Wandering Off Topic

[ShiningInLuz]

Semantics
It is a totally ridiculous suggestion
Would you want to allow amaral to appear on TVs to spread his lies too

His lies?  Now you are wandering into defamation territory.

Mr Amaral is free to spread his opinion within Portugal, which happens to be the scene of the incident.

The UK is not the centre of the universe in this case.

Perhaps the most important battleground for the McCanns is Portugal, where the battle happens to be going very poorly for the McCanns.

How many times does Gonçalo Amaral have to turn up on Portuguese TV before this simple fact gets through?

[ferryman]

His lies?  Now you are wandering into defamation territory.

Mr Amaral is free to spread his opinion within Portugal, which happens to be the scene of the incident.

The UK is not the centre of the universe in this case.

Perhaps the most important battleground for the McCanns is Portugal, where the battle happens to be going very poorly for the McCanns.

How many times does Gonçalo Amaral have to turn up on Portuguese TV before this simple fact gets through?

I (respectfully) differ.

Straight comparison of the book with the files demonstrates that Amaral's account is markedly at variance with the truth.

Particularly since Amaral was coordinator of the investigation (until October 2007) he ought to have had a much better handle of the facts (up to the point of his removal) than his book suggests.

[Mr Gray]

His lies?  Now you are wandering into defamation territory.

Mr Amaral is free to spread his opinion within Portugal, which happens to be the scene of the incident.

The UK is not the centre of the universe in this case.

Perhaps the most important battleground for the McCanns is Portugal, where the battle happens to be going very poorly for the McCanns.

How many times does Gonçalo Amaral have to turn up on Portuguese TV before this simple fact gets through?

#you are making suggestions re the book but do not seem to be aware of what it conrtains

[ferryman]

To convince us of their capability and the extraordinary work carried out by these very special detectives in the course of over 200 investigations, he screens a video for us, showing their training and their intervention on the ground

the dogs have not been involved in 200 investigations.....there are more

Of course, there, Amaral was (accurately) citing the figure Grime cited, which Portuguese libel law would (probably) allow him to get away with (on the basis that he was entitled to believe what Grime said).

[mercury]

Of course, there, Amaral was (accurately) citing the figure Grime cited, which Portuguese libel law would (probably) allow him to get away with (on the basis that he was entitled to believe what Grime said).

Grime cited over 200 case searches, dont twist his words, Amaral merely quoted him, nothng wrong done,no lies at all by either of them, unless amaral misunderstood,which is not a crime, just numbers

[jassi]

So do you - to no avail .

[stephen25000]

All this drivel, and what difference will it make.

ZERO. 

[Mr Gray]

All this drivel, and what difference will it make.

ZERO. 

is that the best you can come up with...of course it makes no difference...the only difference would be if evidence had been found

[Alice Purjorick]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MA2hk_CIZeo

[ShiningInLuz]

yes lies... have you read any of the book...i have posted several excerpts that are plainly untrue

That they are untrue is not the point.  Amaral is not supposed to be the god of truth.

I have read the book around 3 times.

I have posted some of the nonsense in the book.

But you are still in defamation territory.  It is simple.  It is the difference between Amaral got it wrong (which I believe the book does on multiple occasions) and Amaral lied in the book (for which you have no evidence).

[mercury]

That they are untrue is not the point.  Amaral is not supposed to be the god of truth.

I have read the book around 3 times.

I have posted some of the nonsense in the book.

But you are still in defamation territory.  It is simple.  It is the difference between Amaral got it wrong (which I believe the book does on multiple occasions) and Amaral lied in the book (for which you have no evidence).

 

[ShiningInLuz]

An error is where one gets it wrong.  A statement that is not true but is presented as the truth.

A lie is quite different.  It is when one knows the truth and deliberately and knowingly tells an untruth.

Unless you have evidence Amaral knew the truth but deliberately told an untruth, you are still in defamation territory.

The book is replete with errors.  I have yet to see any evidence of lies.

[Mr Gray]

An error is where one gets it wrong.  A statement that is not true but is presented as the truth.

A lie is quite different.  It is when one knows the truth and deliberately and knowingly tells an untruth.

Unless you have evidence Amaral knew the truth but deliberately told an untruth, you are still in defamation territory.

The book is replete with errors.  I have yet to see any evidence of lies.

If they are errors why has he not corrected them

Amaral has read the files
He has read what grime said
Are you saying he did not understand it
It's quite simle

[pegasus]

Which block 4 apartment were the contents taken to?

[ShiningInLuz]

If they are errors why has he not corrected them

Amaral has read the files
He has read what grime said
Are you saying he did not understand it
It's quite simle

Maybe because he has not read my blog, but I very much doubt that is the reason.

Mr Amaral claims in his book that on the evening of Friday 4 May 2007 he criss-crossed Luz, and basically found it was shut.  Furthermore, that he was told that Luz was also shut on the evening of 3 May 2007.  That is his opinion.

After digging about on the Internet, I have come up with sufficient evidence to convince me that Luz was not shut on Thursday evening, albeit the restaurants and pubs were far from packed.

I have not specifically checked on Friday 4 May, but the general evidence leads me to believe that Luz was not shut that evening either.

So, we have a situation.  I am right, and Mr Amaral is in error.  This does not make Mr Amaral a liar.  Or Mr Amaral is right, and I am in error.  This does not make me a liar.