From Inside The Courtroom

Hi!

Yes, Amaral got a nice bunch of witnesses;

1. The prosecutor (Magalhães e Menezes) who signed the final report stating or reinforcing the conclusions in there, which are, as you remember, in a nutshell, there is not enough information to decide on which crime has been committed, let alone who committed it. It was him who corrected Cabrita about the role of the dogs: a means of proof, not a proof. Also, he did not read the book, and answering a question from Isabel, he states that, to him, the title seems an attempt of saying that the book is the truth about a flawed investigation (an investigation that lead to a false conclusion, final report). That one is very serious (on Amaral).

2. Then Amaral's pal (Tavares de Almeida) putting all on the boicot by the 'english' police, politicians (en passant), the McCanns. Yes he did write the report stating that the parents should have their status aggravated because they were suspect of having concealed their daughter's body. Yes, the book is a summary of the investigation. Yes the dogs are super and marked everything, if forensic evidence wasn't found it is all down to FSS, who first said that there were 15 markers out of 19 and then said there was contamination, how could they do that as they (PJ) were getting all the directions on how to recover the indices from them (FSS)? (my comment, what great investigators we've got, they need directions on how to collect residues, evidences, indices!!!). Just remembered, Isabel showed him a map in the book where Amaral explains that the Smiths saw a man that would have come from OC. They had a slightly heated argument, and he lead Isabel to conclude, without any denial, that that map was incorrect, so what else was incorrect in the book?

3. The liaison officer (Ricardo Paiva) speaking in a very very low voice, who basically confirmed everything that is in the book (I think as I haven't read it), being the dogs the main 'dish'. Isabel asked him if he didn't think if the book and the thesis it expresses could hamper the search for Madeleine, to which he answered no, only last week he received several messages that were duly investigated and then he was in complete disarray when Isabel put a question to him ,sorry, can't remember which one because she was careful to remind him that he was under oath!!! And then Isabel asked him 3 (three) times how did the parents hide the body for at least 23/24 days (he wasn't sure about the time) and everytime he answered that they must have hid the body cause the dogs marked the car...blablabla... then Isabel wrapped up her questioning with a 'Right, I understand you do not want to answer my question. That's all, thank you'

4. And finally the director of the national unit of combat of terrorism, formerly and at the time, the unit of combat of bandistry (Luís Neves). A heavy weight, strong voice, but deaf of his left ear (Isabel was on his left). Only one meeting with the British Ambassador (10-15 minutes), two or three meetings with the parents, the consul, Guilhermino Encarnação and two high rank british officers, very helpfull the british police, no, he doesn't know Clarence Mitchel, no pressure while he was there (until August), the dogs came very highly reccomended, no false positives in 100 or 200 cases. Suggestion for the dogs to come from the british. No he did not read the book, he just went through it quickly on the eve of the December hearing so that he could prepare his statement... Yes, what is in the book is also in the files. But the book is a view over an investigation, an 'outburst' of GA, so angry he must have been by loosing 'his' investigation .'We' hate that, 'we' do not like when an investigation does not lead to a charge. Yes, if Gonçalo stayed in the investigation it would probably end in a different way.

Some or all of them said that Kate 'started' admitting that Madeleine 'was' dead when she asked for Krugel to be called and even asked that his searches to be widened to the rocks, some scrubland...

Sorry for the scattered report, it is my first court case... Tomorrow I will take notes, it will be easier.

About the questions, you were complaining that without knowing the questions it became difficult to understand the answers. Well, Cabrita is not very imaginative. Always the dogs (why, what, how), the 'coincidence' between the files and the book, the strange behaviours, namely Kate's, no much more than that.

Oh, and the mad woman was there! I didn't see anybody besides the media at the door, but ten meters away I heard her 'long live Dr. Gonçalo Amaral'. I believe she was completely alone.

My opinion? Amaral must be thinking to himself 'with friends like these who needs ennemies?'

Well, and I'm going to try to get some sleep, I'll have to get up at 4:30...

