Former Portuguese detective Gonçalo Amaral wins appeal in damages trial.

[stephen25000]

 'From the outset everyone agreed that despite the costs involved, it (the Fund) must be run to the highest standards of transparency whatever it cost.'

Commitment given by Dr Kate McCann in her book madeleine (p. 138 Irish paperback edition)


That's a cracker.

[jassi]

'From the outset everyone agreed that despite the costs involved, it (the Fund) must be run to the highest standards of transparency whatever it cost.'

Commitment given by Dr Kate McCann in her book madeleine (p. 138 Irish paperback edition)


That's a cracker.

It's the way she tells 'em 

[ferryman]

So steering things back on topic, since the "neglect" drum is being banged, I assume everyone accepts the McCanns did nothing, directly, nefarious to Madeleine, as Amaral accuses in his book.

So why did Amaral win his appeal?

[jassi]

So steering things back on topic, since the "neglect" drum is being banged, I assume everyone accepts the McCanns did nothing, directly, nefarious to Madeleine, as Amaral accuses in his book.

So why did Amaral win his appeal?

None of us know anything for sure.

[mercury]

I cannot get the site in the link to respond, so this is based purely on your post.

What legal expenditure (presuming this relates to actions in law, rather than expenditure that is not illegal) could BK have possibly had in mind on 17 May 2007?

PS.  Who is the "us" that got told this?

Some of this ? ,totalling near 180k? If I've understood the question correctly.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=actual&linkpath=http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/madeleinesfundgraphic.jpg&target=tlx_picamk1

[ferryman]

None of us know anything for sure.

If you mean about the details of the (shelved) investigation, yes we do.

It's all on line.

[ShiningInLuz]

Us the general public. 11th May; IFLG told us that we needed to set up a ‘fighting fund’.There had already been some speculation in the press, based on those erroneous reports that when Madeleine was taken we were dining ‘hundreds of metres away’, that we could face prosecution for negligence...... Kate McCann Madeleine.

By then they seem to have hired Control Risks and IFLG.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4jsLkwa7cc

Thank you.

[mercury]

So steering things back on topic, since the "neglect" drum is being banged, I assume everyone accepts the McCanns did nothing, directly, nefarious to Madeleine, as Amaral accuses in his book.

So why did Amaral win his appeal?

I don't recall him accusng the Mccanns of directly and nefariously harming their child,lets have a cite then

[ferryman]

I don't recall him accusng the Mccanns of directly and nefariously harming their child,lets have a cite then

Read the final chapter of his book.

[stephen25000]

Read the final chapter of his book.

I have.

and with no misrepresentations on here either.

[mercury]

Read the final chapter of his book.

Well, i did a quick scan, cant see the bit where he accuses them directly and nefariously harming their chld

http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/chapter-22-ria-de-alvor-one-year-on.html

???

[ferryman]

Well, i did a quick scan, cant see the bit where he accuses them directly and nefariously harming their chld

http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/chapter-22-ria-de-alvor-one-year-on.html

???

Nefariously covering up the (alleged) "fact" of her "death".

[stephen25000]

Nefariously covering up the (alleged) "fact" of her "death".

and if is she died in the apartment, which has hardly been disproved ?

[ferryman]

and if is she died in the apartment, which has hardly been disproved ?

Yet more libel.

If Madeleine died in the apartment it was at the hands of an intruder (a line of enquiry pursued by the second investigation).

[stephen25000]

Yet more libel.

If Madeleine died in the apartment it was at the hands of an intruder (a line of enquiry pursued by the second investigation).

You can of course prove that. &%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+