tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-48137871943193856922024-02-08T00:16:15.763+00:00Attic ShelfJacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.comBlogger30125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-53202041157935446832014-01-13T22:30:00.000+00:002014-01-13T22:30:05.057+00:00Astro: Postponement of Libel trial for 07 January 2014 (Day 11) <b>Source:</b> <a href="http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/81jan14/Astro_07_01_2014.htm">Pamalam's blog</a><br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"><b>Important notice from astro</b></span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: red;">This did NOT happen in a court session,</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: red;">Nobody went to court on Tuesday. There was no session at all.</span><br />
<span style="color: red;">We heard about the postponement on Monday. The filing of documents took place between Friday afternoon and Monday, as far as I know.</span><br />
<br />
Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer filed a request for the court to evaluate the McCann couple's legitimacy to file a lawsuit in their daughter's name, as she is a Ward of Court in the UK.<br />
<br />
He did not ask for any postponement. It was the judge that issued a 15-day deadline for him to submit the relevant documentation. <br />
<br />
Afterwards, Dr Isabel Duarte filed a document that is related to Mr Alan Pike, and asked for a postponement of Tuesday's session. <br />
<br />
This information is not covered by judicial secrecy and can be freely shared.Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-72082010129801493552013-12-03T12:22:00.002+00:002013-12-03T12:22:27.072+00:00McCann v Amaral (27 Nov 2013) Day 10<b>By Anne Guedes & John</b> (Senior Editor) of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=vpl6ipq567mkg4sqdb3bfsci06&board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum </a><br />
<br />
<b>
Day 10 </b>of the trial sees Luis Froes return to complete his evidence...<br />
<br />
<b>Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 10</b><br />
<br />
<br />
(27.11.2013, 10.00am)<br />
<br />
Dra Isabel Duarte, the McCanns' lawyer, is today substituted by her assistant, Dr Ricardo Afonso.<br />
The Judge seeks further confirmation from Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer that they no longer wish to call Dr Paulo Sargento to the stand <br />
Defence lawyers who were previously ordered to provide financial documents to the Court seek and receive a 10 day extension.<br />
<br />
Witness <b>Luis Froes</b> is recalled today to give further evidence. He previously testified on the 5th November having been called by lawyer Dr. Henrique Costa Pinto acting on behalf of Valentim de CarvalhoFilmes and VC Multimedia. His return to Court today was ordered by the Judge following his failure to provide qualified responses to certain questions on the previous occasion.<br />
<br />
Dr. Henrique Costa Pinto, is the only lawyer to question the witness.<br />
<br />
<b>VC</b> - refers to some invoices which the Clerk to the Court presents to LF, and asks to what they refer.<br />
<b>LF</b> reads and says he is aware of these documents.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>- What is the first document about?<br />
<b>LF </b>presumes that it is about the cost of the seals.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>- Is it an invoice?<br />
<b>LF </b>says the amount is €75,000. He adds that the seals guarantee the authenticity of the product.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>- Is the function of the seals to authenticate the DVDs?<br />
<b>LF </b>- It is. The witness thinks that the contract indicated that VC Multimedia were responsible for the cost of the seals.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>adds that VC Multimedia had to prove that it had the rights.<br />
<br />
<b>LF </b>reads the second document.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Getting back on the first document.<br />
<b>LF </b>– VC Multimedia charged Presslivre - Imprensa Livre, S.A. (owner of the newspaper Correio da Manhã) with the cost of the seals.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– About the second document?<br />
<b>LF </b>says it is an invoice for €xxxxxx to Presslivre.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– And about the third document?<br />
<b>LF </b>– It concerns the distributed copies.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Do you remember having given authorisation to destroy the unsold copies?<br />
<b>LF </b>says he does vaguely remember they were destroyed.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Is it usual practice when products cease to be bought?<br />
<b>LF </b>says it is.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– There is a number that doesn't correspond to the number of surplus copies. It seems the invoice concerns fewer copies than there actually were. Subtracting to the number of distributed copies for sale the number of unsold (destroyed) copies gives a slight difference in relation to the invoice.<br />
<br />
<b>LF </b>doesn't explain this difference.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Apart from this edition, was there a second edition in Portugal or in other foreign countries?<br />
<b>LF </b>says that in this case he would have had to authorise it, which he never did.<br />
<br />
<b>VC</b> – You don't remember.<br />
<b>LF </b>says he doesn't.<br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends.</b><br />
<br />
After a break, the Plaintiffs lawyer Dr Ricardo Afonso plays a recording of the original TV broadcast of the documentary (with publicity etc.) to the Court on a small screen. After a few technical problems, he decides to substitute the original broadcast with the DVD. <br />
<br />
The Judge takes some notes.<br />
<br />
It is scheduled that two video presentations are also played to the Court, but Dr Ricardo Afonso desists of one (an interview made on 16th May 2009) and plays the second one, dated 27th May 2009 (SIC, Querida Julia program).<br />
<br />
The Judge takes some notes of Querida Julia's round table.<br />
<br />
Taking part are Gonçalo Amaral, Paulo Sargento and, on the phone from Brussels, Duarte Levy.<br />
The video starts with mention of GA's condemnation related to his involvement in the Joana Cipriano case. GA states that the new suspect is a British man (whose name is never disclosed, but everybody will understand who he is, a dying man) accused of assaulting teenagers and with convictions in the UK. GA criticises the PJ for having let the private detective group Metodo 3 undertake the investigation of this man and his possible involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Duarte Levy states that the suspect is in Germany and that he was informed that this man (married to a German woman) wasn't properly investigated in Germany and that detectives weren't even allowed into his hospital room. The discussion expands to cover the moral aspect of taking advantage of someone who is seriously ill. Duarte Levy says that the documentary, with English subtitles, made it possible for those with little or no understanding of the Maddie case to appreciate in less than an hour what was at stake. Paulo Sargento underlines that little is known about what really happened between 5.30pm and 8.30pm and adds that the British investigators' paedophile hypothesis is geographically implausible. Gonçalo Amaral concludes saying that trusting in justice is a must (referring to his condemnation in the Joana Case).<br />
<br />
The gathering of evidence has concluded.<br />
The Judge proposes that the last session with the allegations and statements from the parties be fixed for the 18 December but changes this to 7 January 2014 which is the first date when all parties will be available.<br />
<br />
<b>End of session.</b>Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-8033455709844409222013-11-20T22:45:00.002+00:002013-11-20T22:51:02.608+00:00McCann v Gonçalo Amaral Libel Trial in Lisbon - Day 9<b>By Anne Guedes &</b> <b>John (</b> Senior Editor) of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2991.0"> UK Justice Forum </a><br />
<br />
<div class="western" style="line-height: 0.45cm; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
Lisbon - Tuesday 19 Nov 2013<br />
<br />
All lawyers are present. VCFilmes/Multimedia's lawyer is substituted by a lawyer who states that she took part in the Providência Cautelar (Injunction hearing). Witnesses due to testify today are dismissed by defendants TVI, VC and Gonçalo Amaral and will no longer be required to give evidence.<br />
<br />
The Judge starts the session by raising the issue of documents requested by the plaintiffs evidencing the value of royalties paid to Gonçalo Amaral. She reminds the Court that G&P's position is that the request is extemporaneous and illegal and that no other payment was received beyond that previously declared to the Court. One such document relates to a request to Gonçalo Amaral to provide receipts X and Y specific to the period from 17 - 30 October 2008 and from 6 - 30 November 2009. The Judge adds that any others are of no consequence since G&P has proven that no other royalties were paid to Gonçalo Amaral.<br />
<br />
The Judge reminds the Court of the principle that when a Party declares to another Party that a requested document does not exist or is not in their possession, the legal remedy is not for the pursuer to make a further request but to prove through whatever means that the respondent is being untruthful. The Judge therefore grants a request by the plaintiffs that receipts be provided as previously requested since the defender has failed to produce the information sought.<br />
<br />
TVI must provide an extract of accounts for the fiscal years 2008, 2009 and 2010 related to VCFilmes and VCMultimédia. They are given 10 days to produce the relevant documents.<br />
<br />
The Judge omits partially a request concerning the accounts of VCFilmes, which are limited to the the period from the 7 February 2012 onwards. VC Filmes is also given 10 days to produce the documents.<br />
<br />
The Judge reminds the Court that the request by the plaintiffs is related to the search of material facts in order that justice is done. However, she adds that the lawyer representing G&P should consider that if any of the documents requested in the process contain information unrelated to Gonçalo Amaral then that should be maintained apart for commercial and/or fiscal reasons. The defence is therefore authorised to present said documents in the judicial section in order to protect any commercially sensitive information, making only available that which relates to the process concerming the relationship between G&P and Gonçalo Amaral. G&P is given 10 days to respond to the request.<br />
<br />
The Judge adds that G&P has already provided indications about the financial aspect of the publication of the book and about the number of books that have been sold.<br />
<br />
The Judge finally confirms that the date of the next hearing will be on Wednesday 27 November 2013. The date for the final allegations will then be fixed.<br />
<br />
<b>End of session.</b>
</div>
Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-62326560215762851782013-11-18T16:36:00.001+00:002013-11-18T16:36:35.184+00:00McCann v Amaral (05 Nov 2013) Paulo Santos Transcript <b>Libel Trial Day 8 </b><br />Paulo Santos <br /><b>(Lawyer and Media Executive) </b> <br /><br /> By Anne Guedes of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a> <br /><br /><b>Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 8 Witness No 3</b><br /><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://i.imgur.com/wdXpdeE.jpg"><img border="0" src="http://i.imgur.com/wdXpdeE.jpg" /></a><br /><br /> <b>The testimony as it happened...</b><br /><br />(05.11.2013, <b>3:30pm</b>) António Paulo Antunes dos Santos is a Lawyer and post-graduate in Communication Law specialising in the field of Intellectual Property Rights. He is currently the Chief Executive of the Federação Editores de Videogramas (FEVIP), a Portuguese Association which represents the interests of its affiliate members in the coordination of the national programme against audiovisual piracy. He is also a former Polícia Judiciária Inspector.<br /><br />Up until 2009, VCFilmes was an affiliate member of FEVIP. <br /><br /><b>The Judge</b> Maria Emília de Avillez Melo e Castro – Do you know what this trial is about?<br /><b>AS </b>says he remembers the issue of the Providência Cautelar (Injunction hearing).<br /> <br /><b>The Judge</b> – Do you know Gonçalo Amaral?<br /><b>AS </b>says he does, they were colleagues in the Policia Judiciaria for some years and they occasionally talk to each other. He adds that, as a juridical consultant, he helped GA concerning the contract with G&P and the rights related to the documentary's production by VCFilmes. <br /><b><br />The judge </b>raises the issue of confidentiality, but AS says he was not Gonçalo Amaral’s lawyer.<br />It is established that there is professional confidentiality covering the issue of the contracts, but questions can be asked concerning other matters. This limitation will be observed.<br /><br />The defence lawyer for VCFilmes, Dr. Henrique Costa Pinto, is the only lawyer to question the witness.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Did you know GA before the book was published?<br /><b>AS </b>answers that he met GA at the PJ. Though their areas were different, they worked together for some time and had a good relationship. He says that he left the PJ in 1991 in order to lead a program for the protection of authors against the violation of their rights.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Do you know the book by Gonçalo Amaral?<br /><b>AS </b>says he does.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- This book was the basis for a documentary, it was adapted into a film that was broadcast by TVI Have you watched it?<br /><b>AS </b>says he did. He adds that he bought the DVD with a copy of the Correio da Manhã.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Do you remember when that was?<br /><b>AS </b>says it was in 2009.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Apart from the version broadcast by TVI, have you knowledge of any copy made of this audio visual work?<br /><b>AS </b>– No legal one. He adds that an illegal reproduction appeared on the Internet on a certain site. He says that a complaint was lodged with the PJ.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Was it a Portuguese site?<br /><b>AS </b>says he doesn't know who the webmaster was, but that the site was a Portuguese. He adds that the pirated copy had subtitles in English <br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Did VCFilmes put this documentary on-line? <br /><b>AS </b>says that they didn't, they were the victims of a fraud and started an action against the hackers.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Did your association (FEVIP) protest against foreign sites?<br /><b>AS </b>says "no".<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Was VCFilmes damaged in the process?<br /><b>AS </b>- Of course they were. If people have free access to the documentary on the Web, it represents a significant loss of clients.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Are you sure that VCFilmes didn't authorise this?<br /><b>AS </b>- Absolutely.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Have you some knowledge of the Criminal Process in the Madeleine case?<br /><b>AS </b>says he knows some parts of it but none in particular.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Have you seen, in the documentary, parts that weren't in the Criminal Inquiry?<br /><b>AS </b>answers "no".<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- What about the facts themselves?<br /><b>AS </b>says he doesn't know the details, but he thinks that what is in the book is in the Criminal Inquiry. He adds that GA's book analyses the case from the perspective of the investigator, namely, Gonçalo Amaral.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- But this perspective ended up not being confirmed.<br /><b>AS </b>says he doesn't understand what the lawyer means.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- What is the conclusion of the book?<br /><b>AS </b>- The evidence established at that determinate time allowed for some conclusions. The shelving of the case was months afterwards. The book, which was published afterwards, might have divergence points, but it clearly states that there is case for further investigations.<br /><br /><b>Evidence ends.</b><br /><br />
<u>Note</u><br /><br />The witness was consulted by the 8th Committee (education, science and culture) of the Parliament about the Cinema and Audio-visual Law on the 2 July 2012<br /><a href="http://www.parlamento.pt/ActividadeParlamentar/Paginas/DetalheIniciativa.aspx?BID=37048">http://www.parlamento.pt/ActividadeParlamentar/Paginas/DetalheIniciativa.aspx?BID=37048</a><br /><br />About the testimony of this witness in the Providência Cautelar (injunction hearing)<br /><a href="http://www.mccannfiles.com/id297.html">http://www.mccannfiles.com/id297.html</a> (10:32 am)<br /><br />About the Court decision on the temporary injunction (February 2010)<br /><a href="http://www.mccannfiles.com/id339.html">http://www.mccannfiles.com/id339.html</a> <br /><br /> Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-38020695005650164292013-11-15T12:43:00.001+00:002013-11-15T12:43:47.165+00:00McCann v Amaral (05 Nov 2013) Luis Froes Transcript <b>Libel Trial Day 8</b><br />
Luis Froes<br />
<b>(Film Industry Executive)</b><br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<b>Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 8 Witness No 2</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i.imgur.com/v7JmgUC.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="318" src="http://i.imgur.com/v7JmgUC.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="western" style="line-height: 0.58cm; margin-bottom: 0cm;">
<br /></div>
<br /><br /><b>The testimony as it happened...</b><br /><br />(05.11.2013, <b>2:45pm</b>) <b>Luis Froes</b> is a Partner at Outsider Films Ltd. He was General Manager at Valentim de Carvalho Multimédia between April 2008 and September 2012, in which period the Amaral documentary was produced. His evidence relates to the background in which the documentary was produced. <br /><br />Please note the following:<br /><br />• VCFilmes S.A. is the Company which produced the documentary Maddie: The Truth of the Lie based on the book by Dr Gonçalo Amaral (GA) and directed by Carlos Coelho da Silva.<br /><br />• The rights of edition and distribution of this documentary in DVD format were ceded to VC Multimédia S.A., this Company therefore being their representative as regards the exploration or commercialisation of the rights of television broadcast or transmission of this documentary in foreign countries.<br /><br />• The reproduction and editing were authorised by Valentim de Carvalho Multimédia to the company Presslivre - Imprensa Livre, S.A., owner of the newspaper Correio da Manhã (CdM) by means of a contract established between both parties, under which terms, the DVDs, their covers and packaging would be produced on account, by order and under the responsibility of Presslivre, to be distributed and commercialised jointly with said newspaper.<br /><br /><b>The Judge</b> Maria Emília de Avillez Melo e Castro asks the witness if he recalls the details of the distribution contract concerning the DVD.<br /><b>LF </b>doesn't remember.<br /><br /><b>The Judge</b> – Who signed the contract?<br /><b>LF </b>says he did, but he doesn't know about the international contracts.<br /><br /><br /><b>1) The Defence lawyers.</b><br /><br /><b>a) Valentim de Carvalho’s (VC) lawyer, Dr. Henrique Costa Pinto, is the first to question the witness.</b><br /><br />VC - Did you take part in the Providência Cautelar (injunction judgement) hearings?<br /><b>LF </b>- Yes, but I don't remember when I took the stand.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>refers to the DVD audiovisual adaptation of GA's book which was commercialised at the end of 2009. Was it edited by Valentim de Carvalho? <br /><b>LF </b>- Yes<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Who edited the DVD version which went on sale?<br /><b>LF </b>- VC Multimédia distributed. I don't know who edited. <br /><br /><b>VC </b>- I'm talking of the copies of the DVD.<br /><b>LF </b>- VC Multimédia edited them. <br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Wasn't the Correio da Manhã in charge of them?<br /><b>LF </b>– They had to be distributed.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Who commercialised them?<br /><b>LF </b>- For me, commercialising or distributing is the same thing. The unique contract that existed was through the CdM.<br /><br /><b>The Court Clerk</b> is asked to show the contract to the witness.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- The edition was made by the CdM.<br /><b>LF </b>- It was the CdM who sold the DVD to the public.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Did VC commercialise the DVD?<br /><b>LF </b>says that for him "editing" is "editing" (montar)<br /><br />(Note: the Portuguese "editar" that has been translated "edit" means establish the reproduction, publication and diffusion of a work. The Portuguese, as other languages, uses "montar" for "editing" a film).<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Who created the cover, the packaging?<br /><b>LF </b>says it was VC Multimédia .<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Then you've not looked at the contract? Do you have an issue with Valentim de Carvalho? In Court?<br /><b>LF </b>says he has.<br /><br /><b>The Judge</b> – Are you the executing or the executed one?<br /><br /><b>LF </b>says the action is against VC.<br /><b>LF </b>says that there is a problem of definition: VC produced a documentary, and then looked for the best way to distribute it and found CdM.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Who created the cover and the packaging? Who was responsible for this?<br /><b>LF </b>says he doesn't remember. Normally the producer would do that, but in this case it might have not happened this way.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- What about the silver seals with the registration number?<br /><b>LF </b>doesn't know.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Do you know how many copies were made?<br /><b>LF </b>says he knows.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Do you know how many copies were destroyed?<br /><b>LF </b>says that all copies left over were destroyed.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Was there a new edition of the DVD?<br /><b>LF </b>thinks "no". <br /><br /><b>VC </b>– The documentary appeared with subtitles on the Internet.<br /><b>LF </b>says that everything, all sorts of things appear on the Web.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>– But with subtitles?<br /><b>LF </b>doesn't remember.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>makes a request to suspend this witness' testimony without prejudicing the continuity of the trial, because the witness requires to study the documents before being questioned further. Only Dra Duarte objects. The Judge tells the witness that he must return to give further evidence on the 27th November at 9:30 am. <br /><br /><b>VC </b>requests that the examination of the witness continues but on another subject.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Don't you remember seeing that documentary on the Web?<br /><b>LF </b>says he already stated in Court in January 2010 that he didn't.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Do you think it could be that documentary?<br /><b>LF </b>says that there is no control over the release of films on the Internet.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Did VC Multimédia already have the film subtitled? <br /><b>LF </b>answers "no".<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Did VC Multimédia use a system to prevent pirating on the Internet?<br /><b>LF </b>thinks they don't. He adds it's not rare to see a subtitled series on the Internet before they're broadcast on TV.<br /><br /><b>VC</b>'s next question relates to the Providência Cautelar or Injunction but the Judge objects on the basis that it is not relevant, the main action being the present hearing.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>now alludes to the watermark, the documentary having been sold on the international market.<br /><b>VC </b>- Did the international sales concern TV channels or the DVD market? Was there edition and sale of DVDs in foreign countries?<br /><b>LF </b>says he doesn't remember.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Who bought the documentary?<br /><b>LF </b>says that various TV channels bought it.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>- Was the DVD protected by a watermark?<br /><b>LF </b>says it was normal that it was.<br /><br /><b>VC </b>answers a question by the Judge about the watermark and explains that the original documentary is supposed to have a bandwidth (a signal processing)<br /><br /> <br /><b>b) Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer, Dr. Santos de Oliveira.</b><br /><br /><b>SO </b>- As General Director, you had to have knowledge concerning the distribution of the DVD.<br /><b>LF </b>- Yes.<br /><br /><b>SO </b>- Weren't you supposed also to know how many copies were distributed?<br /><b>LF </b>says he doesn't remember. <br /><br /><b>SO </b>- You knew how the DVD was created; shouldn't you also know what kind of protection was applied to the copies?<br /><b>LF </b>says he didn't have to know that.<br /><br /><b>SO </b>- Could some alteration be made without your knowing about it?<br /><b>LF </b>says "no".<br /><br /><b>SO </b>- Did you know whether there was protection against pirate copying?<br /><b>LF </b>says that practically there's always a way to bypass any protection.<br /><br /><b>2) The Plaintiffs' lawyer, Dra Isabel Duarte</b>.<br /><br /><b>ID </b>- Where was the watermark?<br /><b>LF </b>says it was in the DVDs sold in foreign countries.<br /><br /><br /><b>ID </b>- Which countries?<br /><b>LF </b>says he doesn't know, since he didn't sell them, he doesn't remember. He adds that the only entity that commercialised the DVD was the CdM.<br /><br /><b>The Judge</b> asks if the unsold DVDs were destroyed.<br /><b>LF </b>says "yes", all those which weren't sold were destroyed.<br /><br /><b>The Judge</b> asks the witness how he knows that.<br /><b>LF </b>- I was told so.<br /><br /><b>The Judge </b>– Who told you?<br /><b>LF </b>- The CdM.<br /><br /><b>The Judge </b>- Is this a normal procedure?<br /><b>LF </b>- It is.<br /><br /><b>The Judge</b> - When there's no further expectation of selling additional copies, then, before destroying them, do they let you know that they are about to destroy them?<br /><b>LF </b>- Yes, the CdM announced it beforehand.<br /><br /><b>Evidence ends.</b><br /><br /><u>Note</u><br /><br />This witness previously took the stand in the Providência Cautelar (Temporary Injunction) hearings.<br /><br />Civil Court decision in the Injunction<br /><a href="http://www.mccannfiles.com/id339.html">http://www.mccannfiles.com/id339.html</a>Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-14660679878298152192013-11-11T16:50:00.003+00:002013-11-11T16:50:54.830+00:00McCann v Amaral (05 Nov 2013) Mário Sena Lopes Transcript <b>Libel Trial Day 8</b><br />
Mário Sena Lopes<br />
(owner and manager of Publinédita, a Literary Agency and Publishing Company, based in Lisbon )<br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a> <br />
<b><br />Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 8 Witness No 1 </b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i.imgur.com/8dFWCxG.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="http://i.imgur.com/8dFWCxG.jpg" width="200" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
A request is made to the Judge to disclose before the last session of the trial (27 November 2013), as to whether the plaintiffs will, on that day, be permitted to take the stand as plaintiffs (not as witnesses, therefore they do not have to be notified). There were no objections. <br />
<br />
Another request is made and allowed by the Judge to postpone the testimony of Dr Paulo Sargento, whose absence today is justified. Again, there were no objections. <br />
<br />
Publishers Guerra & Paz (G&P) lawyer, Dra Fatima Esteves, informs the Judge that she will no longer be calling witness, Mr Marreiros.<br />
<br />
<b>The testimony as it happened... </b><br />
<br />
(05.11.2013, <b>9:45 am</b>) Mário Sena Lopes greets the public when entering the court room and will greet them again before leaving it. He is the owner and manager of Publinédita, a Literary Agency and Publishing Company, based in Lisbon. From 2007 to 2009 he was Editorial Director for the publisher Guerra & Paz and was responsible for the Gonçalo Amaral book, The Truth of the Lie. He remains as Gonçalo Amaral’s literary agent.<br />
<br />
The Judge asks the witness whether he has knowledge of the trial. He replies that he is unaware of specific details. He adds that, following the publication of the Amaral book, he is no longer involved with it. <br />
<br />
<u><b>1) The defence G&P's lawyer, Dra Fatima Esteves, is the first to question the witness.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- Do you remember what the normal selling price of the book was when it was launched?<br />
<b>SL </b>thinks it was €13.30<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- asks what was the price in Brazil.<br />
<b>SL </b>G&P did not market the book in Brazil nor made any approaches to have it published there. Some of the publishers have head offices in both Portugal and Brazil, but that is not the case with Guerra & Paz.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- How was the book distributed?<br />
<b>SL </b>says there are two methods but in this case it was done through the Correio da Manha. The books were delivered to the bookshops. The unsold copies are sent back to the publisher who must accept them without invoicing.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- asks what are the reasons for the returns.<br />
<b>SL </b>there are many, like the lack of public response, too many copies, contrary publicity in the media, unexpected social factors.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- What about the defective copies? <br />
<b>SL </b>there are always damaged copies. They are destroyed either by the publisher or by the distributor. They are of no benefit to the authors <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- Other books were written about the McCann case. Have you knowledge of them?<br />
<b>SL </b>thinks there are quite a few, such as, "A culpa dos McCann" (The Guilt of the McCanns) and the Kate McCann book, “Madeleine”.<br />
<br />
<u><b>2) The Plaintiff’s lawyer, Dra Isabel Duarte.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- alluding to the successive 12 editions of the book which she lists, asks the witness if he has an idea of the number of returns, either because the copy was defective or had been damaged.<br />
