of debt but also the payment of compensation mentioned in art.804º,nº1, which in terms of art.806º, matches the fees, counting from the day of fees creation – citation date – until full fulfillment.

Litigation of bad faith

Plaintiff requests the condemnation of the defendants payment of fee, by litigation of bad faith.

Judicial Circle of Almada

The artº 456º, nº1, of Civil code, shows, that having litigated with bad faith the part condemned with fee and compensation in favor of contrary part requested.

In the case, the plaintiff only requested the condemnation of the defendants in fee and not compensation in his favor, motive which this could never be allowed.

It seems, in the case, that it is evident the bad faith of the defendants

The truth is, these have perfect knowledge of the contract celebrated and obligations which both parts had, not admitting with that purpose any ignorance or mistake.

What we have here is, both defendants deduced opposition due to lack of ground, altered in relevant form and totally aware of the truth of facts and its judicial consequences.

Their conduct integrates point a), of nº2, of art. 456º, of Civil Code, which establishes precisely that it is litigant of bad faith the person who acts with the described way.

Taking in consideration the circumstances of the case, it is understood as adequate the correspondent fee to 12 UC – art. 102º, point b) of Judicial Expenses Code here applicable.

Decision

(…).

C) Paying to the plaintiff's fees, with legal taxes, about the amounts mentioned in points a) and b), since the date of citation until full fulfillment;

D) Payment of fine, which matches to 12 UC, by litigation of bad faith.

(…):

The decision is full part of sentence told in these proceedings.

To be noted in its right place.

Notify.

Seixal, November 13th 2009


Signature:

(Carla Oliveira Alves)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:55 am

Portuguese newspaper 24horas today: The judge who ordered the seizure of the house and jaguar of former PJ inspector, rated a trail of debts, in a action of anticipation of the eventual sentence of compensation to Madeleine´s parents. The assets of Gonçalo Amaral was already precarious before the decision of the Civil Court of Lisbon, who last October ordered the arrest of the proceeds frfom the rights of copyright related with the sales of the book "Maddie - the truth of lie". Until May 19, 2008, hung over Gonçalo Amaral, two measures of attachment, an attachment of seize and tax / debts, which together amounted to 468, 4 thousand euros. According with a certificate signed by the 3rd Land Registry of Lisbon, with the date of 21st September of 2009, which 24horas had access - the former PJ inspector was noticed in those three actions by A.S. Amaral, by the National Treasury and also from the Bank of Espírito Santo. The first of those three actions, a seizure of the order of 129, 6 thousand euros, was brought at February 9th of 2005, referring to a "fact" verified in December 16th previous year. A.S. Amaral, and the applicant of the action was at the time, resident in na 3rd floor of Quinta da Mata, in Corroios (Seixal). 24horas could not locate him. At September 14th of 2006, new "nightmare to Gonçalo Amaral with the National Treasury to move forward with seize action of 16.996 euros. The day of May 19th of 2008 was a date of an even worst news. An action - another one - the seize by the Bank Espírito Santo (which belongs to BIC) against Gonçalo Amaral reaches the sum of 294.405 euros, plus with other 14,7 thousand as payment of expenses of the executive process, judged and ordered by a judge of Olhão´s Court. The Civil Court of Lisbon understood, once evaluated the finantial situation of Gonçalo Amaral, that if he becomes to be condemned as a result of the application of indemnization requested by Madeleine´s parents, does not offer guarantees of match it´s payment. It´s from that assessment that comes the decision of... arrest the house, the jaguar, the share of Amaral in the company Gonçalo Amaral Unipessoal Lda, and a third part of his salary as manager of the firm.

House arrested:

Amaral and his wife, Alexandra, had bought a house with 240 square metres on a land with a total area of 1145 square metres at Urbanização Cerro Azul, in Quelfes, Olhão - with 2 floors, 2 terraces, a pool and a garage - at October 25 of 2002. The house was registered only in Alexandra´s name, but, the registration communion marriage of acquired in which the married, dictated their arrest due to actions taxes against her husband. The couple payed for the house 204, 3 thousand euros, form which they move forward with na voluntary morgage, as a loan title, hired in that same day and near BIC, with the total value of 292,9 thousand euros. At october 31st of 2003, the demand another loan at the same bank, with the top value of 64, 5 mil euros.

