UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Carana on May 10, 2013, 11:32:22 AM
-
Robert Murat wins slander case as Kate McCann visits Luz
by Brendan de Beer, in General · 09-05-2013 10:23:00 · 2 Comments
A Lisbon court has ruled national daily Correio da Manhã pay a total of 15,000 euros to Robert Murat who was dragged into the case of missing British toddler Madeleine McCann after volunteering to act as a translator between Portuguese authorities and the McCanns.
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
http://theportugalnews.com/news/robert-murat-wins-slander-case-as-kate-mccann-visits-luz/28371
-
Can anyone find a link to the full ruling on this?
Here it is »
Acórdão do Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa
http://www.dgsi.pt/jtrl.nsf/33182fc732316039802565fa00497eec/8ae65886ef70827180257b63003d7a75?OpenDocument
-
Can anyone find a link to the full ruling on this?
I did a little search and found nothing. What is known is through the Lusa agency.
http://www.jn.pt/Dossies/dossie.aspx?content_id=3204064&dossier=O%20caso%20Maddie%20McCann
You have to go to the Tribunal da Relação to read the full ruling, I'm afraid.
-
Hmm... PJ Officer lied and fed spin, lies and smears to the papers.... sound familiar to anyone??
Amaral really is the common denominator in all of this isn't he
-
Do we think this news might put the McCanns in a stronger position regarding the forth-coming libel trial against Amaral?
In what way ? ... Did Amaral similarly libel Murat ? ( in his book, I mean )
-
Do we think this news might put the McCanns in a stronger position regarding the forth-coming libel trial against Amaral?
In what way ? ... Did Amaral similarly libel Murat ? ( in his book, I mean )
Read chapter 7, of his book.
-
Do we think this news might put the McCanns in a stronger position regarding the forth-coming libel trial against Amaral?
In what way ? ... Did Amaral similarly libel Murat ? ( in his book, I mean )
Read chapter 7, of his book.
I think the judgement shows that the McCanns have a stronger case than a lot of posters thought. If Amaral has libelled Murat then perhaps on the strength of this victory Murat will sue Amaral once the McCanns have finished with him.
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
Here's hoping, Martha - here's hoping. I'm very glad to hear that Robert Murat has fought back against the poisonous PT press and won.
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Kate confirms in her book that it was 'a bolt from the blue'
In fact, she says Clarence Michell learned about the reversal of the injunction from a Sun reporter
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Nobody was there, Benice, it's a judgement on a judgement... the Supreme Court considered there was no motive for a ban. Supreme Courts rarely lose an opportunity to show their superiority. But they don't have the last word. An appeal was possible. And was made.
-
A friend found the link to the Murat Appeal court ruling.
http://www.dgsi.pt/jtrl.nsf/33182fc732316039802565fa00497eec/8ae65886ef70827180257b63003d7a75?OpenDocument
I'm interested in the legal bases of this ruling and Google translate produces gibberish.
-
figure of speech ;)
-
This has got to be the final nail in Amaral's coffin.
The above statement is simply a figure of speech, for those who don't understand colloquial or idiomatic English.
-
And where did they get that news from?
It is true that the witness, in particular, have ensured the PJ, "according to a source close to the investigation"
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
That was never going to be the case. Even in the US a lot of what has been printed would be defamatory under their laws. Someone just assumed that it was only in the UK that such actions for defamation are likely to be successful.
-
Robert M, in this appeal, didn't obtain as much as he had asked in the first instance (he lost)
not winning the amount he asked for does not mean he "lost".
He won his case - are you denying that?
-
Do we think this news might put the McCanns in a stronger position regarding the forth-coming libel trial against Amaral?
In what way ? ... Did Amaral similarly libel Murat ? ( in his book, I mean )
Read chapter 7, of his book.
please tell me that is not compulsory
-
Robert M, in this appeal, didn't obtain as much as he had asked in the first instance (he lost)
not winning the amount he asked for does not mean he "lost".
He won his case - are you denying that?
You have to admit that it's quite a good bit of spin, if you have a brain the size of a pea. Although even a pea might have trouble with that one.
-
i'm having trouble understanding the Portuguese.
This appears to be a ruling of the Lisbon Court of Appeal. Is that correct?
And is it a civil suit?
-
Do we think this news might put the McCanns in a stronger position regarding the forth-coming libel trial against Amaral?
In what way ? ... Did Amaral similarly libel Murat ? ( in his book, I mean )
Read chapter 7, of his book.
please tell me that is not compulsory
Sorry, it is if you want to see Amaral libelling, Murat. 8)><(
-
Do we think this news might put the McCanns in a stronger position regarding the forth-coming libel trial against Amaral?
In what way ? ... Did Amaral similarly libel Murat ? ( in his book, I mean )
Read chapter 7, of his book.
please tell me that is not compulsory
Sorry, it is if you want to see Amaral libelling, Murat. 8)><(
?{)(**
-
Robert M, in this appeal, didn't obtain as much as he had asked in the first instance (he lost). The judgement is based on the effects of the CdM's articles on Robert M's life : he was mainly deprived of peace of mind and tranquillity, forced to go out in disguise in order not to be recognized, avoiding friends in order to protect them as well from photographs, etc., bound to leave his mother's house.
The "journalists" are accused of high neglect in publishing "news" and photographs without respect of the presumption of innocence.
And where did they get that news from?
It is true that the witness, in particular, have ensured the PJ, "according to a source close to the investigation"
Anne, I don't think this was about money for Robert Murat. It was about challenging the disgusting smears on his character from the PT Press.
-
Robert M, in this appeal, didn't obtain as much as he had asked in the first instance (he lost). The judgement is based on the effects of the CdM's articles on Robert M's life : he was mainly deprived of peace of mind and tranquillity, forced to go out in disguise in order not to be recognized, avoiding friends in order to protect them as well from photographs, etc., bound to leave his mother's house.
The "journalists" are accused of high neglect in publishing "news" and photographs without respect of the presumption of innocence.
And where did they get that news from?
It is true that the witness, in particular, have ensured the PJ, "according to a source close to the investigation"
Anne, I don't think this was about money for Robert Murat. It was about challenging the disgusting smears on his character from the PT Press.
15,000 Euros sounds half decent to me. So what did he lose?
-
there are rumours abound that a certain couple who had a fallout (reported on the internet) were the source of false information to the press.
-
Anne, I don't think this was about money for Robert Murat. It was about challenging the disgusting smears on his character from the PT Press.
I didn't say it was about money, Rachel. He asked 60000 (half of it was patrimonial loss and the other half for moral prejudice) in first instance. Now he won, that's what matters (15000 is symbolical)
-
Robert M, in this appeal, didn't obtain as much as he had asked in the first instance (he lost). The judgement is based on the effects of the CdM's articles on Robert M's life : he was mainly deprived of peace of mind and tranquillity, forced to go out in disguise in order not to be recognized, avoiding friends in order to protect them as well from photographs, etc., bound to leave his mother's house.
The "journalists" are accused of high neglect in publishing "news" and photographs without respect of the presumption of innocence.
And where did they get that news from?
It is true that the witness, in particular, have ensured the PJ, "according to a source close to the investigation"
Anne, I don't think this was about money for Robert Murat. It was about challenging the disgusting smears on his character from the PT Press.
15,000 Euros sounds half decent to me. So what did he lose?
Getting only €15k for being accused of the worst accusations and the repercussions on the family for so long?
-
there are rumours abound that a certain couple who had a fallout (reported on the internet) were the source of false information to the press.
Quite shocking, isn't it. The worst yet.
-
(he lost)
he won
-
Do we think this news might put the McCanns in a stronger position regarding the forth-coming libel trial against Amaral?
In what way ? ... Did Amaral similarly libel Murat ? ( in his book, I mean )
Read chapter 7, of his book.
please tell me that is not compulsory
Sorry, it is if you want to see Amaral libelling, Murat. 8)><(
Detailing facts from a police investigation is not libel and you forget in the book he does say that none of it was proven to be true, the libel was was from the people who phoned or wrote in with it and the papers that repeated it
And where did the papers get it from?
"It is true that the witness, in particular, have ensured the PJ, "according to a source close to the investigation"
-
Redblossom
I was addressing the question of whether police investigation or the reporting of it by a policeman can be libellous, it cant I dont think
it will be very interesting to see how it applies to an ex policeman
-
And where did the papers get it from?
DCI I have no idea, though for you I understand it MUST have been Mr Amaral, after all, he is behind everything isnz't he? I was addressing the question of whether police investigation or the reporting of it by a policeman can be libellous, it cant I dont think
It obviously is.
-
I'm confused - who has claimed Murat lost this latest court action?
anne the impartial translator
-
Do we think this news might put the McCanns in a stronger position regarding the forth-coming libel trial against Amaral?
