THE GONCALO AMARAL LIBEL TRIAL

Re: Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral
Post AnneGuedes Today at 3:25 pm

Panda wrote:
Smethurst is a Corporate Lawyer for Kennedy (which tells you something) and the McCanns must have been cockahoop winning £600,000 from the Express so they thought they would fleece Amaral , but they didn't bargain for him winning an appeal.

The effect of the arguido status, as it was treated by the media, was much more dramatic than the book's effect. It changed for ever the perspective, even if believers' faith remained intact. There's no way to escape what happened in the beginning of September 2007, no way to bypass this when talking to the twins. And imo they should start speaking to them. After telling this, the fact a police inspector (who was substituted, good argument for them) didn't believe them will be anecdotal.
the difficulty concerning the twins isn't what Mr Amaral thinks, that Madeleine died and her body was concealed in order to make believe she was abducted, the difficulty is lying to your own kids. Parents are the only ones you can tell everything, even shameful things, who will love you all the same. But trust is basic.
I'm afraid this trial is another pretext for not facing reality.

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 3h
Internet trolls plotted to kidnap one of Madeleine McCann's siblings to get them to reveal what happened to her, libel trial hears #McCann  

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 3h
Kidnap plot was discussed in internet forum and taken so seriously police were called in, family friend says #McCann  (on the 3 Arguidos forum)

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 3h
#McCann pal Michael Wright says Goncalo Amaral's book's claim the couple covered up Madeleine's death incited internet bigots

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 3h
Michael Wright, who monitored web traffic on Madeleine for her parents, claimed Mr Amaral demanded 80,000 Euro for a TV interview #McCann

Jerry Lawton ‏@JerryLawton 3h
Wright: Kate's reaction to Amaral's cash demand was `this was not about justice or truth..this was about greed'. #McCann

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2426813/Anti-McCann-kate-madeleine-websites-plotted-kidnap-siblings-knew-disappearance-court-hears.html#ixzz2fRZZC5fV

'Anti-McCann' websites plotted to kidnap one of Madeleine's siblings 'to find out what they knew about her disappearance', court hears
Friend of the McCanns found examples of forum members encouraging kidnap so one of the twins could 'throw some light on the matter'
Police chief claimed the McCanns hid their daughter's body after her death
Evidence heard in Lisbon during £1million libel case against Goncalo Amaral

By GERARD COUZENS
PUBLISHED: 15:09, 20 September 2013 | UPDATED: 15:36, 20 September 2013

Internet trolls fuelled by an ex police chief's claims about the McCanns incited conspiracy-theorists to plot to kidnap the couple's twins Sean and Amelie, a court heard today.
Goncalo Amaral's claims they faked daughter Madeleine's abduction to cover up her death in their Algarve holiday apartment was to blame for the threats, close family friend Michael Wright said.
Gerry and Kate McCann, 45, from Rothley, Leics, are suing the former Portuguese detective over his bombshell July 2008 book 'The Truth of the Lie.'

The couple have also launched £1 million libel proceedings at Lisbon's Palace of Justice against Mr Amaral's book publishers and a TV station which broadcast an April 2009 documentary based on his claims.
Mr Wright, husband of Kate McCann's cousin Anne-Marie, told the court the theories in Mr Amaral's book gave conspiracy theorists on anti-Mccann Internet forums 'focus' because he had been in charge of the botched investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.
He said: 'There were several examples of them inciting forum members to abduct one of the twins as they felt they would be able to throw some light on what may have happened.
'On one of the Internet forums, called The 3 Arguidos, there was an Internet conversation in great length where a member was suggesting that someone should abduct Sean or Amelie because they may be able to get information out of them that would confirm Mr Amaral's theories.'
Mr Wright, who helped monitor Internet activity on missing Madeleine for the couple, said he felt compelled to tell Gerry and he was interviewed by police from his home county of North Yorkshire after they decided detectives should be alerted.
He said the threats also made Gerry and Kate more vigilant about the use of the Internet by their twins, now eight.

