You believe that if you wish.
The trial was about damage caused by the content of the book not breaking judicial secrecy.
The damages have been ruled as zilch, nada, fa to steal your expressions.
What do suppose the mechanism is for someone being found guilty of an offence with which he hasn't been charged while defending another charge. One of which is criminal and one of which is civil ?
Try to think about it without names attached.
As for your prediction well you are one nil down at present so there is no good track record there.
Amaral's breach (of judicial secrecy) is the key to (the nonsense) of the present ruling.
The question (of whether the Portuguese authorities choose to pursue separate
criminal proceedings in respect of that breach, or whether they don't) we can ignore (here).
The key question is how the (proven and undisputed) breach affects the civil proceedings brought by the McCanns.
It affects those proceedings by meaning that Amaral breached his obligation to keep his mouth shut about confidential matters (in spreading his lies in his book).
Seems as if Amaral would have had carte blanche (to spread his lies) if only he hadn't breached judicial secrecy.
He breached judicial secrecy.
He didn't have that freedom.