<b>SL </b>says that G&P, in terms of editions and copies, takes good care to protect the rights of the authors. He adds that at the beginning there are more requests than copies provided. This changes with the final edition.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- What about the books which were controlled by the injunction?<br />
<b>SL </b>there is always distributed books that escape an injunction, but most of the copies were delivered to the pursuers' lawyer, namely (Dra Isabel Duarte). He says he couldn't guarantee that all were delivered, but can guarantee that no copy remained at the publisher or at the distributor.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- About the sale price, are you certain of what you answered?<br />
<b>SL </b>says he is.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Wasn't the sale price lowered in the case of this book?<br />
<b>SL </b>says that for most books that doesn't happen. It happens sometimes when the book has no success or when there's a motive to promote it. He doesn't think it is good practice.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- What likely happened in the case of this book?<br />
<b>SL </b>nothing of this kind happened.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Therefore the sale price was around €13. What about the hypermarkets?<br />
<b>SL </b>states the hypermarkets don’t normally promote books to the public and adds that the 15,000 copies of the first edition were sold in the same week. He adds that all editions are referred to in the following ones.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether the witness knows the percentage of returns among the published books.<br />
<b>SL </b>doesn't know. <br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends.</b><br />
<br />
<b>Note:</b> <br />
<br />
Mário Sena Lopes was a witness in the matter of the temporary Injunction granted in respect of the McCanns v G Amaral & Others in relation to the publication of the Amaral book, The Truth of the Lie. The decision for which was delivered on 18 February 2010.<br />
<br />
Mário Rui da Silva Sena Lopes, editorial manager for the publisher from July 2007 to September 2009, clarified questions regarding the choice of date to launch the book, foreign editions and destruction of books; he stated that negotiations for the book began in the first trimester [quarter] of 2008. <a href="http://www.mccannfiles.com/id339.html">http://www.mccannfiles.com/id339.html</a> <br />
<br />Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-2124350810592032762013-11-06T08:47:00.002+00:002013-11-07T05:39:11.283+00:00McCann v Amaral (08 Oct 2013) Francisco Moita Flores Transcript<b>Libel Trial Day 7</b><br />
Francisco Moita Flores<br />
<b>(Retired Polícia Judiciária (PJ) Inspector and writer)</b><br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a> <br />
<br />
<b>Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 7 Witness No 5</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipm8k7pKaDIsyjrh_CtbHYTODfMOlsUcuXqKKHeiUJcFSca-gbtxdeuQeFU7L3iEAxmYOpQVNHe93ifPLp-tTn2liFrynvXL-T-CEaDQC_RvoOGUJIRwcSPZwEoZAAVN5B3PPBsJi-1F8/s1600/FranciscoMoitaFlores.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="222" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipm8k7pKaDIsyjrh_CtbHYTODfMOlsUcuXqKKHeiUJcFSca-gbtxdeuQeFU7L3iEAxmYOpQVNHe93ifPLp-tTn2liFrynvXL-T-CEaDQC_RvoOGUJIRwcSPZwEoZAAVN5B3PPBsJi-1F8/s320/FranciscoMoitaFlores.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<b>The testimony as it happened...</b><br />
<br />
(08.10.2013, <b>2:45pm</b>) Francisco Moita Flores is a retired Polícia Judiciária (PJ) Inspector, he is also a writer.<br />
<br />
He is the only witness who has greeted the public before sitting in the witness chair. This was repeated at the end of the session when the witness turned towards the public and again acknowledged them with a smile and a slight nod.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>asks the witness what sort of contact he has with the McCann process.<br />
<b>MF </b>says he has known Gonçalo Amaral since the time they were both in the PJ. He says they are more or less contemporaneous; although GA is younger than him.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether apart from professional relations they are friends.<br />
<b>MF </b>says they know each other, he says they never went to each other's home.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks if the witness knows the McCanns.<br />
<b>MF </b>says "no". <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks MF if he wrote a book on this case.<br />
<b>MF </b>says he didn't, but commented on the case many times, particularly on TV. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> – Have you read the book?<br />
<b>MF </b>says he did. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> – Have you watched the documentary?<br />
<b>MF </b>says he didn't. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> – Then you were a commentator on TV and also wrote chronicles?<br />
<b>MF </b>answers "yes". <br />
<br />
<b><u>1) Defence lawyers </u></b><br />
<br />
<b>a) Dr Santos de Oliveira, GA's lawyer, is the first to question the witness. </b><br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– What reason did you have to comment on this case?<br />
<b>MF </b>says that first it is his job. He does it professionally because he has experience of being a police inspector and has connections with the police. In this particular case he says that very early he claimed that the police were making errors. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Why?<br />
<b>MF </b>Because they should have considered all the possible hypotheses instead of restricting the investigation to the prefabricated idea of abduction. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– When did you read the book?<br />
<b>MF </b>says he only read it after it was published. He adds that he first read the book and then read the criminal process report. <br />
<br />
<b>SO</b> – Through those readings do you consider that the "death" theory...<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules, she says the questions cannot be commented upon. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– When you became aware of the book and the Report have you heard...<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>protests’ arguing the issue is to consider the conclusions. He asks about the "death" theory.<br />
<b>MF </b>says it is more likely that the child died. And he adds it is impossible that someone passed through the window with a child. He says the abduction theory then doesn't make sense. He observes that there are many possibilities, it's perfectly admissible for instance that the child went out to search for her parents. If the child died, it could have been outside of the flat or in the flat. But, he says, the disappearance never could have happened through the window, he insists that it is essential to understand that it is technically, humanly, impossible. The witness concludes affirming that all the hypotheses are possible, except for the abduction “through that window”. <br />
<br />
<b><u>b) G&P's lawyer, Dra Fatima Esteves. </u></b><br />
<br />
<b>GP</b> – Is it possible to determine a "before" and an "after" the book's publication, in a media perspective?<br />
<b>MF </b>says he was in Greece at the time. He learnt about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann through CNN or Sky News. He returned to Portugal a few days later and doesn't remember having ever seen such a large media circus. It was so enormous that it lasted for weeks and even months. The witness recalls how the parents were filmed every time they went out. When they were made arguidos, he claimed that they should be well treated. Eventually they could be blamed for having neglected their children. Many TV programmes were done. He says the book was published in the continuity of chronicles, interviews, documentaries that this case elicited: the witness statement of an inspector. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– What about the documentary?<br />
<b>MF </b>only remembers that someone talked to him about it, nothing more. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you think that, because of the book, they stopped investigating the case?<br />
<b>MF </b>says he was perplexed when the case was shelved. He feels he has to say that the case was very well investigated. If the Public Ministry doesn't reopen the case, it's because no relevant piece of evidence has been brought. The witness suggests that the case suffered carnival aspects and early errors, the biggest being not to have investigated the parents. Life shows us that there are parents who mistreat their children and this eventuality could not be properly discarded. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you know about the note sent to the media by the PGR (Procuradoria da Republica)?<br />
<b>MF </b>says the PJ cannot do diligences without authorisation from the Public Ministry. He insists very much on this. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– What about the Scotland Yard rogatory letter?<br />
<b>MF</b> says that what SY requested was in the criminal process, such as the checking of cell-phone communications. Recreate everything? Yes, I suppose everything can be done again only to reach the same conclusion. The witness remarks that SY only contemplated the abduction hypothesis. What if for example the little girl went out, fell and wasn't found? He qualifies the restricted vision (of abduction) as "prophetic and dogmatic" and observes that the police knew that what was crucial was finding evidence. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Are there some books published on this?<br />
<b>MF </b>says in Portugal and in the UK many books are published on relevant cases. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Cases with media coverage are a subject matter for books?<br />
<b>MF </b>says that the majority of the authors are journalists. He adds that he himself writes about crime and refers to the many books in which he contributes his opinion on cases. <br />
<br />
<b><u>2) Lawyer for the Plaintiffs in substitution of Dra Isabel Duarte, Dr Ricardo Afonso</u></b>. <br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>– When you said that the police had committed an error in investigating only the abduction hypothesis, what do you base that assumption on?<br />
<b>MF </b>answers that it is based on his own experience. Experience says that the main suspects are closest to the victim and that the solution is often the simpler one. He adds that an abduction assumption cannot be discarded, but should not be the first or only one to be examined. <br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>– Gonçalo Amaral says that on the 4 May 2007, all the hypotheses were taken in consideration.<br />
<b>MF </b>Yes, at that time. <br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>– Whom would you point to?<br />
<b>MF </b>Nobody in particular. <br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>– Why were you perplexed when the process was shelved?<br />
<b>MF </b>I found that the contradictions by the people who had access to the McCann apartment were not explored sufficiently. It was a fundamental error not to isolate them, check who had access to the apartment and collect the data relating to their phone calls in order to clarify the discrepancies in their statements. If it had been done, we wouldn't be here, involved in a trial on freedom of opinion. <br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends.</b><br />
<br />
<b>Note</b><br />
<br />
Witness for the Defence, Hernâni Carvalho, was scheduled to give evidence on the 10th October. . The Judge asked Defence lawyer Dr Santos de Oliveira, if he wished to give up this witness to which he replied that he doesn’t. The Judge then dictated to the clerk a note of the fine this witness will have to pay for not having presented himself before the Court (if a valid justification is provided, the fine will be set aside). Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-23455650163092269752013-10-11T19:52:00.001+01:002013-10-11T19:52:49.943+01:00McCann v Amaral (08 Oct 2013) Manuel Catarino Transcript<b>Libel Trial Day 7</b><br />
Manuel Catarino<br />
<b>(Editor in Chief, Correio da Manhã)</b><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<div class="western">
<b>Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 7
Witness No 4</b></div>
<br />
<b>The testimony as it happened...</b><br />
<br />
(08.10.2013, <b>2:25pm</b>) Manuel Catarino is Editor in Chief of the Portuguese daily, the Morning Mail (Correio da Manhã) and a journalist familiar with criminal processes. He authored "A culpa dos McCann” ("The guilt of the McCanns") with a preface by Francisco Moita Flores, that contains an interview by the criminologist José Manuel Anes, who reviewed the PJ investigation. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether the witness knows what this trial is about.<br />
<b>MC</b> replies that he was involved in various journalistic works on this issue.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks him when.<br />
<b>MC </b> in 2008.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks if the witness' relations with Gonçalo Amaral are only professional or if they are friends.<br />
<b>MC</b> says they are professional, but he knows Gonçalo Amaral personally.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether MC knows the McCanns.<br />
<b>MC </b>says "no".<br />
<br />
<b><u>1) Defence lawyers</u></b><br />
<br />
<b>a)Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer, Dr Santos de Oliveira, is the first to question the witness.</b><br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– As a journalist, you will have followed this Madeleine McCann process. When?<br />
<b>MC </b>From Day One.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– How were you aware of the criminal process when the McCanns were made arguidos?<br />
<b>MC</b> explains his knowledge originated in the news Reports, he didn't receive information directly, he coordinated the work of the journalists and reviewed the information they sent him.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Have you got the DVD (provided by the Public Ministry)?<br />
<b>MC </b>says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Have you read GA's book?<br />
<b>MC </b>says he did.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Was there a decrease in interest following the publication of the book?<br />
<b>MC </b>thinks that the attention was greater when the McCanns were in the Algarve.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– But was there a decrease because of the book?<br />
<b>MC </b>says he can't answer that.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– As a redaction coordinator, have you instructed not to publish more on this case because the news had lost interest?<br />
<b>MC </b>No, a newspaper doesn't abandon cases. What counts are relevant points and this is decided every single day. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Are you aware of other books on this case?<br />
<b>MC </b>says that the Madeleine McCann mystery raised curiosity. The interest for the story was great, that is why so many books were published.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Since you saw the AG Final Report and you read the book, did you find that content in the book included revelations?<br />
<b>MC </b>remembers that the book was released after the Final Report and that the revelations weren’t really unique.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Then the book doesn't bring revelations?<br />
<b>MC </b>agrees.<br />
<br />
<b>b) TVI's lawyer, Dr Miguel Coroadinha.</b><br />
<br />
<b>TVI</b> – Haven't you yourself written a book on this case?<br />
<b>MC </b>says he did.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– When was it published?<br />
<b>MC</b> says it was at the end of 2008, beginning of 2009. <br />
(Note: the book was published on the 6th December 2007).<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>wants to know what the book is about...<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules and says the book will be included within the trial files.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– What does the book consist of?<br />
<b>MC </b>says the book has two parts. One is on the news published by the newspapers and the other consists of analyses by experts on the various aspects of the criminal investigation.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI</b> – How many newspapers were taken into consideration?<br />
<b>MC</b> says the main newspaper was the Correio da Manhã. The first part of the book is based upon facts described in its articles.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– You said that no newspaper ceases abruptly to mention any issue?<br />
<b>MC </b>– Yes, and any published book is news.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– But isn't there a first phase where a lot of attention is given to a case and then isn't it normal that the interest subsides?<br />
<b>MC </b>In the case of Joana Cipriano, there was a beginning and there was an end. The case of Madeleine McCann is a crime without punishment, it is an open narrative.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– A book cannot suppress this situation?<br />
<b>MC </b>Logically no.<br />
<br />
<b>2) McCann lawyer, Dr Ricardo Alfonso.</b><br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>asks why Manuel Catarino described this case as a crime without punishment.<br />
<b>MC </b>A child disappeared, that is a crime... <br />
<br />
<b>TVI</b> intervenes – What is the crime?<br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>– You said that the attention didn't decrease when the book was published. Do you remember that the Correio da Manhã published an interview with Gonçalo Amaral?<br />
<b>MC</b> says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>– When?<br />
<b>MC </b>says it was just before the book was launched.<br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>– Did the Correio da Manhã consider it was in the public interest to publish this kind of stuff?<br />
<b>MC </b>says "yes". <br />
<br />
Nothing more was said.<br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends.</b><br />
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<u><b>Previous Transcripts:</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html"> Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a> (Media Consultant)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html"> Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-maria.html">Witness 2, Maria Stilwell</a> (Writer and Newspaper Editor)
<br />
<br />
<b>Day 5 – 27 September 2013</b><br />
Postponed <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-27-sept-2013.html"> Explanation of Postponement</a>
<br />
<br />
<b>Day 6 - 2nd October 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-trish.html"> Witness 1, Patricia Cameron</a> - Gerry McCann's sister (Nurse)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-henrique.html"> Witness 2, Henrique Machado</a> (Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-eduardo.html"> Witness 3, Eduardo Dâmaso</a> (Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper) <br />
<br />
<b>Day 7 - 8th October 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-08-oct-2013-ricardo.html"> Witness 1, Ricardo Paiva</a> (Police Inspector)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-08-oct-2013-victor.html"> Witness 2, Victor Tavares de Almeida</a> (Police Chief Inspector)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-08-oct-2013-luis-neves.html"> Witness 3, Luis Neves</a> (Director National anti Terrorism Unit)Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-8253443898589466332013-10-11T19:42:00.001+01:002013-10-11T19:42:33.194+01:00McCann v Amaral (08 Oct 2013) Luis Neves Transcript<b>Libel Trial Day 7</b><br />
Luis Neves<br />
<b>(Director National anti Terrorism Unit)</b><br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<b>Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 7 Witness No 3</b><br />
<br />
<b>The testimony as it happened...</b><br />
<br />
(08.10.2013, <b>12:01pm</b>) Luis Neves, former Coordinator of the DCCB (Direcção Central de Combate ao Banditismo), now directs the UNCT (Unidade Nacional de Combate ao Terrorismo), the PJ unit that fights violent criminality.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks the witness if he intervened in the criminal process related to Madeleine McCann's disappearance.<br />
<div>
<b>LN </b>says he did, but not directly. He explains that, after some days, the then National Director of the PJ, Alipio Ribeiro, asked him to send officers of his unit who were specialised in cases of abduction and hostage. He adds that his team had collaborated in the Joana Cipriano murder case.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> – What do you mean by "indirectly"?<br />
<b>LN</b> says that, though he went to the Algarve a few times to meet Guilhermino Encarnação, then Director of the PJ in Faro, and Gonçalo Amaral, the operations were performed by Portimão police officers under the direction of his team.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>asks if the witness' relations with Gonçalo Amaral are only professional or if there is a personal relationship.<br />
<b>LN </b>says there's friendship between them.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks if the witness had a relationship with the McCanns.<br />
<b>LN </b>remembers he saw them at a meeting organized by Guilhermino Encarnação in the British Consulate in Portimão concerning diligences to perform on sightings.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> – Have you read the book?<br />
<b>LN </b>says he didn't read it completely. Somebody showed the book to him and he read a few sections, just before the injunction trial.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> - Have you watched the documentary?<br />
<b>LN </b>says "no".<br />
<br />
He swears to tell the truth.<br />
<br />
<b><u>1) Defence lawyers</u></b><br />
<br />
This witness is common to Defence lawyers acting on behalf of both Guerra & Paz and Gonçalo Amaral, the question being who will start.<br />
<br />
<b>a) Gonçalo Amaral’s lawyer, Dr Santos de Oliveira, is the first to question the witness</b>.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Do you have any knowledge of the AG Final Report concerning this case?<br />
<b>LN </b>says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Do you know that the PJ went on gathering information after the case was shelved? <br />
<b>LN</b> says he is aware of that.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Was there some investigation?<br />
<b>LN </b>says if there was he didn't take part in it. <br />
<br />
<b>SO</b> – But didn't you receive Reports?<br />
<b>LN</b> says "no", but as he had contacts with people in charge of the operations, he was informed about them.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– After the publication of GA's book, was there a breach in the flow of information?<br />
<b>LN </b>presumes that there wasn't, but points out that he doesn't know. He says that, independently of the shelving of any criminal process, the PJ continue to work. They don't perform formal (official) operations but correlate and investigate any new information that is brought to them.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– What do you know about the Scotland Yard rogatory letter?<br />
<b>LN</b> says he has no knowledge of its content.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– From what you read of the book, would you say it constitutes a revelation?<br />
<b>LN </b>There's nothing new in this book.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– What about the conclusions?<br />
<b>LN </b>says he only remembers clearly one or two chapters, about dogs and about an Irish family. He says that anybody who at the time was aware of this case knew all that was in this book. He explains that the Public Ministry had the files digitalised in order to make them available.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Have you any knowledge about how the "death" theory came about?<br />
<b>LN</b> says there was no such theory in the beginning; he even remembers that Guilhermino Encarnação talked of abduction. But with time this idea had to be contemplated. He says that Madeleine's parents were the first to talk of death. It occurred in the British Consulate when the parents wanted a South African ex-policeman to come with a machine supposed to find bodies from hair samples (Note: Matter Orientation System or MOS). <br />
<br />
He remembers there were a lot of problems at the customs because of this device. The witness says that later, the British police officers who were collaborating in Portimão started speaking of special dogs that could discover bodies in a field. He says that it is where the initiative of sending for the dogs originated. Through the help of the dogs the investigation evolved. Death appeared a serious possibility. It led to the examination of telecommunications. From the end of 2007 on, the "death" theory became a distinct possibility.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Was the investigation limited to the facts that are in the book?<br />
<b>LN</b> Independently of the main theory, all lines of inquiry kept on being investigated. The witness adds that the dogs (Eddie and Keela) resolved many cases, they arrived with an impressive curriculum vitae and a lot of certificates that of course carried a certain amount of prestige. <br />
<br />
<b>b) G&P's lawyer, Dra Fatima Esteves.</b><br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Your Unit is specialised in abductions. Concerning the reopening of the investigation...<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules the question.<br />
<br />
<b>GP</b> – When did you read the book?<br />
<b>LN </b>says he read it before the judgement of the providência cautelar ("injunction", in January 2010), he read extracts of it.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Were the facts in the book different from the facts that are in the criminal process Report?<br />
<b>LN </b>says he remembers the facts in the book are those of the investigation. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you know if the PJ continued to investigate?<br />
<b>LN</b> says they didn't officially investigate. He adds that the police must take seriously and pursue all information that comes to them regardless. <br />
<br />
<b>d) TVI's lawyer, Dr. Miguel Coroadinha. </b><br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– What about the South African called Krügel, who suggested he be sent for?<br />
<b>LN </b>The parents did, particularly the mother, she made much pressure for it to happen.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– Was the machine intended to find bodies or living people?<br />
<b>LN </b>Bodies. It wasn't supposed to reveal the location of living people.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– Then the parents considered death...<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules.<br />
<br />
<b>LN </b>spontaneously says it was very complicated to have the equipment pass the border.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– When was it? One, two months later?<br />
<b>LN </b>thinks it was in July 2007.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI</b> – Was there a reaction by the British after those operations?<br />
<b>LN </b>says he wasn't present during the Krügel diligence, but he was told how it occurred. He describes the methodology.<br />
<br />
Then the witness mentions that some sticks were inserted into the ground in order to help the dogs find an eventually buried corpse.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– Was that theory promoted among all others?<br />
<b>LN </b>says he didn't say so and observes that Guilhermino Encarnação spoke of abduction in spite of having absolutely nothing that could substantiate it. He insists that, as in the Joana Cipriano case previously investigated, all hypotheses must always be on the table. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>2) The McCann’s substitute lawyer, Dr Ricardo Afonso.</b><br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>– You spoke of a suggestion to send for dogs, is it in the process?<br />
<b>LN </b>says he doesn't know if there is a Report on that. He knows that the proposal by the British police wasn't easy to accept because it involved high costs and there was no precedent in Portugal to work with this type of specialised dog. He remembers that, just after the operations with the dogs, he spoke to two British officials in Lisbon to whom he asked what use the English Courts made of the dogs' alerts.<br />
<br />
<b>RA</b> – Then?<br />
<b>LN </b>I was told they only perform a secondary part, but in many different cases they had helped to reach the truth.<br />
<br />
And then nothing more was said.<br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends.</b></div>
<u><b>Previous Transcripts:</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html"> Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a> (Media Consultant)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html"> Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-maria.html">Witness 2, Maria Stilwell</a> (Writer and Newspaper Editor)
<br />
<br />
<b>Day 5 – 27 September 2013</b><br />
Postponed <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-27-sept-2013.html"> Explanation of Postponement</a>
<br />
<br />
<b>Day 6 - 2nd October 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-trish.html"> Witness 1, Patricia Cameron</a> - Gerry McCann's sister (Nurse)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-henrique.html"> Witness 2, Henrique Machado</a> (Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-eduardo.html"> Witness 3, Eduardo Dâmaso</a> (Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper) <br />
<br />
<b>Day 7 - 8th October 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-08-oct-2013-ricardo.html"> Witness 1, Ricardo Paiva</a> (Police Inspector)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-08-oct-2013-victor.html"> Witness 2, Victor Tavares de Almeida</a> (Police Chief Inspector)Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-48495653143882323122013-10-11T16:36:00.000+01:002013-10-11T16:50:54.426+01:00McCann v Amaral (08 Oct 2013) Victor Tavares de Almeida Transcript<b>Libel Trial Day 7</b><br />
Victor Tavares de Almeida<br />
<b>(Police Chief Inspector)</b><br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes </b>of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i.imgur.com/6pSFaq3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="http://i.imgur.com/6pSFaq3.jpg" width="228" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="western">
<b>Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 7
Witness No 2
</b></div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
(08.10.2013, <b>11:45am</b>). There are some video-link
connection problems, a pause is decided. Once Victor Tavares de
Almeida appears on the screen, the lawyers return to the Court and
the trial commences at 11:55am.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> asks the witness if he is a Chief
Inspector.