'I know Amelie has Googled her name and discovered sites to do with the conclusions of Mr Amaral's book,' he told the court.
'I do not know if she opened any of the pages and fortunately she told Gerry and Kate.
'But I know they will definitely be in a position where over the coming years they will search on the Internet and they will find people who will be saying their parents killed their sister.'
Mr Amaral's book was published just three days after the McCanns - made suspects over their daughter's death in September 2007 - had their status as 'arguidos' formally lifted.
Around 120,000 copies of the book were sold before it was withdrawn when the McCanns won an injunction against him.
It formed the basis for a documentary screened on TVI - the Portuguese equivalent of ITV - in April 2009.
Company director Mr Wright, from Skipton, North Yorks, said Gerry had suffered one of his darkest hours when they marked the second anniversary of Madeleine's May 3 2007 disappearance together in a remote cottage.
The couple were told on the way to the cottage locals on the Algarve were ripping up posters they had put up as part of a campaign to find their daughter.
He told the court: 'I had a discussion with Gerry where he talked about not being able to go on.

'I had never heard Gerry speak like that before.
'It was a very upsetting conversation for me to hear Gerry talk like that.
'Both he and Kate are incredibly strong and driven people.'
He said Kate, who flew to Lisbon last week for the start of the libel trial, changed whenever she was in Portugal where she felt most people believed Mr Amaral's theories.
'She feels she can't be seen to smile,' he told the court.
'Almost any form of relaxation is a problem, she wouldn't even go to the gym on her own, because there's still a belief most people in Portugal think she and Gerry are responsible for killing Madeleine.

'What is normal behaviour for her at home is very different when she is in Portugal.'
Revealing he had received an email informing him Mr Amaral had asked for £67,000 for an interview with Channel 5 in September 2009, he added: 'Kate's reaction was this was confirmation this was not about justice or truth.
'This was about greed.' Amaral, 56, is denying defamation.
He insists everything he published in his book is already contained in police and court case files on Madeleine which have been made public - an argument disputed by the McCanns.
The case, due to finish hearing evidence in November, continues next Friday.
It is believed Kate's mother Susan Healy, cousin Michael Corner and Gerry's sister Bridget Cameron, known as Trish, will be called as witnesses

Kathy Belle Has the 3 Arguido forum closed down? The last thing I ever heard of this site, was that it was disabled, because the person running it resigned. If the site has closed down, Michael Wright could have used the site, to make this accusation. Unless I'm mistaken, it will be hard for the police to prove that a member of the forum, did or didn't threaten to kidnap one of the twins. It just shows how far the McCanns and their allies are prepared to go, in this unfair lawsuit.

Frances Gallagher I believe that most of it is archived so it can be searched, .But am quite sure the pros would have provided screen shots by now if there was any truth in this.

Re: Lisbon Libel Trial McCanns v Amaral

Post margaret Today at 5:34 pm

jeanmonroe wrote:My E-Mail to NYP.

To: general.enquiries@northyorkshire.pnn.police.uk ;

Subject: Your investigation into McCann twins 'threat'

Dear Sir/ Madam,
Mr Michael Wright, of Skipton, has stated publicly, in an open court, that the North Yorkshire Police 'investigated' several people in connection with a 'threat' to the McCann family twins.
Please could you confirm that what Mr Wright has stated is true, and that people were 'interviewed' by your force in relation to a specific 'threat'?
Mr Wright has also said that North Yorkshire Police interviewed him about this.
Mr Wright has stated that the threat originated from the now closed 3 Arguidos website forum.
Do you have an incident number for the investigation your force carried out , as Mr Wright has said, into the 'threat' to the McCann children.?
Do you also have an incident report number in relation to Mr G McCann's reporting to the North Yorkshire Police about the same specific threat to his children?
Has North Yorkshire Police retained specific information, in a very important complaint, that will confirm Mr McCann's and Mr Wright's claims are true?
Do i have to compose a Freedom of Information request to receive the information i have asked?

Yours faithfully.

SENT: 13:31pm 21st September 2013

Well that's all i can do, for the time being.

Normally, I'd get angry at the arrogance of this vile creature and her delusion that she is entitled to know everything about the McCanns, like some love-struck stalker.

But today I just pity her. Why doesn't she just ask the person concerned to tell the truth - you know; that thing they claim to be so fond of?

Or ask him why is claiming it wasn't him: Is he worried the tabloids will be at his door within minutes? Is he now realising that his words and actions have damaged his beloved Amoral? Is he horrified by that delicious irony?