Night all, hope this very very short summary is of any use.

Maria thank you so much for you findings from inside the court and I look forward to reading your update tomorrow.

You are a star thank you so much.

Thank you from me too Maria. Good job.

Am just catching up here too.
Maria, thank you, its much appreciated by us all.
Doesnt look good for Gonc so far does it?
Are his next lot of witnesses as good as his first lot?
Gonc, just admit defeat, you know you cannot possibly win this case.

Yes, many thanks Maria!

Thank you Maria.
Morais must be sooooooooo jealous of you, as it seems she's said she can't get into court because she's no journalist.

Rosie, you've said "All they are doing is repeating libel in court."
I disagree. Imo what they are showing is how they were prejudiced by their personal opinion about the couple and how they funded their investigation on that as well as on gossips.

GA can't feel happy about the statements of Magalhães e Menezes and Luís Neves in particular.

Maria will be reporting for us and once again we feel indebted to her, she is a very special lady and J4 is lucky to have her.

Thank you so much Maria

Maria there are replies to this post on the other thread, I just wanted you to have your own thread so what you report will get the special attention it deserves. I hope you do not mind that I have moved it here? (I can always move it back if you want - no problem)

Cath wrote:Thank you Maria.
Morais must be sooooooooo jealous of you, as it seems she's said she can't get into court because she's no journalist.

Rosie, you've said "All they are doing is repeating libel in court."
I disagree. Imo what they are showing is how they were prejudiced by their personal opinion about the couple and how they funded their investigation on that as well as on gossips.

GA can't feel happy about the statements of Magalhães e Menezes and Luís Neves in particular.

Exactly Cath! Amaral is putting witnesses in who are repeating his libel and gossip, they are demonstrating themselves, just how ineffectual the investigation was and just how libellous Amaral has been in his book, by writing his rubbish in there!

Wow Maria, you are more than a star! TY

I read on another thread on here that the Judge mentioned the Joana case yesterday. Has that been reported by Sky?

Bloody marvellous, Maria. xxxx

Maria my friend, thank you.

Wow Maria. That is super stuff. Can't wait to read your account of today's proceedings with Amaral having flounced from the court.

Hi Maria, hope you got a good nights sleep, you certainly earned it, lol.

I cannot tell you how much we appreciate what you are doing, you are one special lady.

Hi Maria,

Hope all went well today and you are not too tired, can't wait for your report (If you have the time)

IMO, Amaral's witness list is an attempt to justify the investigation. But as I have also said, this is irrelevant. There is no problem with investigating Kate after the dream (except it is so bloody unprofessional that the mind boggles) or to bring in cadaver dogs etc, or even to want to investigate the fund. But it is not the investigation that is the basis of the trial. It is the conclusions that he reached from the investigation, and he must prove that he has some justifiable basis for reaching a different conclusion to the prosecutor. He is not doing that, he seems to be just showing why he had certain suspicions during the investigation, but nothing to show why his theory (the ever changing one) is true.

The difference is not subtle. I cannot understand why Amaral thinks this is a line of defence. I suspect that if this were Britain or Aust, it would not even be allowed into the courtroom, only evidence would be allowed, not personal belief with nothing to support it.

Madeleine: Indictment proves that the book of Gonçalo Amaral was completed before the order of filing
19h08m

Lisboa,
13 Jan (Lusa) - A acusação no julgamento de proibição do livro "Maddie
- A Verdade da Mentira" provou hoje que a obra de Gonçalo Amaral foi
concluída antes do despacho de arquivamento do processo de
investigação, o que poderá suscitar violação do segredo de justiça.



Lisbon, Jan 13 (Reuters) - The prosecution in the trial to ban the book "Maddie - The Truth Lies" proved
today that the work of Gonçalo Amaral was completed before the decision
to file the research process, which may lead to violation of secrecy.





http://jn.sapo.pt/PaginaInicial/Interio ... id=1469170

Please delete if someones already brought this over.