Retirement pension also under "pillage":

That same house would be the target of a seize of 129,9 thousand euros demanded by A.S. Amaral in 2005 and would work with the same purpose on the next seize, the one at 2006, as a guarantee of payment of 16.996 euros to the National Treasury. But, there is more. Retired since June 2008, Gonçalo Amaral receives a pension by early retirement - after 26 years of service - of 2039 euros, but the Retirement Administration Office forces him to discount a sixth part of that value every month, until the value of that debt reaches the 10.505 euros. The former inspector payed five of those benefits until the beginning of October. He has yet 26 to pay. And yet... a certificate of debts of October 16th of 2009 at Finantial Service from Olhão which proves that Amaral owes to the Tax payer office a total of 13.426.7 euros. The debts (of 2006, 2007, 2009) has origin in fines, IRS, stamp duty and transfer tax. In a statement released in October 21, Amaral told that he feared to "be prevented of defending his reasons in court" due to the "higher costs of money" by the judicial action requested by the couple McCann. 24horas tried to get in touch with Amaral and his wife to clarify this situation. None of them answered the phone. Also none of them answered the written messages sent by 24horas.

80 thousand for tv interview:

At the end of april 2009, a correspondent of Five News requested an interview to Amaral. According to information gathered by 24horas, the British journalist received Amaral´s answer, but the interview, if granted, would have to be payed. Amaral issued that he would charge 80 thousand euros, also the same with other broadcasts including Portuguese tv channel TVI.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyd91V8GHX0&feature=player_embedded

"My name is inspector Amagal. After I have filled at expenses of little Maddie, by telling the whole truth in books, documentaries and variety shows, I´m going to continue to fill by telling the whole truth about what happened to the small investigation of the Maddie case. Discover with me the whole truth about what happened to the small investigation, a flop, many people wanted to include, starting with me". The truth of incompetence. In May of 2007, inspector Amaral started the small investigation, the small investigation died because of political pressures, this one is the version we accustomed to accepted as the only possible, but, is it true? Or this version hides an incompetence that many wants to hide? Words of Amagal: "It was here, at Luz beach, that was last seen the small investigation, but now, I come to reveal the small investigation: not disappeared, was murdered, I´m certain that the responsibility of her death is of her parents, and, me and my team going to prove it". The official version guarantees that the small investigation was ruined because of the couple McCann, but several witnesses guarantees that all those months the inspector Amaral and his friends of PJ left the small investigation alone while drinking lots of white wine bottles. Words of Amagal: "It was not with white wine, because that is a thing of XXXX, it was bottles of red wine and sometimes either a red wine of XXXX". The inspector Amaral didn´t care about the small investigation, he understood that was enough a confession of the couple McCann, but this raised a problem. Words of Amagal: "It was not one but two, first: the McCan were British, therefore, I couldn´t get a confession by beating them, as I use to do, second: the McCan were questioned on the ground floor, therefore I could not tell that they had fallen from the stairs". The inspector Amaral followed fully all the PJ instructions, by phoning to dozens of reporters and informed them of all the facts of the small investigation which was under secrecy of justice. Words of Amagal: "with the McCan being judge in the public square, I requested the assistance of Max, a detective dog, but then I was inforrmed that Max doesn´t exist and so we brougt other two irracional animals, which spent their days chewing bones to do our work". And in one day, both irracional animals which spent days chewing bones and sniffing each others behinds did a lot more then Amaral in months. Words of Amagal: "the sniffer dogs did exactly what I expected, walked through the room sniffing every corner wity determination searching for evidences and they found it, evidences of a lot of things, I prefered that they bitten the McCan until they confess everything, but that is me". Meanwhile, the couple left Portugal, without say nothing to Amaral. Words of Amagal: "shorty after, I was sacked / kicked frrom PJ and the small investigation died, can say I killed the investigation, because I prefered that the truth never knew, to continue to appear on tv, to belch, to XXXX, you can say I killed the small investigation because I´m an incompetent, but one thing is certain: for the first time in my life I proved one thing: it was me who killed the small investigation, this was what happened, that is the whole truth and I have not lost hope of going to America to tell it to Oprah".

For those of you my friends, who don´t know who Max is: Max was a dog of a fictional tv series at TVI.

Sat Oct 24, 2009

Here is the full news from Expresso, about Gonzo´s jag:

Justice takes Jaguar from Gonçalo Amaral. Court keeps with Jaguar of Gonçalo Amaral. Copyright and share of the former inspector of PJ at the company he created were also arrested.