And then ask your beloved Mr Bennett about the hoops he had to jump through in order to provide the court with 'evidence' for his court case. Does she really think for one minute that the Portuguese court wouldn't expect the same? From all parties?

The person who made the threats is making you all look more stupid than usual - who knew that was even possible?

McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel hearing witness João Melchior Gomes.

« Last Edit: Today at 06:51:51 PM by John »

Libel Trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 3 Witness No 2

The testimony as it happened...

(19.09.2013, 12:45 pm) 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.

– The judge asks him if he is aware of what the court is judging.
– MG responds that it is a trial against Gonçalo Amaral.

– 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.
– 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.

The judge asks whether his relationship with Gonçalo Amaral was personal or professional.
MG answers "only professional".

1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.

ID 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.

ID asks if the AG Report reflects the results of the criminal investigation up to July 2008.
MG 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.

ID – Was all the information made available to the public?
MG says "yes", except for documents relating to people investigated or convicted of sex crimes.

ID – Are the facts mentioned in his book (Amarals) and in the documentary part of the investigation?
MG says he didn't read the book nor did he watch the documentary.

A momentary silence envelops the court room.

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.

ID – The book and the documentary are based on the conclusions of this Report, do you remember it?

MG 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.

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.

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.

ID – But Robert Murat isn't "autor" (plaintiff)!

2) Defence lawyers.

a) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions

GP – Was it normal to nominate another Public Prosecutor to supervise the process?
MG observes that he was nominated as Deputy AG.

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

The judge (Maria Emília de Melo e Castro) is now asking

MC – Therefore the content of the DVD doesn't include all the files?
MG says that files relating to sex offenders and those involved in sex related crimes were suppressed.

MC – 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?
MG hesitates a few seconds and answers "yes".

Evidence ends.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2313.15

Offline DCI

Re: Do the McCanns Care About their Children's Emotional Security ?
« Reply #16 on: Today at 11:34:39 AM »

Quote from: icabodcrane on Today at 12:26:39 AM
I wonder what Trickey, the expert witness child psychologist, makes of all the latest lurid headlines that the McCann children's friends will undoubtedly become aware of

Unbelievable.

I don't expect its entered your head, that these lurid headlines, wouldn't even exist if some sicko's hadn't posted them, in the first place.
Perverts posting altered images of Madeleine's father, threats to throw molotov cocktails through their windows, sicko's hoping the McCann's take their last breath and die.
So who is it thats made these lurid headlines available for the twins to see, in the first place.

Why do you never find this wrong?

But don't blame them, blame the McCann's.

John's posted Ribiero's testimony up on Justice.

Libel Trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 3 Witness No 3
The testimony as it happened...
(19.09.2013, 14:45pm) 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.
– The Judge, Maria Emília de Melo e Castro, asks him if he is aware of what the court is judging?
– AR says he knows through the media.
– The judge asks about his knowledge of the case?
AR 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.
– The judge asks whether he has met the McCanns?
AR says "never".
– The judge asks if he knows Gonçalo Amaral?
AR says he knows Doctor Amaral (sic), but had rare contacts with him and exclusively on a professional basis.
McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the only lawyer to question the witness.
ID asks whether AR read the Amaral book?
AR answers "no".
ID asks whether AR watched the documentary?
AR answers he did not watch it.
Nobody has anything further to add.
Evidence ends.

Guedes:

I don't know how to thank you for being so grateful.
There are boring part when they dictate their request one after the other in the terrible juridical language. That's when the journalists leave the court room and start writing their articles on their laptop. They're pretty busy, the one who works for 4 newspapers was next to me this morning and I saw him take notes, it seems he has some skill in Spanish because he was taking some notes in Portuguese !
The lawyers take notes, the judge too (a "well made head" as Montaigne would say). But they only take note of matter on which they will react.
According to what I understood the evidence gathered through testimonies will be analysed by the court and sorted out (all lines are defined and Isabel Duarte announces in the beginning which lines she will ask the witness to give evidence on). What's off topic will not be considered.
Marinho Pinto, the bastonário (head of the bar association), was supposed to testify to-day. He didn't appear.

