Justice 4 ALL Madeleine McCann Family
You need to be a member of this forum in order to view its entire contents.
We welcome applications to join the forum from genuine caring compassionate people that wish to support Mr Mrs McCann in their never ending resolve to finding their daughter Madeleine and bringing her back home where she truly belongs.

All applicants are checked out so people with no sense, no moral compass, no rationality and only half a brain cell and even less grip on reality and who are devoid of all logic - need NOT apply!
This also applies to ex-members, who no longer want to be members, yet spend their lives viewing this forum and telling people they no longer want to be members.
This is said without prejudice with no one in particular in mind.

From Inside The Courtroom

Page 4 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Catkins on Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:01 pm

MARIA...........Obrigada..........




Last edited by Catkins on Sat Jan 16, 2010 1:15 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Catkins
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1829
Location : UK
Registration date : 2009-02-11

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:39 pm

Maria



I'm too choked to say anything else at the moment.
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Zavvi on Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:13 am

Tinkerbell43 wrote:Maria



I'm too choked to say anything else at the moment.

Me too an enormous Maria xx
avatar
Zavvi
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 91
Location : Lancashire
Registration date : 2009-09-02

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by maria on Sat Jan 16, 2010 2:36 am

Thank you all.

I'm going to take an aspirin now, going around the forum next to catch up, and I'll try to write the report afterwards. You are destabilising me!

Thank you again for all your kind words, all your help and support.


Last edited by maria on Sat Jan 16, 2010 5:04 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
maria
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1128
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-07-04

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by jean on Sat Jan 16, 2010 3:50 am

thanks for being there for kate - she knows we are all here supporting her and gerry in all they are doing to find madeleine - but you have reinforced this by just being there in person. if the tv and newspapers get in touch with you to do a programme on the support you are giving the mccanns, let us know and we'll all come over en mass to show our support!!!! and help turn a few screws in ameral's coffin!! as everyone before me has said- you are one hell of a lady. i don't know how to do those flower things at the end of my message but the thought is there.

jean
Master
Master

Number of posts : 474
Location : knutsford cheshire
Registration date : 2008-12-11

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by maria on Sun Jan 17, 2010 3:47 am

Everytime I come here to write this report on the third day I'm caught by my previous one, and I move away from the computer. So, sorry for being this late with the report.

Good, feeling better now.

You'll recall that I did not report on two witnesses (second day) that I remembered as having been repetitive. Well, I had bought a block to take notes, and on the second day I had it, only I left it on the car and was too tired to go there and pick it up. As it happens, I think it is important to report some bits and pieces that were said then, both by Moita Flores and José Anes, then the other two. There we go.

2nd day (part two)

Moita Flores

Because he knew that Amaral was such a good investigator, he decided to write the preface of the book titling it as 'The truth of Locard' (actually, I'm not sure if it is the 'truth' or the 'question', this confusion also lead Isabel, later, to ask the question, and he answered that it was the same thing, so no problem with the title of the preface), being Locard (end of XIX century) the master and creator of modern criminal investigation followed by all police forces all over the world. (Bluj?). It is pathetic to say that the book could hamper the search for Madeleine. The parents want to convince the police that it was an abduction. This doesn't happen anywhere in the world. All the hypothesis must be followed. Madeleine's death is not attributed to the parents. He knows the reasons why they were made arguidos, and they were correctly made arguidos. They knew from the beginning that there was no abduction at all but not that the child was killed by A or B. They knew that a story, a fable was being told, built. He also spoke to a french colleague who agreed with the view that all hypothesis should be taken into account. What is astonishing is that portuguese authorities have 2 weights and 2 measures re negligence. He does not agree that a case already closed cannot be commented. There are cases of censorship in dictatorships. There is no attack on the good name and dignity, not on the McCann's. All the PJ suggestions were accepted by the prosecutor, although the final PJ report was not. On the reverse, the final (prosecution) report is a handwash (not a 'whitewash') and must be discussed it is 'pilatesque' (from Pôncio Pilatos, the roman consul who washed his hands handing Jesus to the jews to be trialed). It was Amaral who was insulted. JFK case is still discussed today. The same will happen with this one. It would be a mistake to forbid it. He doesn't know people who had written on cases they worked on (?). It is normal, it is not normal in China and other countries without freedom. The activities of searching Madeleine are just mystifications to pass the idea that there were no investigations on the hypothesis of abduction.