The Civil Court of Lisbon, who, this week ordered the arrest of the copyright of the book of Gonçalo Amaral, about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, a also the documentary which follow it, considers that the member company created by the former coordinator of PJ cannot produce, and remove the proceeds to him personally for the sales of books and videos.
Therefore, following the claim from the McCann family, decided through a trial process, arrested also the share of Amaral in the company, a third of his salary as a manager and even the jaguar he drives - but that belongs to the firm.

The car, with a displacement of 2700 cc and with a price of around 70 thousand euros new, was purchased in May and registered in the name of the sopciety Gonçalo Amaral Ltd, with a social capital of 5000 euros.
The company, created in November last year, offers consultancy, studies and analysis in the field of criminal investigation and is specialized in the dissemination, promotion and communication of technical work.

The notifications to the publishers who published the book "Maddie - the truth of lies" - followed at the beginning of last week to several european countries: Italy, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Spain and France.
The publisher Guerra & Paz "War & Peace" (which published the book in Portugal), (owner of Correio da Manhã, where Amaral has a weekly columnist), the Valentim de Carvalho and TVI were also notified of the arrest of the copyright are due to the former coordinator of PJ until a final decision on the ongoing process.

Contacted by the Expresso newspaper, Gonçalo Amaral declined to make any comment on the decision of the Civil Court, referring to its position to a press release issued on Wednesday. In that document, Amaral "fears to get prevented to defend his reasons in court and admits constraints related to his own defense".

Kate and Gerry McCann, who were considered "arguidos" during the process of investigation, and their three minor children. Sean, Amelie and Madeleine, are the applicants of the ongoing process in court. They require to the former inspector, a compensation of 1.2 million euros by defamation, due to claims "continued and blatant" about the investigation of ther case in 2007. However, according to the assessment made by the Court, the assets of Amaral does not offer sufficient guarantees for the payment in case of conviction.

The house of Olhão which he bought together with his wife in 2002, with a loan from the BIC, but it is only registered in his wife´s name - was arrested in 2005 due to a debt of around 130 thousand euros. A year later, the National Treasury recorded the seize of a house as a guarantee of payment of 16900 euros. Finally, two years ago, was the BES (to whom now BIC belongs) to go forward with a executive action against Amaral and his wife, for the recovery of more than 300 thousand euros - new seized
.
The book "Maddie- the truth of lies" was launched in July 2008 and, until the end of September, has 12 editions - in other words - 120 thousand books. However, in September, also, by Court decision, the book´s sales had already been banned. Gonçalo Amaral retired from PJ in July last year, after 26 years of service. At the time, he said he went out to have "full freedom of expression", after having been sacked, months before the investigation of the disappearance of the British child, due to statements made to the media. Currently, Amaral receives a pension for early retirement of 2039 euros.

AMARAL'S TV INTERVIEW ON SIC PORTUGUESE TV CHANNEL:

My friends, here it is the complete translation:

Miguel: Good evening GA, thank you for this interview. Now the investigation begins, you are dining with a friend in Portimao, you are placed in Portimao eating some shrimps, good taste, you coordinate that area at the Portimao county, of Lagos, and then you receive a phone call saying that a little British girl has disappeared at Praia da Luz, so, I think that in your place you should be released immediately because that was a case which assumed great gravity, paedophile, Algarve, tourism, English, etc, etc, why didn´t you go immediately to the crime scene and give instructions to PJ picket, let me finish, to say to whoever goes there to be very careful with the evidences?