John:

Sorry for the delay in posting the first of yesterdays evidence Reports but as they are quite detailed I have sent it back to Portugal for a further revision check. Will post the first one around breakfast time (UK)

Warren Thornton
DAILY MAIL PRINT LIES TO HELP GUILTY PARENTS

Yes you did hear that right,the DAILY MAIL have LIED to the British public.
Imagine my surprise,off i potter to Lords for the day and am about to board the train when i am alerted to the front page of the Daily Mail.
What manner of internet stupidity is this? Has a new facebook group opened up and actually threatened to kidnap Kate's twins? There are so many groups out there now that do not believe the parents ridiculous version of events,after all.

No,we are laughably informed that it is a forum against the parents,twitching moustaches and hatching plots to kidnap(abduction anyone?) the younger of the McCann twins.

I arrive at the ground,settle into the members stand and having time to spare,i decide to ring this garbage peddler and ask some pertinent questions.

After asking "Sarah" who is the first line of defence,i start asking pertinent questions about the terrible kidnap plot .She quickly passes me on to someone else who refuses to give his name and asks me mine,i also in a tit for tat move,the rest of the conversation goes like this.

Me: "Can you tell us the names of these internet would be kidnappers as they do not appear in the papers?"

Journo:"No we cannot reveal those at the moment"

Me: "Because of possible libel?"

Journo"It is a matter for the police,who is this?"

Me:"If you give me your name i will give you mine,what is the name of this forum so we can go and look at this outrage?"

Journo "Who is this?"

Me: "Can you tell me the name of this forum please it does not matter who i am"

Journo:"It's a matter for the police"

Me:"The name of the forum is a matter for the police and you cannot tell readers that? Has any action been taken and can you tell me which police authority has been informed so i can find out more?"

Journo: "No"

Me: "Does this forum actually exist or is this mote Clarence Mitchell rubbish?"

CLICK

This conversation took place at 10.26am on Saturday morning,so there we have it,either they have to invent a site and two bogus kidnappers,to go along with the bogus site and the two bogus kidnappers..if you follow me, or they are guilty of fraud on the British public like the parents,they are guilty of lying to the British Public just like the parents and JUST LIKE THE PARENTS THEY INVENT A BOGUS KIDNAP STORY.

\The Murdoch press and associated lackeys have reached rock bottom...and have started to dig!

McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel hearing witness Cláudia Nogueira.

Libel Trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 3 Witness No 4


The testimony as it happened...

(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.

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).


1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.

ID – Why did you leave Lift Consulting?
CN 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.

ID – In the course of your profession did you have access to statistics?
CN said she had.

ID – Do you know if at least 2.2 million people watched the documentary in Portugal?
CN says she doesn't remember the exact number but she knows it was 50% of the audience share.

ID – Do you still work as a communication manager?
CN says she does. She says that people focused on this program, which is rare.

ID asks if the attention of social communication decreased afterwards. (note: she might have meant "care for Madeleine")
CN 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.

ID – Were these news items suggestive of any other solutions for the case?
CN No unfortunately. It wasn't well balanced. All the focus was on the book's conclusions.

ID – Did you try to offer a counterpoint?
CN – Yes, but the social communication wasn't looking for contradictions.

ID – Was the documentary copied in English on the Web without authorization?
CN says it was.


2) Defence lawyers.

a) TVI lawyers’ questions.

TVI – Did you know that TVI wanted also to broadcast the Channel 4 documentary (Emma Loach's one, "Madeleine was here")?
CN says she knows.

TVI – You said the attention associated with the book didn't diminish after the publication. Was that everywhere?
CN says she meant "in Portugal". She adds the attention was focused mainly on Gonçalo Amaral and this included the UK.

TVI – What about the news on the governmental support for the case?
CN – The news in Portugal were interpretations of the various facts.

TVI – But the facts never were clarified.
CN – They should have been.

TVI – But there are not many facts.


b) Valentim de Carvalho (DVD production/distribution) lawyer's questions

VC – Before 2009, were the McCanns clients of Lift Consulting?
CN says "no".

VC – Did they contract Lift Consulting in order to spread their initiatives and positions?
CN 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.

VC says it's the first time he has heard such a thing.

c) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions

GP asks whether she did some research when she started to work for the McCanns
CN says "yes".

GP 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.

