Gonzo's libel trial re-starts

I'll say especially after the court heard this:-

Fatima de Oliveira Esteves, representing publisher Guerra e Paz, admitted that Mr Amaral 'appeared to have invented' much of the book.

McCanns vs Amaral verdict nearing


Created: 06 February 2015

The verdict in Kate and Gerry McCann’s civil action against the former lead detective Gonçalo Amaral may come sooner than expected because of a recent behind-the-scenes development in the long-drawn-out case.

The question of whether or not Kate and Gerry McCann are legally entitled to represent their daughter Madeleine in their claim for damages has taken a significant step closer to being resolved, according to a source close to the process.

Madeleine was made a ward of court in the UK in April 2008. In January last year, Amaral argued in Lisbon’s Palace of Justice that because Madeleine was still a ward of court the McCanns did not have the legal right to represent her in their Lisbon lawsuit against him and three other parties.

The Lisbon judge, Emília Melo e Castro, gave Madeleine’s parents the opportunity to obtain appropriate documentation about the ward of court matter from the British High Court.

The McCanns had a 30-day set period in which to present this. They did so without delay and much earlier than expected. The documentation was presented to the Lisbon court through the couple’s lawyers on 23 January. None of the defence lawyers has or is expected to raise any objections.

So it is now up to the Lisbon judge to decide the relatively straightforward matter of whether the documentation attests to the McCanns’ right to represent Madeleine. When this is settled, the trial is expected to move towards its last formal exchanges and then, finally, sooner than most people had anticipated, perhaps next month, a verdict.

The McCanns are seeking €1.2 million in damages for the severe distress they say has been caused to them by Amaral’s book, A Verdade da Mentira (‘The Truth of the Lie’), and a subsequent documentary.

The judge’s recent summary of the main points in the case that had been proved or not proved left Amaral and his supporters optimistic about the eventual outcome.

Amaral said this week that he was hoping for an acquittal and the lifting of financial difficulties that have burdened him since the McCanns decided to sue five years ago.

© Len Port


http://algarvedailynews.com/news/4705-mccanns-vs-amaral-verdict-nearing

Huh, and I hope to win the lottery every week, Max. I suspect I have a better chance....


The McCanns had a 30-day set period in which to present this. They did so without delay and much earlier than expected. The documentation was presented to the Lisbon court through the couple’s lawyers on 23 January. None of the defence lawyers has or is expected to raise any objections.

Gonzo was pinning a lot of hope on that - I wouldn't be surprised if he had been getting his legal advice on British law from some numbskull in the UK like Bennett.

Incidentally, did you know that blogging churnalist LEN PORT is a member of the hounders' hate site?

he did invented much of the book to feed his nasty purpose.

I wonder why The McCanns never told us about proving their right to represent Madeleine? This simply isn't good enough.
And why did The Judge need it anyway, if Amaral is going to win?

Perhaps she just likes collecting rubbish paperwork.

I wonder why The McCanns never told us about proving their right to represent Madeleine?

Why would they, though, Sabot? If you read their reasons for the WoC status, Judge Hodge's remarks, etc., it's glaringly obvious that they did NOT surrender normal parental rights; the WoC status was just to ensure that, wherever in the world Madeleine may be found, she is under the protection of the Crown. End of.

That's why I suspect Gonzo has been getting some woefully bad legal advice from the UK.

I know, Bonny. Obviously somdebody has been feeding him Bull Poo. Just like the Seven Years Dead idea. But sadly, all to no avail.
I have no idea how much The McCanns will be awarded, and I don't really care. And I never supposed that The McCanns did either. A sum of money had to be asked for when the suit was filed.

This whole case was just a means to shut him up after his claims became more and more bizarre. And in my opinion, it was never the book that was the problem. It was his cocky, big mouth, for which I doubt The Publisher made allowances.

PS. Got it, JP. I think.