José Anes

He followed this case. He was interviewed and answered objectively. English media reported that he minimized the results. He worked for Amaral in Joana case as well as on this one. There was strong conviction as methodology it is good to go public sa Amaral went public but then there was process archiving, there had been contamination, we know about contamination (OJSimpson). The court needs indices. It is not common to go public, this case was victim of friendly fire. It is understandable but there were moments when he (Amaral) couldn't keep quiet.

Answering Cabrita's questions

He read the book quickly, he thinks the hypothesis is good but there is something missing. He remembers Moita Flores writing about the Cavacos (should be some old case, don't know). His thesis (the witness') about Camarate (a plane crash in Lisbon where the prime minister and several other government members were killed more than 20 years ago) was not accepted, he still makes statements on that, he doesn't ponder to write a book about that. He applies self-'restriction', does not cross that boundary. He still respects Amaral but he immediately suspected that these proclamations would have consequences, but he still thinks that things should be public. There are repreensible procedures from the english forensic police, it happened before in other cases. He did not read the process. The book didn't seem very offensive.

Answering another lawyer's question (TVI I think)

There were incorrect procedures on the crime scene isolation (it doesn't come to me the correct word now, sorry), not only by PJ the family as well. Foreign detectives are usually impecable, although sometimes there are interferences. When it comes to DNA questions, it must be 100%, 80% is simply not good enough. This investigation was victim of friendly fire, with new news everyday in the press. Causes the desire of a public investigation. The investigation is blocked but Amaral's is a good theory. If a correct attitude in the gathering and preservation of indices is not in place, the investigation is lost. (Isabel-Amaral's thesis exclude the thesis of abduction and that Madeleine is alive) There is a strong belief, but it should be said in a different way. It is safer, more 'armoured' not to talk. We all have the right to free speech but it is necessary to think about the next step, it can offend someone else's rights. (Isabel-do you think that an investigator who believes that Madeleine is dead will investigate for a living Madeleine) There are experiences where changing the investigator the investigation changes.

Well well well...



Mário Rui Sena Lopes (publishing director for Guerra e Paz)

It has been his responsibility to make the deal to acquire 'patrimonial' rights (physical not moral) over the book, no rights regarding audio-visual of any kind. Launch on the 27/28th of July 2008. On sale on every kiosk, book shops, supermarkets, distributed with Correio da Manhã (bought separately). Many books offered to tv entertainment programs. The book was ready during the first week of July 2008, already revised and printed. By the launching date, there were already two editions ready. Promotion, media impact immediate. Sales team procedures normal for a book based on facts non speculative. Available to journalists 24 hours in advance. Press release. Interviews directed to the author. 12 editions, 10 to 30.000 books each, 170 to 180.000 in total. It is difficult to say exactly how many books were sold, giving the structure of distribution. Before the last edition, there might be 30 to 35.000 books still in the market, so in practice it was not sold out. Last edition September 2008. Several foreign editions.Spain (could cover spanish latin America), France (could cover Belgium) Germany (could cover Austria and german swiss cantons), Holland, Denmark (could also be sold in Sweden and Finland, languages very easily understandable between these countries). There were requests from UK and USA. English translation not authorized (net). Portuguese edition on the net, suspended.Images in the book were drawings, the pictures were made available by ??? (couldn't aunderstand). New editions no changes to text, changes on the distribution only. The cover is not Amaral's, it is done by a designer they probably exchanged opinions. On Amaral's request, the book wasn't launched before he was definitely retired. No he didn't take any precautions re the secrecy law that could still be in force. There were already conversations for an edition in the UK, they were at a preliminar phase at the date of the injunction. They still hadn't precise juridical informations. Isabel calls his attention to the fact that the french version does not include a full chapter (the one about the 'fraudulent' fund). He feels that the cover calls the attention to the essential thesis of the book. They had very little time to make the book.


