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

[misty]

In the period 29 Apr 2015 to 21 Oct 2015 PJGA recieved >£50K through GFM and >E6K through PP.
I compliment PJGA on their transparent reporting to donaters.
What was MF's income in the same period?
Even supporters can only imagine or guess.
Because MF haven't released any figures at all for that period, and possibly won't until late Dec 2016.

PJGA  reported on sums of money donated which were publicly available on the GFM site. Precious little else.
The amount required by the FMF is unquantifiable as the administrators of the fund have no idea how much expenditure may or may not be required in the future.
Amaral's needs, on the other hand, are quantifiable & current donations are destined for a Portuguese. charity if the PJGA  statement is anything to go by. Why is the appeal still running? And why did someone want to raise £300,000 for the man last year?

[Mr Gray]

If you can't see a contradiction there that's fine. I can. Supreme Court; freedom of speech trumps the right to reputation. Libel judge; Right to reputation trumps the right to freedom of speech. That wasn't her actual ruling, but the effect of her ruling was to curtail his freedom of speech.

the supreme court did not take libel into account as it had not been proved...there is absolutely no contradictions between the two judgements

[Mr Gray]

Very true.Six years ago a quick decision might have been relevant. At this stage everyone who wants to has read the book. Everyone who wants to has read the files on which the book is (mostly) based. Whatever the outcome no-one wins really.

If the McCanns were trying to clean up their reputations that hasn't happened. For those who believe in them their reputations were never tarnished anyway and for those who don't the final judgement won't change their minds. I suppose they'll enjoy having his money, if they get it and telling the newspapers how it 'wasn't about the money' and it'll all be used for 'the search' (unless they have to pay lawyers to sue someone else, of course).

At this stage I expect Amaral has become accustomed to being poorer than he expected, so the money will be no loss. I think his faith in Portuguese justice system will be dented and he cares about that, rather misguidedly in my opinion.

I think amaral will be totally devastated if the judgement goes against him which I am sure it will

[ferryman]

If you can't see a contradiction there that's fine. I can. Supreme Court; freedom of speech trumps the right to reputation. Libel judge; Right to reputation trumps the right to freedom of speech. That wasn't her actual ruling, but the effect of her ruling was to curtail his freedom of speech.

Amaral does not have a right to spread disinformation and lies, either by Portuguese libel laws or the Portuguese constitution.

Lies he told:

Harrison changed the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead (oh no he did not)

Prior contradicted and 'corrected' Prior on interpretation of the forensic results and Prior berated the FSS on the PJ's powers of arrest.

We can confidently predict that's a lie.

The Scent Transfer Unit detects cadaver odour.  It detects (and stores) scents of living people.

The McCanns set up a fraudulent fund.  The fund is not mentioned at all in the files, and there's no evidence it is fraudulent.

Madeleine died in the apartment (says Amaral).  On what evidence?

Grime and Harrison both say no evidential reliability can be placed on the reactions of the dogs.

All reasons why Amaral's book is not based on the files and why he is likely to lose his appeal (if he hasn't already).

[stephen25000]

Amaral does not have a right to spread disinformation and lies, either by Portuguese libel laws or the Portuguese constitution.

Lies he told:

Harrison changed the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead (oh no he did not)

Prior contradicted and 'corrected' Prior on interpretation of the forensic results and Prior berated the FSS on the PJ's powers of arrest.

We can confidently predict that's a lie.

The Scent Transfer Unit detects cadaver odour.  It detects (and stores) scents of living people.

The McCanns set up a fraudulent fund.  The fund is not mentioned at all in the files, and there's no evidence it is fraudulent.

Madeleine died in the apartment (says Amaral).  On what evidence?

Grime and Harrison both say no evidential reliability can be placed on the reactions of the dogs.

All reasons why Amaral's book is not based on the files and why he is likely to lose his appeal (if he hasn't already).

Crime remains undetermined ferryman, no matter how much you may fantasize about abduction.

It does not make abduction real.

[Mr Gray]

Crime remains undetermined ferryman, no matter how much you may fantasize about abduction.

It does not make abduction real.

this thread is about the court case......

[stephen25000]

Amaral does not have a right to spread disinformation and lies, either by Portuguese libel laws or the Portuguese constitution.

Lies he told:

Harrison changed the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead (oh no he did not)

Prior contradicted and 'corrected' Prior on interpretation of the forensic results and Prior berated the FSS on the PJ's powers of arrest.

We can confidently predict that's a lie.

The Scent Transfer Unit detects cadaver odour.  It detects (and stores) scents of living people.

The McCanns set up a fraudulent fund.  The fund is not mentioned at all in the files, and there's no evidence it is fraudulent.