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA </b>says he is.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> asks where he works and for how long he
has been there.
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA</b> says he has worked in the DIC (Department of
Criminal Investigation) at Portimão since January 2007.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> presents the reason for this trial and
asks if the witness is aware of it.
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA </b>says he knows exactly.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> asks if the witness participated in the
investigation.
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA </b>says he started to work on the case two days
after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann until the end of
September 2007.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> – Hierarchically, were you
subordinated to Gonçalo Amaral? TA said that Gonçalo Amaral was the
Coordinator and he was under him.</div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> – Were you Number 2?
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA</b> says it can be said so.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether, independently of
professional ties, is there a personal friendship between him and
Gonçalo Amaral.
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA </b>said that is correct.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> wants to know if the relationship with
the McCanns was only professional.
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA </b>says the unique relationship he had was exactly
that, professional.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> asks the witness if he has read GA's
book.
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA </b>says he only read the final part.
<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>The Judge</b> asks if he watched the documentary
produced by Valentim de Carvalho. </div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA </b>says he didn't.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
Witness says he will answer with honesty.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b><u>Guerra & Paz's lawyer's is the first to
question the witness.
</u></b></div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>GP </b>– You exercised your functions in the
Madeleine McCann investigation until September 2007... </div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA</b> takes
advantage of a pause – "why?"
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>GP </b>– No, I just wanted to confirm this.
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA</b> confirms.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>GP </b>– Do you have any knowledge of a note emitted
by the media because of the shelving of the process?
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>TA </b>doesn't know to what note the lawyer refers
(<b>see below*</b>)
<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
Then all the lawyers, one by one, state that they
don't have any questions for the witness since he didn't read the
book nor watched the documentary.
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>Evidence ends. </b>
</div>
<div class="western">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="western">
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>* The note is an important feature of this
case, it considers and lists the 3 possible methods whereby the case
can be reopened following the shelving Report by the Public Ministry.
</b>
</div>
<div class="western">
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>They are as follows:- </b>
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>1) A hierarchically superior magistrate can
disagree with the shelving and order an instruction inquiry. </b>
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>2) Any of the arguidos can request an
instruction inquiry. They would have participated in the diligences,
asked for new operations and finally had been part of a final
contradictory debate. </b>
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<b>3) Anyone who has a new and relevant piece of
evidence can request the reopening of the process.</b></div>
<div class="western">
</div>
<div class="western">
<b>The question of the note to the media, asked of
Eduardo Dâmaso by the Defence, isn't mentioned in the Dâmaso
statement (he didn't know what it was). Since it is again asked of
another witness, it is reproduced below in both Portuguese and
English: </b>
</div>
<div class="western">
<br /></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><i>NOTA PARA A COMUNICAÇÃO SOCIAL </i>
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<i><span style="color: #674ea7;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="western">
</div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><i>Por despacho com data de hoje (21.07.2008)
proferido pelos dois magistrados do Ministério Público competentes
para o caso, foi determinado o arquivamento do inquérito relativo ao
desaparecimento da menor Madeleine McCann, por não se terem obtido
provas da prática de qualquer crime por parte dos arguidos. </i>
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">NOTE TO THE MEDIA
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">By order dated today (21.07.2008) emitted by the
two prosecutors in charge of the case, we determined the shelving of
the investigation concerning the disappearance of the minor Madeleine
McCann having failed to obtain any evidence of the practice of any
crime by the arguidos.
</span></div>
<div class="western">
</div>
<div align="CENTER" class="western" style="widows: 132;">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">II
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<i><span style="color: #674ea7;">Cessa assim a condição de arguido de Robert
James Queriol Evelegh Murat, Gerald Patrick McCann e Kate Marie
Healy, declarando-se extinctas as medidas de coacção impostas aos
mesmos.</span></i></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">Ceases then the arguido status of defendant Robert
James Queriol Evelegh Murat, Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie
Healy, being declared extinguished the coercive measures imposed on
them.
</span><br />
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="western">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">
III
</span></div>
</div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><i>Poderão ter lugar a reclamação hierárquica,
o pedido de abertura de instrução ou a reabertura do inquérito,
requeridos por quem tiver legitimidade para tal. </i>
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">Can be reopened following a hierarchical
complaint, the request for opening an instruction or the reopening of
the investigation, required by those who would have legitimacy to do
so.
</span><br />
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="western">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">
IV
</span></div>
</div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><i>O inquérito poderá vir a ser reaberto por
iniciativa do Ministério Público ou a requerimento de algum
interessado se surgirem novos elementos de prova que originem
diligências sérias, pertinentes e consequentes. </i>
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">The investigation will be able to be reopened at
the initiative of the Public Ministry or on request of any person
interested if new evidence arises deserving of serious, relevant and
consequential diligences.
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">
V
</span></div>
</div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<i><span style="color: #674ea7;">Decorridos que sejam os prazos legais, o
processo poderá ser consultado por qualquer pessoa que nisso revele
interesse legítimo, respeitados que sejam o formalismo e limites
impostos por lei.</span></i></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><i>Lisboa, 21 de Julho de 2008</i></span></div>
<div align="CENTER" class="western" style="widows: 132;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><i>O Gabinete de
Imprensa
</i></span></div>
</div>
<div align="CENTER" class="western" style="widows: 132;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><i>Ana Lima
</i></span></div>
</div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">Elapsed since the legal deadlines, the process may
be inspected by any person showing legitimate interest, in the
respect of the formalism and the limits imposed by the Law.</span></div>
<div class="western">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">Lisbon, 21 July 2008</span></div>
<div align="CENTER" class="western" style="widows: 132;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">O Gabinete de
Imprensa</span></div>
</div>
<div align="CENTER" class="western" style="widows: 132;">
<div style="text-align: left;">
<span style="color: #674ea7;">Ana Lima </span><span style="color: #8e7cc3;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div align="CENTER" class="western" style="widows: 132;">
<span style="color: #8e7cc3;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="western" style="text-align: left; widows: 132;">
<div align="LEFT" class="western" style="widows: 129;">
<b><u>Note from John
(Senior Editor of UK Justice Forum):</u></b></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><i>"A
special feature of this Report is the reference to a 'note' which
relates the conditions on which the case has been shelved.</i></span></span></span><br />
<i><br /></i>
<i><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">It
should be noted that any of the arguidos have the right to ask that
the case be reopened </span></span></span><strong><span style="color: black;"><span style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">at
any time."</span></span></span></strong></i></blockquote>
</div>
<u><b>Previous Transcripts:</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html"> Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a> (Media Consultant)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html"> Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-maria.html">Witness 2, Maria Stilwell</a> (Writer and Newspaper Editor)
<br />
<br />
<b>Day 5 – 27 September 2013</b><br />
Postponed <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-27-sept-2013.html"> Explanation of Postponement</a>
<br />
<br />
<b>Day 6 - 2nd October 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-trish.html"> Witness 1, Patricia Cameron</a> - Gerry McCann's sister (Nurse)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-henrique.html"> Witness 2, Henrique Machado</a> (Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-eduardo.html"> Witness 3, Eduardo Dâmaso</a> (Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper) <br />
<br />
<b>Day 7 - 8th October 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-08-oct-2013-ricardo.html"> Witness 1, Ricardo Paiva</a> (Police Inspector)Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-27877795837877923582013-10-10T21:52:00.000+01:002013-10-11T16:38:20.853+01:00McCann v Amaral (08 Oct 2013) Ricardo Paiva Transcript<b>Libel Trial Day 7</b><br />
Ricardo Paiva<br />
<b>(Police Inspector)</b><br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://i.imgur.com/doyeekP.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="308" src="http://i.imgur.com/doyeekP.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<b>Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 7 Witness No1</b><br />
<br />
(08.10.2013 <b>10:10 am</b>) The Metro is on strike today. Everyone is present in Court except for the Judge. The plaintiff’s lawyer, Dra Isabel Duarte, is not present but substituted by her assistant Dr Ricardo Alfonso, he sits in her chair.<br />
<br />
The session eventually starts by considering several requests by the two parties. The first request (from the plaintiffs) concerns documents. The Judge reminds the Court that only documents which are relevant will be admitted in the process. G&P's lawyer, Dra Fatima Esteves, makes an objection on the basis that first three documents aren't legible. The Judge says they are. It seems the origin of these documents was with the Madeleine Fund site. The Judge eventually finds unjustified the presentation of these documents.<br />
<br />
The Judge then refers to the late formal request by Gerald McCann and Gonçalo Amaral to take the stand to which now is added a similar request by Kate McCann. The Judge says that the Court will decide about the relevance or not of these requests, when the presentation of the matter of proof indicated by the parties is concluded.<br />
<br />
Now follows a request by Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer, Dr Santos de Oliveira, regarding an Application dated 27th September 2013 concerning the substitution of two witnesses. The Judge observes that this request, not being grounded as it should, according to the Law, can't be conceded. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>then reads an extended statement relating the technical and financial difficulty which his client is experiencing in researching information which is available concerning the effect on the McCanns of the book publication. He states that due to this complex research it was only now that GA found the complete version of an interview by the McCanns in the weekly Expresso dated 6th September 2008 (online on the 7th) entitled Gonçalo Amaral é uma vergonha ("GA is a shame"), i.e a month and a half after the publication of the book. Link to Expresso article in English> <a href="http://www.mccannfiles.com/id163.html">http://www.mccannfiles.com/id163.html</a><br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>continues. This interview raises the issue of the reaction of the McCanns to the publication of the book and mentions their intention to publicise the process related to the disappearance of their daughter.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>quotes the McCanns as answering "no" to one journalist when asked if they had read the book. Kate McCann added, “Why would I (read it)?” and Gerald McCann claimed, “I won't learn anything from reading it.”<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>quotes further comments where the McCanns are asked about suing Gonçalo Amaral. Gerald McCann says they are, “...focused on what they can do to find Madeleine and not on suing anyone.” whereas Kate McCann observes that she, “...will not lose time with Mr Amaral.”<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>observes that the McCanns also claim in the interview that the twins, “...are very, very happy.” and do not mention any problems related to the book. SO suggests that a month and a half after the book was published they seem not to feel shame, lack of appetite, anxiety, and insomnia etc., all psychological arguments for the case. Apparently, the two journalists who conducted the interview, namely, Raquel Moleiro and Rui Gustavo, have been asked to take the stand to confirm the accuracy of the McCann’s statements. There is some confusion about the Expresso article, which is in the providência cautelar (injunction) files, but not in its full version. <br />
<br />
Photocopies of the Expresso article which SO brought to Court are distributed to all lawyers with the assistance of the Clerk of the Court.<br />
<br />
<b>RA</b>, Dra Duarte's substitute, opposes the request for the interview to be included in the process because it was already appended to in the injunction. He adds that it is not necessary to hear the journalists because the court does not seek to prove whether or not the plaintiff’s statements are accurately reproduced in the written text. He asks for the request to include the document to be rejected.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> disagrees and declares that this document will be included within this trial's files because it constitutes a more legible version than the one which was joined to the providência cautelar (injunction) relating to the banning of the book. The Judge adds that the comments of the readers about the interview have to be included in the files because they illustrate the reactions of the public to the contents of the article.<br />
<br />
<b>The testimony as it happened...</b><br />
<br />
(08.10.2013, <b>11am</b>) Ricardo Paiva, Police Inspector now working in Funchal, Madeira gives his evidence via video-link.<br />
<br />
Gonçalo Amaral, who without exception attended all sessions so far, leaves the court room.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks the witness if he knows why he is here by video-link.<br />
<b>RP </b>says he knows.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks if RP if he was a colleague to Gonçalo Amaral.<br />
<b>RP</b> says "yes" and adds GA was the Coordinator of the investigation team.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>asks the witness when he was a Police Inspector in Portimão.<br />
<b>RP </b>says he commenced in 2004 and finished in November 2012.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>asks when he participated in the investigation.<br />
<b>RP </b>says it was from the very beginning and lasted up to the shelving of the process. He adds that even afterwards, he continued to analyse information which kept arriving at the Portimão Criminal Investigation Department (DIC).<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks if the witness' relations with Gonçalo Amaral are professional or personal.<br />
<b>RP </b>replies that he had a professional relationship with GA, as one has with one's superior but also a friendly relation, as with colleagues.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether this friendship lasted.<br />
<b>RP </b>says "yes". <br />
<br />
Asked, RP swears that he will answer the truth.<br />
<br />
<b><u>1) Defence lawyers</u></b><br />
a) Guerra & Paz's lawyer, Dra Fátima Esteves, is the first to question the witness.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Considering the investigation, can you affirm whether, because of the book, the PJ stopped collecting information?<br />
<b>RP </b>As I said to the Court, there was no effect on the collection and subsequent examination of new information on this case.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Is the investigation continuing?<br />
<b>RP </b>says he's not involved with this investigation any more, but he read in the media that it was.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you know when the shelving report was published?<br />
<b>RP </b>says "in June?", then corrects saying he doesn't know the exact date.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you know if the investigation was reopened later, with new information?<br />
<b>RP </b>It wasn't formally reopened. However, several pieces of information arrived about possible places where Madeleine could be. Individuals also said they had information. All this was investigated and the proceedings were released to the Portimão Court. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Have you read the GA book?<br />
<b>RP </b>says "yes" and adds he read various books by Gonçalo Amaral. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Are the facts mentioned in this book those of the investigation or are they new?<br />
<b>RP</b> says he can affirm that what's in the book is backed by the investigation data. He adds that the content of the book mirrors the investigation and can be checked since the public has access to the files. <br />
<br />
<b><u>b) GA's lawyer, Dr Santos de Oliveira. </u></b><br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– You stated that the facts in the book are in the investigation which you were part of. Was that up until the shelving of the process?<br />
<b>RP </b>says "yes" and that, afterwards, he sorted out and worked on the incoming information. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>asks whether the facts then were insignificant... <br />
<br />
<b>The Judg</b>e overrules. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– What about the possibility that the child had died?<br />
<b>RP </b>says that after a certain time it is normal to start thinking of death. He says that the investigation took various avenues, one of them being the death of the child. He says their British colleagues even contemplated the possible concealment of a cadaver. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– So you went on working on this case. What did you do?<br />
<b>RP </b>says his task was to examine the new information. He processed it, introducing it into a data base in order to cross reference with other data. When it was necessary the PJ made external interventions. He thinks that information still arrives even now and is given the same treatment. <br />
<br />
<b>SO</b> – During this processing of data retrieval and comparing, did you notice a change after the book was published?<br />
<b>RP </b>says he didn't at all. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– What happened then?<br />
<b>RP </b>says the volume of information was more or less the same. He adds that none of the various published books or newspaper articles stopped the information flow. <br />
<br />
<b>SO</b> – When the files are shelved, is it normal to continue to process information?<br />
<b>RP </b>says "yes". The police have to examine every piece of information in order to establish whether it is relevant or not. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Was a work team constituted to process information?<br />
<b>RP </b>says they were two officers for that job, both of them having knowledge about the case. The witness then alludes to the Scotland Yard review and says that the processed information was transmitted to the team that worked with SY. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>asks when this team was formed, if it was after the publication of the book.<br />
<b>RP </b>says it was much later. <br />
<br />
<b><u>c) The Producer and Publisher of the documentary (VC)'s lawyer, Dr Henrique Costa Pinto</u></b>. <br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Have you watched the documentary?<br />
<b>RP </b>says he did. <br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– This documentary was based on Gonçalo Amaral's book. Does it refer to facts that aren't mentioned in the investigation?<br />
<b>RP </b>answers that the documentary was synonymous with the book. He says that if the documentary was based on the book then that in turn by inference was also based on the investigation... <br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>interrupts and insists, repeating his question.<br />
<b>RP </b>says the book both exhibits what is in the investigation and the author's opinion about it. <br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>observes that an opinion is an opinion and facts are facts. He wants the witness to tell the Court if the documentary contains facts that aren't in the criminal process.<br />
<b>RP </b>says the documentary, according to his understanding, is based on the facts of the criminal process.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>- Only on facts?<br />
<b>RP </b>– Yes, facts complemented by an opinion about them. <br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– And the book?<br />
<b>RP </b>says that the book is based on the investigation, contains an opinion about the investigation data and also refers to GA's experience as a police inspector.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Do you remember the conclusions (of the documentary)?<br />
<b>RP </b>says he remembers vaguely. <br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Have you found conclusions that are in conflict with the content of the criminal process? <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules saying that it is not what they are here trying to establish. She says that the Court is attempting to ascertain facts, not opinions. <br />
<br />
<b><u>d) TVI's lawyer, Dr Miguel Coroadinha. </u></b><br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Up to what date were you involved in sorting out the incoming information?<br />