The second witness from Guerra e Paz, can't remember exactly her job, gave more or less the same information, not so complete, but in no way contradictory and certainly nothing new.
avatar
maria
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1128
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-07-04

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by May on Sun Jan 17, 2010 4:42 am

Maria

Thank you for all the work you are doing. It certainly makes interesting reading and mustn't have been easy for you trying to concentrate on what was being said whilst making notes. Thank you so much
avatar
May
Master
Master

Number of posts : 498
Registration date : 2008-07-27

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by bluj1515 on Sun Jan 17, 2010 5:19 am

Thanks for the synopsis again, Maria!

Locard is indeed the father of modern criminal investigation and his views and theories are used all over the world, including the US. Ironically, though, Amarals investigation is a perfect example of what Locard would NOT have done. Here is a good thread from PFA2 about Locard: http://www.pfa2.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4549&p=163322&hilit=Locard#p163322.

Locard's theory is basically the following, courtesy Preciousramotse on PFA2: Essentially Locard's principle is applied to crime scenes in which the perpetrator(s) of a crime comes into contact with the scene, so the perpetrator(s) will both bring something into the scene and leave with something from the scene. Every contact leaves a trace.

“ Wherever he steps, whatever he touches, whatever he leaves, even unconsciously, will serve as a silent witness against him. Not only his fingerprints or his footprints, but his hair, the fibers from his clothes, the glass he breaks, the tool mark he leaves, the paint he scratches, the blood or semen he deposits or collects. All of these and more, bear mute witness against him. This is evidence that does not forget. It is not confused by the excitement of the moment. It is not absent because human witnesses are. It is factual evidence. Physical evidence cannot be wrong, it cannot perjure itself, it cannot be wholly absent. Only human failure to find it, study and understand it, can diminish its value.

So if the McCanns "did" it there should have been traces at the scene or traces one them of the scene. The same for an abductor. Amaral did not search for these traces. He relies on the bark of a dog for such evidence. Locard would not approve. Nor would he have approved of not ensuring the purity of the crime scene, having a protocol in place for missing children cases, or doing a DNA and forensic sweep 3 months after the fact.
avatar
bluj1515
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1017
Location : United States
Registration date : 2009-06-30

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Rosie on Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:29 am

Maria, that is exactly what I said about what Moita Flores said when he wrote the preface to the English gag!

This is what I wrote on the blog and also posted it here, good to know I got the prediction right that Moita Flores would make an idiot out of himself in court when questioned!

Re: 'The English Gag' An Introduction.
by
Rosiepops on Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:59 am


I think I will write a book about the renowned criminologist that gets all his thesis from an American TV crime programme.

You can just imagine this prat Flores as an expert witness in court, when he is questioned on what he based his evidence, he would have to answer the CSI American TV programme.


And if Moita Flores has to quote Sherlock Holmes, Dr Watson and Galileo as some kind of proof of what Amaral is saying, then Amaral is in bigger trouble than even I think! it is pathetic

Someone needs to tell Moita Flores that Sherlock Holmes and Dr Watson are *FICTIONAL* characters and Galileo was born in 1512 and Locard, would completely destroy Amaral's argument.

If this is all this new book has to offer, at best it will be totally discredited as a load of nonsense and at worse it will be laughed at by real criminologist and detectives.

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Rosie on Sun Jan 17, 2010 8:47 am

Just to add to my previous post....

