Would you pay up without question in the same situation?
They say the guy has hindered the search for their missing daughter. I disagree on that part but if thats what they think then why on earth would they hand over a considerable chunk of money, money that they have set aside apparently for the search for their missing daughter...pretty much TO the person they were trying to sue to begin with?
Nah, I'm nearly certain they will drag their heels. They may be MADE to pay up eventually but I cannot see them voluntarily doing so. Not in a million years. And I don't think they should be blamed for that, if it happens either.
If Mr Amaral decides to proceed with his threat to sue the McCanns, it is a different ball game.
He doesn't just present an invoice and the money is put into his pocket.
The onus will be on him to prove his allegation with accounts of exactly what income he has lost: I would imagine that would be the procedure even for a Portuguese court.
I don't know how they will quantify losses for his legal fees as these have been covered by gifts sent to an account set up for that purpose.
That will take a lot of close scrutiny before an assessment can be made.
I don't know how his earnings from television appearances ~ particularly those dealing with the McCann case ~ will be quantified.
If he is claiming financial loss ... the onus will be on him to prove that claim ... I for one would find that prospect almost as interesting as Pandora found the box which she opened.
The question is in retrospect did she regret doing that?