RP Until the start of 2012. <br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– Between 2008 and 2012, did you note a difference... <br />
<br />
<b>The Judg</b>e interrupts again saying that the witness has already answered that question and adds that the witness hasn't observed any differences. <br />
<br />
<b>TVI</b> – Was the new team to help Scotland Yard constituted before you left?<br />
<b>RP </b>says the media informed us about this, he says the new team is in Porto to reanimate the process. <br />
<br />
<b><u>2) McCann’s lawyer, Dr Ricardo Afonso. </u></b><br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>- Can you explain to the Court how this team was constituted and why it wasn't constituted earlier?<br />
<b>RP</b> answers that the lawyer must ask this question to the PJ National Director as he is not familiar with the reasons that led to the formation of this team. <br />
<br />
<b>RA </b>– You said that what is in the book is also in the criminal process?<br />
<b>RP </b>replies that he said that the book is based on the criminal process and supports the opinion of the author. <br />
<br />
<b>RA</b> says he wants to know whether the final part of the book which states, "Para mim e os investigadores..." (For me and my team)... <br />
<br />
<b>The judge</b> overrules saying this is not a fact, but a conclusion. She observes that the lawyers will have to work for the final allegations; they'll have to distinguish between what is fact, indication or conclusion. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> (Maria Emília de Melo e Castro) is now asking <br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>– What are the revelations of the book?<br />
<b>RP </b>asks the Judge to explain... <br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>interrupts and repeats – What is new in this book?<br />
<b>RP </b>Compared to the investigation, nothing. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> seizes the book, on her desk, and waves it in the direction of the screen. <br />
<br />
<b>MC</b> – Doesn't the cover say it has unique revelations?<br />
<b>TVI's </b>lawyer says "no".<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks him to kindly not comment. <br />
<b>RP </b>answers that there is nothing new in the book.<br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>– Shall I have to conclude then that what's on the cover is misleading publicity?<br />
<b>RP </b>mumbles. <br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>– Is there or is there not?<br />
<b>RP</b> mumbles. <br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>insists again and again<br />
<b>RP </b>mumbles.<br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>– Then there are no revelations! <br />
<br />
There is a few seconds silence, like a relief after a tension.<br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends. </b>
<u><b>Previous Transcripts:</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html"> Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a> (Media Consultant)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html"> Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-maria.html">Witness 2, Maria Stilwell</a> (Writer and Newspaper Editor)
<br />
<br />
<b>Day 5 – 27 September 2013</b><br />
Postponed <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-27-sept-2013.html"> Explanation of Postponement</a>
<br />
<br />
<b>Day 6 - 2nd October 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-trish.html"> Witness 1, Patricia Cameron</a> - Gerry McCann's sister (Nurse)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-henrique.html"> Witness 2, Henrique Machado</a> (Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-eduardo.html"> Witness 3, Eduardo Dâmaso</a> (Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper) Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-9764952356419366842013-10-08T15:27:00.001+01:002013-10-10T21:54:27.281+01:00McCann v Amaral (02 Oct 2013) Eduardo Dâmaso Transcript<b>Libel Trial Day 6</b><br />
Eduardo Dâmaso <br />
<b>(Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper)</b><br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<b> Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 6 Witness No3</b><br />
<br />
<b>The testimony as it happened...</b><br />
<br />
(02.10.2013,<b> 2:50pm</b>) – Eduardo Dâmaso is a witness for both parties. He is a journalist with the Portuguese Morning Mail (Correio da Manhã) based in Lisbon.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks what exactly his job with the newspaper was when the interview with Gonçalo Amaral was published. (Note: The article referred to only exists in print, a copy of which has been lodged with the Court).<br />
<b>ED </b>says that at the time the book was published he was Deputy Director with the Correio da Manhã. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether he knows why he has been called to testify.<br />
<b>ED </b>says he is aware the reason is because he took part, he was present, at the interview of Gonçalo Amaral.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks when that was.<br />
<b>ED </b>thinks it was about one year after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>asks how the interview was set up and organized, who contacted who.<br />
<b>ED </b>says that he and Henrique Machado contacted Gonçalo Amaral.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether he remembers what they told him.<br />
<b>ED </b>says he doesn't remember.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks the Clerk of the Court to show the witness the newspaper clipping previously shown to the previous witness.<br />
<b>ED </b>confirms that it is indeed the article mentioned which he has been shown.<br />
<br />
The Judge asks whether the witness has any connection with Gonçalo Amaral or with the McCanns.<br />
<b>ED </b>says "no".<br />
<br />
The witness first takes the stand on behalf of the Plaintiff.<br />
<br />
<u><b>1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- wants to know whether Gonçalo Amaral's answers were subjected to alteration or does the article represent the transcript of what was actually said.<br />
<b>ED </b>says that sometimes there's a difference and it may happen what is published doesn't reflect rigorously what was said.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks if it's common practice for journalists to edit their articles.<br />
<b>ED </b>answers that it's an obligation. He explains that an interview represents hours of words whereas the space in the newspaper is limited.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Do you edit?<br />
<b>ED </b>answers "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks who was in charge of editing this article.<br />
<b>ED </b>says he doesn't remember. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- announces that she will read an extract from the interview.<br />
<br />
(Note: it hasn't yet been possible to find the original article. This is a Joana Morais' English translation)<br />
<br />
“The little girl died in the apartment. Everything is in the book, which is faithful to the investigation until September: it reflects the understanding of the Portuguese and the English police and of the Public Ministry. For all of us, until then, the concealment of the cadaver, the simulation of abduction and the exposure or abandonment were proved.”<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks whether the extract was actually worded as it was reported.<br />
<b>ED </b>Yes.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>reads another extract:<br />
<br />
“And the issue of the bedroom window, where Maddie and her siblings slept, is vital. It leads to simulation. The question is whether or not it was open when Jane says that she saw the man carrying the child. The little girl’s mother, Kate, is the only person that mentions the open window.”<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- pauses reading...<br />
<b>ED </b>answers that he thinks so.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- reads another extract from the interview:<br />
<br />
“Due to the type of fluid, we policemen, experts, say that the cadaver was frozen or preserved in the cold and when placed into the car boot, with the heat at that time [of the year], part of the ice melted. On a kerb, for example, something fell from the car boot’s right side, above the wheel.”<br />
<br />
<b>ED </b>says that it was what Gonçalo Amaral said.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- resumes her reading:<br />
<br />
“It may be said that this is speculation, but it’s the only way to explain what happened there.”<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks, if the sentence "the cadaver was frozen" hadn’t existed, would the newspaper have had a banner headline.<br />
<b>ED </b>says "perhaps", he can't say.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>2) Defence lawyers.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>a) Santos Oliveira (GA lawyer) questions</b><br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Did you have any prior knowledge of the case before the interview?<br />
<b>ED </b>answers "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Taking into account the information you had, was the book unexpected?<br />
<b>ED </b>says that after the McCanns were made arguidos the case was widely discussed.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>- asks whether the information was easily accessed using the internet for the UK media.<br />
<b>ED </b>says he was amazed by the depth and volume of detail given by the UK Press. He says they (the journalists) stayed up very late to see what would be printed in the front pages of the British tabloids the following day. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>- asks if the content of Gonçalo Amaral’s book was a surprise.<br />
<b>ED </b>says it wasn't because its content was already more or less known. He believes the book didn't reveal anything extraordinary and refers to the fact that the media quickly obtained the DVD of the files.<br />
<br />
<u><b>b) Fatima Esteves (Guerra & Paz's lawyer) questions</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you remember the date of the shelving of the files?<br />
<b>ED </b>says it was in the summer of 2008. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– What happened between the date of Gonçalo Amaral's dismissal and the shelving of the process?<br />
<b>ED </b>says not much really happened. He says there was much debate around the status the McCanns had in the process, but he doesn't remember much more.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Did the interest in the case decrease after the publication of the book?<br />
<b>ED </b>says "no", the interest remained in the media for some time, because it was an extraordinary case. The fact it was very much beyond other cases can be explained by many factors like the circumstances and the worldwide solidarity for the family.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you know of other books inspired by this case?<br />
<b>ED </b>says he does.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Are you aware of the comments made by Moita Flores on TV?<br />
<b>ED </b>says "yes", MF made quite a few comments. <br />
<br />
<u><b>c) Santos Oliveira (GA lawyer) questions again the witness</b></u>, this time for the Defence<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>- What effect did the book's publication have in relation to the investigation, did it hinder it?<br />
<b>ED </b>says that he doesn't think so. He says the book was, in part, Gonçalo Amaral's legitimate defence because he was permanently hounded, with unpleasant things published about him. He says he was badly treated institutionally. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>- In this context your conclusion is that the book is against the institution or against the McCanns?<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>- His legitimate defence is the one of somebody who...<br />
<b>ED </b>(finishing the sentence)... defends the work he did with sincerity. <br />
<br />
<u><b>d) TVI's lawyer questions the witness</b></u> (here for the defence)<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- The suspicions concerning the McCanns started at a certain time. In the first days the UK media didn't criticise the parents nor cast doubts on them. They mainly focused on Madeleine and secondarily on the parents.<br />
<b>ED </b>says that they rapidly mentioned an abductor, which gave an extraordinary dimension to the case, and then there was the spectacular TV appeal of the mother to the abductor. A mainly British media circus settled in. These media were ready to pay anything to obtain information. Then the parents started to travel, there was a big wave of solidarity, they met the Pope, etc. This was very uncommon and that's how the disappearance of Madeleine became a big event. In addition, an English journalist told the UK police of her suspicions concerning a man, Robert Murat. The event was taking aspects of a TV series (telenovela). Whatever happened thereafter, nothing could modify this situation. ED adds that the parents benefited from special treatment. <br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- First the media's concern themselves with the child and then they centre on the parents. Is that normal?<br />
<b>ED </b>Nobody knew whether the abductor was imaginary or real. The media focused on lateral aspects of the case, the group of friends, a certain neglect of the children, some contradictions. <br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Was the media presence generally predominantly British or Portuguese?<br />
<b>ED </b>says that they waited to see what the UK press would publish the following day. He says they were amazed by the extracts from the September 2007 statements given to the PJ which the UK press reproduced. He added that it seemed as if the British Press had access to internal official sources.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>overrules this last comment.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>wants to know about the importance of media treatment of this case in order to compare different years.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>says that that issue will be considered by the Court.<br />
<br />
<u><b>e) Dra Duarte, the McCann's lawyer, questions the witness</b></u> (here as a witness of the defence)<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Was Gonçalo Amaral's book published for his defence?<br />
<b>ED </b>answers "yes" and adds that the police investigation coordinated by GA was severely criticised thus he was entitled to respond.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Do you think the book contributes in the defence of GA?<br />
<b>ED </b>thinks it does.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- For what reason?<br />
<b>ED </b>– through this book he defends his work as a PJ Coordinator and why he came to certain conclusions.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– So why the need to publish a book?<br />
<b>ED </b>answers that, as a citizen, it seems to him legitimate to do so, he adds that GA's team's work was attacked by many people after the McCanns were made arguidos. He says that the investigation led to his conviction.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks about the media treatment when the book was launched. She wants to know what the consequences of the book and the documentary were.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> interrupts saying that the witness has already answered to that.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks if the witness knows when the documentary was broadcast.<br />
<b>ED </b>thinks it was later. He says he remembers the work of the cadaver dogs.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks whether the interest was maintained afterwards.<br />
<b>ED </b>says "yes" and adds it's difficult to distinguish between the motives involved. He says there was no essential alteration.<br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends.</b><br />
End of day 6.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>Previous Transcripts:</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html">Wintess 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a>(Media Consultant)
<b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013</b>
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html">Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-maria.html">Witness 2, Maria Stilwell</a> (Writer and Newspaper Editor)
<b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>Day 5 – 27 September 2013</b><br />
Postponed
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-27-sept-2013.html"> Explanation of Postponement</a><br />
<br />
<b>Day 6 - 2nd October 2013</b>
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-trish.html">Witness 1, Patricia Cameron</a> - Gerry McCann's sister (Nurse)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-henrique.html"> Witness 2, Henrique Machado</a> (Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper)
Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-20029772016804292142013-10-05T23:21:00.000+01:002013-10-10T21:59:10.346+01:00McCann v Amaral (02 Oct 2013) Henrique Machado Transcript<b>Libel Trial Day 6</b><br />
Henrique Machado <br />
<b>(Reporter for Correio da Manhã newspaper)</b><br />
<br />
By Anne Guedes of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<b>Libel Trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 6, Witness No2</b><br />
<br />
<b>Note:</b> This witness is the last witness of the accusation strictly speaking, unless the Judge agrees to Mr Gerry McCann taking the stand in November.<br />
<br />
The testimony as it happened...<b> </b><br />
<br />
(02.10.2013, <b>11:30 am</b>) Henrique Machado – Staff reporter with the Portuguese Morning Mail (Correio da Manhã) newspaper in Lisbon since 2005. He is not a freelance journalist.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks him if he knows why he has been asked to testify. <br />
<b>HM</b> – I think I'm here because I interviewed Mr Amaral in June 2008, before his book was published. I was with Eduardo Dâmaso for this interview. <i>(Note: this interview was published on the 24th of July, the day GA's book was launched, on paper edition only)</i><br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks in what circumstances this interview occurred.<br />
<b>HM</b> – It was an initiative of the Correio da Manhã. At the time Gonçalo Amaral had already resigned and had left the Polícia Judiciária (PJ).<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether the witness knew that Gonçalo Amaral had a thesis about the case.<br />
<b>HM </b>– Yes. He says that this understanding was induced by the orientation of the investigation.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> observes that the process had evolved (after GA was dismissed).<br />
<b>HM</b> says it's normal that Gonçalo Amaral had a thesis.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> remarks that it is based on Dr Amaral’s own experiences as Coordinator and not on the investigation as a whole. The investigation went on (after GA's dismissal). How could he know what was happening?<br />
<b>HM</b> says he knew the McCanns were arguidos, that what was happening was public knowledge. He says he never had any contact with Gonçalo Amaral (before the interview).<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> tells him he can sit down.<br />
<br />
<u><b>McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>ID</b> asks the witness whether he knows if Eduardo Dâmaso had contacts with Gonçalo Amaral.<br />
<b>HM </b>argues that the journalists' sources are protected.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules the question.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Do you know that Mr Amaral was dismissed from the case?<br />
<br />
<b>Dr Santos de Oliveira</b>, GA's lawyer, protests and the Judge overrules.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Do you know why he was dismissed?<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> again overrules.<br />
<br />
<b>ID</b> insists her question about what led to the dismissal is important, but the Judge overrules. <br />
<b>SO</b> starts protesting and <b>ID </b>raises her voice.<b>
The Judge</b> overrules SO, but ID interrupts the Judge saying that it was GA who made affirmations...<br />
<b>The Judge</b> interrupts reminding that she is the one who directs the session, she asks ID to please not interrupt her.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>wants to show a document to the witness, a newspaper (a copy of the Correio da Manhã), in order to confirm that they will speak of the same interview. <br />
<b>ID </b>justifies this request by saying to the Judge that she wonders if there are things in the interview that weren't actually said by Gonçalo Amaral or if GA did say all that's there.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks the witness to read the article. <br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks the witness if the interview was taped.<br />
<b>HM </b>answers that interviews are normally tape-recorded in order to provide an accurate transcript.<br />
<br />
The documentary maker Valentim de Carvalho's lawyer intervenes to ask whether the transcript is complete or partial or if it was adapted for journalistic reasons.<br />
<b>HM </b>says of necessity it had to be adapted to the allotted space in the newspaper.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Are the titles (note : as he uses a plural, he likely means the title and the sub-headings) the responsibility of the newspaper or did Gonçalo Amaral participate? <br />
<b>HM </b>says GA didn't participate, all titles are the responsibility of the newspaper.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>starts reading an extract of the interview which refers to the freeze and transport topic and asks if it suffered journalistic treatment.<br />
<b>HM </b>– In what way? Then he adds that sometimes they have to suppress parts of an interview, but they respect what is said.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether this principle (respect of what is said) applies to the entire interview. <br />
<b>HM </b>says that with so much time passing he can't answer. He says they were careful to keep a certain distance.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>quotes a sentence on condensation and asks whether it was given journalistic treatment.<br />
<b>HM </b>says that things were said that weren't published, but what is published attributed to GA is accurate. He says that it sometimes happens that a 40-minute speech has to be shortened, but he doesn't cut it in the middle of a sentence. The interviewee might have said things that the journalist considers not relevant and therefore doesn't publish.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> says the witness may go.<br />
<b><br />Evidence ends.</b><br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>dictates to the Clerk of the Court the proceedings concerning Mrs Healy. She states that, after the Court session was adjourned for reasons independent of the Judge's will, she had given up calling this witness. However she then thought the witness had important things to tell, but she forgot to reapply for this witness to be called. She says she asked the witness to return from the UK hoping that the Court would allow her to testify.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>(Guerra&Paz's lawyer) dictates her position, the rules have to be respected.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>(GA's lawyer) dictates that it seems the witness wasn't so important or hadn't significant evidence to report since her colleague opted first to give her up. He observes that it is not a case where, in the course of the trial, an unexpected witness pops up with crucial facts to reveal.