It is not only what a criminal would leave at a scene, basically Locard's principle concerns, if you shake hands with someone or just touch someone else, inadvertently you could transfer their DNA to a crime scene. Example, you meet someone you shake hands and touch their other arm with your other hand, or you hug someone, their DNA will transfer over to you and the chances are their hairs and or fibres from their clothes will transfer over on to you. You could then go off and murder someone, transferring the DNA you picked up from someone else directly on to the crime scene and your DNA will be there and it may be that you have NEVER even set foot in that place. This is why DNA evidence is very rarely used as stand alone evidence, it cannot be, because it could give the wrong picture, it is all about our old friend and as with the dogs "corroboration" there must be corroborating evidence to back up the DNA evidence. People have the completely wrong impression of DNA, they think that once your DNA is found in a crime scene that this is it, game set and match you are guilty, this is just not the case.

As a matter of interest, the word of a policeman simply because he was a policeman, was used to convict Leonor Cipriano, the evidence if one could call it that was of the flimsiest circumstantial evidence and the blood found in the Cipriano residence was NEVER matched to that of Joana Cipriano and of course Joana's DNA would have been all over her home in any case.

See how badly they needed a confession from Leonor?

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Sabot on Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:25 am

See how badly they needed a confession from Kate?

Sabot
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 764
Location : France
Registration date : 2009-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Rosie on Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:47 am

Sabot wrote:See how badly they needed a confession from Kate?

Exactly so Sabot!

They could beat a confession out of Leonor, the poor woman is just a simple plain uneducated woman and they could scare her with their threats etc, they could not do this to Kate, they knew they would never get away with physical violence, so Amaral did the next best thing, he tried psychological torture on both them, but really increased the pressure on Kate McCann, it must have been a real shock to the system for Amaral when he realised that this was one lady who was not going to break under the severest psychological pressure, which made Amaral dislike her all the more!

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by dianeh on Sun Jan 17, 2010 10:11 am

José Anes

He followed this case. He was interviewed and answered objectively. English media reported that he minimized the results. He worked for Amaral in Joana case as well as on this one. There was strong conviction as methodology it is good to go public sa Amaral went public but then there was process archiving, there had been contamination, we know about contamination (OJSimpson). The court needs indices. It is not common to go public, this case was victim of friendly fire. It is understandable but there were moments when he (Amaral) couldn't keep quiet.

Is this the forensic scientist, or another copper? Because if a forensic scientist then he must be aware of the lack of supporting forensic evidence in the Cipriano case that he worked on. He would also be aware that the forensics of the McCann case fail to show that Madeleine died in the apartment. That will probably surface (at least the second bit) at the libel trial.

But if he is a copper, then please just ignore my sleepy Sunday morning post.
avatar
dianeh
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3465
Age : 53
Location : Outback, Australia
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Sabot on Sun Jan 17, 2010 10:23 am

Rosiepops wrote:
Sabot wrote:See how badly they needed a confession from Kate?

Exactly so Sabot!

They could beat a confession out of Leonor, the poor woman is just a simple plain uneducated woman and they could scare her with their threats etc, they could not do this to Kate, they knew they would never get away with physical violence, so Amaral did the next best thing, he tried psychological torture on both them, but really increased the pressure on Kate McCann, it must have been a real shock to the system for Amaral when he realised that this was one lady who was not going to break under the severest psychological pressure, which made Amaral dislike her all the more!

We all know he is a mysoganist from the way he has treated his wife. So what's new in trying to brow beat Kate. Pig.

Sabot
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 764
Location : France
Registration date : 2009-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by maria on Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:59 pm

Yes Diane, José Anes is a retired scientist and former university professor. From his statement, I think it becomes very clear he is being absolutely honest. The fact that we worked for Amaral in both cases and that Amaral was unable to produce real analysis results just adds to his honesty. LPC, the portuguese PJ lab where he worked, came out with inconclusive results in both cases. So it was not only FSS, Amaral knew it very well.