GA: it´s like this, we have many cases in Portimao, and the PJ coordinator could not, would not be present, it´s like this now, PJ works really well, has experts, has technicians, it is established to function well, it doesn´t need a coordinator, the coordinator has other things to do, besides to go along to the police picket, as you can guess, we have many cases (Miguel says: that is in any case, but in this case that´s not justified, you are at 20 kilometers of the crime scene (GA says: perhaps in a week or two it could justified), now the issue is, we have many things to do (Miguel says: you released yourself, that, the first ones, gathering evidences, whoever was there, did not do a very good job (GA says, a normal job inside the perspective that abduction, shall we say, the theft of, the theft of a person in the case and that inspects the site as if it were a theft, the object who was there was removed, it was a lack of procedures that PJ is somehow rethink and has a lot to do with that, with the perspective approach to inspect the site in this case (Miguel says: didn´t you think that you must go there immediately?) it´s not to think, it´s like this, the coordinator or director doesn´t have to go there, the coordinator has to control and I controlled it (Miguel: perhaps it was better to go there, don´t you regret of not being there later?) No, I don´t regret, police professionals, are police professionals, they are experts, technicians, we being there and as a sign for a technician to gather fingerprints and with the job of taking photos (Miguel: for example, at certain time you...) it is something that should justified PJ to go there (Miguel: public experience, at a certain time you must regret that you did not know how the English, the McCanns were dressed on that night, and says it is a shame that they took so many photos during holidays, but not during night?) No, they took during night they just didn´t showed up (Miguel: didn´t showed up) and I (Miguel: I asked you if you a have a man there?) GA If Miguel allows me, it´s like this, I'm a man under an injunction and talk directly about it here in the case, I don´t know if I´m going to break the injunction, there is a conflict of sides, help me a bit in that (Miguel: I´ll help: justify people, an injunction is a order governed by court, I read the sentence which says: you cannot talk about your book´s thesis, but you can talk about other thesis) I can talk about the abduction (Miguel: I asked you this because when you said you regret that there are no photos to know how the English were dressed that night, yet you had a man in charge of taking photos, so why did he not take photos of the English people also? How can anyone remembers saying to take photos of everything? Yes, such mistakes happen a lot, and in many cases, I remind a case, it´s in the book also, of an expert who showed up in the photos with a brush in her hand in the outside window of the little girl´s room, and without any protection, today the experts, the police in the crime scene has their own clothes (Miguel: you´ve learned with your mistakes) and we didn´t look at CSI (Miguel: seems to me you had a lifetime chance as a pseudo-criminal investigator, you had a difficult case to solve, no argument about that, but under worldwide attention, that immediately became global news, at a time when speaks about child abductions, paedophiles, you had a golden chance to shine personally, to show your corporation in a good light (GA says: it´s not bright) Miguel says: you had 2 goals: 1- find Maddie, or discover what happened to her, you have failed both, you failed your mission and you failed your chance) GA: no, no, I gave my contribution to the investigation until I was no longer allowed to be there, and I can tell you that I was not alone in the investigation as the coordinator. GA, the director of Portimao who was alone in the charge of the investigation and the director (Miguel: but it was you who was the public face of the investigation) GA says no. Miguel says: you were the one who talked a lot about her) GA: no, the public face was the one used in England´s terms, or here, in Portugal also, I just spoke about her when I left the police, until that, if I was seen in or out the police, it was to go to my office, to lunch with colleagues and so on, Miguel says: then I ´ll take the explosive charge on yourself: The team you conducted failed both goals. GA says: no. Miguel: it´s a fact evidence isn´t it? GA says: not wanting to break the injunction, many evidences was gathered and I´m talking in good faith, and I think I´m not breaking the injunction. I cannot speak about the book, but you doctor can (Miguel: yes I can, I was not forbidden, when you talk about evidences, you speaks about the hypothesis of her being killed by her parents, to hide her body) GA: no, no I never said that, Miguel says: but it is what is in the book, GA: what I say in the book, let me explain (Miguel: but you had fun yourself). GA: I don´t say, (Miguel: the final conclusion), GA: no, no, then you had not read the book, that book is the English truth and there is nothing there. Miguel: I have not read it? Oh yes I have read it, the book ends with 4 conclusions marked in black. GA says: conclusions which are not talking about murder by the parents. (Miguel: I didn´t said murder by her parents, could been killed accidentally). GA repeats: no, no,accidentally is not killed by someone, an accident is an accident, it´s not any murder. Miguel says: it is involuntary murder, you always told that they hid their daughter´s body, is that not in your book? Miguel repeats this question, Is this not in your book?) GA says: this is where you Miguel is wrong, what´s in the book is six month of investigation, during which I was in charge and where it concludes with reports which are there, the suspicions at that time and has you Miguel knows, criminal investigation has it´s time, a beginning, a middle and an end, and so on, and in that moment there was suspicion, which doesn´t mean later, but, but (Miguel says: but the suspicions were mostly yours, you know GA, another thing that is impressive is, let´s get back, shall we (GA: you are putting words in my mouth, you are forbidden) Miguel continues: no no, the words are mine, my conclusions and taken from your book and taken from the process)