The Judge remarks that on the 24th of September 2013, Dra Duarte declared that she relinquished all additional witnesses except for Mrs Cameron. She says it's possible to forfeit a witness at any time, but the Court may judge differently and notify the witness if reasons exist to presume that witness has knowledge of important facts for a forthright discussion of the available evidence. <br />
<br />
She adds that the production of testimony evidence up until now does not lead the Court to believe that the witness Susan Healy's knowledge is relevant to the discussion about the case considering her relationship with Kate McCann and the fact that lawyer for the plaintiffs had officially given her up. She therefore doesn't authorize the witness to take the stand.<br />
<b><br />End of morning session </b><br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>Previous Transcripts:</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html">Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a>(Media Consultant)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013</b>
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html">Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-maria.html">Witness 2, Maria Stilwell</a> (Writer and Newspaper Editor)
<b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>Day 5 – 27 September 2013</b><br />
Postponed
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-27-sept-2013.html"> Explanation of Postponement</a><br />
<br />
<b>Day 6 - 2nd October 2013</b>
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/mccann-v-amaral-02-oct-2013-trish.html">Witness 1, Patricia Cameron</a> - Gerry McCann's sister (Nurse)
Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-43770802702798859592013-10-04T15:50:00.000+01:002013-10-10T22:00:20.187+01:00McCann v Amaral (02 Oct 2013) Trish Cameron Transcript<b>Libel Trial Day 6</b><br />
Patricia Cameron – Gerry McCann's sister<br />
<b>(Nurse)</b><br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<b>Libel Trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 6 Witness No1</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjN8vLdnoww0P4m6LwQu-1bdbOtgjKkAuBly0ttqWmB3IkyOI0NkPahyphenhyphenpsxcx8RYr0BDauP9pNby0IsgMzt4zTrgrBMG0yBuyKHtMrYPpT4stZTvM8ky8LzrXJ9KVGYh4ETviMv8qS2yB0/s1600/TrishCameron.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjN8vLdnoww0P4m6LwQu-1bdbOtgjKkAuBly0ttqWmB3IkyOI0NkPahyphenhyphenpsxcx8RYr0BDauP9pNby0IsgMzt4zTrgrBMG0yBuyKHtMrYPpT4stZTvM8ky8LzrXJ9KVGYh4ETviMv8qS2yB0/s1600/TrishCameron.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The testimony as it happened... <br />
<br />
(02.10.2013, <b>10:10 am</b>) The Judge arrives. TVI's lawyer is missing. The Judge dictates a note to the Clerk of the Court relating to the delay. <br />
<br />
The McCann’s lawyer, Dra Isabel Duarte, reminds the Court that on 12th September 2013, the Complainants requested that Guerra & Paz produce the receipts signed by Gonçalo Amaral relating to his book copyrights. <br />
<br />
Lawyer for Dr Amaral, Dr Santos de Oliveira, objects, but the Judge refers to the new CPC and states that a party can present documents at any time up to the end of the sessions. <br />
<br />
The Judge rules that the defence must deliver up the documents requested. <br />
<br />
In relation to the order in which the witnesses will give testimony, the Judge suggests that Mrs Cameron (Gerry McCann’s sister) testifies in the afternoon, but ID objects stating that this was not possible since her flight back to the UK departs shortly after lunch. The witness Henrique Machado cannot swap places with Mrs Cameron because he has an appointment also around that time. <br />
<br />
The Judge decides that he will hear Mrs Cameron as the first witness immediately followed by Mr Machado whilst third witness Mr Dâmaso is asked to come back at 2.30pm for the afternoon session. <br />
<br />
The TVI lawyer has still not arrived but the Judge says the session will start regardless. Dr Santos de Oliveira pleads the missing lawyer’s case and attempts to obtain a further 5 minutes adjournment as it appears that the TVI lawyer is stuck in a traffic queue following a road accident. <br />
<br />
<b>The testimony as it happened... </b><br />
<br />
(02.10.2013, <b>10:25 am</b>) (Patricia Cameron née McCann) Trish Cameron. Divorced and a nurse by occupation. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks her where she was when Madeleine disappeared.<br />
<b>TC </b>answers she was at home at the time, she was married and living in ......... She thinks that she was the first person Gerald McCann called after Madeleine was taken. She says she spoke to her local police and then spoke with her mother. She managed to get to Praia da Luz by the 5th May 2007 and remained there for 3 months before returning to the UK. She later returned to Praia da Luz.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>asks how frequently she speaks with her brother and sister in law and whether she meets them sometimes.<br />
<b>TC </b>says she calls them on the phone and sends SMS as well as visiting them in Rothley. But when something important occurs such as this trial she is in daily contact with them. <br />
<b><br />The Judge</b> asks what the distance is from her home to that of the McCanns in Rothley.<br />
<b>TC </b>says it’s about 330 miles. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether TC feels free to tell the truth, in spite of her relationship with the McCanns. <b>TC</b> answers "yes". <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether TC can swear by her honour.<br />
<b>TC </b>swears. <br />
<br />
<u><b>McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.</b></u> <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– We are here to discuss the eventual consequences, in the McCann family's life, of the publication of Mr Amaral's book and of the broadcast of the documentary based on that book. Have you read the book and watched the documentary? TC – Yes, both. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– In which circumstances have you read the book and watched the documentary? <br />
<b>TC </b>– Gerry called me on the phone and told me about the book and... <br />
<b>ID </b>interrupts asking the witness to speak more slowly because she wants to understand. To explain, Trish Cameron speaks quickly and with a strong Glaswegian accent rendering translation to Portuguese difficult at times. <br />
<b>TC </b>(resuming) – Gerry was very upset about the documentary. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Under what circumstances did you read the book? <br />
<b>TC </b>says Gerry telephoned her asking for help and for her to come and stay with them. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Had Gerry just been made aware of the book? Was it translated? <br />
<b>TC </b>thinks he had a translated version <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Do you know who did the translation? <br />
<b>TC </b>answers her husband found it on the internet. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– When did he watch the documentary? <br />
<b>TC </b>says it was much later. Gerry told her they were feeling very bad and that everybody believed the documentary. Asked again, she remembers that it was broadcast in April 2009. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– What do you know about the consequences, following the shelving of the case? <br />
<b>TC </b>says that right after the case had been closed, the book appeared saying her brother and sister in law were somehow involved and that meant no-one would look for Madeleine. As soon as the book was published, people’s opinions started to change. Though "we know that the book doesn't tell the truth", while they were trying to get some balance, people didn't believe the official version. When they came back to the UK, the people supported them. After the book was published, the number of supporters decreased. She says she used to help her brother and sister in law and had to make sure that someone would watch over them when she had to leave. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– For how long have you been doing this? <br />
<b>TC </b>says she did it every time she had days off or a long week-end. Many people came to help.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– How were the McCanns at that time? <br />
<b>TC </b>says that Kate was very low, she wasn't able to face daily life and Gerry had to go to work. Kate used to go to the church and visit a counsellor, but she didn't go to the shops and had no social life. <b>TC </b>adds she helped with the cooking and with looking after the other two children. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Was the situation difficult before the book was published? What was the difference between the before and after? <br />
<b>TC </b>says that it was very different. Before, when they were arguidos, they were quite unhappy, but the effect of the book was very different because it offered a conclusion which effectively was demonising and dehumanising her brother and her sister in law. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Was the reaction to the book equal to that of the documentary? <br />
<b>TC </b>(doesn't answer the question, might not have properly understood) The book was the first thing, it spread quickly, there was a lot of publicity. People started to turn their backs on them and nobody was looking for Madeleine. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– On which occasion did the McCann couple feel completely destroyed? <br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules the question. <br />
<b>ID </b>– How did they know that people had turned their backs on them? <br />
<b>TC </b>says that many people read the book and that as the book was written by the inspector who led the criminal investigation, the people believed that he was telling the truth. She adds that the book wouldn't have had so much success if it wasn't written by the head of the investigation. She says there was a lot of publicity about the book even before it was published. The reader is led to a conclusion which is false, it is a lie. She adds that the McCanns were already living the nightmare of having lost their eldest daughter and the book increased their distress saying they didn't care for their children.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Was their despair related to the information that was coming from Portugal? <br />
<b>TC </b>says they were vilified. If the book tells lies, how will people help them?<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Did they stop socialising after the book was published and why?<br />
<b>TC </b>says they have resumed a social life only a year ago or so, but adds that they don't go out much. They feel better when they are in friend’s homes. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Were they despised by friends? <br />
<b>TC </b>says "no", but when some of the locals in Portugal screamed at them, they were advised to take security measures. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Do you have something more to say about the effect of the book and the documentary? <br />
<b>TC </b>speaks of the internet, the fact that the files are public and very easy to access even by children. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– What relationship do you have with the children (the twins)? <br />
<b>TC </b>says they get along very well with them, they have a very close relationship. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– When did the twins go to school for the first time? <br />
<b>TC </b>– It was in August when they were 5 years old. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Do they read and write easily? <br />
<b>TC </b>answers "yes". <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Do they know of the book and its conclusions? <br />
<b>TC </b>says that some pupils mentioned it at school. Last week Amelie told that somebody had spoken about it at school. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Have you heard her say this? <br />
<b>TC </b>says "no". <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– What about Sean? <br />
<b>TC </b>says she doesn’t know. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– What did Amelie say? <br />
<b>TC </b>– People were speaking about her. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Was she more specific? <br />
<b>TC </b>– No, and Kate tried to minimize this. She says that in the past Sean asked his father, "Are you famous?", because a friend told him he had seen his father on TV. Gerry said he wasn't famous, that all this was because of Madeleine. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Do the children have access to the internet at school? <br />
<b>TC </b>says "yes", but she thinks it is monitored and controlled. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks whether the attention of the media increased or decreased after the publication of the book and the documentary. <br />
<b>TC </b>says it increased. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– How do you know? <br />
<b>TC </b>explains that her husband collaborated in the (Madeleine Fund) website. There was much more activity on-line. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– And in the media, did they talk of the book? <br />
<b>TC </b>Not so much. But they (the McCanns) received information from Portugal according to which the matter was very much talked about. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Can you name the people who said so? <br />
<b>TC </b>names Susan Hubbard, but says she doesn't know the others. <br />
<br />
<u><b>2) Defence lawyers. </b></u><br />
<b>a) Santos Oliveira (GA lawyer) questions </b><br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– You said the book had a big effect on the McCanns. Have you knowledge of a Petition containing some 17,000 signatures which originated in the UK in January 2008, which demanded that Social Services investigate the family about the children being left alone? <br />
<b>ID </b>tries to protest against this question, but <b>the Judge</b> overrules. <br />
<b>TC </b>says she heard about it. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– How did the McCanns react to that? In what state were they? <br />
<b>TC </b>says they were unhappy. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Do you know that 70% of the UK people, in August 2007, protested against the fact the McCanns had left their children alone? <br />
<b>TC </b>answers "no". <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Did you know the UK police indicated that the child could be dead? <br />
<b>TC </b>answers "no". <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Why do you assume that the book is conclusive? <br />
<b>TC </b>Because there's only one conclusion. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Have you knowledge of the process which made the McCanns arguidos? <br />
<b>TC </b>says the fact they were arguidos was public. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>clarifies and speaks of the Attorney General’s Final Report according to which the most likely scenario was that Madeleine was dead. <br />
<b>TC </b>says she's aware of that. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>asks if the witness is aware that the closing of the case was inconclusive because of lack of evidence and therefore recommended the lifting of the arguido status? <br />
<b>TC </b>answers "yes". <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Then why was it worse when the book was published? <br />
<b>TC </b>– There's no alternative in the book. It says that Madeleine died accidentally and her parents tried to cover it up. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Last week, Amelie mentioned that they were talked about at school and that previously it had never happened. Does it have something to do with this trial?<br />
<b>TC </b>– Yes, it does. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– When you were told about the Petition against the McCanns... <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> corrects – for the Social Services <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– What do you know was done? <br />
<b>TC </b>doesn't know much. She knows that measures were taken against it, they went to Court. She doesn't know much more. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> – A senhora pode ir à sua vida = The lady may go back to her life<br />
<br />
<b>TC </b>says she wishes to say something. She states that Kate studied the PJ files and the process and said it was very different from what is in the book. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>protests and <b>ID </b>even more. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules saying that it falls to the Court to compare the book and the investigation process and she does not need the intervention of the witness to do so. <br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends. </b><br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>Previous Transcripts:</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html">Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a>(Media Consultant)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013</b>
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html">Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-maria.html">Witness 2, Maria Stilwell</a> (Writer and Newspaper Editor)
<br />
<br />
<b>Day 5 – 27 September 2013 </b><br />
Postponed
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-27-sept-2013.html"> Explanation of Postponement</a>Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-17738253632126762852013-10-03T14:37:00.000+01:002013-10-10T21:55:59.971+01:00Has the McCann vs Gonçalo Amaral libel trial become a comedy of errors?<b>Written by</b> John<br />
Senior Editor of <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2475.0">UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div class="western" style="page-break-inside: avoid;">
Day 6 at the McCann vs Gonçalo Amaral and Others libel hearing in Lisbon couldn't have been much worse for McCann family lawyer Isabel Duarte and her faithful assistant Ricardo Alfonso.<br />
<br />
Kate McCann's mother, Susan Healey, was scheduled to testify on day 2 of the trial but the Judge never made it back to the Court for the afternoon session. Worse was yet to come as an oversight by Mrs Duarte meant that although Mrs Healey again returned to the Court yesterday she was refused the opportunity to take the stand. Third time lucky perhaps you might say but that is not how the Portuguese Justice System works. Truth is that Mrs Healey may not now have an opportunity to give evidence to the trial.<br />
<br />
For his part, Gerry McCann has now appeared at the hearings over two days, he attended last Friday and again yesterday accompanied by Mrs Healey and his sister Patricia Cameron. Gerry never intended to testify but following a change in the Law (a plaintiff can now give evidence in a libel case) he decided to do so. Off course all of this might well be academic since it is the Judge who interprets the rulebook as to who will or will not give evidence and she appears to be becoming increasingly irritated at events. Whether Gerry McCann will ultimately be allowed to testify is as yet still to be determined.<br />
<br />
And as if it wasn't complicated enough, it now appears that former PJ Coordinator, Gonçalo Amaral, also wants to get in on the act and has applied to testify on his own behalf. Whether the good Judge will allow it is akin to so much in this case, an unknown quantity.<br />
<br />
Finally, it seems the action is not confined to the courtroom if events outside the Palace of Justice yesterday are anything to go by with McCann lawyer Isabel Duarte launching a screaming tirade towards our own correspondent. The reason? Simply because she dared take a photo of the disheveled Duarte and her assistant Ricardo Alfonso.<br />
<br />
It wasn't to end there though. Several hours later this exchange of words took a sinister new twist with Alfonso posting an ominous threat against our correspondent on twitter. One has to wonder is this really the conduct one would expect from professionals involved in such a high profile case?<br />
<br />
The McCanns have been plagued throughout their search for Madeleine by incompetents and unprofessional conduct by those they have contracted. By the looks of it they have managed it all over again
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div class="western" style="page-break-inside: avoid;">
<br /></div>
<u><b>Tweets by</b></u> <a href="https://twitter.com/RicardoCAfonso"> Ricardo C Afonso</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOxK1dh4iIUx2BKMqOOx0jvbZMX5rxLRuyxmwtQHXy6oxd42bRR1M0GP4QGQGlpaofj1WhfcCp0npWrSTOrl9RhMsBKXAEMp1MlyZACq2ueFFMwgMyO78TsTn2FiwApHqwPflzSX3dGIs/s1600/01RicardoAfonsoTweet2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOxK1dh4iIUx2BKMqOOx0jvbZMX5rxLRuyxmwtQHXy6oxd42bRR1M0GP4QGQGlpaofj1WhfcCp0npWrSTOrl9RhMsBKXAEMp1MlyZACq2ueFFMwgMyO78TsTn2FiwApHqwPflzSX3dGIs/s1600/01RicardoAfonsoTweet2.png" />
</a></div>
<div class="western" style="page-break-inside: avoid;">
<a href="https://twitter.com/aacg"><span style="color: #66b5d2;"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">@</span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="color: #0084b4;"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">aacg</span></span></span></span></span></span></a><span style="color: #333333;">
</span><a href="https://twitter.com/xklamation"><span style="color: #66b5d2;"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">@</span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="color: #0084b4;"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">xklamation</span></span></span></span></span></span></a><span style="color: #333333;">
</span><span style="color: #333333;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Sra.
Anne Guedes agradeço retire do UK justice forum a foto que bem sabe
nao lhe foi autorizada. Tem ate as 12h de amanha</span></span></span></span></span>
</div>
<div class="western" style="page-break-inside: avoid;">
<br />
</div>
<u><b>Google Translation: </b></u><br /><br />"Mrs. Anne Guedes thank remove the UK justice forum the photo and not know it was allowed. Have until 12am tomorrow's"<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguhyphenhyphenFsNgQBoGlMkmd1hZHsHl8d0Dt6JUNg8dkvmByZV-uhd0wJuqliAFWxz6VJDovacIIgGfzKSSAuT4YdqfwYifqFA3dMTtuXxY2IlIfGQrJ2bULOwYBtGK59kgjzSeYeCcN_6s3f_z0/s1600/02RicardoAfonso.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguhyphenhyphenFsNgQBoGlMkmd1hZHsHl8d0Dt6JUNg8dkvmByZV-uhd0wJuqliAFWxz6VJDovacIIgGfzKSSAuT4YdqfwYifqFA3dMTtuXxY2IlIfGQrJ2bULOwYBtGK59kgjzSeYeCcN_6s3f_z0/s1600/02RicardoAfonso.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="western" style="page-break-inside: avoid;">
<a href="https://twitter.com/aacg"><span style="color: #66b5d2;"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">@</span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="color: #0084b4;"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">aacg</span></span></span></span></span></span></a><span style="color: #333333;">
</span><a href="https://twitter.com/xklamation"><span style="color: #66b5d2;"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">@</span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="color: #0084b4;"><span style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">xklamation</span></span></span></span></span></span></a><span style="color: #333333;">
</span><span style="color: #333333;"><span style="font-family: Georgia, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-style: normal;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">se
nao a retirar, reagirei em conformidade.</span></span></span></span></span>
</div>
<div class="western" style="page-break-inside: avoid;">
<br />
</div>
<u><b>Google Translation: </b></u><br /><br />"if not to remove, will react accordingly."<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbGDxXv04b12S4S1p9f_Jwj-7HLHyg52konkmjmOYuMkiYY3QFbcld3SGmbdLesTXEHAsMOL40nUQaOWjA_xIcHJXf3p2SgEpPN5FhVIkLwL7u56Q5J27Nb7nwlU6ez9TpamV49sjLAqw/s1600/IDTiradeAnneGuedesPhoto.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbGDxXv04b12S4S1p9f_Jwj-7HLHyg52konkmjmOYuMkiYY3QFbcld3SGmbdLesTXEHAsMOL40nUQaOWjA_xIcHJXf3p2SgEpPN5FhVIkLwL7u56Q5J27Nb7nwlU6ez9TpamV49sjLAqw/s400/IDTiradeAnneGuedesPhoto.png" width="300" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOxK1dh4iIUx2BKMqOOx0jvbZMX5rxLRuyxmwtQHXy6oxd42bRR1M0GP4QGQGlpaofj1WhfcCp0npWrSTOrl9RhMsBKXAEMp1MlyZACq2ueFFMwgMyO78TsTn2FiwApHqwPflzSX3dGIs/s1600/01RicardoAfonsoTweet2.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a></div>
Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-90673306741222354742013-09-29T20:02:00.003+01:002013-09-29T20:02:36.636+01:00McCann v Amaral 2013: New dates with who is attending<b style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;"><u>Information from Anne Guedes:</u> </b><br />
<br />
<b style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">October 2nd<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Henrique Machado (journalist of Correio da Manhã)</span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Eduardo Dâmaso (political analyst)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Mrs Cameron<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">(Mrs Healy probably won't be heard now)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><b style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">October 5th<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Paulo Sargento<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Moita Flores<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">(Two persons related to Guerra&Paz)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><b style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">October 8<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Inspectors Tavares de Almeida and Ricardo Paiva</span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Luis Nunes, the head of the Central unit against organized crime<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Manuel Catarino, editorialist in the CdM (who seems specialised in juridical issues)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Journalist and writer Hernani Carvalho (who is doing a PhD on criminology)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><b style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">November 19<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Marinho Pinto (bar association president)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Carlos Coelho da Silva (the documentary film maker)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Margarida Teotónio Pereira (TVI director of international programs)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">possibly a witness for the accusation (?), José Viega Soares, a consultant in PR who was at the court on day 1<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><b style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">November 27<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></b><br style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;" /><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">The last session (exhibition of the documentary and final allegations)<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-18324540899567793812013-09-28T10:15:00.000+01:002013-09-28T10:15:44.999+01:00McCann v Amaral (27 Sept 2013) Explanation of postponement<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<br />
The Judge appeared at 9:50. All lawyers were there, as well as the interpreter. Dra Isabel Duarte had a new assistant. But in the audience we were only two members of the public (Astro and I), all journalists were outside waiting for Mr McCann and Mrs Cameron. Among the journalists, Martin Brunt was back in Lisbon and back was his very British sense of humour. He is literally chained to his photographer, since he holds the perch ! When the crowd of photographers suddenly rushes in a certain direction, he can't but follow.<br />
<br />
Back to court. Mr Amaral's lawyer made a request because his son was in the hospital (it seems the problem surged yesterday) to have a urgent surgery and the father was needed there. Dra Duarte said she made yesterday a request for the complainant G. McCann who is coming from the UK (she insisted twice on this) to be heard. This request has to be accepted by the lawyers of the defence within a few days. The Judge consulted a great amount of books and files when she was dictating to the court clerk. She found Dr Santos Oliveira's request justified and unforeseeable and stated that the adjournment had to be accepted. <br />
<br />
The Judge then announced that the 27th witnesses would be heard on the 2nd of October (Henrique Machado (journalist of Correio da Manhã), Eduardo Dâmaso (political analyst) and Mrs Cameron). <br />
From this I deduce that 1) Mrs Healy will not be heard and 2) Mrs Cameron is the last witness for the accusation, except for the bar association president, Marinho Pinto who eventually will be heard on the 19 of November. <br />
<br />
The last session (exhibition of the documentary and final allegations) will now be on the 27th of November.<br />
<br />
On the 8th of October will be heard only witnesses for the defence :<br />
Inspectores Tavares de Almeida and Ricardo Paiva, Luis Nunes, the head of the Central unit against organized crime, Manuel Catarino, editorialist in the CdM (who seems specialised in juridical issues) and the journalist and writer Hernani Carvalho (who is doing a PhD on criminology) <br />
<br />
On the 5th of October will be heard other witnesses for the defence :<br />
Paulo Sargento, Moita Flores, two persons related to Guerra&Paz, etc.<br />
On the 19 of Novempber, will be heard the last witnesses for the defence :<br />
Carlos Coelho da Silva (the documentary film maker), Margarida Teotónio Pereira (TVI director of international programs), etc. and possiby a witness for the accusation (?), José Viega Soares, a consultant in PR who was at the court on day 1 (the only (but me) reading a book and not consulting a smart phone) and was dismissed for that day. <br />
<br />
Meanwhile Mr McCann and his sister had arrived. The Judge asked to call the two witnesses first Eduardo Dâmaso and later Trish Cameron. She explained no hearing was possible if a lawyer was missing. She said she was sorry the witnesses would have to come next Wednesday. Mrs Cameron observed it was the second time.. The Judge acknowledged and apologized for this. She said this kind of circumstance, like health, cannot be anticipated and we can't but accept it. She said the court thanked the witnesses.<br />
Mr McCann didn't even enter the audience room.<br />
<br />
The Sun guy wasn't there, the one who works for 4 newspapers with 4 different identities to-day was working for 5.<br />
<br />
Gonçalo Amaral's car was parked behind the building. So he took another exit. The reporters saw him (I don't know how, they do have hawk eyes) and rushed. Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-56744349703940693412013-09-27T13:57:00.001+01:002013-09-27T14:04:51.046+01:00Today's McCann v Amaral hearing has been postponedSky News Correspondent, Martin Brunt, has reported that today's McCann v Amaral libel hearing has been postponed because the son of Mr Goncalo Amaral's lawyer is ill.<br />
<br />
<br />
Jerry Lawson for Daily Star says that the trial will resume on <b>Wednesday</b> <b>2nd October</b><br />
<br />
<br />Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-4133225359858548342013-09-27T09:37:00.000+01:002013-10-10T21:56:59.164+01:00McCann v Amaral (20 Sept 2013) Maria Stilwell TranscriptLibel Trial Day 4<br />