Mulleena

We all knew that the book was completed prior to the release of the files. Now that it has come out in court, perhaps the judicial system will take some action against him. I wonder if there is a statute of limitations on this type of action in Portugal.

Some are convinced this is his reason for walking out of court today.

He's walked out while the other witness, Mr Enes, was still on the stand.

Does anybody know if this retired forensic was actually involved in the investigation? Maria, if you're around, do you know?

It appears that Amaral may have walked because it was pointed out that his book was written before the files were released.

I was wondering why Morais has been so quiet.,

Courtesy of PFA

http://www.pfa2.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4801

Looks like Amaral is in trouble.

Mulleena wrote:Madeleine: Indictment proves that the book of Gonçalo Amaral was completed before the order of filing
19h08m

Lisboa,
13 Jan (Lusa) - A acusação no julgamento de proibição do livro "Maddie
- A Verdade da Mentira" provou hoje que a obra de Gonçalo Amaral foi
concluída antes do despacho de arquivamento do processo de
investigação, o que poderá suscitar violação do segredo de justiça.



Lisbon, Jan 13 (Reuters) - The prosecution in the trial to ban the book "Maddie - The Truth Lies" proved
today that the work of Gonçalo Amaral was completed before the decision
to file the research process, which may lead to violation of secrecy.





http://jn.sapo.pt/PaginaInicial/Interio ... id=1469170

Please delete if someones already brought this over.

you see there is more than one way of skinning a cat!

I just posted about this on PFA.

We dont know for certain (we havent read the book) if he used the files. He says that the files support what he says, so we it is not unreasonable to assume that he used them.

But there are 2 things to consider.

1. If he didnt use the files, he must have used his own notes (which is illegal for him to take away, as they are police property,not his), and he would supposedly been unaware of what occurred in the end of the investigation. Therefore his book would be incorrect. But he then went on to defend his book in interviews, promoting it as the truth. He then says that the files support what he says, when they clearly do not.

2. If he used the files, then he had them illegally, and has broken the secrecy laws. It also means that he knowingly wrote the book in contradiction to the evidence in the files. That he knowingly defamed the McCanns, and that he knew what he wrote was not supported by the files.

Either way, he is up s### creek.

Diane

Honestly take it from me he is definitely up the "brown" creek!

Well, first of all, if you go on calling me names, like star and I don't know what else, I'll shut up! I'm no star, just a person who, for the moment, is enjoying herself to bits, and is doing nothing more nothing less than what any of you would do in my place. Thank you very much for your friendship, that's what counts. And yes, I'm priviledged, I met the McCanns and Isabel Duarte, and THAT is special.

Today's report.

Rosie, you are being very unfair to Amaral. I went down with him today on the elevator and his earring is very very discreet, small even. Actually, I believe he must have two, cause yesterday I could sware he was wearing a cross, silver, white gold or platinum...

Another important issue. Do you know what a majorette is? I believe that the mad woman is a Gonçalette... And she takes her job very seriously, shouting everytime someone gets in or out. Tonight she decided to declare that Gonçalo Amaral is a grande (big or large, take your pick...) man, he is no cheminee cleaner...???

Seriously.

Pedro, you are in charge of the press, they all are writing about the trial and the McCanns. Of course, do not expect big surprises. But I have a good one on that aspect. There is an article in Destak, a free paper available at all train stations (and subway?) about the couple/case. Didn't read it, stupidly today I did not pick up a paper, but I know it is a good article. Will try and see if I can get it tomorrow.

