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

[ferryman]

LOL

Irony klaxon moment.

What "truth"? Ascertaining the material truth has been left out of the equation and (IMO) is what is causing confusion for people accustomed to an anglophone understanding of what a libel case would involve.

ETA for Admin: wouldn't the fund-raising for his legal defence be better on a separate thread?

Yep.

I'm one that's never understood that.

If matters of truth or untruth are irrelevant, then what is the point of libel laws?

Perhaps JP can explain?

[ferryman]

So to be clear, Amaral has lied:

That Mark Harrison turned the investigation into one for a little girl assumed dead when Mark Harrison did no such thing

That Mark Harrison said Madeleine's body was buried in close proximity to PdL when Harrison, explicitly ruled out burial

That Amaral contradicted and corrected Prior on interpretation of the forensic results when Amaral's own misunderstanding of forensics is incompetent.

That Stuart Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the subject of the PJ's powers of arrest (when Prior, almost certainly, did no such thing)

That Eddie 'scented death' all over the place when both Harrison and Grime made plain that no incriminating inferences could be drawn from dog alerts.

That the McCanns launched a fraudulent appeal in their (dead) daughter's name when the accounts are in apple-pie order, and there is still no clue of what happened to Madeleine.

All that and more ....

Yet Amaral will be allowed to appeal?

On what grounds?

[Jean-Pierre]

Yep.

I'm one that's never understood that.

If matters of truth or untruth are irrelevant, then what is the point of libel laws?

Perhaps JP can explain?

Its complicated!!  But in précis form - Usually truth will be an absolute defence to libel.  However, if a statement is made with "malicious intent" then it is intent that can be the pivotal factor and the intent can override the fact.

[faithlilly]

So to be clear, Amaral has lied:

That Mark Harrison turned the investigation into one for a little girl assumed dead when Mark Harrison did no such thing

That Mark Harrison said Madeleine's body was buried in close proximity to PdL when Harrison, explicitly ruled out burial

That Amaral contradicted and corrected Prior on interpretation of the forensic results when Amaral's own misunderstanding of forensics is incompetent.

That Stuart Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the subject of the PJ's powers of arrest (when Prior, almost certainly, did no such thing)

That Eddie 'scented death' all over the place when both Harrison and Grime made plain that no incriminating inferences could be drawn from dog alerts.

That the McCanns launched a fraudulent appeal in their (dead) daughter's name when the accounts are in apple-pie order, and there is still no clue of what happened to Madeleine.

All that and more ....

Yet Amaral will be allowed to appeal?

On what grounds?

The accounts are in apple-pie order ? The aims of the fund are so broad that the McCanns could use it to take out a contract on Amaral's life and the payment to the hitman could be justified.

[John]

So to be clear, Amaral has lied:

That Mark Harrison turned the investigation into one for a little girl assumed dead when Mark Harrison did no such thing

That Mark Harrison said Madeleine's body was buried in close proximity to PdL when Harrison, explicitly ruled out burial

That Amaral contradicted and corrected Prior on interpretation of the forensic results when Amaral's own misunderstanding of forensics is incompetent.

That Stuart Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the subject of the PJ's powers of arrest (when Prior, almost certainly, did no such thing)

That Eddie 'scented death' all over the place when both Harrison and Grime made plain that no incriminating inferences could be drawn from dog alerts.

That the McCanns launched a fraudulent appeal in their (dead) daughter's name when the accounts are in apple-pie order, and there is still no clue of what happened to Madeleine.

All that and more ....

Yet Amaral will be allowed to appeal?

On what grounds?

You don't know what was being said behind the scenes Ferryman. Is it not a fact that officers from Leicestershire Police supported Gonçalo in the death in the apartment theory otherwise why bother to bring in Martin Grime and the dogs?

I'll bet there are officers from LP who could tell us a thing or two and a few home truths about this investigation but are constrained from doing so because of the Official Secrets Act.

[ferryman]

Its complicated!!  But in précis form - Usually truth will be an absolute defence to libel.  However, if a statement is made with "malicious intent" then it is intent that can be the pivotal factor and the intent can override the fact.

So in other words, you can get away with untruths that don't have malicious intent.

Is that right?

[ferryman]

Is it not a fact that officers from Leicestershire Police supported Gonçalo in the death in the apartment theory otherwise why bother to bring in Martin Grime and the dogs?

No, what happened was that Mark Harrison was handed a brief to consider that Madeleine had been murdered, and recommended (freelance!) Martin Grime and his dogs to assist with the investigaton

Nothing to do with Leicestershire Police at all.

[Jean-Pierre]

So in other words, you can get away with untruths that don't have malicious intent.

Is that right?

No.  Sometimes you can tell the truth, but with malicious intent, and lose an action for libel.

[Jean-Pierre]

So to be clear, Amaral has lied:

That Mark Harrison turned the investigation into one for a little girl assumed dead when Mark Harrison did no such thing

That Mark Harrison said Madeleine's body was buried in close proximity to PdL when Harrison, explicitly ruled out burial

That Amaral contradicted and corrected Prior on interpretation of the forensic results when Amaral's own misunderstanding of forensics is incompetent.