Maria Isabel Stilwell <br />
<b>(Writer and Newspaper Editor)</b><br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgOrWLSUz-T-l_OUQSYHsJ_NCk3mpQ7ffuBW7qMaMEUA15O2jaFSkmqRNfxXg_PQ6UtBOU-z5HnG-90v0ZB16iVQus9J2Y-soE2CtnOdSjilsLzvb4GB6idBF4ksA5GDajCs3UFGDKCk0/s1600/IsabelStilwell1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="249" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgOrWLSUz-T-l_OUQSYHsJ_NCk3mpQ7ffuBW7qMaMEUA15O2jaFSkmqRNfxXg_PQ6UtBOU-z5HnG-90v0ZB16iVQus9J2Y-soE2CtnOdSjilsLzvb4GB6idBF4ksA5GDajCs3UFGDKCk0/s320/IsabelStilwell1.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: #222222; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 18px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">Libel Trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 4 Witness No2</span><br />
<br />
The testimony as it happened...<br />
<br />
(20.09.2013, <b>3:30pm</b>) Maria Isabel Stilwell is a writer and the editor of Destak, the first free daily newspaper in Portugal. She says she interviewed Kate McCann in May 2011 when she launched the Portuguese translation of the book "Madeleine". She only knows Gonçalo Amaral by reputation and has never had any dealings with any of the other defendants. The witness is asked about libel judgements she is or has been part of. She answers that she presently has no process with Gonçalo Amaral. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks if the witness has read Gonçalo Amaral's book.<br />
<b>IS</b> says she has.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether IS has watched his documentary.<br />
<b>IS</b> says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether the witness' public controversial position concerning Gonçalo Amaral will influence her testimony.<br />
<b>IS</b> says her conscience tells her "no", but then adds she hopes it will not.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>1) The McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>ID</b> - Are you a writer?<br />
<b>IS </b>says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Are you familiar with all the files in this case?<br />
<b>IS </b>says she is aware of the contents of the Attorney General’s Final Report and adds that she wrote about it.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- What was your job then?<br />
<b>IS </b>says she was the editor of Destak. She adds that the book campaign was massive.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules the comment as off topic for now.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- What was the effect of the Amaral book on the public?<br />
<b>IS </b>– Any person who announces he/she will tell people all the truth is very successful.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- About the audience share of the documentary, how did you obtain that data?<br />
<b>IS </b>doesn't know but thinks Destak may have found the information online.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- It had over 2 million viewers! Is that normal?<br />
<b>IS </b>apologises for being trivial but draws a parallel to a major football competition.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Did the attention of the media and the people diminish after the publication of the book?<br />
<b>IS </b>believes so. She says the issue which had most focus was whether Madeleine was alive or dead. She refers to people in Portugal who believe that bad things happen to bad people and that good things happen to good people. People think that "criminals are always different from us and since the McCanns aren't like us, they are widely considered cold and uncaring." <br />
<br />
<b>Dr Santos de Oliveira</b>, lawyer for Gonçalo Amaral listening to this exchange has become increasingly exasperated, reacts saying that it is nothing to do with his client. ID's assistant also reacts vehemently. The judge tells them to stop immediately.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>dictates the court clerk a protest saying that the witness exhibits a hostile demeanour towards his client and asks that her statement not be admitted by the Court. ID obviously protests. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> cites an Article from Chapter 6, section I of the CPC which can preclude a witness from testifying. She adds that SO presented none of these arguments. Therefore nothing prevents IS from testifying. But the Judge requests that the questions be more objective.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Did the attention of the public and the media decrease after the publication of the book and the broadcast of the documentary?<br />
<b>IS </b>says she "has a feeling" it did.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Are there numbers, notes supporting this?<br />
<b>IS </b>says that as a newspaper editor she knows when an issue is important. She resumes her narrative about beliefs that bad things happen to bad people and observes that everything (in the media) tended to make the McCann couple more distant than they were. When finally the book was published, the issue appeared to be resolved and closed. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- The Maddie case has been deeply and amply treated, there have been many other books...<br />
<b>IS </b>interrupts objecting she read none of these books. She thinks they're not of much concern and adds that none of them has the credibility or impact of a book written by an ex-inspector who was initially in charge of the case.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks if she knows that former PJ inspector Moita Flores commented on the Maddie case and the book on TV.<br />
<b>IS </b>knows that the book was commented on TV, on the news. She remembers that MF praised Gonçalo Amaral and she adds that a child can be missing without the parents being guilty. She remembers the title "PJ inspector agrees with homicide". She wrote on the providencia cautelar (the Injunction) because the people imagined that the issue was to examine whether the parents were guilty or not, she wanted to speak on freedom of expression versus the right to a good name. <br />
She resumes her narrative about newspapers which publish anything just for a story, people who accept anything as the truth, etc.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks whether the facts mentioned in the book and the documentary were facts established in the Final Report.<br />
<b>IS </b>thinks they're not, otherwise the parents would have be tried. She says that none of the allegations were proved. She says it is typical Portuguese provincialism to believe the opposite of what a Final Report says.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Were the facts mentioned by Gonçalo Amaral ascertained?<br />
<b>IS </b>thinks "no". The Final Report says there is no proof. She adds that it is not legitimate to speak of freedom of expression without limits.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks whether the witness speaks of a paragraph in the book or of the insinuations in the conclusions.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules, she requires more precision. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- says she refers to the paragraph containing the words, “fraud or abuse of trust...” ("burla ou<br />
abuso de...")<br />
<br />
During a moment of relaxation at one of these meetings, I did a side step or I might have been inopportune and rather undiplomatic. Worried with the possibility that the McCann couple were somehow involved in their daughter's disappearance and reflecting about the kind of crime they might have committed, something occurred to me. If, really, any type of responsibility of the McCann couple was confirmed, then the fund set up to finance the search for Madeleine that had reached nearly €3 million could be a crime of fraud or abuse of trust. This question was debated and, in fact, with such premises the crimes of qualified fraud or abuse of trust could exist, but Portugal would have no jurisdiction to investigate and judge it. The fund being legally registered in England, it would be our English colleagues who would deal with the case. Our English colleagues then realised a hard reality: the strong possibility that they would have a crime to investigate in their own country, with the McCann couple as the main suspects: a prospect that left them rather reluctant. <br />
<b>IS </b>interrupts and says she didn't read any reference to that fact in the Final Report.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>objects that this isn't a fact and the Judge concurs. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks how she can explain the effect of...<br />
<b>IS </b>interrupts and says that whoever reads it sees all the pieces fall into place, the theory seems genuine, it doesn't leave room for doubt. She says it is written from the perspective of a victim.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> again overrules...<br />
<br />
<b>IS </b>interrupts saying it's her reading of the book. She adds that if it was true the McCanns would be in jail.<br />
<br />
<u><b>2) Defence lawyers.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>a) TVI lawyers’ questions</b>.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- You're not sure about the over 2 millions of audience share?<br />
<b>IS </b>says that at the time she thinks an article was written on this but it's easy to check.<br />
She makes a gesture towards her bag but stops as nobody reacts.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Are you speaking as a journalist?<br />
<b>IS </b>says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- asks a conclusive question about freedom of expression versus good name.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> again overrules.<br />
<br />
<b>IS </b>resumes her narrative criticising the documentary where the group is shown drinking and a little girl left alone without any alternative point of view. How could parents agree with fifty minutes of that? She says that after 33 years of professional work she's allowed to value judgements.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- wants to know if the witness has evidence comparisons on the topic of decreasing interest.<br />
<b>IS </b>says she has. <br />
<br />
<u><b>b) Valentim de Carvalho (DVD production/distribution) lawyer's questions</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>- Do you remember when the Final Report was released?<br />
<b>IS </b>thinks it was in June 2008.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>reminds her that the Final Report states that the definition of the crime was not established from the available evidence.<br />
<b>IS </b>says she didn't read that.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> intervenes and points out that the case was shelved for lack of evidence.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>asks whether IS remembers the conclusions of Gonçalo Amaral book and starts to quote an extract... <br />
<br />
The results my team and I have arrived at are the following:-<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the <br /> night of 3rd May 2007;<br /> 2. There was simulation of abduction;<br /> 3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann are suspects of involvement in the concealment of their daughter's body;<br /> 4. The death could have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;<br /> 5. There are clues about the parents’ negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.</span><br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>- asks in what way those are facts or conclusions.<br />
<b>IS </b>starts to claim vehemently and loudly that Gonçalo Amaral had no right to, he has an obsession... She mentions the Intermediate Report that he signed (10th September by Tavares de Almeida). She insists that it is worse than the book. She says the book is very well written, easy to read.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>- Are the facts of the criminal investigation the same as close expressed in the book? If the conclusions...<br />
<b>IS </b>again interrupts, but not to answer. She speaks with a great volubility which renders her speech difficult to understand. She speaks of the newspaper Correio da Manhã and of delirious theories of conspiracy.<br />
<br />
<u><b>c) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- asks since when did IS commence working in journalism.<br />
<b>IS </b>says she started in 1981 and starts listing everything she did in a sarcastic manner.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> intervenes to remind the witness this is a judgement and not to be sarcastic by entering into such minute detail.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- was the decrease of news related to the fact it was a book?<br />
<b>IS </b>answers it's obvious that news may emerge when, for example, there's a judgement. The feeling is that people think that what happened is already known.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- but...<br />
<b>IS </b>interrupts GP again saying that when there are doubts, people speak a lot. She starts describing how a journalist works. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- asks if someone was in charge of marketing of the book.<br />
<b>IS </b>says that marketing actions, to-day, can't be bypassed. She resumes a narrative about the marketing of books, including books for children, cooking, novels, etc.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- mentions the three other books written on the case and asks about their marketing.<br />
<b>IS </b>says she didn't read them.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you know how many copies the Correio da Manha sells?<br />
<b>IS </b>knows, but asks "what has that got to do with the issue?"<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules the witness's question and observes the witness is continuously attempting to give meaning to what she says. IS interrupts the Judge and protests. The Judge concludes she can't help it.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– In your editorials you mentioned the position of Gonçalo Amaral...<br />
<b>IS </b>again interrupts saying there are two kinds of things in a newspaper, facts and articles of opinion.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Didn't you say your objective was to clarify things in order to inform the public?<br />
<b>IS </b>answers that from the beginning, in May 2007, she claimed she would be objective and wouldn't necessarily be on the side of the parents, known to be the initial suspects in this kind of case. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>reminds her that the book was published on the 24th July while the Final Report was released on the 21st July. She wants to know if GA could be aware of the Final Report's conclusions.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> overrules. <br />
<br />
<u><b>d) Santos Oliveira (GA lawyer) questions</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>- Are your opinions only based on news?<br />
<b>IS </b>says "not only". She mentions TV programs, books.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>- Have you read all the Final Report?<br />
<b>IS </b>says "no".<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Are you aware that the Final Report indicates the child to be most likely dead?<br />
<b>IS </b>says she is.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Since this hypothesis exists in the Final Report, the book...<br />
<b>IS </b>interrupts again saying the fact of death doesn't mean that the parents are guilty.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> – The Final report doesn't say the homicide is due to the parents. <br />
She reads this part from the Report:-<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><i>No respeitante aos outros crimes indiciados não passam disso mesmo e pese embora se nos afigurar não ser de descartar, dado o seu elevado grau de probabilidade, a verificação dum homicídio, tal não pode passar de mera suposição por carência de elementos de sustentação nos autos.</i><br /><br />Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.<br />(Astro translation)</span><br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>- But the book doesn't say that the homicide was due to the parents. If the book doesn't say anything else that what's in the...<br />
<b>IS </b>interrupts, but in turn is immediately interrupted by the Judge.<br />
<br />
<b>Judge</b>: Let me do this part!<br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends.</b><br />
<br />
<b>End of day 4.</b><br />
<br />
<u><b>Previous Transcripts:</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html">Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a> (Media Consultant)
<b></b><br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html"> Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.
Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-17513064911563160812013-09-23T14:31:00.003+01:002013-09-29T19:52:54.989+01:00Next dates for McCann v Amaral 2013 Libel Trial<u><b>2013 </b></u><br />
<br />
Friday 27th September <br />
Wednesday 2nd October<br />
Thursday 8th October<br />
Concludes on Tuesday 5th November<br />
<br />
<u><b>UPDATE (information from Anne Guedes):</b></u> <br />
<br />
<b>October 2nd </b><br />
Henrique Machado (journalist of Correio da Manhã)<br />
Eduardo Dâmaso (political analyst) <br />
Mrs Cameron <br />
(Mrs Healy probably won't be heard now) <br />
<br />
<b>October 5th </b><br />
Paulo Sargento <br />
Moita Flores <br />
(Two persons related to Guerra&Paz) <br />
<br />
<b>October 8 </b><br />
Inspectors Tavares de Almeida and Ricardo Paiva<br />
Luis Nunes, the head of the Central unit against organized crime <br />
Manuel Catarino, editorialist in the CdM (who seems specialised in juridical issues) <br />
Journalist and writer Hernani Carvalho (who is doing a PhD on criminology) <br />
<br />
<b>November 19 </b><br />
Marinho Pinto (bar association president) <br />
Carlos Coelho da Silva (the documentary film maker) <br />
Margarida Teotónio Pereira (TVI director of international programs) <br />
possibly a witness for the accusation (?), José Viega Soares, a consultant in PR who was at the court on day 1 <br />
<br />
<b>November 27 </b><br />
The last session (exhibition of the documentary and final allegations) <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-77835942777179347262013-09-23T14:09:00.000+01:002013-09-23T19:20:36.660+01:00McCann v Amaral (20 Sept 2013) Michael Wright TranscriptLibel Trial Day 4<br />
Michael Wright - His wife is Kate McCann's cousin<br />
(<b>Administrator</b>) <br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgh6WpvYDtFrgjaXXuAH00e-0-907H6ivIIBamBIIiuyonDA1vtd4HyqqWbzS_BVfV0WnQQnCakP-ercwzFxHh_Hl0lWPmqvKNi0yHIBvw_NokHGzwvoaKxnF9cV0qLqA3gotGEYJo5tDY/s1600/MichaelWright.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgh6WpvYDtFrgjaXXuAH00e-0-907H6ivIIBamBIIiuyonDA1vtd4HyqqWbzS_BVfV0WnQQnCakP-ercwzFxHh_Hl0lWPmqvKNi0yHIBvw_NokHGzwvoaKxnF9cV0qLqA3gotGEYJo5tDY/s1600/MichaelWright.png" /></a></div>
<br />Libel Trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 4 Witness No 1<br />
<br />
20.09.2013 <b>10am</b>. The session starts with a request from the defence concerning a plaintive witness, the President of the Bar Association (bastonário da ordem dos advogados) since 2008, António Marinho Pinto (MP) who was supposed to give evidence this afternoon. <br />
<br />
MP was cited as a witness in the libel writ but in January 2012 determined that he would submit a written statement, which was his privilege as bastonário. He was however obliged to inform the Court of his intentions.<br />
<br />
On the 20th January 2013, MP declared his wish to waive his right to make a written submission and declared that he would be present to testify in the court room.<br />
<br />
At the last minute, MP let the lawyer for the plaintive, Isabel Duarte (ID), know that he had changed his mind. He now wished to deposit a written statement on the basis of his privilege. This change would bring his written statement late to the proceedings and would not afford the defence an opportunity to properly consider his evidence or to put questions to him regarding same. <br />
<br />
<b>The judge</b> said MP should have revealed his intention during the 10 legal days so lost his right because he didn't do so. It now falls to the lawyer for the plaintive to ensure that MP appears personally in order to be examined in the final allegations session.<br />
<br />
<b>10:30pm</b> The testimony as it happens...<br />
<br />
The first witness of the session is Michael Wright, an administrator, whose wife is Kate McCann's cousin. He has known Kate since she was ten years of age and Gerald McCann since 2001. They used to have regular contact. <br />
<br />
He went to PDL in May 2007 and many times during that summer (10 weeks). Since the McCanns returned to the UK, he visits them regularly. They spent the first Christmas without Madeleine together. He tries to give them some comfort and calls or e-mails or sends sms messages at least once a week.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judg</b>e asks how regularly he had contact with the McCanns in the period from 2008-2009.<br />
<b>MW </b>says he saw them once a month. He adds he was monitoring e-mails that came to the Madeleine site.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether he read the book of Gonçalo Amaral.<br />
<b>MW </b>answers he read a translation on the internet.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks "when".<br />
<b>MW </b>Very shortly after the book was published.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether he watched the documentary on the same theme.<br />
<b>MW </b>says he did on the internet.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judg</b>e asks whether he knows the author of the book.<br />
<b>MW </b>says "only by hearsay".<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether his family relationships will influence his testimony.<br />
<b>MW </b>answer "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether it will prevent him from telling the truth.<br />
<b>MW </b>says "no".<br />
<br />
<u><b>1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- We are here to analyse the effect on the McCann's family life of the publication of GA's book and the documentary inspired by this book. Can you tell the court what you know about this? <br />
<b>MW </b>After the lifting of the arguido status they (the McCanns) were well, though no authority was searching for Madeleine any more. It was very important that people looked for her in Portugal. According to the book they were somehow involved in the disappearance of Madeleine. Therefore the book hampered the search for her.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>interrupts MW because she can't hear him (there's a motor outside, perhaps cutting the grass). ID makes known the lines of questioning she intends to pursue but the Judge reminds her that witness statements which are off topic will not be permitted.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks whether the investigation was hampered because of GA's book and an article in the Correio da Manhã (Portuguese Morning Post newspaper).<br />
<b>MW </b>says it's what he understood.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- What happened when the files were released?<br />
<b>MW </b>The McCanns had to have them translated in order to study them. They had to lead a campaign to motivate the public to search for Madeleine.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Do you know whether there was an end to the investigation?<br />
<b>MW </b>It was public knowledge that the investigation was stopped.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Did this event occur because of the publication of the book?<br />
<b>MW </b>The content of the book was conflicting with what was in the files. He says he would be speculating if he answered the question.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Don't you have knowledge of this direct relationship?<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> interrupts and asks whether the book was published before or after the archiving of the files.<br />
<b>MW </b>says it was after.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judg</b>e – Then how could the book interfere with the investigation?<br />
<b>MW </b>stays silent.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> repeats the question.<br />
<b>MW </b>says it didn't but it interfered with the following investigations made by the private investigators hired by Kate and Gerry.
The Judge overrules ID who wanted to know how the book influenced the McCann investigation.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>starts asking if because of the.... but the Judge overrules again arguing she reveals the answer in the question. She adds that questions should be asked in an appropriate way.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- In which circumstances did the McCanns learn about the book and the documentary?<br />
<b>MW </b>says they knew before the shelving of the case, that a book would be published. About the documentary, they were told it had been broadcast on TV in April 2009.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- When did they read the book and watch the documentary?<br />
<b>MW </b>– They read the book when I sent them the translation that was on the internet in August 2008. They heard about the documentary in March/April 2009. There was a big campaign in Praia da Luz, they needed people to support them and the documentary had a negative effect on that.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- When they learnt about it, how did they react? Was it sadness or pain? Were they socially and professionally affected?<br />
<b>GA's lawyer</b>, <b>SO</b>, interrupts asking the Judge to ask the witness what is the paper he is reading.<br />
<b>MW </b>says that they are notes about feelings, etc. to remember.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judg</b>e asks what is actually in the notes.<br />
<b>MW </b>repeats that it is to help him remember feelings and special contacts.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>dictates the court clerk a request for a copy of the paper listing feelings is joined to the process for appreciation by the court. <br />
<br />
<b>GP's lawyer</b> completes quoting the Law that insist on the importance of testimonies being spontaneous. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>protests arguing the witness has the right to have notes with dates and facts. She asks that only the Court checks the paper.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> concludes saying the witness himself says the notes concern feelings and contacts with the McCanns, which might cast doubt upon spontaneity, moreover because the witness is part of the McCann family. She concludes it's important to clarify totally what these notes are in the interest of the witness' credibility. <br />
<b><br />The Judge</b> asks the court clerk to make photocopies (note: it's an A4 page, with parts underlined in green).<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- resumes her question about the feelings that the book and the documentary provoked.<br />
<b>MW </b>When the book was launched, the McCanns were trying to launch a campaign and their own proper investigation. The contacts they had in Portugal said the publicity about the book was huge and that there was also some publicity in the UK. This provoked much distress in the family.<br />
<br />
The court clerk comes back with a lot of photocopies and distributes them to all. ID asks for a recess in order to read the document. Everybody reads.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>observes the notes are on stationary paper. She asks the witness where that paper comes from. The witness answers that it's from the hotel where he stays. He took notes to help his memory.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- When you speak of the stress and the anger, how was this expressed in the behaviour of the McCanns?<br />
<b>MW </b>When the book came out, the reactions were of much anger. Kate was upset and cried. She felt Madeleine was betrayed.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Why?<br />
<b>MW </b>- Because of the thesis of the book according to which Madeleine was dead and her body had been concealed. At the time they were very keen to re-establish a normal family life, Gerry was working again full time and they were starting a campaign. The stress increased between the book and the documentary in March/April 2009. They were preparing a new campaign before the second anniversary. Anger and anxiety overwhelmed them because of the documentary. He says there always was activity on the internet (e-mails...) but they became very subdued.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- What does "negative e-mail" mean?<br />
<b>MW </b>says it refers to all sorts of conspiracy theories that appeared on various forums.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks if the witness can name some of these forums.<br />
<b>MW </b>The 3 Arguidos and Madeleine Foundation. He says Tony Bennett invited Gonçalo Amaral to do conferences in the UK. These forums were full of speculation focused on GA's conclusions. People said those conclusions must be true because GA had been in charge of the initial investigation.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- When?<br />
<b>MW </b>– Activity was increased and heavy in March/April 2009.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Did the McCanns learn about these forums? How?<br />
<b>MW </b>They learned through me, the family members who monitored the activity and their support group. I wondered whether it was worse to let them know or not to. I didn't want to add up to their pain, but a significant change happened. There were several instances of threats to kidnap the twins on the 3 Arguidos site. Then I couldn't but speak. There was a chat where a poster suggested someone should kidnap a twin to get to the truth.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Is this dialogue on the forum? Can you get a copy?<br />
<b>MW </b>says he has a copy and can deliver it.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks if it's possible to put the paper copy on the internet?<br />
<b>MW </b>thinks the 3A doesn't exist anymore. He says the McCanns took action against this threat and against the Madeleine Foundation. The main page of MF had the 5 conclusions.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks whether he has a copy.<br />
<b>MW </b>says he has screen shots. He adds he had to tell his cousins about the threats. They reported them to the UK police (Leicestershire Police). He was visited by a police officer on the matter.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Was a process formally investigated?<br />
<b>MW </b>had only one contact with the police. He doesn't know what happened afterwards.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- What consequence did this have on the McCanns family life and in particular that relating to the twins?<br />
<b>MW </b>Around the time of the negative e-mails and threats, which was when they tried to launch the campaign, we went away for the second anniversary with Kate and Gerry to a remote house in the countryside. Anniversaries and Christmases were never very good. But in 2009 it was horrible. When they arrived at the cottage, they heard through friends they had in Praia da Luz that the 10,000 posters they had distributed and put up in the Algarve had been ripped and torn. Their friends had called them on the phone to say it was awful and that there were some people who were saying that the child was dead.
