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

[Brietta]

If so, why did the other two defendants not have to pay? Only Amaral because of his job. The award to the McCanns  was ordered solely because the judge said Amaral was restricted by the terms of his job - secrecy and presumption of innocence.

I'll go with that as far as Mr Amaral is concerned.

How do you fancy your chances if you popped over to Portugal with a couple of friends and started distributing flyers making allegations about Mr Murat and attesting he was guilty of ... whatever.
Do you think your freedom of speech as a civilian would protect you from impugning Mr Murat's right to a presumption of innocence ... or do you think it possible you might be giving Mr Murat grounds to take action against you?

[Alfred R Jones]

The gofundme money is being transferred to the PJGA account according to Leanne further back in this thread.

Who manages and has access to that account? 

[Alice Purjorick]

Who says?  Where will we be able to see detailed accounts?

Write to the fund managers for a copy of the accounts enclosing a postal order in a sum to cover copying and administrative costs?

[Alfred R Jones]

Write to the fund managers for a copy of the accounts enclosing a postal order in a sum to cover copying and administrative costs?

If I do so and don't get a reply what should I deduce from this...?

[Jean-Pierre]

The gofundme money is being transferred to the PJGA account according to Leanne further back in this thread.

Thank you.  So there has not been any changes.

How transparent is the PJGA account?  For example, do you happen to know when the last accounts made available? 

[Alice Purjorick]

If I do so and don't get a reply what should I deduce from this...?

That would depend on whether or not the PO was cashed and the time lapse.
But given the PO was not cashed then generally if one does not hear:
The communication failed to reach its destination.
The recipients organisation lost it before it could be actioned.
The recipient couldn't be bothered for what ever reason to respond.
Other than that we would be guessing.

[Montclair]

Why are some people so worried about the fund?  The people who have decided to donate aren't worried about it. That's what is important.

[Alfred R Jones]

Why are some people so worried about the fund?  The people who have decided to donate aren't worried about it. That's what is important.

How do you know?  Spoken to all of them have you?

[ferryman]

So let me see if I can clear this up, once and for all.

I understand that by Portuguese libel law, in common with most countries of the world that have libel laws, but unlike the UK, the onus is on the party(ies) bringing an action to establish the untruth of statements that lower reputation.

A slight concern about the McCanns' action is that Kate wrote her own book, which might have invoked the principle: to s/he who is willing, no harm can come.

But that principle is annulled by clear proof that Amaral breached judicial secrecy in writing his book.

And the McCanns can, and have, demonstrated in spades that heaps in Amaral's book, video and interviews (that lower repuation) is also manifestly untrue.

So while Amaral may apply for leave to appeal, what possible grounds will he find?

[Jean-Pierre]

So let me see if I can clear this up, once and for all.

I understand that by Portuguese libel law, in common with most countries of the world that have libel laws, but unlike the UK, the onus is on the party(ies) bringing an action to establish the untruth of statements that lower reputation.

A slight concern about the McCanns' action is that Kate wrote her own book, which might have invoked the principle: to s/he who is willing, no harm can come.

But that principle is annulled by clear proof that Amaral breached judicial secrecy in writing his book.

And the McCanns can, and have, demonstrated in spades that heaps in Amaral's book, video and interviews (that lower repuation) is also manifestly untrue.

So while Amaral may apply for leave to appeal, what possible grounds will he find?

Not quite.  The verdict of the court turned on Amarals job.

(a)  As a police officer he had a duty to uphold the law and this includes to maintain the right of presumption of innocence.  This continues even though he is retired.

(b) He wrote his book making great play of being a police officer and the coordinator of the case.  This lent his tale greater credibility and meant that it was taken more seriously and sold more than if it had been written by Joe Blogs.

(c) a further point was that he published it very soon after the files were realised and so was using privileged information. 

All in all, he abused his position, and is paying the price.

   

[ferryman]

Not quite.  The verdict of the court turned on Amarals job.

(a)  As a police officer he had a duty to uphold the law and this includes to maintain the right of presumption of innocence.  This continues even though he is retired.

(b) He wrote his book making great play of being a police officer and the coordinator of the case.  This lent his tale greater credibility and meant that it was taken more seriously and sold more than if it had been written by Joe Blogs.

(c) a further point was that he published it very soon after the files were realised and so was using privileged information. 

All in all, he abused his position, and is paying the price.

 

Would you go with the view, then, that if he had written the book as a private citizen (without access to privileged information) he'd have gotten away with it?

[Brietta]

Why are some people so worried about the fund?  The people who have decided to donate aren't worried about it. That's what is important.

Hmmm ... don't think that is quite the opinion held about Madeleine's Fund.  Can you explain why the difference?

[stephen25000]

Good news for the mccann supporters.

The fund has reached the £25,000 and the 'appeal will be filed in due tme'.



 

[Jean-Pierre]

Would you go with the view, then, that if he had written the book as a private citizen (without access to privileged information) he'd have gotten away with it?

Yes.  I think he would. 

How much interest would it have aroused?  And how many copies would it have sold? 

[ferryman]

Yes.  I think he would. 

How much interest would it have aroused?  And how many copies would it have sold?

But not because, in a legal sense, he deserved to get away with it; simply because the McCanns wouldn't have bothered to pursue it.

Is that right?