What stuns me is why on earth has Amaral called for this witness, so honest and so damaging for him, to take the stand.
avatar
maria
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1128
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-07-04

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Cath on Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:09 am

maria wrote:Yes Diane, José Anes is a retired scientist and former
university professor. From his statement, I think it becomes very clear
he is being absolutely honest. The fact that we worked for Amaral in
both cases and that Amaral was unable to produce real analysis results
just adds to his honesty. LPC, the portuguese PJ lab where he worked,
came out with inconclusive results in both cases. So it was not only
FSS, Amaral knew it very well.

What stuns me is why on earth has Amaral called for this witness, so honest and so damaging for him, to take the stand.

Perhaps he didn't expect that witness would be so honest?
Those replies José Anes gave, were they to GA's lawyer's questions or to Isobelle's?


Last edited by Cath on Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:22 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : eta quote)

Cath
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 722
Location : Holland
Registration date : 2009-04-10

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by maria on Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:18 am

At long last, I'm starting the report on the third day of hearings.

As you remember, Gerry is back home, Fiona takes over supporting Kate.

Today, there will be two witnesses for Valentim de Carvalho, the video (and future fiction film) producer, and another 2 from TVI, the tv station who bought the transmission rights for Portugal.

I did not take note of the names and jobs, sorry, but I believe we will be able to discover them, either somewhere in the forum (I'm sure I have seen them already) or outside in reports and media pieces.


1. ? Director for Valentim de Carvalho

When identifiying himself, he reveals that he is a former PJ, not at the course as Amaral but they had sporadic contacts, so he knows quite a bit about criminal investigation. He trusts Amaral. As usual, the judge asks for dates for the different jobs he has had.

Starting his statement, he says that VC acquired the rights to make a video and, later, a fiction film on the subject. The video will be made based on the book. As a remark, the video will contain the refference that the only certainty is that Madeleine disappeared on that night, he says. VC is a producer. He refers his personal previous contact with Amaral, then refers that he signed the contract without any discussion, gave advice to Amaral (presumably on the contract) but didn't discuss. It was a licensing contract, with VC acquiring the rights to make a video or a film, and where Amaral would necessarily be the narrator. The narrator has rights, very similar or the same as an actor. No, neither the book or the video do accuse the parents of murdering Madeleine. He knows the files through the media. He explains how the criminal investigation is conducted based on his experience. It looks to him like that some facts are missing. Amaral ommitted his interpretation of the facts. During the investigation an hypothesis was built according to which Madeleine died in the apartment. Soiled reputation, he decided to retire and write, he was angry.. The book points out to one dilligence, or lack of it, this dilligence was necessary to confirm or deny the hypothesis. The judge interrupts to confirm if the contract was signed on the 12th of March 2008? It was. He goes on. What triggered the writing of the book was that he was being contradicted (not good translation...), he had lost the investigation, had no support from PJ, therefore he decided to bring out in the public what he thought. Because he was convinced that there were interferences, he decided like that. In defence of his professional honour, he didn't do anything to defend his personal honour, didn't sue, nothing. Again, he understood that not all dilligences had been made . The objective is to clarify. To bring back the issue of professional competence or incompetence. To the question if he didn't think that that book added to the pain of the parents, he answers no. The biggest pain anyone can suffer is the loss of own child. Nothing coming afterwards would be worse or add to that pain, that would be impossible. He's a father too, may God forbid, he doesn't know what he would do if he lost a child. It is normal to loose your parents, your partner even, it hurts but that's normal in life. But a child... God forbid. Doesn't he think that the book could slow or stop the search for Madeleine? No, the process was shelved, so it even helps. Before the book was published, the leaks were so many that everybody already knew. He saw (read?) the process on the net. The documentary was shown on TVI, then subtitled and put illegally on the net. It was legally shown and then sold with Correio da Manhã. Everything on the net is illegal and not authorized. A complaint was filed to the PJ. When this injunction took place everything had already happened. The fact that there is no more propagation doesn't change the one that has already been made. Isabel then explains that the injunction was filed 4 days after the first airing of the video, it couldn't be done before that. (somehow, he gets angry and starts explaining what criminal investigation is, ending with the hypothesis, that, after demonstration, becomes a thesis). What is in the book is an hypotesis. Isabel asks if it is an hypothesis or a thesis. Hypothesis or thesis that's the same thing, he shouts. The aim was to prove the hypothesis. Saw the video and owns one. Doesn't know if Levy, Corte Real, the Ministry of Justice interfered/intervened (???). He didn't read the process in its entirety. Isabel: where did he read it, in the net. What colour has the first page of the process in the net? What colour? Does it matter? Doesn't remember. Isabel then asks if he thinks that it is right that, to defend himself from offences committed by third parties Amaral makes accusations to two people that were illibated, but the judge didn't accept the question.


