|
The hearing as it happened
(08.07.2014,
11am)
The lawyers
asked for a pause after KMC's deposition. At the end of a 10' pause,
the clerk arrived with GMC. He was asked to stand to answer the
usual identity questions and commit himself to tell the truth.
Judge –
When did you learn that Gonçalo Amaral's book had been published?
GMC
says it was in April 2008, a friend sent them translations of media
articles.
Judge
– The book hadn't been published yet?
GMC –
No.
He says that the book was introduced in the media before it was
published.
Judge
– Was it through interviews?
GMC
– Yes.
Judge
– When was the book published?
GMC
says it was published 3 days after the releasing of the AG final
report.
Judge
– When did you have access to the book?
GMC
replies that he learnt through the media, particularly the
Correio da Manhã, that the book was published. Portuguese
friends daily translated for them what the media said.
Judge –
Have you read the book entirely?
GMC
says that he read translated parts. Only later a translation of the
whole book was available.
Judge
– When?
GMC –
Later in
2008. He adds that he must say that their lawyer
Rogério
Alves read the book, made a report upon it and then had a discussion
with them about it.
Judge –
How did
you feel?
GMC
says that what was said in the media, before he himself read the
book, was the cause of much anxiety for him.
Judge
– And the book?
GMC
says it was shocking. The book is an affront to him, to his wife, to
his family and to the people who believe in them.
Judge
– How did you feel?
GMC
says that he obviously felt anguish, despair and of course anger
reckoning that someone so close to the investigation alleges claims
without evidence that his missing daughter is unequivocally dead.
The most important issue for them was that the book was read by
hundreds of thousands of people and widely publicised. That made the
people believe in the conclusions, preventing information about
Madeleine from being brought up.
Judge
– Then the documentary was broadcast?
GMC
says that it was even worse then.
Judge
– Why?
GMC
explains that it states right at the beginning that Madeleine is
dead, that there was no abduction, that he and his wife are liars,
that they are cold and ruthless enough to hide a body instead of
rending assistance. There's no evidence of that and the evidence
that the documentary presents doesn't match.
Judge
– Have you watched the documentary?
GMC
watched it on the Web.
Judge
– Have you been feeling the same as with the book?
GMC
says it was worst.
Judge
– In what way?
GMC
says it was horrible to realise that people were watching something
that wasn't true. They were working very hard on the investigation,
including people in the Algarve who had been brought in to help. The
documentary destroyed all the possibilities of obtaining assistance.
Judge
– Do you know about interviews of Gonçalo Amaral in the Correio
da Manhã ?
GMC
says that he read many interviews.
Judge
– What about interviews upon the thesis of the book?
GMC
argues that there were many articles on the theme published in the
Correio da
Manhã
and also in other newspapers.
Judge
– Do you remember an article published in (30) Julho 2008 in the
Correio da
Manhã ?
GMC
remarks that articles were published almost on a daily basis and
asks whether he can see the headline.
The Judge
asks the clerk to show the article to GMC, says that the header is
"Madeleine
died in the flat" and ask the interpreter to translate the beginning
of the article.
LINK
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/noticia.aspx?channelid=00000009-0000-0000-0000-000000000009&contentid=F4C302DD-058C-44C9-8D9E-84C08B61B68C
Judge
– Do you remember it?
GMC
says that he saw that in many other newspapers.
The Judge
observes that this was the first of a series of excerpts of "A
verdade da Mentira" published by the Correio da
Manhã.
Judge
– Have you had insomnia, lack of appetite?
GMC
says there were not many nights without thinking of that book.
Anxiety was big and of course appetite was failing, but it wasn't
permanent.
Judge
– Have you observed that people thought differently of you after the
publication of the book?
GMC
notes that it is difficult to answer because this requires knowing
what the people thought before.
Judge
– Do you
think that for most people these theories are true?
GMC
argues that there was clearly no evidence that Madeleine was dead
and that nothing supported that Kate and him were anyhow
responsible. People strongly believed them, but after the book was
published and after a huge media coverage most Portuguese stopped
believing because they were bombarded by the idea of Madeleine's
death and of a staged abduction.
Judge
– What about the public in the UK?
GMC
says that, thanks to the legal actions, the content of the book
hasn't been published by the MSM, but small minority groups, in the
UK, have launched campaigns of persecution against them, based on
the book.
Judge
– Can you name them?
GMC
– Yes, we had legal actions against the Madeleine Foundation and the
name is Anthony Bennett.
Judge
– What relation exists between this group and the publication of the
book?
GMC
says that AB used parts of the book, interviewed Gonçalo Amaral and
invited him on a forum.
Judge
– Did the group exist before the publication?
GMC
isn't sure about that. But he's able to say that the material they
used was based on the allegations of the book. They published
pamphlets that said that Madeleine hadn't been abducted. They
distributed them to his neighbours and in the whole Leicestershire.
This led AB to receive many warnings from his juridical counsels and
finally to be sued.
Judge
– The twins know the theory of the book?
GMC
says they try not to talk upon that subject, but they answer the
twins' questions. Sean asked Kate a specific question; he asked why
Mr Amaral said that they hid Madeleine. They're aware that the twins
make those questions because they hear people tell things.
Judge
– What did you do?
GMC
mentions that they were very worried about the twins and took a
professional advice. They contacted a child psychologist who told
them how to handle the issue the best way. He still advises them
when they need it. GMC adds that the key-piece of advice is to
answer the questions as openly as possible, at their understanding
level. Up to now, he says, it has functioned very well, but he's
worried by the fact they're going to discover on the Web horrible
things about their parents. He's worried by the effect it will have
on them.
The Judge
asks whether there is a coordination with the school upon that
issue.
GMC
says that the school provided a big support and is in contact with
Kate, but there hasn't been specific incidents.
Judge
– Do
you know a book by Paulo Cristóvão on the Maddie Case (A Estrela
de Madeleine)
GMC
says he vaguely heard of it.
Judge
– Do you
know a book by Manuel Catarino (A Culpa dos McCann?)
GMC
says he doesn't know that name.
Judge
– Do you know a book by
Hernâni Carvalho and Luís Maia (Maddy
129)?
GMC
says he knows the name Hernâni Carvalho because his comments in the
media on GA's book. But he doesn't know that he wrote a book.
Gonçalo Amaral's new lawyer, Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, is the
only one who has a question for GMC. He wants to know what caused
more distress, the disappearance, the arguido status or the reason
for this trial.
The judge
rephrases – What disturbed you more: the disappearance of your
daughter, the fact you were made arguido or the reason for this
trial, i.e the book and the documentary?
GMC
says that those events happened at different times. A missing child
is the hugest pain there is, but the publication of the book
sharpened the pain.
There's no more questions and the Judge is about to dismiss the
plaintiff when GMC claims that he has something to say.
The judge
says that in a civil trial the parties aren't allowed to spontaneous
depositions. But she allows him: please do speak!
GMC
says that he wants to make a comment about the dogs; he wants to
make it clear that it is not a fact that they detected blood...
The judge
interrupts him – The issue here isn't not to elucidate what actually
happened. The perspective, in this trial, is to determine whether
the book and the documentary affected the plaintiffs.
GMC
– But the book mentions facts that aren't true.
The judge
– The point isn't to establish whether things are true or
not, this is not the issue. We want to know whether we are in the
juridical remit of offence to persons. For this it's not necessary
to know what the truth is. As a judge I'm not supposed to stand in
for a criminal investigation.
And so it ended |