That Stuart Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the subject of the PJ's powers of arrest (when Prior, almost certainly, did no such thing)

That Eddie 'scented death' all over the place when both Harrison and Grime made plain that no incriminating inferences could be drawn from dog alerts.

That the McCanns launched a fraudulent appeal in their (dead) daughter's name when the accounts are in apple-pie order, and there is still no clue of what happened to Madeleine.

All that and more ....

Yet Amaral will be allowed to appeal?

On what grounds?

Of course he is.  The ability to appeal a judgment is one of checks and balances of proper justice system. 

[ferryman]

The accounts are in apple-pie order ? The aims of the fund are so broad that the McCanns could use it to take out a contract on Amaral's life and the payment to the hitman could be justified.

Sorry you don't like the aim of the funds, Faith.

I'm sure you'll find a way to cope.

[ferryman]

Of course he is.  The ability to appeal a judgment is one of checks and balances of proper justice system.

But entitled to the assumption that his cited grounds of appeal will be permitted?

[Jean-Pierre]

But entitled to the assumption that his cited grounds of appeal will be permitted?

He will have to have some grounds for appeal - otherwise the higher court will simply rubber stamp the first instance courts ruling. 

But yes, if he can find something to appeal then it should be permitted. 

[Alice Purjorick]

So to be clear, Amaral has lied:

That Mark Harrison turned the investigation into one for a little girl assumed dead when Mark Harrison did no such thing

That Mark Harrison said Madeleine's body was buried in close proximity to PdL when Harrison, explicitly ruled out burial

That Amaral contradicted and corrected Prior on interpretation of the forensic results when Amaral's own misunderstanding of forensics is incompetent.

That Stuart Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the subject of the PJ's powers of arrest (when Prior, almost certainly, did no such thing)

That Eddie 'scented death' all over the place when both Harrison and Grime made plain that no incriminating inferences could be drawn from dog alerts.

That the McCanns launched a fraudulent appeal in their (dead) daughter's name when the accounts are in apple-pie order, and there is still no clue of what happened to Madeleine.

All that and more ....

Yet Amaral will be allowed to appeal?

On what grounds?

That is an interesting bit of syntax. If the misunderstanding is incompetent then the understanding must be competent? "I don't believe you wanted to do that!"

I don't think he was referring to how the accounts are presented.

[Carana]

So to be clear, Amaral has lied:

That Mark Harrison turned the investigation into one for a little girl assumed dead when Mark Harrison did no such thing

That Mark Harrison said Madeleine's body was buried in close proximity to PdL when Harrison, explicitly ruled out burial

That Amaral contradicted and corrected Prior on interpretation of the forensic results when Amaral's own misunderstanding of forensics is incompetent.

That Stuart Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the subject of the PJ's powers of arrest (when Prior, almost certainly, did no such thing)

That Eddie 'scented death' all over the place when both Harrison and Grime made plain that no incriminating inferences could be drawn from dog alerts.

That the McCanns launched a fraudulent appeal in their (dead) daughter's name when the accounts are in apple-pie order, and there is still no clue of what happened to Madeleine.

All that and more ....

Yet Amaral will be allowed to appeal?

On what grounds?

I find that your points would be perfectly valid in a UK libel trial - and may well explain why no established UK publisher would have ever touched the book / docu drama with a barge pole.

I agree with you that numerous details aren't substantiated in the files and - to be generous - that he has a garbled understanding of much of what was in the files.

And even what is in the files had never been tested in a criminal trial prosecuting the former arguidos.


However... the judge ruled (as did the appeals court in Murat's case) that establishing the "truth" of the "facts" wasn't the remit of the civil court in the trials in question.

This appears to be a blanket judgement covering the whole issue of "truth": questioning the veracity of the "facts" in the files, the "information" received via hearsay and the "interpretation" of said "information" would stray beyond the remit - which appears to be about relative rights.

The judge bypassed all of that by referring to the AG's assessment, based on all of the files, which came to a different conclusion.

[John]

Is it not a fact that officers from Leicestershire Police supported Gonçalo in the death in the apartment theory otherwise why bother to bring in Martin Grime and the dogs?

No, what happened was that Mark Harrison was handed a brief to consider that Madeleine had been murdered, and recommended (freelance!) Martin Grime and his dogs to assist with the investigaton

Nothing to do with Leicestershire Police at all.

Don't be silly, he was tasked by both Leicestershire Police and the Portuguese Police.

On 20.07.2007 I was sent by NPIA to Portugal with the  goal of helping the Leicestershire police and the Policia Judiciaria relative to the disappearance of a child, Madeleine McCann, missing since 03.05.07 from Praia da Luz, Algarve, Portugal.

The terms of assistance we agreed to provide were directed by the PJ Regional Director, Guilhermino ENCARNACO after consultation with DI Neil HOLDEN of the Leicestershire Police and myself, the details of which are on page two of the document I authored, titled “Decision Support Document in the Search for Madeleine McCann” dated 23.07.2007 and presented as evidence MH4.

www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON-RIGATORY.htm