2. ? Video Director

The contents of the video is an adaptation of the book and this has to do with Amaral's thesis. The screenplay was made by a journalist with Amaral's cooperation. It contains material from archives as well as original images, Amaral's declaration and reconstitution. The master id an HD cassette. He stresses that the conclusion from the video is that the mistery persists. (I stopped taking notes, I was astonished, so from here on it is only by heart). Nothing special about the screenplay, it is just a screenplay. The important thing was that screenplay was faithful to the book, which it was, so he had not to worry about the book's contents or accuracy. He is a film director, his job was to direct the video, which he did. No, he doesn't think about feelings when he directs a film or a video. Isabel wrapped up with the question 'Do you have children?' No, he answered. (so low voice that I can be mistaken).


3. ? TVI

TVI aquired the rights of transmission of the video for the portuguese market. TVI was very enthousiastic about the video as it was about a subject very much on the top interest of the public at the time, this would ensure high audience level. Specially if aired in prime time, that is, just after the evening news. So it was, the audience topped the 2.4 million people, by very far the highest audience level that evening.


4. ? (International Relations?) TVI

TVI did not intervene on any phase of the video making. She didn't know Amaral and never spoke to him. The decision to buy was their General Manager's, José Eduardo Moniz. They thought it was a good acquisition (subject, contents) because it was on the top of public preferences. Current contents, no collages. TVI did not make comments on the video, only a short declaration to position the spectator (actually, Amaral's declaration from the video was included on this self promotion TVI spot). Objective : national interest, so spread (propagate). TVI doesn't make judgements. A short framework just before the airing, at least the first time. They reached some 2.4 million people. Then they were approached by Menthor, distributor for Channel4 about the other video and after very quick negotiations they signed the Memo Deal (or Deal Memo? seems this is the correct title, but everybody calls it Memo Deal), which would give them exclusive rights of transmission in Portugal. On international relations, everybody accepts this Memo Deal as a real contract although it states 'contract pending'. However, some 10 days later, they were informed that the deal was off as the McCann family would not allow it. They were also informed that the reffusal was not for the country but for the station. They were interested in presenting another documentary, probably defending a different thesis (???...). High pressure from the General Manager, because of the audience level it could reach. Again, a 'clean' acquisition without any intervention of the station over the contents (thesis). Pressure over Menthor and C4. They were informed that another station had bought it (SIC). Tried an injunction based on the Memo Deal but lost given the fact that it says 'contract pending', that is, for a court this is not a contract, although internationally regarded as such. C4 documentary aired on SIC. Oprah's interview as well, as SIC has an exclusive contract with Oprah. Saw just a bit of Oprah's interview in one of the SIC news bulletins. So, second exhibition of Amaral's documentary on the same day and time as the C4 video on SIC, only to 'hit' SIC on the audience share (answer to Isabel). Yes, a bit 'foul play' (answer to Isabel). Had an idea that there was some special date approaching, but didn't know which or when (answer to Isabel). Again she reinforces that the only objective is audience share, no judgements are made over the contents (answer to Isabel). Several times she comments that TVI is the station with the highest share. Several times she refers that the GM (at the time) was sort of obsessed with audience share.