Do not worry, Amaral had no better luck with today's witnesses. The first was great Moita Flores, on video conference. As you know, we can't see anything, the screen is oriented to the judge, lawyers etc. We can only listen. And I listened. I listened to him saying that Amaral was a good professional, the best, they had a workplace frienship, not more than that, but he knew he was very very good on everything he did, starting at the drug squad. I listened him saying that the book faithfully reflected what is in the files. I also listened him saying that if what happened to Amaral - the defamation, descredit, family intrusion, insults - from the english press had happened to him, he would probably do much worse than Amaral. I listened to him when he said that from the very first minute he and all the others knew that the parents were staging something by staging an abduction. I listened to him saying that the media circus was very well orchestrated and aimed at putting pressure on the police, to descredit and demoralise them.I listened to him saying that no abductor could ever remove Madeleine through that window unless he had 4 hands and 4 feet, and he should be very stupid to use a window when he had a door easily at hand. Then for a moment there was some confusion with the lawyers looking for something, I did not listen to him telling an employee of the tribunal of Santarém that he was giving a witness account to a trial, he didn't know which trial it was, but a trial anyway. I did not listen, I only heard the judge telling him, with a very nice smile, that he was on loud voice (loud speakers?) and the whole court room heard his doubt so she informed him that he was giving evidence on the appeal moved by Amaral. I just heard Sandra Felgueiras on RTP2 saying that MF made a two hours statement, so I would say that he repeated these things I just said for one hour and a half, varying only the format, not the contents. Then, Isabel started her questioning. She was divine (lack of better word).(we had been talking before and agreed that MF was THE man needed to descredit the 'book'). She asked him if he ever had been at PdL, to which he said yes, once, for a SIC direct programme. She asked him several times how high was that window, to which he always answered he did not remember (although he had been in front of it during that tv program). She told him that the book in fact contained some things that are not in the files, like descriptions of the weather, states of mind, feelings of the author. He agreed. So the book was not in 'investigation format', he agreed again. So, she said, if the book was not an investigation, what was it, a romance, a novel, an essay? He thought loud, expressing why it was nothing of that, as it was not fictional, and concluded it was an autobiography. Isabel asked then if an autobiography was unbiased. He hesitate only a moment and said no, not necessarily, but the conclusion stands (that there was no abduction, Madeleine died at 5A, the parents concealed the body, etc). Even if it contradicts the conclusion drawn by the prosecutor, she asked. Yes, he said, the conclusion drawn by the prosecutor is nothing more than the prosecutor's opinion. Bruhaha in the room. I was so busy bruhahaing that I did not look to the judge, but I'm sure she jumped like everybody else. Isabel insisted, who directs an investigation? The prosecutor, he answered. Who concludes an investigation, she asked. The prosecutor, he answered. 'Are you saying that the opinion of an investigator is more accurate that the technical, founded opinion of a prosecutor?' 'They are not the way, the light and the life' (Jesus words, I'm the way, the light and the life, I don't know if this translation is correct). End of statement. I bet a penny to one hundred quid (as you say) that the judge wasn't happy.

Then Luis (?) Anes, a retired university professor (antropology) and former director for many years of the forensics lab of PJ (LPC). He did read the book, did NOT see the files. Well, yes, the book looked accurate, but if it was him he would probably handle it in another way or even not do it at all. Yes, of course he understands the anger and sense of useless (not a good word) of Amaral, but if it was him he would probably handle it in a different way or even not do it at all. Oh yes, he understands the position Amaral was put in, he himself went through similar processes once or twice in his time, but he handled them in a different way. And so on and so forth. Very honest man, therefore not very much in line with Amaral.

The two other witnesses were from Guerra e Paz, not very interesting, the judge did not allow Isabel to even touch the subject of how much money ... So, I did not feel they were exciting, sorry. Also, they didn't look to have slipped much. It was only determined that Amaral would write/publish the book after his retirement had come through (when he finally regained his 'freedom of expression'), no special concerns about publishing before or after the process shelving and secrecy lifted. They came out quite clean I think. 180.000 books printed, not necessarily sold. Very difficult to know exactly how many weren't sold given the distribution organisation. There is no brazilian edition, only Dinalivro, a company dedicated to sell brazilian books in Portugal and portuguese books in Brazil, requested for 4 000 books to export to Brazil.

And now, my dear friends, bedtime. My dogs look at me in the morning and I can clearly see in their eyes that they think I definitely went nuts: breakfast at 4:30 in the morning? After last pee and dinner the previous 21:00? They are asleep already, like babies.

Good night all, talk to you tomorrow.