As the McCanns and their friends have been ruled out as suspects or persons of interest - then it is perfectly reasonable to believe that Madeleine was removed from 5A (dead or alive)by a stranger.
On the other hand - in nine years not a scrap of evidence that the McCanns or their friends were involved in Madeleine's removal from 5a has emerged.
Therefore to claim that the McCanns knew their daughter could not be found and that an abduction did not happen, as if those were proven facts, is libelous IMO.
Amaral's conclusions in his book match the conclusions of the PJ investigation as at September 2007. Full stop. It was his story of the investigation and it's conclusions during the time he worked on it. His conclusions were the same as the conclusions in the files as at September 2007.
Anything which has happened or been said since is irrelevant. It has to be judged in light of what the situation was then, not what it is now.
Having said that, of course, he could be right, they could be right, Mark Williams-Thomas could be right or they could all be wrong.
The legal question came down to whether his right to free speech is greater than the McCann's right to a good reputation.
The judge in the lower court seemed unable to settle this matter without referring to his former job. It was only by saying that his situation as an ex policeman prevented him from expressing his opinion that she felt able to rule in favour of the McCanns. The inference being that had he not been an ex policeman she would have reached a different conclusion.
The Appeal judges ruled in favour of Amaral because they rejected the lower judge's conclusion that his situation as an ex policeman affected his right to speak freely.
If the Supreme Court rules on points of law only they will decide between the two decisions above. The question being are there legal constraints affecting ex policemen's rights to speak freely or not?
I don't know if new legal questions can be raised on appeal or not, but I don't think the proved and unproved facts will be reconsidered.