McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Wonderfulspam]

You obviously don't understand libel and speak from a position of total ignorance.
Amaral would have no defence against libel in the UK...if you imagine he would..tell us what it is...all fact..not opinion

What if the case files belonged to & were made public by the state of Britain?
Could he have published it then?

[Venturi Swirl]

Amaral's book wasn't published in the UK because publisher's weren't going to take that risk imo. Nobody knew if it was libellous or not. Just because the McCanns said it was didn't make it true.

What IS true is that the McCanns are innocent in the eyes of the law, that’s all that counts.  Amaral would have to defend his daft theory in this country with some actual evidence which he and his publisher would struggle with and hence would lose any libel case brought in this country. 

[Brietta]

What IS true is that the McCanns are innocent in the eyes of the law, that’s all that counts.  Amaral would have to defend his daft theory in this country with some actual evidence which he and his publisher would struggle with and hence would lose any libel case brought in this country.

To illustrate your point ~ there is no English language edition of the books in which he libels the McCanns.

[Wonderfulspam]

What IS true is that the McCanns are innocent in the eyes of the law, that’s all that counts.  Amaral would have to defend his daft theory in this country with some actual evidence which he and his publisher would struggle with and hence would lose any libel case brought in this country. 

What IS true is that Christian Brueckner is innocent in the eyes of the law, that’s all that counts.  Wolters would have to defend his daft theory in this country with some actual evidence which he and his publisher would struggle with and hence would lose any libel case brought in this country.

[G-Unit]

You obviously don't understand libel and speak from a position of total ignorance.
Amaral would have no defence against libel in the UK...if you imagine he would..tell us what it is...all fact..not opinion

Says the expert.

[Mr Gray]

Says the expert.

As expected you can't give any logical answer....I'll ask again reinforce your ignorance...
What defense would amaral have against a libel claim......his book would be deemed libellous in the UK.

[Eleanor]

As expected you can't give any logical answer....I'll ask again reinforce your ignorance...
What defense would amaral have against a libel claim......his book would be deemed libellous in the UK.

Which is why some people kicked in with their own ideas of a translation.  All of which were inaccurate in some way or another and where some of The Myths originated.

There was even one translated from Portuguese into French and then into English.  And what a mess that one was.

[G-Unit]

As expected you can't give any logical answer....I'll ask again reinforce your ignorance...
What defense would amaral have against a libel claim......his book would be deemed libellous in the UK.

As expected you give no information explaining why you think the book would have been found libellous in the UK. Instead you choose to challenge me to explain why I think it wasn't. I didn't say it wasn't, though, my opinion was that there could be other reasons why no publisher published it. Who needed the hassle that would clearly follow?

[G-Unit]

How can you possibly doubt the McCanns?

Well they complained loud and long about Amaral's libelous book, but were unable to prove it in accordance with Portuguese law. Maybe the same result would have occurred under English law, especially after 2013 when the defence of 'fair comment' was abolished and replaced by 'honest opinion'.

[Eleanor]

As expected you give no information explaining why you think the book would have been found libellous in the UK. Instead you choose to challenge me to explain why I think it wasn't. I didn't say it wasn't, though, my opinion was that there could be other reasons why no publisher published it. Who needed the hassle that would clearly follow?

Who needed the money might be more to the point.  Anyone interested was scrambling to get some sort of translation so a fair few Books could have been sold.

No explanation is required for why the Book would have been found Libellous, so that is a very silly question.  Have you no conception of The Laws of Libel in Britain?  Freedom of Speech is not absolute.

[Eleanor]

Well they complained loud and long about Amaral's libelous book, but were unable to prove it in accordance with Portuguese law. Maybe the same result would have occurred under English law, especially after 2013 when the defence of 'fair comment' was abolished and replaced by 'honest opinion'.

"Portuguese Law."  And we all know what that amounts to.  And since Amaral was not an honest man then his honest opinion would have been worth nothing in a British Court.

[G-Unit]

What IS true is that the McCanns are innocent in the eyes of the law, that’s all that counts.  Amaral would have to defend his daft theory in this country with some actual evidence which he and his publisher would struggle with and hence would lose any libel case brought in this country.

Why was he unable to claim honest opinion?

[G-Unit]

To illustrate your point ~ there is no English language edition of the books in which he libels the McCanns.

Under which law has he been found guilty of libelling the McCanns?
Or are you posting your opinion as a fact?

[G-Unit]

Who needed the money might be more to the point.  Anyone interested was scrambling to get some sort of translation so a fair few Books could have been sold.

No explanation is required for why the Book would have been found Libellous, so that is a very silly question.  Have you no conception of The Laws of Libel in Britain?  Freedom of Speech is not absolute.

Freedom of speech isn't absolute in Portugal either, but in this case the McCanns were unable to prove that Amaral's was restricted. Both the UK and Portugal are required to abide by ECHR law, so why would the book be cleared by Portugal and the ECHR but found guilty by the UK courts?

[Venturi Swirl]

Why was he unable to claim honest opinion?

He could have claimed whatever he liked, the fact that he didn't even attempt to get his book published in this country (potentially its biggest market) tells you everything you need to know.