Gonçalo Amaral confirms he will appeal the damages decision to higher Court.

[stephen25000]

Irrelevant Stephen, as you well know.  Amaral cannot base his case on a supposition that the McCanns may or may not have committed a crime.

A key point remains.

Until the cause of Madeleine's disappearance is determined, as others have commented, how could this case proceed ?

What would happen if it was eventually found that Madeleine did die in the apartment ?

[OxfordBloo]

A key point remains.

Until the cause of Madeleine's disappearance is determined, as others have commented, how could this case proceed ?

What would happen if it was eventually found that Madeleine did die in the apartment ?

Even if she died there, Amaral still broke his oath and misused information that was privileged. Damage to the McCanns still occurred.

[stephen25000]

Even if she died there, Amaral still broke his oath and misused information that was privileged. Damage to the McCanns still occurred.

The damage was self inflicted.

It was not just Amaral's belief that accidental death occurred.

[OxfordBloo]

The damage was self inflicted.

It was not just Amaral's belief that accidental death occurred.

The damage was inflicted purely by Amaral's behaviour. It does not matter who believed what.

[stephen25000]

The damage was inflicted purely by Amaral's behaviour. It does not matter who believed what.

That is your subjective opinion.


Amaral's theory was already known and held by others, and continues to be so.

[jassi]

Agreed. But assuming that it will is unjustified. It could go either way. Maybe the McCanns will appeal on the points that their claim was rebutted?

Will they have that option, or is appeal only for the loser?

[Alfred R Jones]

That is your subjective opinion.


Amaral's theory was already known and held by others, and continues to be so.

Damages were awarded in court were they not?  so what was the damage caused by, in your opinion?

[stephen25000]

Damages were awarded in court were they not?  so what was the damage caused by, in your opinion?

On that judges subjective interpretation of the law.

The fact remains, if the mccanns had not left their childrenn unattended, none of this would have happened.

[OxfordBloo]

That is your subjective opinion.


Amaral's theory was already known and held by others, and continues to be so.

It is not my subjective opinion, but the judgement of the court.

Even if Amaral's theory was true, it would not affect his unlawful behaviour towards the McCanns by breaking confidence and failing in his oath of office - the actions for which damages were awarded.

[slartibartfast]

Seems that the supporters are happy that damages were awarded because GA had insider knowledge of the case in writing his book.

[OxfordBloo]

On that judges subjective interpretation of the law.

The fact remains, if the mccanns had not left their childrenn unattended, none of this would have happened.

Do you believe that all judgements are subjective, or only those that conflict with your belief system?

[stephen25000]

It is not my subjective opinion, but the judgement of the court.

Even if Amaral's theory was true, it would not affect his unlawful behaviour towards the McCanns by breaking confidence and failing in his oath of office - the actions for which damages were awarded.

The key thing remains.

The book was released after he left office.

[OxfordBloo]

Seems that the supporters are happy that damages were awarded because GA had insider knowledge of the case in writing his book.

And us Independents as well!

But it was also for ignoring his responsibilities as an officer of the law.

The Judgement explains exactly what Amaral did wrong that resulted in him being found liable and being required to pay damages to counter his behaviour.

[OxfordBloo]

The key thing remains.

The book was released after he left office.

But as the judge said, obviously written before and obviously relying on privileged facts and obviously against Amaral's duty to uphold the law.

[Alfred R Jones]

On that judges subjective interpretation of the law.

The fact remains, if the mccanns had not left their childrenn unattended, none of this would have happened.

Damage to the McCanns was caused by the judge's interpretation of the law?!