The fact that people in Praia da Luz believed the conclusions of the book was terrible for them because they were already depressed. It was a time of great anger and sadness. During the week-end we talked about the effect of the book.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- What did they say?<br />
<b>MW </b>That was the first time I ever heard Gerry say he couldn't manage going on any more. I never heard him speak that way before. It was an upsetting conversation.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Why?<br />
<b>MW </b>He and Kate are incredibly strong. They had been dealing with it all for two years. There had been the media backlash when they were made arguidos. But they always left the rest of the family and the helpers out of it. Now Gerry was saying that it was too much to carry on. It was a great shock for me. It was at the end of a night. The following day Gerry said he had no choice. I wondered how much more they could take.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- How did the revelations of that week-end evolve?<br />
<b>MW </b>says he had a similar conversation with Gerry about being down because people believed Madeleine was dead.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Did they feel deeply ashamed at being considered responsible for her death and the concealment of her body? Did they feel like cowards?<br />
<b>MW </b>says "no, because they knew the truth". However he saw how Kate changed last week in Lisbon and how she couldn't smile or properly relax. She couldn't have come on her own because she feared people think they are responsible. Her behaviour in Portugal is very different.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- In what way was the relationship between the parents and the twins influenced?<br />
<b>MW </b>The threats made them more vigilant, in particular when they started to use the internet at school or at home. Amélie googled her name and told Kate and Gerry she had found a site, Madeleine Foundation, which was at the top. So they realized they had to control the use of the internet.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Did she find internet pages related to the book?<br />
<b>MW </b>believes so, a page with the conclusions of the book. Ah but he doesn't know whether she opened the page. He says in the future they'll search and they'll find that her parents killed (sic) Madeleine.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Is that a daily pressure on the McCanns?<br />
<b>MW </b>is not sure he can answer that. He says that probably their friends as the friends of his children comment on this at school. It's inevitable they'll know the conclusions.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>(seems not to have understood) repeats – Is it a daily pressure for the couple?<br />
<b>MW </b>No.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Is Kate depressed?<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>overrules, saying this is a question for a doctor.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Have you read the criminal investigation Report?<br />
<b>MW </b>says he didn't read it all, he read the conclusions<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Do the facts reported by Gonçalo Amaral in his book and in the documentary correspond to the facts of the investigation?<br />
<b>MW </b>says "no", in no way.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Why?<br />
<b>MW </b>The PJ Report made after Gonçalo Amaral was removed from the inquiry and after the McCanns were made arguidos concludes that there was no evidence that they were involved.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- This means that the book doesn't correspond with the investigation facts?<br />
<b>MW </b>The thesis that Madeleine died and the parents concealed her body contradicts the AG Report which led to the lifting of the arguido status. His understanding is that the PJ files say that Madeleine could be dead but there was no evidence that the parents were involved. This is contradictory with the conclusions of GA's book.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Is it the same with the documentary?<br />
<b>MW </b>says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Was this documentary subtitled on the internet?<br />
<b>MW </b>knows it was published on the internet with subtitles in English.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- Do you have anything else you wish to tell the Court within the questions that you have been asked?<br />
<b>MW </b>says that, in terms of impact on the family, he saw in 2009 an e-mail from a British broadcaster, Channel 5, which offered Gonçalo Amaral €80,000 for an interview. He adds that Kate's reaction was that it confirmed that all this had to do with money and not justice.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>wants to know more... but the Judge overrules because it's not known whether such an interview occurred.<br />
<br />
It is 12:30, the interpreter is tired, the Judge suggests a 5 minutes recess, but the interpreter wishes more time. The Judge then decides to bring the proceedings to a close for lunch and resume the session at 1.45pm.<br />
<br />
Everybody is in the Court room by 1.50pm, the Judge arrives at 2pm.<br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>2) Defence lawyers</b></u>.<br />
<br />
<b>a) TVI lawyers’ questions.</b><br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Have you watched the documentary on TVI?<br />
<b>MW </b>says "no", he watched it on the internet.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- How do you know it is the TVI one?<br />
<b>MW </b>says he's sure as much as he can be<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Why? Did it have the TVI logo on it?<br />
<b>MW </b>says he doesn't remember.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Before the publication of the book and the broadcast of the documentary, were there opinions and e-mails that weren't usual, normal, that were different?<br />
<b>MW </b>says there were very scary internet chats and e-mails that speculated, but not only on the McCanns. He said that what changed is that the e-mails became more specific.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Is Gonçalo Amaral's theory widely known, is it known everywhere?<br />
<b>MW </b>says it is.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Does almost everybody know his theory?<br />
<b>MW </b>says a great number of people know it. Any person who knows about the McCanns know the theory of Gonçalo Amaral.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Just the people who are interested in the matter?<br />
<b>MW </b>Yes, the documentary and the book are very well known everywhere in Portugal and in the UK.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- One of the main preoccupations of the family was that, when the book was launched, they were preparing a campaign...<br />
<br />
The Judge overrules.<br />
<b><br />TVI </b>- They were collaborating in the realisation of another documentary, theirs. This documentary wasn't broadcast by TVI, in spite of the agreement between TVI and Channel 4.<br />
<b>MW </b>says they decided it wasn't appropriate to broadcast their documentary on the same channel that would broadcast GA's documentary.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Who are "they"?<br />
<b>MW </b>asks in what sense, then understands and says "Kate and Gerry".<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>- Were these negotiations for the broadcasting of the Channel 4 documentary before the Amaral documentary was broadcast?<br />
<b>MW </b>says he doesn't know.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether, before the book was published, they were speculations on forums.<br />
<b>MW </b>says they were many strange, bizarre speculations on who was involved, on the family, on supporters.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether there was speculation on the cover up of death.<br />
<b>MW </b>Some people, but very limited. Some e-mails would say that Kate was this and Gerry was that, and so on.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks from where came the information that fuelled this speculation.<br />
<b>MW </b>says that information was accepted because it's normal to suspect the family in cases like this. People e-mailed to (Madeleine's) website with this idea. <br />
<b><br />The Judge</b> asks did these rumours have something to do with the arguido status?<br />
<b>MW </b>sighs. He says that, as he was monitoring the e-mails, he observed an increase in speculation. But when the book was launched there was a huge increase of a specific nature.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> – What did the people conclude from the arguido status?<br />
<b>MW </b>stays silent. Then he says there were e-mails saying it confirmed what they suspected, but the e-mails with specific threats only occurred after the book was published.<br />
<br />
<b>AG's lawyer</b> now criticises the translation offered by the interpreter, he says the answers don't correspond with the question. <br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks can you explain why the arguido status didn't provoke many e-mails.<br />
<b>MW </b>says it's very common and normal that the parents are the first suspects. He adds that being arguidos wasn't a preoccupation for the McCanns.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge </b>asks if he has any idea what led to them being made arguidos. Was it because the parents are the first suspects?<br />
<b>MW </b>says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks wasn’t there something during the investigation that led to their constitution as arguidos.<br />
<b>MW </b>Not particularly. He adds he wasn't involved in that matter.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> states that two facts were established:<br />
<br />
1) The British police dogs detected the scent of human blood and also that consistent with a cadaver bring present.<br />
<br />
2) These dogs detected the smell of human blood in the car rented by the McCanns.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether these facts are of general knowledge in the UK.<br />
<b>MW </b>Yes, they were, in 2007.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether it was only before the shelving.<br />
<b>MW</b> says there was speculation at the time, but analyses after the release of the files showed there was no conclusive evidence one way or another.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> agrees but asks whether it wasn't the dogs that led people to speculate.<br />
<b>MW</b> – Yes, the media speculated a lot at that time because there was a big coverage. But when the book was published it was worse because the files form a very great number of pages and the book doesn't. Then few people read the files.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether the witness is aware the investigation wasn't conclusive?<br />
<b>MW</b> sighs, and then adds that anybody who reads the files is aware of that, but those who read the files are few.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> observes that if nothing happened since then, this shows that there's still no conclusion.<br />
If some conclusion had been made, wouldn't someone have been accused.<br />
<b>MW</b> objects that the book was published immediately after the release of the files and was written by a PJ Inspector. Moreover he says GA's book can be read in a day.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks if people believe more in the book than in the PJ?<br />
<b>MW </b>– Oh yes, absolutely! There were more newspaper reports on the book than on the files.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>says that there were more documentaries than the GA one.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks if the Channel 4 documentary had repercussions in the public opinion, in blogs, etc.?<br />
<b>MW </b>We always had people who supported us.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks whether this documentary changed the opinion of those who were convinced by GA's theory. <br />
<b>MW </b>says "no". He says the Channel 4 documentary (Emma Loach's one) wasn't just to say that Madeleine should be looked for and she was alive. Channel 4 didn't conclude so. The point was to challenge the thesis of the book.<br />
<br />
<u><b>b) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- Do the British know the official investigation was inconclusive?<br />
<b>MW </b>says the majority don't know.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> observes that the witness keeps on saying that the conclusions of the Amaral book came on top of the Attorney General's Report. She wonders whether the people have knowledge that an official investigation exists. Are people aware that "we don't know what happened"?<br />
<b>MW </b>– Some, yes. But most people think that Gonçalo Amaral's conclusions are true.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>intervenes asking whether the witness has knowledge of everything contained within the AG Final Report.<br />
<b>The Judge</b> interrupts and reminds that the witness had already indicated that he read the conclusions.<br />
<br />
(Note: there seems to have been some confusion between the PJ and the AG final Reports)<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> – Did you read it all? Do you understand the arguments which led to the discarding of the dogs' results?<br />
<b>MW </b>says he doesn't feel competent to answer. Why should he read it all if he knows the McCanns are innocent?<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks the witness if he remembers the reasons that lead to the discarding of the dogs' results.<br />
<b>MW </b>thinks it had to do with Low Copy Number DNA. He says that without forensic corroboration the findings of the cadaver dog were only intelligence, they were not evidence of anything.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- asks if the average citizen is aware of this in the UK?<br />
<b>MW </b>says the AG Final Report explains why the arguido status was lifted.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> states that the Final Report is evidence in itself and obviously not a judgement.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- insists that the witness gives explanations.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> asks if the UK public know the content of the technical descriptions that are in the Final Report.<br />
<b>MW </b>says that anyone who is interested will find out.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks whether the Ch4 documentary was promoted by the McCanns or was an initiative of Channel 4.<br />
<b>MW </b>sighs. He doesn't know.
TVI - Why, if things are like this – if people base themselves only on the conclusions –, a review in the UK...<br />
<br />
Without waiting for a reaction, the lawyer says he withdraws the question.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>dictates that MW will deliver the documents he has, relating to the internet threats.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>criticises the selective choice of documents, with biased criteria. <br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>observes the documents must be elements of proof in the remit defined for the process. He thinks they have nothing to do with it. This forum 3A doesn't exist anymore and what is the legitimacy of the documents? He wonders also who were the authors of those blogs.<br />
<br />
<b>The Judge</b> concludes saying the documents can be delivered to the plaintiffs, but are irrelevant for the Court. She says the Court cannot bring to the process documents given by the witness to corroborate their own testimony. The plaintiffs can have access to the documents and use them as necessary.<br />
<br />
Therefore the Court doesn't have to notify the witness to deliver the documents. The Court also does not accept that a witness testifies with assistance from a document (she refers to the "memory help" paper on feelings).<br />
<br />
<b>Evidence ends.</b> <br />
<br />
<br />
<u><b>Previous Transcripts:</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)
<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html">Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a> (Media Consultant)Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-70191419940094037602013-09-23T11:15:00.000+01:002013-09-23T19:19:50.562+01:00McCann v Amaral (19 Sept 2013) Cláudia Nogueira Transcript<br />
Libel Trial Day 3.<br />
Cláudia Nogueira (Witness No. 4)<br />
(<b style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: black; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: bold; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 17.46875px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="bbc_size" style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 1.4em;">Media Consultant</span></b><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: white; color: black; display: inline !important; float: none; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 17.46875px; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span></span>)<br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
Libel Trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 3 Witness No 4<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_GII97P7lYILb58GfJlSKnQP4yDE6NHuwjX608LRG9JQkXz85n1i5Ti4eACtgkAQ4EOB9eIjLcmh7knq_O2seVRCRyYDh5oRNLWDTCddlUsBmsEnkTaCcVAbAp92fl0gWEq4S_bPC0t4/s1600/06Cl%C3%A1udiaNogueira.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="190" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_GII97P7lYILb58GfJlSKnQP4yDE6NHuwjX608LRG9JQkXz85n1i5Ti4eACtgkAQ4EOB9eIjLcmh7knq_O2seVRCRyYDh5oRNLWDTCddlUsBmsEnkTaCcVAbAp92fl0gWEq4S_bPC0t4/s320/06Cl%C3%A1udiaNogueira.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
The testimony as it happened...<br />
<br />
(19.09.2013, 15 pm) Cláudia Nogueira, Managing Director of the Portuguese Public Relations and Communications Company, Plus - People Development. From 2009 to 2011 – she was the Executive Director of the Portuguese private agency Lift Consulting, a Company engaged by the McCanns.<br />
Her relationship with the couple was initially professional but with time it became personal. She knows Gonçalo Amaral only "publicly" (they never had personal contact).<br />
<br />
<u><b>1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Why did you leave Lift Consulting?<br />
<b>CN </b>answers that the media pressure was too great and that her work in support of the McCanns was very difficult. They were very worn down.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– In the course of your profession did you have access to statistics?<br />
<b>CN </b>said she had.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Do you know if at least 2.2 million people watched the documentary in Portugal? <br />
<b>CN </b>says she doesn't remember the exact number but she knows it was 50% of the audience share.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Do you still work as a communication manager? <br />
<b>CN </b>says she does. She says that people focused on this program, which is rare.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks if the attention of social communication decreased afterwards. (note: she might have meant "care for Madeleine") <br />
<b>CN </b>thinks there were thousands of news items about the Amaral book and documentary. There were about 2000 for the book and about 1000 for the documentary.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Were these news items suggestive of any other solutions for the case? <br />
<b>CN </b>No unfortunately. It wasn't well balanced. All the focus was on the book's conclusions.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Did you try to offer a counterpoint? <br />
<b>CN </b>– Yes, but the social communication wasn't looking for contradictions.<br />
<br />
<b>ID</b>– Was the documentary copied in English on the Web without authorization?<b> </b><br />
<b>CN </b>says it was.<br />
<br />
<u><b>2) Defence lawyers.</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>a) TVI lawyers’ questions.</b><br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– Did you know that TVI wanted also to broadcast the Channel 4 documentary (Emma Loach's one, "Madeleine was here")?<br />
<b>CN </b>says she knows.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– You said the attention associated with the book didn't diminish after the publication. Was that everywhere?<br />
<b>CN </b>says she meant "in Portugal". She adds the attention was focused mainly on Gonçalo Amaral and this included the UK.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– What about the news on the governmental support for the case?<br />
<b>CN </b>– The news in Portugal were interpretations of the various facts.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– But the facts never were clarified.<br />
<b>CN </b>– They should have been.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– But there are not many facts.<br />
<br />
<u><b>b) Valentim de Carvalho (DVD production/distribution) lawyer's questions</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Before 2009, were the McCanns clients of Lift Consulting?<br />
<b>CN </b>says "no".<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>– Did they contract Lift Consulting in order to spread their initiatives and positions?<br />
<b>CN </b>says they wanted to remind the public of the facts of the disappearance. They were trying to counter the propaganda and the theories that some newspapers were printing.<br />
<br />
<b>VC </b>says it's the first time he has heard such a thing.<br />
<br />
<u><b>c) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions</b></u><br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>asks whether she did some research when she started to work for the McCanns<br />
<b>CN </b>says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>here refers to the Sept 2009 Providencia Cautelar (Injunction) that led to the ban of GA's book. She alludes to the fact there was a need for witnesses.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– You spoke of over 2 million people watching the documentary corresponding to 50% of the audience share, but MarkTest's published share was 23%.<br />
<b>CN </b>says the content of some news was favouring definitively Gonçalo Amaral.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you have a number concerning the news on sightings which mention the GA's theory?<br />
<b>CN </b>says they're many, but she doesn't know how many.<br />
<br />
<b>GP</b>'s lawyer asks to dictate a request. She observes the witness indicated an approximate number for the news reports about the book (see above, approx 2000). The witness couldn't say how many news reports were published in relation to sightings or leads to the whereabouts of Madeleine or which reported a summary of GA's thesis.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>asks the Court to instruct the witness to produce the documents she refers to.<br />
<br />
The Judge asks CN if she has access to these news reports.<br />
<br />
<b>CN </b>responds that they are kept at the agency (Lift Consulting). She says she has only got a few documents with her.<br />
<br />
The Judge asks if she will be able to get the others.<br />
<br />
<b>CN </b>says she can.<br />
<br />
The Judge then agrees to give her 15 days to produce the documents.<br />
<br />
The judge points out that the issue under consideration is whether the attention of the media and the public decreased with the publication of the Amaral book. This is a question to which the Court will have to give an answer. Nevertheless the Judge doubts the documents the witness has will be helpful in this or would contribute positively in any way to the resolution of the case. However, since all parties agree, she agrees the request.<br />
<br />
The Judge reminds the Court that there are two types of news reports:<br />
<br />
•Those related to the publication of the Amaral book.<br />
•Those related to the sightings, etc. that also mention the Amaral thesis of death and cover up.<br />
<br />
The argument being that the "sighting" part is good for the McCanns who try to communicate positive things while the other is counterproductive to the search.<br />
<br />
<u><b>d) Santos Oliveira (GA lawyer) questions</b></u><br />
<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Was your job the transmission of information (to the media) or the management of the public image of your clients?<br />
<b>CN </b>says it was the transmission of positive information about the issues concerning Madeleine.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Were all your publications published?<br />
<b>CN </b>– No, some weren't.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– You said to dra. Isabel Duarte that the news concerning the book wasn't contradicted. You also said that the sightings news had a contradictory part. How do you equate all this?<br />
<b>CN </b>says that when the news was about the McCanns, it was always contradicted. When it was on Gonçalo Amaral, it wasn't.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– How did you work on the news?<br />
<b>CN </b>says she translated the British news in Portuguese and adapted it for the Portuguese public and the Portuguese culture. This was her job.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Did the Amaral book not boost the debate on the disappearance?<br />
<b>CN </b>answers "no".<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Did you read the book and think that whoever reads might think that GA speaks the truth?<br />
<b>CN </b>says she read the book.<br />
<br />
Evidence ends.<br />
<br />
<u><b>Previous Transcripts: </b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<br />
<u><b>Next Transcripts: </b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013
</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html">Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-43459482866064747762013-09-21T22:26:00.004+01:002013-09-23T19:18:55.185+01:00McCann v Amaral (19 Sept 2013) Alípio Ribeiro TranscriptLibel Trial Day 3<br />
Alípio Ribeiro (Witness No. 3)<br />
(Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZWE0cot0czKhSYrvWk8wKJKcyy8qaisYPJSsElEUc2dqnx7n-6xf32xtSmFxHofVhMDc-g6HwKh6SmjtomAcHD_tgDaawRCzhDKTSIwaTIfBT5EWBIkhfmROLklnJ7YgLS79KFvwcmE8/s1600/Al%C3%ADpioRibeiro.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="192" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZWE0cot0czKhSYrvWk8wKJKcyy8qaisYPJSsElEUc2dqnx7n-6xf32xtSmFxHofVhMDc-g6HwKh6SmjtomAcHD_tgDaawRCzhDKTSIwaTIfBT5EWBIkhfmROLklnJ7YgLS79KFvwcmE8/s200/Al%C3%ADpioRibeiro.png" width="200" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="western" style="page-break-inside: avoid;">
The testimony as it happened...<br />
<br />
(19.09.2013, <b>14:45pm</b>) Alípio Ribeiro via video-conference. In 2007 he was the National Director of the Polícia Judiciária (PJ). He left the PJ in May 2008, i.e. before the end of the investigation and obtained the status of Deputy AG (Procurador Geral Adjunto). He now works as a Ministry Inspector.<br />
<br />
– The Judge, Maria Emília de Melo e Castro, asks him if he is aware of what the court is judging?<br />
– <b>AR </b>says he knows through the media.<br />
<br />
– The judge asks about his knowledge of the case?<br />
<b>AR </b>says that he was aware of it, but had no part in it since that responsibility fell to the Faro PJ Director, Guilhermino da Encarnação. He says he is aware of the content of the AG Report only through the media.<br />
<br />
– The judge asks whether he has met the McCanns?<br />
<b>AR</b> says "never".<br />
<br />
– The judge asks if he knows Gonçalo Amaral?<br />
<b>AR </b>says he knows Doctor Amaral (sic), but had rare contacts with him and exclusively on a professional basis.<br />
<br />
