What is the lie in Amarals book. The truth of the lie.

[Venturi Swirl]

By whom?

read back.

[Mr Gray]

Also ratified.

"to confirm by expressing consent, approval, or formal sanction":

He didn't read it it so couldn't ratify it... He should never have been asked to sign something  he could not understand... Very poor policing IMO... We don't know what Gerry said we only know what the interpretor wrote down

[slartibartfast]

read back.

Just trying to tie down a vague post.

[Venturi Swirl]

Just trying to tie down a vague post.

???

[G-Unit]

Are you going to provide me with a cite that proves the McCanns were not libelled or not?

The McCanns sued him for damages and won. That judgement was overturned. Are damages awarded for libel? If they are, then the courts decided it wasn't proved.

[Mr Gray]

The McCanns sued him for damages and won. That judgement was overturned. Are damages awarded for libel? If they are, then the courts decided it wasn't proved.

I disagree as I have already posted...amarals right to free speech was ruled more important than the mccanns right to reputation... ie... The SC allowed amaral to libel the mccanns

[Brietta]

Snip
In accordance to the referenced terms, the charge given to me by Guilhermino ENCARNACO was to comment on prior search activity by the PJ and the GNR in Praia da Luz and to offer a new scenario for the searches with the consideration of the hiding of a corpse and human remains.

Assisted by Professor Oscar Ferreira and Alverinho Dias of the University of the Algarve, we conducted an assessment of the terrain of the immediate excavation areas relative to the viability of a superficial burial of human remains and also considering the possibility of a human cadaver having been thrown into the ocean in Praia da Luz.

This assessment and the respective conclusions are detailed in the evidence MH4 and in “Decision Support Document in the Search for Madeleine McCann—Praia da Luz & Marina” dated 23.07.2007, presented as evidence MH5.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON-RIGATORY.htm



In his book Amaral corrupted the remit given to him by Guilhermino Encarnaco as clearly stated above into, within the pages of his book ...
"After "an intense week of work," he produced a report that pointed to "the probable scenario of Madeleine being dead, and her corpse hidden in the vicinity of Praia da Luz,"

Is it possible he was unaware of the remit given to Mark Harrison by Encarnaco?  Or is it possible he gilded the lily?

If the latter ... he was clearly lying.

[Brietta]

I disagree as I have already posted...amarals right to free speech was ruled more important than the mccanns right to reputation... ie... The SC allowed amaral to libel the mccanns

The laugh is it was the Judicial Police he was trying to get one over on ... an internal row, with Madeleine and her family as collateral damage.

Snip
Amaral justifies writing the book to "replace" his good name, which says he was "messed up in the public square without the institution he belonged to 26 years ago" had allowed him to defend himself. On his departure from the Police, he says that was the way he found to make his "public defense."
https://www.publico.pt/2008/07/23/sociedade/noticia/goncalo-amaral-diz-que-madeleine-morreu-acidentalmente-e-que-pais-esconderam-corpo-1336365

[Brietta]

Further attempts to "out" members will accrue points ... please desist.

[Robittybob1]

Chapter 12  - this surprises me.
"There is no doubt that the adults (apart from the Paynes, who were using a baby monitor) were taking regular turns during dinner to check that the children were asleep - the restaurant's register confirms it."

So were the staff monitoring the coming and going of the parents?  Amaral says they did write it in a register, but is that in the file?

[Venturi Swirl]

The McCanns sued him for damages and won. That judgement was overturned. Are damages awarded for libel? If they are, then the courts decided it wasn't proved.

We were repeatdly assured by McCann sceptics at the time that the case and the award was nothing to do with libel, so what has changed?  Either way, I would like a cite from the SC judgement thst “the McCanns were not libelled”, because IMO it is obvious to anyone who can read that they  were.

[Mr Gray]

I would also like a cite from gunit that the translators were professional

[Robittybob1]

I thought GA should know who's sticker book it was.

Chapter 12:  "It is Russell O'Brien, who hands over to the first police officer to arrive on the scene, two lists written on the cover of a children's sticker album, that probably belonged to Madeleine.

He then appeals to our emotions without confirming it was Madeleine's book.
"How come it had been torn up? A child has just disappeared and one of her books is used to write on? That pays very little consideration to..."

Does the second list say "9.30 - Russ + ( word scored through) Matt check all three"?

Did Russell check all 3 as well as what Matt did?

[Venturi Swirl]

Is there a law in Portugal that states it’s ok to write accusations of criminal behaviour about individuals who have not been cleared of a crime but who have also never been charged?

[Robittybob1]

Chapter 12 - Who is Amaral blaming here?

"The existence of two lists proves that there was a debate; the differences between them probably mean that there was no interest in being accurate." 

As I see and understand the situation it is being written  up by Russell O'Brien  and the main variation in the activities involve what Matt and Russell did.

Is GA blaming their actions on the McCanns?

there was no interest in being accurate  Who was not being accurate?