GP – You spoke of over 2 million people watching the documentary corresponding to 50% of the audience share, but MarkTest's published share was 23%.
CN says the content of some news was favouring definitively Gonçalo Amaral.

GP – Do you have a number concerning the news on sightings which mention the GA's theory?
CN says they're many, but she doesn't know how many.

GP'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.

GP asks the Court to instruct the witness to produce the documents she refers to.

The Judge asks CN if she has access to these news reports.
CN responds that they are kept at the agency (Lift Consulting). She says she has only got a few documents with her.

The Judge asks if she will be able to get the others.
CN says she can.

The Judge then agrees to give her 15 days to produce the documents.

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.

The Judge reminds the Court that there are two types of news reports:

• Those related to the publication of the Amaral book.
• Those related to the sightings, etc. that also mention the Amaral thesis of death and cover up.

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.


d) Santos Oliveira (GA lawyer) questions

SO – Was your job the transmission of information (to the media) or the management of the public image of your clients?
CN says it was the transmission of positive information about the issues concerning Madeleine.

SO – Were all your publications published?
CN – No, some weren't.

SO – 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?
CN says that when the news was about the McCanns, it was always contradicted. When it was on Gonçalo Amaral, it wasn't.

SO – How did you work on the news?
CN says she translated the British news in Portuguese and adapted it for the Portuguese public and the Portuguese culture. This was her job.

SO – Did the Amaral book not boost the debate on the disappearance?
CN answers "no".

SO – Did you read the book and think that whoever reads might think that GA speaks the truth?
CN says she read the book.

Evidence ends.

McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel hearing witness Michael Wright.

Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 4 Witness No1

20.09.2013 10am. 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.

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.

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.

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.

The judge 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.

10:30pm The testimony as it happens...

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.

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.

The Judge asks how regularly he had contact with the McCanns in the period from 2008-2009.
MW says he saw them once a month. He adds he was monitoring e-mails that came to the Madeleine site.

The Judge asks whether he read the book of Gonçalo Amaral.
MW answers he read a translation on the internet.

The Judge asks "when".
MW Very shortly after the book was published.

The Judge asks whether he watched the documentary on the same theme.
MW says he did on the internet.

The Judge asks whether he knows the author of the book.
MW says "only by hearsay"

The Judge asks whether his family relationships will influence his testimony.
MW answer "yes".

The Judge asks whether it will prevent him from telling the truth.
MW says "no".

1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.

ID - 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?
MW 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.

ID 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.

ID - asks whether the investigation was hampered because of GA's book and an article in the Correio da Manhã (Portuguese Morning Post newspaper).
MW says it's what he understood.

ID - What happened when the files were released?
MW 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.

ID - Do you know whether there was an end to the investigation?
MW It was public knowledge that the investigation was stopped.

ID - Did this event occur because of the publication of the book?
MW The content of the book was conflicting with what was in the files. He says he would be speculating if he answered the question.

ID - Don't you have knowledge of this direct relationship?

The Judge interrupts and asks whether the book was published before or after the archiving of the files.

MW says it was after.

The Judge – Then how could the book interfere with the investigation?
MW stays silent.

The Judge repeats the question.
MW 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.

ID 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.

ID - In which circumstances did the McCanns learn about the book and the documentary?
MW 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.

ID - When did they read the book and watch the documentary?
MW – 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.

ID - When they learnt about it, how did they react? Was it sadness or pain? Were they socially and professionally affected?

GA's lawyer, SO, interrupts asking the Judge to ask the witness what is the paper he is reading.

MW says that they are notes about feelings, etc. to remember.

The Judge asks what is actually in the notes.
MW repeats that it is to help him remember feelings and special contacts.

SO dictates the court clerk a request for a copy of the paper listing feelings is joined to the process for appreciation by the court.
GP's lawyer completes quoting the Law that insist on the importance of testimonies being spontaneous.
ID protests arguing the witness has the right to have notes with dates and facts. She asks that only the Court checks the paper.
The Judge 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.
The Judge asks the court clerk to make photocopies (note: it's an A4 page, with parts underlined in green).

ID - resumes her question about the feelings that the book and the documentary provoked.
MW 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.

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.
ID 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.

ID - When you speak of the stress and the anger, how was this expressed in the behaviour of the McCanns?
MW When the book came out, the reactions were of much anger. Kate was upset and cried. She felt Madeleine was betrayed.


McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel hearing witness Michael Wright.

ibel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 4 Witness No1


20.09.2013 10am. 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.

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.

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.

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.

The judge 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.


10:30pm The testimony as it happens...

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.

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.

The Judge asks how regularly he had contact with the McCanns in the period from 2008-2009.
MW says he saw them once a month. He adds he was monitoring e-mails that came to the Madeleine site.

The Judge asks whether he read the book of Gonçalo Amaral.
MW answers he read a translation on the internet.

The Judge asks "when".
MW Very shortly after the book was published.

The Judge asks whether he watched the documentary on the same theme.
MW says he did on the internet.

The Judge asks whether he knows the author of the book.
MW says "only by hearsay"

The Judge asks whether his family relationships will influence his testimony.
MW answer "yes".

The Judge asks whether it will prevent him from telling the truth.
MW says "no".


1) McCann family lawyer, Isabel Duarte, is the first to question the witness.

ID - 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?
MW 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.

ID 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.

ID - asks whether the investigation was hampered because of GA's book and an article in the Correio da Manhã (Portuguese Morning Post newspaper).
MW says it's what he understood.

ID - What happened when the files were released?
MW 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.

ID - Do you know whether there was an end to the investigation?
MW It was public knowledge that the investigation was stopped.

ID - Did this event occur because of the publication of the book?
MW The content of the book was conflicting with what was in the files. He says he would be speculating if he answered the question.

ID - Don't you have knowledge of this direct relationship?

The Judge interrupts and asks whether the book was published before or after the archiving of the files.

MW says it was after.

The Judge – Then how could the book interfere with the investigation?
MW stays silent.

The Judge repeats the question.
MW 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.

ID 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.

ID - In which circumstances did the McCanns learn about the book and the documentary?
MW 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.

ID - When did they read the book and watch the documentary?
MW – 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.

ID - When they learnt about it, how did they react? Was it sadness or pain? Were they socially and professionally affected?

GA's lawyer, SO, interrupts asking the Judge to ask the witness what is the paper he is reading.

MW says that they are notes about feelings, etc. to remember.

The Judge asks what is actually in the notes.
MW repeats that it is to help him remember feelings and special contacts.

SO dictates the court clerk a request for a copy of the paper listing feelings is joined to the process for appreciation by the court.
GP's lawyer completes quoting the Law that insist on the importance of testimonies being spontaneous.
ID protests arguing the witness has the right to have notes with dates and facts. She asks that only the Court checks the paper.
The Judge 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.
The Judge asks the court clerk to make photocopies (note: it's an A4 page, with parts underlined in green).

ID - resumes her question about the feelings that the book and the documentary provoked.
MW 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.

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.
ID 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.

ID - When you speak of the stress and the anger, how was this expressed in the behaviour of the McCanns?
MW When the book came out, the reactions were of much anger. Kate was upset and cried. She felt Madeleine was betrayed.

ID - Why?
MW - 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.

ID - What does "negative e-mail" mean?
MW says it refers to all sorts of conspiracy theories that appeared on various forums.

ID - asks if the witness can name some of these forums.
MW 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.

ID - When?
MW – Activity was increased and heavy in March/April 2009.

ID - Did the McCanns learn about these forums? How?
MW 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.

ID - Is this dialogue on the forum? Can you get a copy?
MW says he has a copy and can deliver it.

ID - asks if it's possible to put the paper copy on the internet?
MW 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.

ID asks whether he has a copy.
MW 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.

ID - Was a process formally investigated?
MW had only one contact with the police. He doesn't know what happened afterwards.

ID - What consequence did this have on the McCanns family life and in particular that relating to the twins?
MW 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.

ID - What did they say?
MW 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.

ID - Why?
MW 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.

ID - How did the revelations of that week-end evolve?
MW says he had a similar conversation with Gerry about being down because people believed Madeleine was dead.

ID - Did they feel deeply ashamed at being considered responsible for her death and the concealment of her body? Did they feel like cowards?
MW 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.

ID - In what way was the relationship between the parents and the twins influenced?
MW 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.

ID - Did she find internet pages related to the book?
MW 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.

ID - Is that a daily pressure on the McCanns?
MW 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.