GA says: no the suspicions, you are putting words in my mouth or what, no, you are talking about the injunction, it is an interpretation of the book (Miguel: it is an interpretation of the book, you receive the news, gives the order to PJ picket, go to your home, (GA: yes, like in any other case). Miguel continues: you go to your home, wake up in the morning, this is in your book, and the first thing that comes to your brain is to ask the British who are the McCanns? And you start immediately to suspect and ask questions, the questions you ask are: if they hurt children, if the have a serious problem with law, if they have psychological problems, if they are in fact doctors in full time, and then, much ahead you say is common sense in these cases to suspect of the parents, so, you have not yet seen the McCanns, you have not yet been at the crime scene and you´re already suspect them? Is it, or is it not. You´re a master). GA says: yes, then says, listen, I or any other, yes, yes, it´s normal, to suspect, you´re wrong, it´s common sense, listen doctor, you are making fantasies, something, Miguel says: no, I´m not making fantasies, I read your book). GA repeats: the issue is this: the national and international laws in any of these cases and we were criticised by the FBI about this, is the issue of suspect or not of parents, or the closest in these types of cases and I can tell you, (Miguel says: you believe, but I don´t say suspect, at a certain time now, the first suspicions is that it?). GA says: it´s not the first suspicion, we have to know first who those people are. Miguel says: Was it not most urgent to know if the borders were all closed? Are all the marinas under surveillance? All the cars who left there under control?). GA says: But we knew. We took care of that. No, it cannot know all cars who left there. And look, we reached the conclusion that for example the Via of Infant has some TV cameras which didn´t work, we talked with Spanish colleagues to control the border of Cádiz, in terms of access to Morocco, all those, Tenerife, and so on (Miguel says: the marinas were not immediately controlled, because I know who left for example of Lagos marina one day after, quietly).

GA: but we have all that information. We know that. From a place where some occurrence happens, we analyze it, if there are CCTV, if there are no CCTV, if there are any CCTV, what can be seen, what cannot be seen, all of that, at the same time, look, saying that we aimed immediately to, it´s not like that, that question is relativity to the parents, excuse me, that first question, that, was answered, it is the first, was never answered, it is the first, it is important to understand... (Miguel: since the first day, anyone who read your book concludes immediately that in the first meeting, at the end of the first day, is the strongest hypothesis you have, and I believe that has been created at a certain time of the investigation, but now, is the first hypothesis of work, it is the first hypothesis of work you pick and seems to be the only. GA says: it´s not (Miguel insists: it looks to be the only one). GA repeats: not it´s not. Miguel insists again: it is, it is. GA says: doctor read the book. Miguel says: I read the book. GA says: notice, there are at the book , there are the investigations for the abduction, there we have the abduction, what has been done. Miguel says: in terms of abduction, yes). GA says: talks about a polish couple and an investigation, that, if you read the book (Miguel: yes, I read it) GA: as for me, I don´t agree with that end of, I don´t agree, but even the McCanns don´t talk about them and there are other situations, situations if, goes to the process, we have the book, then, the process, we have the book which I wrote, I was inside, this is the reason why I wrote it , I can explain it to you later, and there is the process which was been given to the journalists, the book is forbidden, the process is not, the process reaches the same conclusions of those first six months, but if you notice, (Miguel says: no) Ga, says: there are diligencies, if you notice doctor (and Miguel says: no). GA says: have you read the process?. Miguel says: there are diligencies which have not been carried out and which are not made, exactly because it stays since the beginning in the hypothesis of being the parents guilty. GA says: that's a lie, no, it´s a lie). Miguel says: On the very first day: the GNR dogs which went there on the first day all of them pointed to the parking lot, the trail which they follow stops at the parking lot, that lead points to a car that took the child out of there, and that is never, excuse me, never, instead, it stays, stayed six months, five months...).

GA says: and I´ll tell you more, yes, pointed to what? No, sorry, pointed to a car, why, where did you read that, in my book? (Miguel: no, that is not in your book). GA: but it is also in the book, the GNR dogs are good, these are sniffer dogs, what they followed was the trail of a living child, you understand, it was the route of that child, you doctor say it is a car, and Miguel says: why do you say that she was not alive? GA says: excuse me, but, how do you doctor say it was a car, you don´t know the day, hours before the... Miguel says, that in a parking lot it is most likely that it was a car, and if you accepted the idea you give me, I´m not an expert in criminal investigation, now the idea that gives me that is since the beginning and if what we have, started with a serious work in the hypothesis of the abduction, the first suspicion is that the child was taken by a car, instead, instead...).

