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

[Mr Gray]

'His beliefs happen to be wrong...'


When has the accidental death theory been disproved ?

his belief that the dogs prove Maddie died in the apartment...his belief of a dna match in the car....amaral got it wrong

[Brietta]

Please feel free to speak for yourself, but if I am what you call a 'sceptic' I would ask you not to speak for me. According to the judge the evidence in Amaral's book was the same, on the whole, as that in the files. His conclusions were also not his alone, they were and are shared by others. The reason the judge found against him had less to do with the theory proposed in his book and more to do with whether he should, given his profession, have a) used the evidence in the files and b) failed to uphold the presumption of innocence.

WOW!!! is that the basis of Mr Amaral's appeal.  He really ought to have read the final report as opposed to the interim one.

[Lace]

The purpose of the fund is very clear, the reason people choose to donate is down to them. I found the messages left to be very kind, especially towards Madeleine. People are standing with Goncalo, to see justice served for Madeleine. He is the one man that has stood by his beliefs, in order to get the truth for Madeleine McCann, and I believe will continue to do so.

There you see you make the same mistake as Amaral  'in order to get the truth for Madeleine McCann'   There is NO PROOF she is dead,  it was Amaral's theory it was NOT automatically the TRUTH.

Of course he has stood by his beliefs,   he wants to sell his book doesn't he.

[Mr Gray]

Please feel free to speak for yourself, but if I am what you call a 'sceptic' I would ask you not to speak for me. According to the judge the evidence in Amaral's book was the same, on the whole, as that in the files. His conclusions were also not his alone, they were and are shared by others. The reason the judge found against him had less to do with the theory proposed in his book and more to do with whether he should, given his profession, have a) used the evidence in the files and b) failed to uphold the presumption of innocence.

the fact that you say his findings were on the whole the same admits that they were not the same......the archiving report said there was no evidence against the mccanns

[G-Unit]

WOW!!! is that the basis of Mr Amaral's appeal.  He really ought to have read the final report as opposed to the interim one.

I have no idea what the basis of the appeal will be, but I know what the judgement was about.  The conclusion found that he used his position for material for the book and he broke the terms of his position as an ex policeman when he accused them.

[Brietta]

I have no idea what the basis of the appeal will be, but I know what the judgement was about.  The conclusion found that he used his position for material for the book and he broke the terms of his position as an ex policeman when he accused them.

Then I imagine that is exactly what his legal team will have to seek leave to appeal on and nothing else.

[Carana]

I wonder who encouraged him in his enterprises...

[Carana]

So where are we?

1. Has it been confirmed that he has appealed? (I expect so, but I haven't seen any reliable confirmation yet)-
2. If he has, what are the points of contention?

[Mr Gray]

So where are we?

1. Has it been confirmed that he has appealed? (I expect so, but I haven't seen any reliable confirmation yet)-
2. If he has, what are the points of contention?

Stephens confirmed it and Montclair has explained the grounds

[Mr Gray]

It seems we have something else to look forward to...an article in the Sun about amaral's fund...it should be hilarious

[stephen25000]

It seems we have something else to look forward to...an article in the Sun about amaral's fund...it should be hilarious

Ah yes, the most renowned newspaper in the world for t##s. *&*%£

[Montclair]

With regard to the appeal system:

Within a period of 30 days (in this case, the judge gave 40 days), the appellant presents his appeal of the ruling, along with his reasons for the appeal, he can present arguments based on law and/or fact. The appeal is presented a quo, to the court (the judge who pronounced the first ruling).

The judge who pronounced the verdict analyses the application and reads the motivations. If, after reading them, the judge decides to maintain the original decision, the judge then analyses the requirements for presenting an appeal:

- If the decision is susceptible to appeal (this one is);
- If it is presented on time;
- If the person who appeals has the legitimacy to do so;
- If he has paid the "taxa de justiça" (the legal costs).

If these requirements have been fulfilled, the judge pronounces the official communication (despacho) of the admission of the appeal, informing that all of the requirements have been fulfilled, and the acts are sent to the Tribunal da Relaçao.

If the judge does not consider the appellant's arguments valid, she simply maintains her sentence, but she is required to send the appeal to the higher court if the appellant fulfills the objective requirements above. The judge has the possibility of changing her verdict.

[Mr Gray]

With regard to the appeal system:

Within a period of 30 days (in this case, the judge gave 40 days), the appellant presents his appeal of the ruling, along with his reasons for the appeal, he can present arguments based on law and/or fact. The appeal is presented a quo, to the court (the judge who pronounced the first ruling).

The judge who pronounced the verdict analyses the application and reads the motivations. If, after reading them, the judge decides to maintain the original decision, the judge then analyses the requirements for presenting an appeal:

- If the decision is susceptible to appeal (this one is);
- If it is presented on time;
- If the person who appeals has the legitimacy to do so;
- If he has paid the "taxa de justiça" (the legal costs).

If these requirements have been fulfilled, the judge pronounces the official communication (despacho) of the admission of the appeal, informing that all of the requirements have been fulfilled, and the acts are sent to the Tribunal da Relaçao.

If the judge does not consider the appellant's arguments valid, she simply maintains her sentence, but she is required to send the appeal to the higher court if the appellant fulfills the objective requirements above. The judge has the possibility of changing her verdict.

so is it basically just putting a stamp on a letter

[ferryman]

With regard to the appeal system:

Within a period of 30 days (in this case, the judge gave 40 days), the appellant presents his appeal of the ruling, along with his reasons for the appeal, he can present arguments based on law and/or fact. The appeal is presented a quo, to the court (the judge who pronounced the first ruling).

The judge who pronounced the verdict analyses the application and reads the motivations. If, after reading them, the judge decides to maintain the original decision, the judge then analyses the requirements for presenting an appeal:

- If the decision is susceptible to appeal (this one is);
- If it is presented on time;
- If the person who appeals has the legitimacy to do so;
- If he has paid the "taxa de justiça" (the legal costs).

If these requirements have been fulfilled, the judge pronounces the official communication (despacho) of the admission of the appeal, informing that all of the requirements have been fulfilled, and the acts are sent to the Tribunal da Relaçao.

If the judge does not consider the appellant's arguments valid, she simply maintains her sentence, but she is required to send the appeal to the higher court if the appellant fulfills the objective requirements above. The judge has the possibility of changing her verdict.

So Amaral may be allowed to appeal.

Or he may not.

[Montclair]

So Amaral may be allowed to appeal.

Or he may not.

Davel understood!