And that's all for the day, I think. More to follow on the 10th of February.


Last edited by maria on Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:13 am; edited 3 times in total
avatar
maria
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1128
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-07-04

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by maria on Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:27 am

Cath, at this distance, it seems to me that Isabel almost didn't ask him any question. Cabrita wanted desperatly to have him to show bitterness for the other cases where his results were not considered, like the Camarate's case.
avatar
maria
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1128
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-07-04

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Cath on Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:32 am

I understand. Thank you Maria.
Hope your Internet connection gets more stable soon.

Cath
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 722
Location : Holland
Registration date : 2009-04-10

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by rosemary on Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:44 am

His precious "honour" keeps on tripping out doesn´t it......his oh so massive EGO is what they should be saying!

Well done maria - don´t fret, we are a patient lot on this forum!

rosemary
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 963
Location : spain
Registration date : 2009-05-13

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by bluj1515 on Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:59 am

rosemary wrote:His precious "honour" keeps on tripping out doesn´t it......his oh so massive EGO is what they should be saying!

Well done maria - don´t fret, we are a patient lot on this forum!

The lack of mention of Madeleine as his motivation at all was telling and disgusting.
I have heard reports of detectives keeping the child's picture by their desk, comparing the children to their own children, etc.
Not even lip service was paid to Madeleine and what might have happened to her. Not a single, "he wanted to bring the little girl's killers to justice", not a single, "he thought about Madeleine day and night, he was angered that the little girl may have suffered".
No, all we got was talk of HIS honor, HIS TV ratings, HIS reputation.
No mention of Madeleine.
avatar
bluj1515
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1017
Location : United States
Registration date : 2009-06-30

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Sabot on Tue Jan 19, 2010 3:01 am

rosemary wrote:His precious "honour" keeps on tripping out doesn´t it......his oh so massive EGO is what they should be saying!

Well done maria - don´t fret, we are a patient lot on this forum!

What has his honour got to do with plundering the Investigation?

And besides, Men of Honour pay their debts. They don't leave their wives and children open to being made homeless.

I hope Sofia has got her eye on this.

Sabot
Star Poster
Star Poster

Number of posts : 764
Location : France
Registration date : 2009-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by clairesy on Tue Jan 19, 2010 12:14 pm

hi dianne heres the staff names for the first 1. ? Director for Valentim de Carvalho

STAFF
Luis Froes
General Manager and Head of Acquisitionsl
22 years experience in this line of business having worked for Publivideo, Filmes Castello Lopes and LNK Audiovisuais

Margarida Lopes
Sales Manager
20 years experience in the audiovisual sector, having worked for Publivideo, Filmes Castello Lopes and LNK Audiovisuais

Marta Vaz de Sousa
International Sales
10 years experience in the moviemaking area, having worked for Madragoa
Filmes, Atalanta Filmes, Clap Filmes, Filbox, Utopia Filmes, David
& Golias

Pedro Tiago Almeida
Marketing
Ex-Marketing and Content Manager of MySpace Portugal

Susana Barbosa
Operations
Has worked
before with New Age

Sónia Mendes
Designer
18 years experience working for Filmes Castelo Lopes and LNK Audiovisuais

Ana Malcata
Assistant Manager

Roberta Carvalho
Commercial Assistant
Not sure if its one of those?
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by maria on Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:05 pm

It's Luís Froes.
avatar
maria
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 1128
Location : Portugal
Registration date : 2008-07-04

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Zavvi on Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:12 am

Could you confirm Maria if the person on the far right of the photo is Gabriella Rodrigues. the judge in this case
avatar
Zavvi
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 91
Location : Lancashire
Registration date : 2009-09-02

Back to top Go down

Re: From Inside The Courtroom

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum