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

[Alice Purjorick]

Admitting that I know nothing about Portuguese law, the damages awarded in this case seem more like punitive damages to me. Rather than compensating the McCanns the judge seemed to be punishing Amaral for using his position and failing to uphold the presumption of innocence which that position required of him.

punitive damages, which are awarded not to compensate a plaintiff for injury suffered but to penalize a defendant for particularly egregious, wrongful conduct.

I tend to agree. Damages for the children were tossed out by the judge.
Anyway it wasn't about the money:
Speaking today, their Portuguese lawyer Isabel Duarte said: “It was never about the money. It was about stopping awful lies being printed, which hindered the search for Madeleine.”
Then:
"She[the judge] concluded 14 facts had not been proven, ruling Amaral’s statement in his book had not led to Portuguese police halting their search for Madeleine".

I guess all will be revealed in due course, with respect to Sr Amaral's appeal.

[Alfred R Jones]

Admitting that I know nothing about Portuguese law, the damages awarded in this case seem more like punitive damages to me. Rather than compensating the McCanns the judge seemed to be punishing Amaral for using his position and failing to uphold the presumption of innocence which that position required of him.

punitive damages, which are awarded not to compensate a plaintiff for injury suffered but to penalize a defendant for particularly egregious, wrongful conduct.

That being the case what grounds do you think he has for appeal?

[G-Unit]

That being the case what grounds do you think he has for appeal?

No idea, but when the book ban was overturned the Supreme Court said Amaral's right to freedom of expression 'trumped' the McCanns right to a good reputation.

The judge didn't expressly contradict the Supreme Court ruling. She said Amaral broke Judicial secrecy and took advantage of his position by using the contents of the files to write his book. She assumed (probably correctly) that he wrote the book while the files were still secret. Will the appeal court agree? We shall have to wait and see.

The judge's second point was that he was supposed, as a retired senior police officer, to uphold the presumption of innocence. Another point for the appeal court to ponder.

[slartibartfast]

No idea, but when the book ban was overturned the Supreme Court said Amaral's right to freedom of expression 'trumped' the McCanns right to a good reputation.

The judge didn't expressly contradict the Supreme Court ruling. She said Amaral broke Judicial secrecy and took advantage of his position by using the contents of the files to write his book. She assumed (probably correctly) that he wrote the book while the files were still secret. Will the appeal court agree? We shall have to wait and see.

The judge's second point was that he was supposed, as a retired senior police officer, to uphold the presumption of innocence. Another point for the appeal court to ponder.

I should think the appeal will revolve around the fact that he published after he left.

[John]

Admitting that I know nothing about Portuguese law, the damages awarded in this case seem more like punitive damages to me. Rather than compensating the McCanns the judge seemed to be punishing Amaral for using his position and failing to uphold the presumption of innocence which that position required of him.

punitive damages, which are awarded not to compensate a plaintiff for injury suffered but to penalize a defendant for particularly egregious, wrongful conduct.

That is that way I read it too going by the comments the judge herself related in her very lengthy Judgement.  In particular, I don't think she is too enthused by the idea of police officers and especially senior officers using knowledge gleamed whilst in post for personal gain regardless of the circumstances.  It will be interesting to see if the Appeal Court feels the same.  My own view is that they will uphold the Judgement but reduce the fine and then it's off to the Supreme Court for more of the same.

[Mr Gray]

I should think the appeal will revolve around the fact that he published after he left.

It seems the law forbids him from doing this...his previous form seems to show he had little respect for the law

[John]

I tend to agree. Damages for the children were tossed out by the judge.
Anyway it wasn't about the money:
Speaking today, their Portuguese lawyer Isabel Duarte said: “It was never about the money. It was about stopping awful lies being printed, which hindered the search for Madeleine.”
Then:
"She[the judge] concluded 14 facts had not been proven, ruling Amaral’s statement in his book had not led to Portuguese police halting their search for Madeleine".

I guess all will be revealed in due course, with respect to Sr Amaral's appeal.

The difficulty for both sides is that the truth of what happened to Madeleine McCann is yet undetermined. Several scenarios are still as valid today as they were in 2007, Scotland Yard have failed miserably to take this case forward despite the small fortune spent on it.

If the mystery of her disappearance could be resolved then this civil case could be properly concluded as well.

[John]

The judge's second point was that he was supposed, as a retired senior police officer, to uphold the presumption of innocence. Another point for the appeal court to ponder.

I totally agree. 

However, there were goings on in the case which have yet to be explored in a court of law.  I would like to see all the facts surrounding what went on tested in Court.

[G-Unit]

I don't know whether breaking judicial secrecy was a criminal offense, but the McCann's lawyer seemed to think it was. If so, no action has been taken against him. Does that mean that the judge in the 'libel' trial was wrong?

That matter was raised by the McCanns' representative, Isabel Duarte, who is going to file a criminal action against Gonçalo Amaral over breaching the judicial secrecy.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PE-PA.htm

[Mr Gray]

I totally agree. 

However, there were goings on in the case which have yet to be explored in a court of law.  I would like to all the facts surrounding what went on tested in Court.

The facts are that amaral abused his position as a police officer.....that's it

[Mr Gray]

I should think the appeal will revolve around the fact that he published after he left.

remember the judge ruled that the McCanns have the right to be presumed innocent....I don't see how amaral can deny them that

[John]

The facts are that amaral abused his position as a police officer.....that's it

Not quite, he had the right to defend himself against plots.

[Mr Gray]

Not quite, he had the right to defend himself against plots.

he had no right to deny the mccanns the presumption of innocence...that's a fact

[Alfred R Jones]

Not quite, he had the right to defend himself against plots.

what plots?

[ferryman]

I don't know whether breaking judicial secrecy was a criminal offense, but the McCann's lawyer seemed to think it was. If so, no action has been taken against him. Does that mean that the judge in the 'libel' trial was wrong?

That matter was raised by the McCanns' representative, Isabel Duarte, who is going to file a criminal action against Gonçalo Amaral over breaching the judicial secrecy.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PE-PA.htm

Criminal action (or none) is a separate matter.

The McCanns brought a civil libel action against Amaral and won.

I think Amaral's rantings in the wake of that victory (for the McCanns) that Madeleine disappeared because the McCanns left the children is highly significant.

It suggests he has abandoned theMcCannsdunsomethingtoMadeleineandcovereditup, as does the plea of one of his (sacked) lawyers that proceedings be in camera to protect Madeleine lest Madeleine be alive.

All strongly suggestive that Amaral admitted libel, and has only the size of the award (in favour of the McCanns) to dispute ...