Express - fresh agony for Madeleine's parents

No doubt Mr Amaral will want to say his bit outside the court and it will all flare up again. It will not be helpful for the Yard.

It would be a miracle if the convicted liar resisted an opportunity to tell more lies and hurt efforts to find Madeleine all over again, no wonder so many people find him disgusting.

And I wonder which forker is the 'family friend'?

Numty 1 asks:

Alessandra Fox Why is it that the rag never allows comments on a Madeleine McCann story?

Because of the hatespam and bile from the Amaral Fan Club.

wise decision:

"The Sunday Express understands officers have advised the couple not to attend the civil hearing.

They believe Kate and Gerry’s presence would provoke a media circus and could seriously damage their sensitive work on Portuguese soil.

Isabel Duarte, the McCanns’ lawyer in Lisbon, said: “Kate and Gerry do not have to give evidence so they do not need to be here. I am confident of winning.”

A source said: “Because of the sensitivity of the situation, police don’t want the McCanns anywhere near the country because they fear it could turn into a media circus. They have faith in the Yard investigation and will do what the police feel is best.

Heart specialist Gerry and former GP Kate, both 45, of Rothley, Leicestershire, have vowed never to give up the search for Madeleine, who would now be 10.

Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell said yesterday: “The court process in Portugal is in the hands of Kate and Gerry’s lawyers and is purely a matter for them to proceed with.”

No doubt Mr Amaral will want to say his bit outside the court and it will all flare up again. It will not be helpful for the Yard

Let's hope he starts burbling and hissing about Fridges, so the entire world can see him as a nasty buffoon. I do hope Portugal is setting the scene for the final downfall of the convicted perjurer.

I think that the convicted perjurer amaral is not in healthy conditions to insist in his insanity in the court. probably, he will follow his lawyer´s advice, to solve that issue in the court with an easy way, less painful to him, to avoid more damages in him, against him.

I will be amazed if Gonc makes it into the dock, Pedro. With the state he's in, he looks as if he should be in hospital, not court.

yes bb1, I agree with you:

"I will be amazed if Gonc makes it into the dock. With the state he's in, he looks as if he should be in hospital, not court."

if the lawyer of amaral has minimal intelligence,

he will understand that this is the only possible way to that convicted perjurer.

No doubt Mr Amaral will want to say his bit outside the court and it will all flare up again. It will not be helpful for the Yard

No, Gonc won't want to miss a chance to screw up efforts to find Madeleine McCann, will he? Nasty, nasty man.

even if he repeat his comments insane, it will not have the effect he intends, exactly the opposite, will once again act against himself, and once again show the sort of nasty person he is.

Jude Wilson My thoughts too Caroline. However a few people have posted on Goncalo Amaral's fb page wishing him well. I would have expected many more than a handful given he has thousands of friends.

Not in Portugal he doesn't. Portuguese people know all about Gonc and the thug Cristovao. More fool the forkers for believing the spin from Gonc's cronies.

I wonder if the PJ has tipped off the Yard that Gonc is going to cause a public scene, and want to leave him to make a complete, utter, fool of himself?

Not only that, Bonny, but by allegedly saying what he will, that would be a repeat of libel on TV?

Forker:

The so called "allegations" in the book are the result of the investigation PERIOD.

Oh no they aren't. The crap, lies and smears in The Truth - I'm a Liar bear little resemblance to the police files and even less to the AG's archiving dispatch.

Gonc didn't even know which wonderwoof was in the back of the Grand Scenic - that's the Renault without the wheelwell he had such ghoulish fantasies about.

hey forker, I´m contradicting you:

the book of amaral is the result of a crap, hardly called investigation, with one purpose: to feed the lust of amaral for dirty fame and fortune, in a word: celebrity, PERIOD.

So what will Amaral have to say about Scotland Yard? He is bound to be asked, if he insists on spouting a load of rubbish about his opinion. He could find himself libelling Scotland Yard if he isn't very careful. Or in his arrogance, does he truly believe that he is more clever than they are?

Or in his arrogance, does he truly believe that he is more clever than they are?

Got it in one, Sabot. Can't you picture it?

My hypothesis....fridges...burble....hiss....political interference...burble....dogs.....book....hiss...Gordon Brown...burble....fridges....masons...burble...hiss.....

I sincerely hope that Portugal is giving the disgrace to the nation enough rope to finally hang himself in public.

"This is all a huge, international cover up" is not going to go down well, even in a Portuguese Court. At least I do hope not. Although I can't actually be sure.
Unless The Portuguese Judiciary really don't care if they become a third world laughing stock.

