For what its worth, my thoughts on the news of Amaral's appeal are as follows:
Under Portuguese law, Amaral has a right to appeal the decision of the court, as is right and proper.
There are three possibilities:
- That the appeal count will agree the original verdict in which case no further appeals will be allowed
That the appeal court modify the verdict, in which either party can appeal.
That the appeal count overturn the original verdict, in which either party can appeal (probably the McCanns)
The wording of the court documents that the appeal does not stay the decision. To understand this one need to consider the differences between English civil law and European civil law.
In simple terms:
In England, one must seek permission to appeal. If granted, then execution of the decision of the lower count is suspended until the appeal is heard.
In Europe, including Portugal, the right to appeal is automatic. But execution of the decision is not suspended.
There is a logic in this if you look for it.
In England, one must demonstrate pretty sound grounds for an appeal, and it is therefore logical that the judgement is suspended until the appeal is heard.
In Europe, the right to appeal is automatic (although one must show the grounds upon which the appeal is based - not a very high hurdle). But judgement is not suspended - this is to prevent a losing party using the appeals process to "kick the can down the road" for a few months.
_________
What does it mean for this case? Under English law Amaral would have had to show specific grounds for his appeal. And if granted the court decision to ban the book and DVD may have been suspended.
Under Portuguese law, the appeal is in effect a matter of course, and in the meantime the decision to ban book and DVD sales holds.
Hope this helps!
