Re: Amaral's Appeal Hearing Gets Under way!

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:06 pm

Kazcut here is the link toMaria's post !(Welcome by the way Amaral's Appeal Hearing Gets Under way! - Page 8 517597

Amaral's Appeal Hearing Gets Under way! - Page 8 720908

https://justice4mccannfam.forumotion.com/mccanns-court-case-against-goncalo-amaral-f60/from-inside-the-courtroom-t2281.htm

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:07 pm

12:06

Amaral's Appeal Hearing Gets Under way! - Page 8 Twitter

jondipaolo:
Flores: The McCanns have every right to do everything they can beyond what the Portuguese police did in order to find their daughter.

Wednesday January 13, 2010 12:06 jondipaolo

12:04

jondipaolo:
Flores: This case is pathetic. A citizen is being prevented from freely expressing his opinions in a reponsible way.

Wednesday January 13, 2010 12:04 jondipaolo

12:00

jondipaolo:
Isabel Duarte, the McCanns' top lawyer, leaves the bench and approaches the couple for a quick huddled chat before returning to the fray.

by Tinkerbell43 Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:11 pm

jondipaolo:
Flores: Many, many hours were spend by officers checking out every other possible line of inquiry.

Not according to Paiva yesterday they wasn't! Amarals theory prevented this if I remember rightly!

by Tinkerbell43 Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:12 pm

Ooh so Flores thinks the case is pathetic does he ? Nice of him to voice this opinion, he wouldn't be getting a tad riled would he, lol.

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:14 pm

12:04

jondipaolo:
Flores: This case is pathetic. A citizen is being prevented from freely expressing his opinions in a reponsible way.

Wednesday January 13, 2010 12:04 jondipaolo

Whoops I think the padeophile defending Moita Flores, is getting a teensy beet rattled!

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:15 pm

Morning Tinks, Snap! I think he is getting more than a little bit rattled, Isabel is doing her job nicely!

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:16 pm

12:16

jondipaolo:
Flores: Sections of the British media spread propaganda about Mr Amaral.

Wednesday January 13, 2010 12:16 jondipaolo

12:13

jondipaolo:
Flores: The book is autobiographical, it traces a period of Mr Amaral's life.

Wednesday January 13, 2010 12:13 jondipaolo

12:12

jondipaolo:
Flores: The documentary (based on Mr Amaral's) book is a hypothesis that believers take to be the truth.

by Pedro Silva Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:17 pm

Moita Flores, careful with your you´re saying, you´re in a court of law, you´re not in your house, show respect for the court, show respect for those who are here in the room. You say this case is pathetic, the only who is pathetic is the one who botched the investigation. Since when, a citizen is the right to say lies, smears, defame the good name of innocent people, to try to divert or harm the search, to gain money and fame at the expenses of those who are innocent. Is this the kind of freedom of speech you say? This is not freedom of speech, this is a disgusting behaviour, this is defamation.

by Catkins Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:19 pm

Amaral's Appeal Hearing Gets Under way! - Page 8 356737

hypothesis that believers take to be the truth

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:19 pm

12:12

jondipaolo:
Flores: The documentary (based on Mr Amaral's) book is a hypothesis that believers take to be the truth.

Exactly Mr Flores! Then what is Amaral doing presenting his HYPOTHESIS as fact and saying that Madeleine died in apartment 5a on May 3rd and her parents concealed her body?

Do you not know this is EXACTLY what the case is about, this is libel and it is defamatory towards the McCanns.

Case proven I think!

by Pedro Silva Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:20 pm

Hypothesis is not an accurate fact.