In what way ? ... Did Amaral similarly libel Murat ? ( in his book, I mean )
Read chapter 7, of his book.
please tell me that is not compulsory
Sorry, it is if you want to see Amaral libelling, Murat. 8)><(
Detailing facts from a police investigation is not libel and you forget in the book he does say that none of it was proven to be true, the libel was was from the people who phoned or wrote in with it and the papers that repeated it
As Justice Tugenhadt pointed out in his judgement on Tony Bennett, repeating the truth in a defamatory manner is still defamation.
I used to argue this on the old forums and Bunnies just refused to believe it. I was so pleased when Tugenhadt J included that in his judgement!
-
And where did the papers get it from?
DCI I have no idea, though for you I understand it MUST have been Mr Amaral, after all, he is behind everything isnz't he? I was addressing the question of whether police investigation or the reporting of it by a policeman can be libellous, it cant I dont think
It obviously is.
It is not obvious at all. Whilst police if they leaked info from the investigation was wrong and probably illegal it was not libellous on their part,thats how I understand it.
so why did he win?
-
And where did the papers get it from?
DCI I have no idea, though for you I understand it MUST have been Mr Amaral, after all, he is behind everything isnz't he? I was addressing the question of whether police investigation or the reporting of it by a policeman can be libellous, it cant I dont think
It obviously is.
It is not obvious at all. Whilst police if they leaked info from the investigation was wrong and probably illegal it was not libellous on their part,thats how I understand it.
There is a concept called 'privilege'. Privilege allows an excuse to defamation. For a Prosecutor or a Member of parliament or a police officer or a witness to say that X committed such and such a crime is privileged under certain circumstances. Repeating it without privilege may be seen as defamation.
-
And where did the papers get it from?
DCI I have no idea, though for you I understand it MUST have been Mr Amaral, after all, he is behind everything isnz't he? I was addressing the question of whether police investigation or the reporting of it by a policeman can be libellous, it cant I dont think
It obviously is.
It is not obvious at all. Whilst police if they leaked info from the investigation was wrong and probably illegal it was not libellous on their part,thats how I understand it.
You keep telling yourself that, Sweetcheeks.
-
so why did he win?
I am guessing only, but probably because it gave the public an impression of him from all those anonymous and other reports and silly journalists comments which were info collected by the police but not proven as fact, the police were wrong to leak it but the paper was more responsible on acting on it, he won after all because he sued THEM not the police
See my notes above about defamation by stating the truth and 'privilege'.
-
Redblossom
the police were wrong to leak it but the paper was more responsible on acting on it
is there a sigh smiley?
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Kate confirms in her book that it was 'a bolt from the blue'
In fact, she says Clarence Michell learned about the reversal of the injunction from a Sun reporter
In Britain ex-parte judgments are reserved when one party perceived to be in danger is in need of rescue.
An ex-parte judgment of the type that overturned the injunction would just not be contemplated ...
-
Do we think this news might put the McCanns in a stronger position regarding the forth-coming libel trial against Amaral?
In what way ? ... Did Amaral similarly libel Murat ? ( in his book, I mean )
Read chapter 7, of his book.
please tell me that is not compulsory
Sorry, it is if you want to see Amaral libelling, Murat. 8)><(
Detailing facts from a police investigation is not libel and you forget in the book he does say that none of it was proven to be true, the libel was was from the people who phoned or wrote in with it and the papers that repeated it
As Justice Tugenhadt pointed out in his judgement on Tony Bennett, repeating the truth in a defamatory manner is still defamation.
I used to argue this on the old forums and Bunnies just refused to believe it. I was so pleased when Tugenhadt J included that in his judgement!
Thanks Debunker.
So the same will apply to publishing defamation?
This was publised in April 2008 by CdM, Amarals book was released 24th of July, 2008. So where did CdM get the info? Doesn't take bloody Einstein to work it out, does it?
-
I'm confused - who has claimed Murat lost this latest court action?
anne the impartial translator
How extraordinary.
whilst I don't look at the place, who knows - it may appear on a certain Portuguese blog that Murat lost his case!
-
I'm confused - who has claimed Murat lost this latest court action?
anne the impartial translator
How extraordinary.
whilst I don't look at the place, who knows - it may appear on a certain Portuguese blog that Murat lost his case!
Not Morais again, surely? Isn't she in enough trouble already today?