Amaral might well have had a right to an opinion, but sadly, he made statements of Fact, not only in his book but also on television, none of which he can prove.

But then, Amaral losing a Court Case is always marginally better than caving in, because he and his supporters can then spin The Verdict.
Tell me about it. I can write the script for them. But then so can we all.

And would you ever believe it. If the dates are right, I am going to be on a train to somewhere else, and I won't be taking The Lappy with me.

I don't care, Sabot, as long as the vile wretch STFUs and stops his vendetta.

This nonsense from a forker will make you laugh:

Morning Palmeras16, but the McCanns claimed damages of E1 million which I understand was sequestered so it is up to them to prove that they suffered ill health , that his allegations hindered the search for Madeleine etc. You can't just accuse someone without offering proof that your accusation is right and tbat you are so confident you demand a sequester of their money. It would be like me calling you a liar and saying I suffered because of it but not having to produce evidence that you lied

Accusing people without evidence is a truly terrible thing, isn't it?

So why do the likes of them think it was OK for Amoral to do it to the McCanns? And make so much money out of his lies?

McCann-haters grasp at straws:

e: Daily Express....Fresh agony for Kate and Gerry McCann
Post jeanmonroe Today

AnnaEsse wrote:
Not Born Yesterday wrote:
The bit about libel case defendants being guilty until proved innocent does seem to be relevant under UK law if this website is correct.

http://www.libelreform.org/our-report

I can't of course say if the same is true of Portuguese law but I'm sure that someone else will know.
When that nutty lawyer, who scarpered to Brazil, was sued for defamation by Amaral, nutty lawyer won. The judgement was that nutty lawyer truly believed what he had said and so it wasn't libel or defamation.

So, if Mr A says he truly believes what he has said about this case, where does that leave the McCanns 'claim' of libel or defamation?

========

Deluded fools! One line in a report by a not-for-profit human rights group is NOT the same as an ongoing, Europe-wide, money-making vendetta, encompassing TV, the press and books.

As Gonc is going to find out. But I do hope that lot are giving him legal advice.  

Incidentally, one thing Marcos most definitely is not is 'nutty', especially as he has wiped the floor with Gonc every time they've clashed in court.

And he didn't 'scarper' to Brazil and he isn't there now.  

Xcuse me. I thought that Amaral's money and his house had been sequestered. Still is, as far as I know.
I can't help wondering who did that.

Oh, it was a Portuguese Court. Good heavens, I wonder who decided to sequester Amaral's money? Probably because he is well known for not paying his debts.

Just like it was a Portuguese court that found him guilty of perjury.

Just like it was a Portuguese court that found his wife guilty of tax-dodging.

Just like it was a Portuguese court that found him guilty of trying to cheat his own brother out of a house.


....etc etc.

And this is what they admire so much? Go figure!

bb1 wrote:McCann-haters grasp at straws:

e: Daily Express....Fresh agony for Kate and Gerry McCann
Post  jeanmonroe Today

AnnaEsse wrote:
Not Born Yesterday wrote:
The bit about libel case defendants being guilty until proved innocent does seem to be relevant under UK law if this website is correct.

http://www.libelreform.org/our-report

I can't of course say if the same is true of Portuguese law but I'm sure that someone else will know.
When that nutty lawyer, who scarpered to Brazil, was sued for defamation by Amaral, nutty lawyer won. The judgement was that nutty lawyer truly believed what he had said and so it wasn't libel or defamation.

So, if Mr A says he truly believes what he has said about this case, where does that leave the McCanns 'claim' of libel or defamation?

========

Deluded fools! One line in a report by a not-for-profit human rights group is NOT the same as an ongoing, Europe-wide, money-making vendetta, encompassing TV, the press and books.

As Gonc is going to find out. But I do hope that lot are giving him legal advice.  

Can I make some attempt to explain this? If you please.

Marcos Correia appears to have intimated that Amaral was present during some of Leonor Cipriano's torture because she said that she saw him. Although she didn't actually accuse Amaral of torture. And she did have a bag over her head for most of the time.
Whether or not he was there is by the by since it wasn't actually a point of contention.
But Marcos Correia believed her when she said Amaral was there.
And as it happens, so do I.

In the end Amaral was only charged with and found guilty of Perjury.

The conclusion of The Court re Amaral's accusation against Marcos Correia leads me to suspect that The Court believed that Leonor Cipriano did in fact see Amaral.

It's the context, Sabot, he wasn't on a tour of Europe, Dear Julia's sofa, the Morais blog or anywhere else so public and high-profile.

It was only in the report by the human rights group headed by Marcos and Professor Dore - and let us not forget, Gonc tried to charge the Professor, too.