Why did the judge say ?:
"A first conclusion is that if the book is about an hypothetical checking of the facts or about the opinion of the author on how the evidence collected in the investigation should be read, one shouldn't speak of falsehood, untrue facts, and it doesn't make sense, without a better understanding, to discuss the "exceptio veritatis"
Why did she dismiss all claims except that which applied to Sr Amaral's former office and obligations that went with it even after he ceased to hold that office?
She struck out the claims which related to Madeleine, and the twins, as they did not suffer damage to reputation.
She admitted the claims in respect of KM and GM, as they had suffered damage
As I said above, under Portuguese Law, an honestly held belief may be a valid defense against an action for libel as can right to freedom of expression. However, by virtue of his position as a former police officer, Amaral was obliged to keep his mouth shut.
Amaral based his defense on his right to freedom of expression, (art 37, 1 and 2) forgetting both (art 37, 3 and 4)
If you want to get technical about it, this was resolving the tension between Article 484 of the civil code (Article 484 - Who affirms or spreads a fact capable of harming the credit or good name of any individual or collective person, is liable for damages.) and article 37 of the constitution paragraphs 1 and 2.
And yes Stephen, we will see what the appeal holds.