McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Eleanor]

I'm saying no-one can predict if a book is going to sell well or not.

Cristovao's Book sold so why should Amaral think his wouldn't?

[Robittybob1]

So is this libellous from Brunt and Sky...



Sky

'Police Match Madeleine DNA To Hire Car'

8:26pm UK, Monday September 10, 2007

Portuguese police say they have found firm DNA evidence that the body of Madeleine McCann was in the boot of the family's hire car five weeks after she went missing, sources have told Sky News.


A policeman delivers flowers to the McCanns

Sky crime correspondent Martin Brunt, speaking from Portimao, said police were "adamant" they had found the most "damning" evidence yet implicating either one or both of the McCanns in their daughter's death

You know as well as I do that was a devastating report for the reputation of the McCanns.  I'd say it was "potentially libellous" on the part of Sky News.

[Mr Gray]

You know as well as I do that was a devastating report for the reputation of the McCanns.  I'd say it was "potentially libellous" on the part of Sky News.

its not libellous...Brunt is simply repeating the PJs claim

[Robittybob1]

its not libellous...Brunt is simply repeating the PJs claim

But the PJ didn't make their claims public, did they?   IMO it was a leak designed to undermine the McCanns. 

[G-Unit]

Cristovao's Book sold so why should Amaral think his wouldn't?

I don't know what Amaral thought, and neither do you. I know what he said and if he was lying as has been implied that can't be proved imo.

It seems he made the correct decision to resign when the Portuguese judges ruled that his freedom of expression was not restricted, as it would have been had he stayed in his job.

[Mr Gray]

But the PJ didn't make their claims public, did they?   IMO it was a leak designed to undermine the McCanns.

Yet Brunt and Sky repeated it.

Looking at the evidence i think the PJ actually beleived it.

[Mr Gray]

I don't know what Amaral thought, and neither do you. I know what he said and if he was lying as has been implied that can't be proved imo.

It seems he made the correct decision to resign when the Portuguese judges ruled that his freedom of expression was not restricted, as it would have been had he stayed in his job.

You dont know what the MCcanns thought but have claimed you do

[Robittybob1]

Yet Brunt and Sky repeated it.

Looking at the evidence i think the PJ actually beleived it.

Two wrongs don't make a right.  Three wrongs makes it even worse.  It is a matter of training and learning how to interpret DNA results.  Even the members on the forum would hold multiple views on the subject.

[Venturi Swirl]

I'm saying no-one can predict if a book is going to sell well or not.

Even if it sold less than 10 copies the intent was still to cash in on the case IMO

[Venturi Swirl]

I don't know what Amaral thought, and neither do you. I know what he said and if he was lying as has been implied that can't be proved imo.

It seems he made the correct decision to resign when the Portuguese judges ruled that his freedom of expression was not restricted, as it would have been had he stayed in his job.

He clearly wanted to go on to mouth off about the case, not retire quietly to tend his vegetable patch.

[Brietta]

Surely that is overstepping the mark Brietta.  The discussion was on topic, but it appeared that Eleanor was getting herself into difficulty.  I thought she should have deleted or at least amended her comment, but it was still there.

I have replied to this on the appropriate thread, Rob.

[Brietta]

I don't know what Amaral thought, and neither do you. I know what he said and if he was lying as has been implied that can't be proved imo.

It seems he made the correct decision to resign when the Portuguese judges ruled that his freedom of expression was not restricted, as it would have been had he stayed in his job.

He states quite clearly that his gripe was because he "responds to the need I felt to defend myself, having been discredited by the institution for which I worked for more than twenty-six years, without being given any chance to explain myself, publicly or within the institution itself."

His wife wrote of the ignominy of his last day at work when apparently no-one spoke to him.

To cap it all the tax guys caught up with his bad debt and helped themselves to a chunk of his pension until the debt was cleared.

Did it never occur to you that it might have been preferable for Amaral to resign and be able to claim the residue of his pension he was entitled to retain from the tax guys rather than gamble on perhaps losing it all if his forthcoming torture trial went badly for him.
Which in the event was rather prescient of him.

[Robittybob1]

He states quite clearly that his gripe was because he "responds to the need I felt to defend myself, having been discredited by the institution for which I worked for more than twenty-six years, without being given any chance to explain myself, publicly or within the institution itself."

His wife wrote of the ignominy of his last day at work when apparently no-one spoke to him.

To cap it all the tax guys caught up with his bad debt and helped themselves to a chunk of his pension until the debt was cleared.

Did it never occur to you that it might have been preferable for Amaral to resign and be able to claim the residue of his pension he was entitled to retain from the tax guys rather than gamble on perhaps losing it all if his forthcoming torture trial went badly for him.
Which in the event was rather prescient of him.

Are we supposed to feel sorry for him or something?

Prescient "having or showing knowledge of events before they take place"  Well his boss probably told him what was going to happen.  That is the way it works when you get the boot.

[Venturi Swirl]

Even if it sold less than 10 copies the intent was still to cash in on the case IMO

There’s no IMO about it.  He wrote the book as a commercial endeavour.  The book which was about the case was to make him money.  He couldn’t be sure how much prior to publication but he knew it would earn him something.   Therefore it is not an opinion to say he cashed in on the case.  He did.

[Robittybob1]

There’s no IMO about it.  He wrote the book as a commercial endeavour.  The book which was about the case was to make him money.  He couldn’t be sure how much prior to publication but he knew it would earn him something.   Therefore it is not an opinion to say he cashed in on the case.  He did.

Did the issue of making money come into the appeal to the ECHR.  I'm thinking the first court hearing went hard on the sales of the book and the copies on hand.  But does any of that come into the current situation?