ID (seems not to have understood) repeats – Is it a daily pressure for the couple?
MW No.

ID - Is Kate depressed?

The Judge overrules, saying this is a question for a doctor.

ID - Have you read the criminal investigation Report?
MW says he didn't read it all, he read the conclusions........

.....ID - Do the facts reported by Gonçalo Amaral in his book and in the documentary correspond to the facts of the investigation?
MW says "no", in no way.

ID - Why?
MW 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.

ID - This means that the book doesn't correspond with the investigation facts?
MW 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.

ID - Is it the same with the documentary?
MW says "yes".

ID - Was this documentary subtitled on the internet?
MW knows it was published on the internet with subtitles in English.

ID - Do you have anything else you wish to tell the Court within the questions that you have been asked?
MW 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.

ID wants to know more... but the Judge overrules because it's not known whether such an interview occurred.

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.

Everybody is in the Court room by 1.50pm, the Judge arrives at 2pm.

2) Defence lawyers.

a) TVI lawyers’ questions.

TVI - Have you watched the documentary on TVI?
MW says "no", he watched it on the internet.

TVI - How do you know it is the TVI one?
MW says he's sure as much as he can be

TVI - Why? Did it have the TVI logo on it?
MW says he doesn't remember.

TVI - 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?
MW 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.

TVI - Is Gonçalo Amaral's theory widely known, is it known everywhere?
MW says it is.

TVI - Does almost everybody know his theory?
MW says a great number of people know it. Any person who knows about the McCanns know the theory of Gonçalo Amaral.

TVI - Just the people who are interested in the matter?
MW Yes, the documentary and the book are very well known everywhere in Portugal and in the UK.

TVI - One of the main preoccupations of the family was that, when the book was launched, they were preparing a campaign...

The Judge overrules.

TVI - 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.
MW says they decided it wasn't appropriate to broadcast their documentary on the same channel that would broadcast GA's documentary.

TVI - Who are "they"?
MW asks in what sense, then understands and says "Kate and Gerry".

TVI - Were these negotiations for the broadcasting of the Channel 4 documentary before the Amaral documentary was broadcast?
MW says he doesn't know.

The Judge asks whether, before the book was published, they were speculations on forums.
MW says they were many strange, bizarre speculations on who was involved, on the family, on supporters.

The Judge asks whether there was speculation on the cover up of death.
MW Some people, but very limited. Some e-mails would say that Kate was this and Gerry was that, and so on.

The Judge asks from where came the information that fuelled this speculation.
MW 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.

The Judge asks did these rumours have something to do with the arguido status?
MW 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.

The Judge – What did the people conclude from the arguido status?
MW 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........

AG's lawyer now criticises the translation offered by the interpreter, he says the answers don't correspond with the question.

The Judge asks can you explain why the arguido status didn't provoke many e-mails.
MW 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.

The Judge asks if he has any idea what led to them being made arguidos. Was it because the parents are the first suspects?
MW says "yes".

The Judge asks wasn’t there something during the investigation that led to their constitution as arguidos.
MW Not particularly. He adds he wasn't involved in that matter.

The Judge states that two facts were established:

1) The British police dogs detected the scent of human blood and also that consistent with a cadaver bring present.

2) These dogs detected the smell of human blood in the car rented by the McCanns.

The Judge asks whether these facts are of general knowledge in the UK.
MW Yes, they were, in 2007.

The Judge asks whether it was only before the shelving.
MW 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.

The Judge agrees but asks whether it wasn't the dogs that led people to speculate.
MW – 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.

The Judge asks whether the witness is aware the investigation wasn't conclusive?
MW sighs, and then adds that anybody who reads the files is aware of that, but those who read the files are few.

The Judge observes that if nothing happened since then, this shows that there's still no conclusion.
If some conclusion had been made, wouldn't someone have been accused.
MW 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.

The Judge asks if people believe more in the book than in the PJ?
MW – Oh yes, absolutely! There were more newspaper reports on the book than on the files.

TVI says that there were more documentaries than the GA one.

The Judge asks if the Channel 4 documentary had repercussions in the public opinion, in blogs, etc.?
MW We always had people who supported us.