<b><u>1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the only lawyer to question the witness.</u></b><br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks whether AR read the Amaral book?<br />
<b>AR </b>answers "no".<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks whether AR watched the documentary?<br />
<b>AR </b>answers he did not watch it.<br />
<br />
Nobody has anything further to add.<br />
<br />
Evidence ends. <br />
<br />
<b><u>Previous Transcripts:</u></b><br />
<br /></div>
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General)<br />
<br />
<u><b>Next Transcripts: </b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html">Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a> (Media Consultant)
<b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013
</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html">Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-17667838376434965852013-09-21T22:10:00.003+01:002013-09-23T14:14:29.075+01:00McCann v Amaral (19 Sept 2013) João Melchior Gomes Transcript<div>
McCann v Amaral Libel Trial TranscriptDay 3</div>
João Melchior Gomes (Witness No. 2)<br />
(Former Deputy Attorney General)<br />
<br />
<b>By Anne Guede</b>s of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a>
<br />
<br />
The testimony as it happened...<br />
<br />
(19.09.2013, <b>12:45 pm</b>) João Melchior Gomes via video-conference. He retired (November 2010) but has the title of Deputy Attorney General (AG) and is addressed as Procurador Geral Adjunto. He must nevertheless swear to tell the truth (but no bible and no gesture). He is the (only) person who effectively signed the AG Report.<br />
<br />
– The judge asks him if he is aware of what the court is judging.<br />
– MG responds that it is a trial against Gonçalo Amaral.<br />
<br />
– The judge reminds him that there are three other defendants in the libel case and asks what MG's involvement in the investigation amounted to.<br />
<br />
– MG says that in September 2007 he was charged with the task of supervising the work of the Procurador da Republica, José de Magalhães e Menezes. He was then in Evora as Deputy AG but also visited Portimão and Praia da Luz a number of times. He had two contacts with Gonçalo Amaral. The first was related to the intervention of the British cadaver dogs (Eddie and Keela) and the subsequent forensic analysis of samples. The second was through Guilhermino da Encarnação, the PJ Director in Faro, they had a meeting with the investigation team in Portimão.<br />
<br />
The judge asks whether his relationship with Gonçalo Amaral was personal or professional.<br />
MG answers "only professional".<br />
<br />
<b><u>1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness</u></b>.<br />
<br />
<b>ID</b> explains that the issue at stake is the effect which Goncalo Amaral's book had following its publication in July 2008. She asks whether MG is aware of any developments subsequent to the release of the AG Report which could have led to the reopening of the case. MG says no new element emerged which the Public Ministry was aware of. There was information received but it was found to be irrelevant to the case. That was the situation at least up until November 2010, when he retired.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks if the AG Report reflects the results of the criminal investigation up to July 2008.<br />
<b>MG </b>answers that the Report is based on evidence (elementos de prova) gathered by the PJ, GNR, etc. and also, by Leicestershire Police and others in the UK, He says that thousands of people were contacted.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Was all the information made available to the public?<br />
<b>MG </b>says "yes", except for documents relating to people investigated or convicted of sex crimes.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– Are the facts mentioned in his book (Amarals) and in the documentary part of the investigation?<br />
<b>MG </b>says he didn't read the book nor did he watch the documentary.<br />
<br />
A momentary silence envelops the court room.<br />
<br />
A momentary silence envelops the court room. ID then states that, if that is the case then she will refer to the PJ Files 2587-2602 (Vol X) dated 10 SEP 2007 (Report by Inspector Tavares de Almeida). She doesn't have a copy of the documents however and neither does the Judge. The Court clerk hurriedly exits the Court in an attempt to find them.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– The book and the documentary are based on the conclusions of this Report, do you remember it?<br />
<b>MG </b>says he doesn't. He says that the first formal meeting he was part of was on the 12th September 2007. He says that intermediate Reports were signed by Magalhães e Menezes. He knows that Tavares de Almeida for some reason ceased collaborating.<br />
<br />
He says his confidence is in the AG Report and he doesn't see any reason to alter its findings. He can only say that it was written in close collaboration with Magalhães e Menezes.<br />
<br />
He remembers it was never understood at the time however how Robert Murat became a suspect merely on the basis of a British journalist's statement.<br />
<br />
<b>ID</b> – But Robert Murat isn't "autor" (plaintiff)!<br />
<br />
<b><u>2) Defence lawyers.</u></b><br />
<br />
<b>a) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions</b><br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Was it normal to nominate another Public Prosecutor to supervise the process?<br />
<b>MG</b> observes that he was nominated as Deputy AG.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile the Court clerk is back with a few CDs saying she found no paper copy of the Report. The Judge says she doesn't see the point in any event.<br />
<br />
The judge (Maria Emília de Melo e Castro) is now asking<br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>– Therefore the content of the DVD doesn't include all the files?<br />
<b>MG </b>says that files relating to sex offenders and those involved in sex related crimes were suppressed.<br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>– Can we conclude therefore that, except for the identity of certain persons who were ruled out, a complete copy of the PJ files was released to the public?<br />
<b>MG </b>hesitates a few seconds and answers "yes".<br />
<br />
Evidence ends.<br />
<br />
<b><u>Previous Transcripts:</u></b><br />
<br />
<b>Day 1 - 12th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 2 - 13th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<b> Day 3 - 19th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alan-pike.html">Witness 1, Alan Pike</a> (Trauma Consultant)<br />
<br />
<u><b>Next Transcripts: </b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html">Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a> (Media Consultant)
<b> </b><br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013
</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html">Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4813787194319385692.post-75353419447260969122013-09-21T12:21:00.005+01:002013-09-23T19:17:46.140+01:00McCann v Amaral (19 Sept 2013) Alan Pike TranscriptMcCann v Amaral Libel Trial Transcript<br />
Day 3<br />
Alan Pike (Witness No. 1)<br />
<br />
<div>
<b>By Anne Guedes</b> of the <a href="http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=68.0"> UK Justice Forum</a><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigZ-W1TMqieWrzAogCT_t6twGbgYvmo0mrqGp2nDSe6gz0f_DBV08fpk01F_rUlybg_1fWCDUMCC6MHmhZSSoMzKx9wkx0e2RiV7Fg5mIZ0kN2BqIBOTAYAUe5UjlX729JTquqizvaFgs/s1600/04AlanPike.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEigZ-W1TMqieWrzAogCT_t6twGbgYvmo0mrqGp2nDSe6gz0f_DBV08fpk01F_rUlybg_1fWCDUMCC6MHmhZSSoMzKx9wkx0e2RiV7Fg5mIZ0kN2BqIBOTAYAUe5UjlX729JTquqizvaFgs/s1600/04AlanPike.png" /></a></div>
<br />The session commences with a discussion on the order in which witnesses are to be heard. The McCann family lawyer Isabel Duarte requests a modification because some witnesses reside in the UK (the last session on 13th September, was shortened due to the judge's personal problem). Isabel Duarte had proposed written statements but defence lawyers Fatima Esteves and Santos Oliveira objected (all parties must agree). This protest has to be written down.The judge then reminds the clerk to record the reaction by the plaintiff to the request of "exclusion of publicity" by the defender, a request the judge considered without merit. All this took an hour because each request must comply strictly with and be recorded in accordance with Portugal’s Civil Procedure Code.<br />
<br />
The testimony as it happened...(19.09.2013, 10:30am) Alan Robert Pike is currently a Clinical Partner & Trauma Consultant at The Centre for Crisis Psychology (CCP), a private Company which provides psychological care for traumatised individuals. He is a Crisis Counsellor and holds an honours degree in Social Science.<br />
<br />
He first met the McCanns on the 5th May 2007. His first contact was a phone call from the Mark Warner Group at 4am in the morning. He says it is quite normal to be woken up in the middle of the night in a case of psychological traumatic.<br />
<br />
MW requested he take the next possible flight to the Algarve. He says he provided professional services to the McCann family on a regular basis up until September 2007. After they went back to the UK he continued to counsel them up until about 3 years ago. He is now in contact with them on a pro bono (no charge) basis by e-mail and telephone. From the end of 2007, he was engaged by the McCanns directly. He says MW did much more than would have normally been expected of such a company. <br />
<br />
<b><u>1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.</u></b><br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>asks whether she can question him on his professional relationship with the McCanns, whether there is a confidentiality clause. <br />
<b>AP</b> says he anticipated this question and talked to the McCanns before coming to Lisbon. He says the confidentiality is normal but the McCanns authorized him to provide information.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>says the issue is the effect of the Amaral book and the documentary on the McCann family. <br />
– Do you know of these? <br />
<b>AP </b>says he read the book and has seen the documentary.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– In what circumstances did you come across them?<br />
<b>AP </b>says it was very easy. The documentary was on YouTube and Kate McCann sent him a translated copy of the book.<br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– This book had great impact on Kate, Gerald, Sean and Amelie McCann. Why? Can you explain?<br />
<b>AP </b>says that, in order to understand the effect of the publication of the book on the McCann family, it is necessary to understand something about this family. <br />
<br />
In the first 12 months after the abduction (note: he always speaks of "abduction"), the most dramatic episode of their life, the McCanns were in recuperation mode. In the first weeks they had all the symptoms of a family badly hurt, Kate McCann in particular. It was terrible for her to leave Portugal where she had been with Madeleine for the last time, very tough too to return home, to see Madeleine's bedroom, her toys, clothes, friends, etc. <br />
<br />
The investigation was going on in Portugal and because they were so far away it was difficult to keep up with developments. For someone who experiences an abduction trauma, the most important aspect is information. Ultimately, the friends and the family helped considerably and the McCanns followed the advice of professionals concerning the twins. The McCanns worked with the twins' school and taking the circumstances into account the twins got on well. The routine after a time had returned and things had stabilised. Gerald McCann was involved in a research project while Kate worked on the search for Madeleine, supported her husband and took care of the kids, everything was functioning as best as could be expected given the circumstances<br />
<br />
The publication of the Amaral book caused a bombshell. It was not so much the content of the book, but what one could deduce from it as the book had been published so soon after the shelving of the case. The famous secret of the instruction had been broken by the author of the book. There was a feeling of dire frustration and helplessness, the McCanns could speak to nobody, they had been told so. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>- How did the book speak whereas they weren't allowed to? <br />
<b>AP </b>– It suggested Gonçalo Amaral and the PJ had relationships before the shelving.<br />
<br />
<b>AP </b>doesn't understand how the book could be published, considers that it was a violation of the secret. The fact the book was written by a police officer gave credibility to the book. When, 14 months after the abduction, the McCanns found out about the content of the book and its conclusions (a simulated abduction), their anxiety increased. The McCanns started to worry about public opinion in Portugal, if people thought Madeleine was dead, they wouldn't look for her. Since it was then accepted that the greatest chance of finding Madeleine was still in Portugal, that possibility declined significantly if the public believed her to be dead.<br />
<br />
Then something unexpected happened. Alan Pike asked if he could use notes that were on his iPad. The judge said "yes of course" but when it became clear that Alan Pike was going to read extracts from the McCann book "Madeleine", the judge instructed that he couldn't read the book to the Court.<br />
<br />
<b>AP </b>says the activities and reactions of Gonçalo Amaral were unpleasant and distressing. At that time it was very difficult to tolerate his campaign of trashing the McCann's reputation.<br />
<br />
(Note: AP repeats, repeats what he has already said. It is not clear why he needed his iPad)<br />
<br />
<b>AP </b>says Kate McCann passed days in a terrible state because of the injustice of the book. She was hurt and angry. <br />
<br />
The judge asks whether he recorded this information and then repeats them.<br />
<br />
<b>AP </b>says these are things Kate told him when he asked her. When he had regular contact with them he realised that the McCanns feared that nobody would now look for Madeleine in Portugal. They were at that time also very much concerned with the translation of the PJ files <br />
<br />
<b>AP </b>says he must read his notes. He reads.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>AP </b>– They received information from Portugal in the summer of 2008 about the Amaral book, the support it had, the TV shows... That created a great distress. Nobody in Portugal challenged the conclusions of the book, whereas the judge (note; he means the AG) said there was no evidence they were involved. So how could Gonçalo Amaral arrive at the conclusion he did? Nobody challenged him.<br />
<br />
The McCanns decided to do nothing at that time and concentrate on the most important thing which was the search for Madeleine. They hoped the publicity around the book would diminish slowly with time. But in 2009 Kate told AP about a documentary based on that book. A friend in Portugal had told her about it and said the conclusions were similar. When Kate watched the film, AP remembers she was even more devastated. He says this was the secondary trauma.<br />
<br />
The secondary trauma is sometimes more violent, more rooted and more extreme than the original trauma. It is more difficult to cope with. (note: this notion of "secondary trauma" will be invoked a few times afterwards by the defence lawyers, likely in order to understand it better).<br />
<br />
The family was disappointed and angry, in Portugal the people would stop searching for Madeleine. Kate was in such a bad state that Gerald had to quit his job for some time to care for her. In the summer of 2009 Kate was not well at all as a direct result of reactions to the documentary. She was helpless; she said she'd prefer not to be there. She was anxious (he thinks he's the only one with whom she shared), that is when the idea of an action against the book in Portugal first arose. There was an injunction, the book was banned, but even so the book was available on the internet in the UK, there was also much publicity about it consequently the doubts of their involvement had spread to the UK.<br />
<br />
The book surprised Kate who lived a normal life of a mother, doing shopping, driving the kids to school, chatting with other kids' parents, etc. Most people in Portugal and an increasing number in the UK were also convinced by Amaral's theory. Kate feared her closest friends would be convinced too. This also contributed to the secondary trauma. <br />
<br />
<b>ID </b>– What did you mean when you spoke of the book and the secrecy of the instruction?<br />
<b>AP </b>– It was impossible for Gonçalo Amaral to write the book without inside knowledge about the process before the shelving of the investigation. They saw that Gonçalo Amaral managed to obtain inside information and that worried them.<br />
<br />
<b><u>2) Defence lawyers</u></b>.<br />
<br />
<b>a) TVI lawyers’ questions</b>.<br />
<br />
<b>TVI</b> – When you referred to notes, did you mean Kate McCann's diary or book?<br />
<b>AP </b>says "both".<br />
<br />
<b>TVI </b>– Have you read "Madeleine"?<br />
<b>AP </b>says he did.<br />
<br />
The TVI lawyer wants to know what "Madeleine" is about. The judge says the facts to be examined by this court are listed and this issue isn't part of it.<br />
<br />
<b> TVI </b>– Do you know who put the documentary on YouTube? <br />
<br />
The judge overrules again, saying it is off topic.<br />
<br />
<b><u>b) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions</u></b><br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– What exactly is your profession?<br />
<b>AP </b>answer he is a Crisis Counsellor.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>asks whether he is a psychologist?<br />
<b>AP</b> says he has some competences in psychology (psychology was one of the elements in his degree).<br />
<br />
<b>GP</b> asks again "are you a psychologist?"<br />
<b>AP </b>says no.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>asks which tour operator contacted him<br />
<b>AP</b> says it was Mark Warner.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– When you were contracted and came to Portugal, was it because of a trauma situation? Which situation?<br />
<b>AP </b>– A little girl had been abducted, the family and friends needed support.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Are all your actions around the disappearance of Madeleine?<br />
<b>AP </b>says yes.<br />
<br />
<b>GP</b> - Between the 3rd May and September 2007 you accompanied the McCanns. How? On the phone, being present?<br />
<b>AP </b>says he saw the twins; he had contact many times a day (implies went to and fro).<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– You said it was Kate who provided the book for you?<br />
<b>AP</b> – Yes, she sent it to me.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– It was translated by whom?<br />
<b>AP</b> doesn't know.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- asks if AP understands Portuguese.<br />
<br />
The judge overrules question saying that it's clear AP doesn't speak Portuguese. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>asks another question which is overruled because it is related to British Justice.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>- asks if the constitution of the arguido status created a secondary trauma. <br />
<b>AP </b>says the McCanns were confused about not having been made arguidos sooner, because it was quite normal in an investigation for people close to the victim to be investigated first. He says they expected it.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>suggests (as her question wasn't answered) that AP consult his notes since he saw the McCanns before and after they were made arguidos. Has he notes about his sessions with Kate when she was an arguida?<br />
<b>AP </b>says that being made an arguido wasn't traumatic, but the things that were said, the way to interview them were. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Can it be considered as a secondary trauma?<br />
<b>AP </b>says it is a continuation.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– Do you know if the fact of being made an arguido was related to the suspicion of some crime?<br />
<b>AP </b>says he knows some facts, they weren't surprised.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– What is the difference with the book?<br />
<b>AP </b>doesn't understand.<br />
<br />
<b>GP</b> repeats her question.<br />
<b>AP </b>– They were surprised with the book because the final Report said they were innocent.<br />
<br />
<b>GP</b> – Have you read the final report?<br />
<b>AP </b>says "no".<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– How do you know then what its conclusions are?<br />
<b>AP </b>says the McCanns told him.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>says the investigation was closed because of lack of evidence in respect of what the actual crime was. How did this affect the emotional state of people?<br />
<b>AP </b>– They were disappointed the case was closed. This meant than the case might never again be investigated. However, they were relieved that they were no longer considered to have been involved; they were no longer official suspects.<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>says that the final Report states that there is no evidence, neither positive nor negative. Can you speak about the speculations concerning the case? <br />
<b>AP </b>says there was much human interest in this case. Everybody had an opinion about it. He says it's like when there's a football match (note: a similar comparison in Ms Stilwell's statement on 20.09.13)<br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– In what way is the publication of this book different? What kind of secondary trauma did it lead to? Did the opinions of the world favour the book or not?<br />
<b>AP </b>says that the difference lay in 1) the importance of who wrote the book and 2) the violation of the secrecy of the instruction as the book was published very quickly. <br />
<br />
<b>GP </b>– The McCanns said they didn't believe the book was written in 3 days?<br />
Do you know if the book was publicised before the final Report was released?<br />
<b>AP </b>says "yes", was aware the book was going to be published.<br />
<br />
<b><u>c) Gonçalo Amaral lawyer's questions</u></b><br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– About your competences and professional capacities, what does a specialist of trauma do?<br />
<b>AP </b>says he works with groups, families and individuals.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Is a disappearance a trauma?<br />
<b>AP </b>says "yes".<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Did you advise the McCanns to promote news of the disappearance using the media?<br />
<b>AP </b>says it wasn't his advice. The McCanns were advised by an organisation which specialises in missing people <br />
<br />
<b>SO</b> – What part does excessive publicity play in primary trauma? Does it increase the stress and the anxiety?<br />
<b>AP </b>– Yes it does.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Do you know the importance of publicity in the case?<br />
<b>AP </b>– says yes, I know, I was there.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Would you agree it doesn't favour recuperation in the long term? <br />
<b>AP </b>– The media are useful in the beginning.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– The motivation was to find the little girl?<br />
<b>AP</b> – Yes, it was to look for her.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Is it not true that the principal factor of the secondary trauma was because the McCanns were considered suspects?<br />
<b> AP </b>– No.<br />
<br />
The judge now explains that "suspect" is different from "arguido". "Arguido" means there are indications that will lead a person to have to defend her/himself. It's a statute created for the defence of the person. "Suspect" means a hypothesis is formed about someone.<br />
<br />
The judge repeats that which AP had already indicated and that was if the McCanns hadn't been investigated as suspects then they would have thought the investigation was incomplete.<br />
<br />
There is now a long debate between the judge and SO. SO says he has to insist because the witness uses too much hearsay in his responses. The judge points out that there is no need to repeat the same question over simply in order to see if the answer will vary.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– Was the fact that they were considered arguidos the principal reason for the secondary trauma?<br />
<b>AP </b>says "no".<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– You said psychology was one of the elements comprising your degree, does this allow you to give evaluation of psychological situations?<br />
<b>AP</b> says "yes". The Social Science degree he has permits it.<br />
<br />
<b>SO</b> – Did you have contact with the McCanns in the UK by phone e-mail?<br />
<b>AP </b>says yes, between 2011 and 2013.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– So what occurred between 2007 and 2011?<br />
<b>AP</b> says he saw the family regularly in their home or in his office up to 2009. Thereafter only when they contacted him.<br />
<br />
<b>SO </b>– For support or psychological evaluation?<br />
<b>AP </b>– Support.<br />
<br />
<b><u>The judge (Maria Emília de Melo e Castro) is now asking</u></b><br />
<br />
<b>MC</b> – For how long have you been in this line of work?<br />
<b>AP </b>– I started in 1993. I have been working for the institution for 7 years.<br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>– In which situations have you worked?<br />
<b>AP </b>– Families with domestic violence, maltreatment, children taken from their families (this is a bit like grieving), families who have lost a child. He works for the UK organisation called "Missing People".<br />
<br />
<b>MC </b>– Which strong negative feeling did Kate McCann report to you in the summer of 2009?<br />
<b>AP </b>– She was afraid, she wished she wasn't there; she talked of killing herself as an option.<br />
<br />
Evidence ends. <br />
<br /></div>
<b><u>Previous transcripts:</u></b><br />
<br />
<b> Day 1 - 12th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-susan.html">Witness 1 Susan Hubbard</a> (friend of Mrs McCann)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-emma-loach.html">Witness 2, Emma Loach</a> (Documentary film maker)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-12-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 3, David Edgar</a> (Private Investigator for the McCanns)<br />
<br />
<b> Day 2 - 13th September 2013</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-david.html">Witness 1, David Trickey</a> (Psychologist)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-13-sept-2013-angus.html">Witness 2, Angus McBride</a> (Lawyer)<br />
<br />
<u><b>Next Transcripts: </b></u><br />
<br />
<b>Day 3 - 19th September 2013 </b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-joao.html">Witness 2, João Melchior Gomes</a> (Former Deputy Attorney General) <br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-alipio.html">Witness 3, Alípio Ribeiro</a> (Former National director of the Polícia Judiciária)<br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-19-sept-2013-claudia.html">Witness 4, Cláudia Nogueira</a> (Media Consultant)<br />
<br />
<b>Day 4 – 20 September 2013
</b><br />
<a href="http://atticshelf.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mccann-v-amaral-20-sept-2013-michael.html">Witness 1, Michael Wright</a> (Administrator) – his wife is Kate McCann's cousin.Jacihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11647385754845087805noreply@blogger.com0