GA: oh doctor, there is a witness who even talks that the child went out in the opposite way (Miguel says: exactly, which you give no credibility, which is another English friend of the McCanns, and which you give also no credibility to that witness). GA: I´m not giving credibility? And Miguel says again: no you don´t, you give no credit at all. GA: it´s possible, neither me, nor anyone else. That lady starts by saying this, then by saying that, then it´s going to change, when, in the middle, the only thing she remembered was the hair, she remembers the photo-fit which was the hair and so on, what she remembered is that it was filling everything, until reach the point of recognizes Robert Murat as the author, so, that cannot be, now it´s yes, these are all things which are to be done. Miguel says: the first person who suspects of Robert Murat is you, isn´t it? It is you. You´re the first. You´re the first who goes there and decides to put him under surveillance. GA says: It is Jane Tanner. You´re wrong. It is Jane Tanner, no, no, and Miguel says: yeah, but I don´t talk about that suspect. Well, back to my story, this is a thesis, much like yours, I think the story of the abduction was not investigated properly or enough, because the PJ was a prisoner immediately attached to the other hypothesis: the most darkest theory of them all, and moreover, for me, it contains a thing that I still don´t see any person to explain it: How can a British couple, who is on vacation at the Algarve, who doesn´t know the country, then at night, between 9.30 and 10.00 pm, doesn´t know why, doesn´t know the reason, which mobile / purpose, in which circumstances, wanted, not wanted, kills their daughter and makes the body disappear in half an hour and that no one can find? Evaporates? GA says: It´s like this, the words kill the daughter are form you doctor not mine (Miguel says: they´re mine) the period between 9.30 and 10.00 are from the suspects (Miguel says: from the suspects, of some of the suspects, which were already at the restaurant where employees, witnesses seeing them, even if they were all in... how can a body just disappear?). GA says: oh doctor, let´s talk about one thing, there is one thing, one thing that is said, wait a minute, there is one thing that is said in the report, for me is the principal mistake of the shelve of the process, let me remind, the doctor in an article of June 21st told no to the shelve and against the shelve, and there I agree with you, with everything else behind, the most part I do not agree, but in the issue about the shelve, I agree with you, not a bit as the report about the public ministry: the issue, and even at the British police reports at mpa (Miguel says: are reports... makes a body disappears in half an hour in a foreign country at night?). GA says: I´´m going to answer, wait, what half an hour? Miguel repeats: half an hour. GA says: the child is seen by people outside the couple (Miguel says: 7.30) at 17h35 and then an Irish couple which told saw someone with the, with possibly with that, not sure, at 22h15 and which gives (Miguel says: ah, then) excuse me, who gives the wall, who gives the window of (Miguel says: so your thesis....) is Mr. Gerald McCann, not my thesis (Miguel says: so, you cannot speak about your thesis, but you´re telling me that is also possible to put the hypothesis that, the child died between 17h35 and 22h). GA says: don´t have any doubts about that. you doctor limited half an hour, and I´m not talking in deaths, is someone to have killed, the couple, never mind about it, what is told internationally, (Miguel says: so, if it was not death, what was it? They abducted themselves their own daughter?), GA says:; wait, I´m not telling you that they killed her, that´s not what I´m saying, what is told internationally and in terms of investigation here in Portugal and in any country of the world and it is told by British police, that cannot be trusted at the timetables which are provided by the suspects, and that is why the Public ministry made a mistake to the shelve the process, if you read the dispatch of the shelving, it says: the couple could not have done this or that at that time because they wasn´t there, but who gave that half an hour? Was it Mr. Gerald McCann and Mrs. Kate McCann? (Miguel says: and all the others, all the friends?), GA says: no, no, not all the friends.