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:21 pm

Hello my friend Pedro Amaral's Appeal Hearing Gets Under way! - Page 8 30345

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:22 pm

12:20

jondipaolo:

Glamorous judge Maria Gabriela Cunha Rodrigues halts the cross-examination of Mr Flores by the McCanns' lawyer, saying it is not relevant.

by kazcut Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:22 pm

Rosiepops wrote:Kazcut here is the link toMaria's post !(Welcome by the way

[url=https://justice4mccannfam.forumotion.com/mccanns-court-case-against-goncalo-amaral-f60/from-inside-the-courtroom-t2281.htm

https://justice4mccannfam.forumotion.com/mccanns-court-case-against-goncalo-amaral-f60/from-inside-the-courtroom-t2281.htm[/quote[/url]]

thankyou rosie and hi xx
so the stupid ricardo said the book is based on facts yet he hasnt read it dohhhhhhhhhh

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:22 pm

Would help if Jondi told what is considered as not relevant!

by Catkins Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:23 pm

jondipaolo:

Glamorous judge Maria Gabriela Cunha Rodrigues halts the cross-examination of Mr Flores by the McCanns' lawyer, saying it is not relevant.

???Is this because he's talking SH@T

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:27 pm

12:22

jondipaolo:
Flores: It was a scandal to see such nasty portraits painted of the Portuguese investigators by the British media.

It was nasty to see such a terrible portrait of the McCanns leaked to the Portuguese press by the leader of the investigation Goncalo Amaral, when he broke his country's strict secrecy law ( a law that Amaral himself invoked when he did not have to)

If the PJ had done their job properly then the British media would not have been able to do this and by the way judge Rodrigues

Is what Flores saying relevant to this case?

NO I don't think so!

by christabel Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:28 pm

OK Rosie, I'll take over for a bit now.

by christabel Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:28 pm

Rosiepops wrote:
12:22

jondipaolo:
Flores: It was a scandal to see such nasty portraits painted of the Portuguese investigators by the British media.

It was nasty to see such a terrible portrait of the McCanns leaked to the Portuguese press by the leader of the investigation Goncalo Amaral, when he broke his country's strict secrecy law ( a law that Amaral himself invoked when he did not have to)

If the PJ had done their job properly then the British media would not have been able to do this and by the way judge Rodrigues

Is what Flores saying relevant to this case?

NO I don't think so!

He is a nasty little #####

by christabel Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:29 pm

12.27

jondipaolo:
Flores: Mr Amaral was the co-ordinator of the investigation. He was not in the field.

No not in his field full of pigs

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:31 pm

12:27

jondipaolo:
Flores: Mr Amaral was the co-ordinator of the investigation. He was not in the field.

Wednesday January 13, 2010 12:27 jondipaolo

12:27

jondipaolo:
Flores: Mr Amaral was the victim of a smear campain. He is a good professional with a good technical background.

Talking about smear campaigns, what about the one he operated concerning the McCanns? (Not to say what he did to Leonor Cipriano)

By the way is this relevant? The McCanns kept the secrecy law (Pity Amaral didn't) what has this got to do with amaral committing libel and defamation inhis book?

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:32 pm

christabel wrote:OK Rosie, I'll take over for a bit now.

Thanks Chris Amaral's Appeal Hearing Gets Under way! - Page 8 30345

by Pedro Silva Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:33 pm

Hello my friend Rosiepops. I agree Catkins about what the judge told: "it´s not relevant". Moita, you say it´s a scandal about such nasty portraits, but the only one caused that such nasty portaits is GA, if he had not botched the investigation, such nasty portraits would never happened. You say GA was a victim, since when a victim gain fame and fortune (with smears and lies) and wrotes books and acted like a Hollywood celebrity by giving autographs, some victim.

by Rosie Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:35 pm

Pedro Silva wrote:Moita Flores, careful with your you´re saying, you´re in a court of law, you´re not in your house, show respect for the court, show respect for those who are here in the room. You say this case is pathetic, the only who is pathetic is the one who botched the investigation. Since when, a citizen is the right to say lies, smears, defame the good name of innocent people, to try to divert or harm the search, to gain money and fame at the expenses of those who are innocent. Is this the kind of freedom of speech you say? This is not freedom of speech, this is a disgusting behaviour, this is defamation.

Pedro you are 100% right and you as a Portuguese person would know more about this paedophile defender Moita Flores!

Thank you my friend

by christabel Wed Jan 13, 2010 11:36 pm

I bet he could organise a drink at a brewery though Amaral's Appeal Hearing Gets Under way! - Page 8 908778

by Sponsored content