McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Wonderfulspam]

Would any criminal abductor in half a right mind abduct anyone else from The Algarve with all of the attention focussed  World Wide on the area for the last 16 years?

It is plain silly to point out that no one has.  That one is a dead duck.

Are there any particular child abductions, outside of the Algarve, that you suspect 'the abductor' may have committed? The three expert investigative forces have never mentioned any that could be connected. Strangely enough.

[Wonderfulspam]

Sometimes I really do despair.  Is this the best that Sceptics can do?

What is it you're thinking we are trying to do?

[Wonderfulspam]

Yes, it sounds prime abduction country, what  with all those little blonde victims, a useless police force, and  numerous conveniently-close lawless villages.

The Algarve is awash with paedophiles, apparently, & they don't even have to sign a register. They appear to be able to restrain themselves quite well however, because there haven't been any more child abductions since Maddie.

[Wonderfulspam]

Anyway. Back to the topic at hand. The McCanns defeat at the ECHR. They would have won if not for the lies in the files. Eddie never alerted to cadaver odour. It's not a proven fact that he did. But then, there's still no sign of a living Maddie either. So maybe he just did.

[Venturi Swirl]

The strange logic of sceptics who assume that one child abduction always heralds the arrival of a whole spate of them in the same area.  If Madeleine was taken by Christian Bruckner, the fact that the world's eyes swivelled to his back yard (figuratively speaking) for the remainder of the time he was in the country might be one reason why he decided abducting another child from PdL might not be such a good idea.  But of course only a genius would be able to work this out and one thing sceptics tend not to be is that blessed in the logic department, poor things...

[Wonderfulspam]

The strange logic of sceptics who assume that one child abduction always heralds the arrival of a whole spate of them in the same area.  If Madeleine was taken by Christian Bruckner, the fact that the world's eyes swivelled to his back yard (figuratively speaking) for the remainder of the time he was in the country might be one reason why he decided abducting another child from PdL might not be such a good idea.  But of course only a genius would be able to work this out and one thing sceptics tend not to be is that blessed in the logic department, poor things...

If Madeleine was taken by Brueckner?  That's funny. Is there any good reason to believe she was?

[G-Unit]

The email is an irrelevance.

As you know Amaral was sacked from Madeleine's case, transferred and demoted as a direct result of being caught giving classified information relating to an active investigation directly to a journalist
He was punished for this very obvious breach of the law.

If that's what he did. Criticising the UK police may have been his 'crime'.

[Venturi Swirl]

If that's what he did. Criticising the UK police may have been his 'crime'.

Is that a punishable offence in Portugal?

[Brietta]

If that's what he did. Criticising the UK police may have been his 'crime'.

Whatever it was he did it resulted in him being sacked from his senior post in the high profile missing child investigation taking place.  It merited him losing his job as chief in Portomao.  It resulted in him losing rank and being demoted to some backwater.
Quite a sequence of events for as you suggest is a "trivial crime".  Wonder why his bosses felt justified in doing that to him ~ might be worth your while to cast a passing thought on that one.

[Venturi Swirl]

If Amaral was deomoted for criticising the UK police he should have takenhis case to the ECHR as they are shit hot when it comes to upholding his right to say what he likes.

[Eleanor]

I thought that Freedom of Speech carried responsibilities.  Amaral's book would never be published in Britain because it is Libellous.
Does this not work in Portugal?

Silly me.  Of course it doesn't.

[G-Unit]

I thought that Freedom of Speech carried responsibilities.  Amaral's book would never be published in Britain because it is Libellous.
Does this not work in Portugal?

Silly me.  Of course it doesn't.

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.

[Wonderfulspam]

I thought that Freedom of Speech carried responsibilities.  Amaral's book would never be published in Britain because it is Libellous.
Does this not work in Portugal?

Silly me.  Of course it doesn't.

Amaral's book was based on the files, which were made public by the state of Portugal & are available to view by anyone with access to the interweb. Do you believe the case files are libellous also?

[Mr Gray]

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.

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

[Wonderfulspam]

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.

How can you possibly doubt the McCanns?