The Judge asks whether this documentary changed the opinion of those who were convinced by GA's theory.
MW 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.

b) Guerra & Paz's lawyer's questions

GP - Do the British know the official investigation was inconclusive?
MW says the majority don't know.

The Judge 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"?
MW – Some, yes. But most people think that Gonçalo Amaral's conclusions are true.

ID intervenes asking whether the witness has knowledge of everything contained within the AG Final Report.

The Judge interrupts and reminds that the witness had already indicated that he read the conclusions.

(Note: there seems to have been some confusion between the PJ and the AG final Reports)

The Judge – Did you read it all? Do you understand the arguments which led to the discarding of the dogs' results?
MW says he doesn't feel competent to answer. Why should he read it all if he knows the McCanns are innocent?

The Judge asks the witness if he remembers the reasons that lead to the discarding of the dogs' results.
MW 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.

ID - asks if the average citizen is aware of this in the UK?
MW says the AG Final Report explains why the arguido status was lifted.

The Judge states that the Final Report is evidence in itself and obviously not a judgement.

ID - insists that the witness gives explanations.

The Judge asks if the UK public know the content of the technical descriptions that are in the Final Report.
MW says that anyone who is interested will find out.

ID asks whether the Ch4 documentary was promoted by the McCanns or was an initiative of Channel 4.
MW 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...

Without waiting for a reaction, the lawyer says he withdraws the question.

ID dictates that MW will deliver the documents he has, relating to the internet threats.

VC criticises the selective choice of documents, with biased criteria.

SO 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.

The Judge 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.

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).

Evidence ends.

Rachel Granada wrote:What a saddo jeanmonroe is.  Nothing better to do than waste the time of NY Police.  

If it wasn't so pathetic it would be funny.

Guedes:

I sent two pics of my notes to John, in order to satisfy some posters' legitimate curiosity. Unfortunately I'm the only one who can understand them, thanks to a memory that will be erased in a short time. John corrects my clumsinesses in English so that reading is easier for you. Sometimes, rarely, he's not sure about what I wrote or misunderstood and I reformulate it. After he edited, he sends the report back and I rectify before sending him again. Sometimes he again has doubts and sends me to check.

gilet:

I wonder would John and Anne agree to the following.

When I work collaboratively with colleagues on documents we always maintain a record of the original, and each stage of the changes that have been made because it allows a fuller understanding of the way the document developed.

In the spirit of openness and completeness would John and Anne agree to the posting of all three stages of these court reports? Notes, Anne's original report and the final edited version. That way we could all see the way in which the record was achieved.
Guedes:

gilet

Re: The McCann v Gonçalo Amaral libel trial as it happens.
« Reply #294 on: Today at 11:00:59 AM »

Quote from: icabodcrane on Today at 10:53:09 AM
oh for heaven's sake stop sniping !

Why is it that to you and some others un-spun facts and straightforward truth is anathema ?

Clearly you have no understanding that any historian wanting to know the truth about an event will go to primary sources and compare those with later "editions".

There is no such thing as "un-spun" facts. Any record (unless verbatim) misses details, is prone to bias (be that from memory where the aspects most interesting or familiar will always rise to the surface or be that simply from the inability to hear, to remember or to keep up when note-taking). And any editor worth their salt knows that any changes to an original (no matter how small) can in fact alter meaning and emphasis. Even the addition of a comma can change a sentence entirely.

It is not sniping to seek the fullest possible truth of any situation.

I wonder why you object to such a request so bitterly?

gilet

Re: Michael Wright's testimony
« Reply #77 on: September 24, 2013, 01:47:59 PM »

Quote from: AnneGuedes on September 24, 2013, 01:36:09 PM
No God's help in Portugal !
Yes this is rather strange that Mrs Duarte noted the A4 paper photocopy could be stationary paper. In fact hotels use to provide paper with their printed name on...

That comment really does jar with the idea that you are reporting accurately from the court room.

When you post something like that, making it very clear that you do not understand that 'stationary' is a generic term which most definitely includes the stationary made available in all good hotels with or without a logo. During a recent stay in a central London Hotel (Guoman chain) the stationary included envelopes and both headed and plain notepaper. The headed paper is generally used as the first page of a letter and the plain for subsequent pages. The plain paper was a pad of at least 40 sheets in identical style to the headed paper which was in the drawer as separate sheets.