Madeleine died in the apartment (says Amaral).  On what evidence?

Grime and Harrison both say no evidential reliability can be placed on the reactions of the dogs.

All reasons why Amaral's book is not based on the files and why he is likely to lose his appeal (if he hasn't already).

Amaral's theory of accidental death remains as plausible as any other scenario.

It hasn't been disproved.

The forensic results neither confirmed or dismissed it.

There is certainly NO FORENSIC EVIDENCE of abduction.

and this remains entirely relevant to this thread and the appeal.

After all, but for the mccanns actions, this thread along with the rest, would not exist.

[G-Unit]

Amaral does not have a right to spread disinformation and lies, either by Portuguese libel laws or the Portuguese constitution.

Lies he told:

Harrison changed the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead (oh no he did not)

Prior contradicted and 'corrected' Prior on interpretation of the forensic results and Prior berated the FSS on the PJ's powers of arrest.

We can confidently predict that's a lie.

The Scent Transfer Unit detects cadaver odour.  It detects (and stores) scents of living people.

The McCanns set up a fraudulent fund.  The fund is not mentioned at all in the files, and there's no evidence it is fraudulent.

Madeleine died in the apartment (says Amaral).  On what evidence?

Grime and Harrison both say no evidential reliability can be placed on the reactions of the dogs.

All reasons why Amaral's book is not based on the files and why he is likely to lose his appeal (if he hasn't already).

There has been no ruling on the truth or otherwise of the book. It wasn't banned because it was judged untruthful, much as you'd like to think so.

[ferryman]

There has been no ruling on the truth or otherwise of the book. It wasn't banned because it was judged untruthful, much as you'd like to think so.

Amaral could get away with lies so long as those lies were reflected in what's written in the files; or more pertinently not contradicted in the files.

Hence, he will not get away with saying Eddie 'scented death' all over the place, because although it is written in the files (that he did, Almeida) Harrison and Grime both say he didn't.

And Amaral will not get away with saying Harrison changed the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead because that is a lie (contradicted by Harrison himself).

And Harrison will only get away with saying he contradicted Prior on the forensic results if there is a report (somewhere) which says that; also that Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the PJ's powers of arrest if (again) there is a report indicating that (not in the publicly released files) ....

[stephen25000]

Amaral could get away with lies so long as those lies were reflected in what's written in the files; or more pertinently not contradicted in the files.

Hence, he will not get away with saying Eddie 'scented death' all over the place, because although it is written in the files (that he did, Almeida) Harrison and Grime both say he didn't.

And Amaral will not get away with saying Harrison changed the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead because that is a lie (contradicted by Harrison himself).

And Harrison will only get away with saying he contradicted Prior on the forensic results if there is a report (somewhere) which says that; also that Prior rang the FSS to berate them on the PJ's powers of arrest if (again) there is a report indicating that (not in the publicly released files) ....

It was not up to Harrison or Grime to say Eddie scented death or not.

It is the job of the forensic department to evaluate any evidence collected.

[ferryman]

It was not up to Harrison or Grime to say Eddie scented death or not.

It is the job of the forensic department to evaluate any evidence collected.

It was Amaral who lied (in his book) that Harrison and Grime did say those things.

It's why Amaral will lose the libel trial ....

If he hasn't already.

[stephen25000]

It was Amaral who lied (in his book) that Harrison and Grime did say those things.

It's why Amaral will lose the libel trial ....

If he hasn't already.

Amaral made mistakes.

However, the biggest mistake in this case is the mccanns saying they exhibited 'responsible parenting skills'.

Without which, we would not be on here now.

Nothing to do with Amaral, whom you you clearly hate, as do the mccanns.

yet other people purport the same theory as he does, yet the mccanns don't take them to court.

Why is that ?

Perhaps they thought he was an easy target.

[ferryman]

Amaral made mistakes.

However, the biggest mistake in this case is the mccanns saying they exhibited 'responsible parenting skills'.

Without which, we would not be on here now.

Nothing to do with Amaral, whom you you clearly hate, as do the mccanns.

yet other people purport the same theory as he does, yet the mccanns don't take them to court.

Why is that ?

Perhaps they thought he was an easy target.

It was an English barrister (specialising in family law) who said the McCanns actions were 'within bounds of responsible parenting'.

But then what do barristers who specialise in family law know ...

[stephen25000]

It was an English barrister (specialising in family law) who said the McCanns actions were 'within bounds of responsible parenting'.

But then what do barristers who specialise in family law know ...

So the barrister said it was quite OK to go out drinking and leave your children unsafe and in unlocked accomodation ?

How many cases as this Barrister won ?

Meanwhile police in the UK have arrested people for less.

[jassi]

Lawyers generally say what their clients pay them to say.