GA: It is you, whose going to use an apartment (Miguel says to go to that apartment) GA says: just to that apartment (Miguel says: not just that one, there are other apartments, six friends dining plus an older lady, seven people who says all that goes there minutes in minutes) GA says: there are seven children and only goes to that apartment? No, it´s like this: Mr. Matthew Oldfield, for example, said that he never saw the girl and says he entered in the apartment and didn´t see her, now it´s like this: I´m talking in general terms, not want to break any injunction, it is needed to have careful with that, all I´m saying in technical terms, of police experts, in police terms, it cannot be trusted in, it´s in the reports, even the British police (Miguel says: it cannot be trusted and I believe in what the witnesses says) GA says: it is not about what the witnesses says, the suspect, don´t you forget that (Miguel says again: but you determined them as suspects before they become suspects, it is what it seems to me, really, the idea you give me is and they are immediately suspects, that you woke up in the next day in the morning and without even having looked at their faces, you are already suspect them, is that a golden rule? I think that the golden rule here is to start investigate, if there are evidences and then comes the suspicions, but before you have any evidences there are already suspicions? Seems to me Mr.Amaral, excuse me for that, but seems to me that you started from a thesis and looked for evidences to confirm your thesis, instead of doing otherwise). GA says: you´re wrong, they are not, but it is a golden rule, no, in international terms, in rules terms, we don´t have many cases. No, on the contrary, I can tell you something: in the beginning they said it was a case similar to the one with Joana Cipriano, I said no (Miguel says: similar with the Joana Cipriano) and GA, nervously, says:not again, Miguel repeats: similar with the Joana Cipriano, GA says: our mistake (Miguel says: it´s the same), GA says: no, it´s not the same, it´s not the same, Miguel says: you also investigated, also no body and you concludes with it was the mother and the brother). GA, nervous: I, I, didn´t conclude it, it was the court of Portimao who concludes it and they were condemned (Miguel says: you only feels satisfied, now, let me ask you: you were convinced, I´m not convinced, I believe you had been satisfied as investigator that the court corroborated your thesis, right? In the case of Joana Cipriano).

GA says: But why my thesis? (Miguel says: now, after being proved that she was beaten, that is also being judged, that she was beaten hard (GA says: who was condemned?) Miguel says: you are condemned with a suspended probation, suspended not for beating her but for making false declarations about the case), GA says: how can false declarations, how can we reach that? I´m going to explain it quickly (Miguel says: a judicial sentence, I´m guided by the sentence now) GA: no, I was listened always and as a witness... (Miguel says: let me ask you a question: you think that in this country (Portugal) many people believes that Leonor Cipriano killed her daughter? A very few people Mr. Amaral, very few people (GA says: You think?) very few people and we don´t believe: how can a woman without any instruction, without any proof, who was beaten hard by PJ (GA says: nothing has been proved, you are going to...) how can she managed, managed to be so clever, that she kills her daughter, hides the body and PJ couldn´t get a single trace? Miguel continues: where is the body? (GA says: the inspection which was carried 12 days after and then let´s see the circumstances in which he was, there is blood, washing of the apartment itself, a person who never washed the apartment, wash it at that time, there are a series of traces, if you want to talk about that case, let´s talk, I mean (Miguel says: no, some should exist for the court to condemned her, now there is also a revue of the sentence based on something) GA says: yes it was inferred the review of the sentence), Miguel says: it was inferred? I didn´t know that, look, I wish it had been, because that doesn´t convince me) GA says: why doesn´t it convince you?, Miguel says: because it doesn´t convince me, because I have a previous suspicion about defendants who reach court, after confessing to crimes made under beatings, which is obvious, I cannot accept that, therefore, I suspect). GA says: but, do you suspect of me? Miguel says: you signed the confession. GA says: Do you think so? In what time? Miguel says: it´s in the confession in the files, I don´t know or have assumed? What I know is: she was taken out of jail, during night, she was taken back to PJ facilities and they returned her beaten, it was during night, and besides, it was participated by the warden of the jail, right?).

