Why would it be?
Again...
The judge's job was to examine a civil case, not a criminal one (which had never come to court).
The judge didn't want to know whether the dogs were reliable or not, either. Not her job.
I'm (slowly) beginning to understand that, now.
The judge compared what was written in the book with what was written in the files.
If they matched, Amaral could say it (true or not).
In that sense, the judge did not adjudicate on what was 'true' or 'not true', just whether it was faithful to the files.
Unsure of the status of stuff in the files, but contradicted by other stuff, also in the files.
It's in the files that Eddie 'scented death' all over the place; also in the files (Grime and Harrison) that no evidential reliability could be placed on the dogs' reactions.
Where does Amaral stand on that one?
Amaral said Harrison changed the direction of the investigation into one for a little girl assumed dead
and buried (in close vicinity to PdL), an outright distortion (of the files). Harrison formed no fixed conclusion, but proffered the opinion that
if death had occurred, it was most likely Madeleine's remains had been jettisoned into the sea ....
Amaral claimed the Scent Transfer Unit is a device for detecting death scent. It is used for trapping and storing scents of
living people.
Amaral's conclusion diametrically contradicts the conclusion of the Portuguese prosecutors.
I've no clue how the court that overruled the injunction concluded Amaral's book is based on the files.
It is plain common sense that Martin Smith agreed to produce an efit only because he had changed his mind about the man the Smiths all saw being Gerry.
And so on.
Amaral is up against it.
