How did the award of Amaral's improper profits to the McCanns redress the balance if the breach of duty of reserve was the only offence? That in itself, did not make the McCanns victims who required compensating for anything above the cost of bringing the action in the first place.
It was Amaral's conduct which harmed the McCanns, said the judge. He failed to censor himself as he was expected to as a retired police officer. It wasn't what he said, it was what he did, it seems.
The judgement of personal censorship that can be directed to the defendant Goncalo Amaral seems evident, given the standard of article 487º, paragraph 2, of the Civil Code, being particularly emphasised by the way the events were organised chronologically - the disclosure of the investigation shelving on July 21, 2008, the book launch, its sale and the interview published on next 24th.
Therefore it will necessary to compensate the duly confirmed damage within the parameters of paragraph 4 of the article 496º of the Civil Code, those whom the defendant's conduct harmed - the claimants Gerald and Kate McCann.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0