GA says: at night? Took her at night. Yeah, it was, maybe it should be listened better, because you know... if we are going to talk about this case (Miguel says: but we are not going to talk about Joana Cipriano, let´s go back to Maddie´s case), GA says: Let´s talk, look, there is one thing essential, let´s focus here a very fast thing: I was accused in this process of omission of seeing and denounce and I ask: what does that lady do when she thought that she had someone there and she told that PJ doesn´t asked for forensics, didn´t inform the Public ministry, why does she asked to a worker, a person under her dependence, wait, let me finish this, why did she asked for a dependant medic by green tickets to make one medical exam attached to a psychiatric, this is interesting, because there are experts in Odemira, you doctor know where Odemira is and there are forensic experts there, it can be done there. It will not be a German psychiatrist in green tickets dependent of the lady warden that will make forensics (Miguel: I´m not discussing the Joana case, I don´t have time, what I want is Maddie case, it still actual, it didn´t reach any conclusion, at the time of the Maddie case, the Times of London wrote something which I agree completely: it said like this (GA says: it´s in your opinion? I cannot give mine?) Miguel says: about this you can give it, Times told: "Portuguese police continues to be the bulk of their investigations in the self-incrimination of arguidos, of suspects (GA says: that´s a lie), Miguel continues: listen: or thought the tapping phone calls where they confess the crime, or through confessions and I remembered this; after that, because when you tell in the book that you invited Kate McCann as arguida, that there was great expectations that she confessed spontaneously and she didn´t confess and the husband didn´t confess and then they return to England, you become very disappointed because they returned to England, because from that moment on, they are not here for you to continue interrogate them, because, (GA says: To England we already knew they were going to... it says here that our director, was hasted the nomination as arguidos, but they were leaving and there are statements in that direction, but saying that (Miguel says;: but it was a right who assists them) Ga says: yes, it was, completely), Miguel says: to whom had read the news blown by police and by the press, by police obviously (GA says: why obviously? Why not by the Public ministry, by British police?) Miguel says: it was by Public ministry, by British police. Its another opinion of mine; for you it seemed that the McCanns were suspects because they returned to England, to return home five months later, but, their purpose was to stay here and be interrogated, be interrogated by PJ until they confessed something they never did, isn´t that right?), GA says: we are running out of time, you told me so, let´s change the format and you doctor talks and I´m going to tell you very quickly one important thing: look, as for the couple McCann, the couple only mentioned in leaving in the day that British dogs arrived to Portugal and then Mr. Gerald McCann knowing the potentialities of those dogs, and to be all enlightened (Miguel says: I don´t see the connection, if he were in London, wouldn´t the dogs acted the same way?) GA says: seems that the dogs only failed here, it´s because of the heat in Algarve (Miguel says: what difference can they make by being here or not, at the same time as the dogs?) GA says: what difference? They knew what´s going to happened next, until that, they walked holding hands and PJ gave them information, just to say something. I wrote that book - the truth of lie, in the exercise of my freedom of speech like the judge told, because the attacks towards me, which I was targeted, I´m going to tell you: they call me, the British press: 418 times shameful, 440 times outrageous, 140 times torturer, 45 times disabled, 37 times incompetent, 23 times libertine cop, 20 times sacked, let me tell you: when my freedom of speech is in stake, and when at Republic Assembly discusses problems of freedom of speech, as it was told recently, for me is something smaller, because the discussion should be extended, because what´s in stale here is not only the Gonçalo Amaral´s freedom of speech, it´s in stake the freedom of speech of the journalists and the freedom of speech of this country´s citizens. Miguel says with a bored expression: yes, yes, I heard, so, you made your statement, I only want a short answer to this question: imagine, imagine yourself, because me I cannot imagine: that the McCanns are indeed innocent, imagine that they under the excruciating pain of losing their daughter, who was abducted, which they do not know what happened to her, they had still suffered the ignominy of seeing themselves considered suspects of having killed and hiding their daughter´s corpse, have you already thought about that hypothesis? GA says: I have already thought and thought about all of them. Miguel says: and you sleep with tranquility with the certain that that didn´t happened? Ga says: I do sleep, you know why? It´s like this: who demanded the shelving of the process? You doctor told in that title from the Express diy 21: The couple McCann. Who conformed with the shelving of the process? The couple McCann (Miguel says: excuse, but, they are not confirmed they want reopen the process). GA says: Excuses, you doctor don´t know the rules. They at that time, opening the instruction, speaks about the process reopened.

Miguel says: Dr. GA, I have to "shelve" the interview.

GA says: sadly, sadly..

Thank you, Pedro

You welcome bb1.

Here's their idol, ripping off his own brother and being ordered by yet another court to pay damages:

http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/t3832-gonc-s-debts-and-brothers-court-case

I seem to recall Gonc's brother, António de Sousa Amaral, ended up having to have various items of Gonc's siezed?

Yes bb1.

bb1 wrote:Here's their idol, ripping off his own brother and being ordered by yet another court to pay damages:

http://justice4mccannfam.5forum.biz/t3832-gonc-s-debts-and-brothers-court-case

I seem to recall Gonc's brother, António de Sousa Amaral, ended up having to have various items of Gonc's siezed?

The Gonc fan club have the lowest of standards. He can never be referred to as a class act so what does it say about them?

Marvellous, Pedro. What a horror story that man is. And The Lovely Sofa doesn't come out of it very well either.

lily, Sabot, I agree with you.