-
I'm confused - who has claimed Murat lost this latest court action?
anne the impartial translator
How extraordinary.
whilst I don't look at the place, who knows - it may appear on a certain Portuguese blog that Murat lost his case!
Not Morais again, surely? Isn't she in enough trouble already today?
maybe someone could take a peek there - I only have a firewall on my computer - not resistant to more extreme attacks.
-
I'm confused - who has claimed Murat lost this latest court action?
anne the impartial translator
How extraordinary.
whilst I don't look at the place, who knows - it may appear on a certain Portuguese blog that Murat lost his case!
Not Morais again, surely? Isn't she in enough trouble already today?
maybe someone could take a peek there - I only have a firewall on my computer - not resistant to more extreme attacks.
She doesn't seem to be at work @)(++(*
Nothing since April.
-
I'm confused - who has claimed Murat lost this latest court action?
anne the impartial translator
How extraordinary.
whilst I don't look at the place, who knows - it may appear on a certain Portuguese blog that Murat lost his case!
Not Morais again, surely? Isn't she in enough trouble already today?
maybe someone could take a peek there - I only have a firewall on my computer - not resistant to more extreme attacks.
No, it doesn't seem to be her. I wonder who else it could be?
-
The bottom line is that Murat fought back against the poisonous PT press and won. YAY ! 8@??)(
-
I'm confused - who has claimed Murat lost this latest court action?
anne the impartial translator
How extraordinary.
whilst I don't look at the place, who knows - it may appear on a certain Portuguese blog that Murat lost his case!
Before today, I'd not read anything at all about Murat's civil action for libel.
That, in its own right, I would tend to interpret as "bad news" for those on a certain side of a certain fence ...
-
there seems to have been "judicial secrecy"
-
I'm confused - who has claimed Murat lost this latest court action?
anne the impartial translator
How extraordinary.
whilst I don't look at the place, who knows - it may appear on a certain Portuguese blog that Murat lost his case!
Before today, I'd not read anything at all about Murat's civil action for libel.
That, in its own right, I would tend to interpret as "bad news" for those on a certain side of a certain fence ...
The supreme courts judgement in the overturning of the Amaral book ban pretty much annuls any libel case claims
You keep telling yourself that Blossom.
-
The supreme courts judgement in the overturning of the Amaral book ban pretty much annuls any libel case claims
No it doesn't
-
there seems to have been "judicial secrecy"
Which goes back to a different isse. In such a system, there can be no official crime-related journalism. So everyone has their (possibly lucrative) fans blowing out of windows. Whether they are accurate or overheard as vague ruminations in the PJ coffee shop.
-
Well, Redblossom, not really ! If you can prove that divulged informations, either false or true, focused the interest of the public without being, on a normative point of view, of the interest of the public, that they forced you to change home, city, profession and go into the public space in disguise, then courts of justice have rightly to contemplate your case.
-
The supreme courts judgement in the overturning of the Amaral book ban pretty much annuls any libel case claims
No it doesn't
It certainly doesn't. The main decider will come at the forthcoming libel trial (which Amaral has tried to delay time and time again with spurious excuses).
-
The supreme courts judgement in the overturning of the Amaral book ban pretty much annuls any libel case claims
No it doesn't
Course it does I suggest you read the judgement again
Seemingly unlike you, I know what the judgment says.
Having read the court rulings in the action brought by Murat, I also know Portuguese courts accept that Madeleine was abducted.
If Portuguese courts accept that Madeleine was abducted, why on earth would they find in favour of a man who claims the McCanns know Madeleine is dead, know how she died and covered up the facts of her death ....
-
The supreme courts judgement in the overturning of the Amaral book ban pretty much annuls any libel case claims
No it doesn't
Course it does I suggest you read the judgement again
Seemingly unlike you, I know what the judgment says.
Having read the court rulings in the action brought by Murat, I also know Portuguese courts accept that Madeleine was abducted.
If Portuguese courts accept that Madeleine was abducted, why on earth would they find in favour of a man who claims the McCanns know Madeleine is dead, know how she died and covered up the facts of her death ....
8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
-
I'm confused - who has claimed Murat lost this latest court action?
anne the impartial translator
How extraordinary.
whilst I don't look at the place, who knows - it may appear on a certain Portuguese blog that Murat lost his case!
Before today, I'd not read anything at all about Murat's civil action for libel.
That, in its own right, I would tend to interpret as "bad news" for those on a certain side of a certain fence ...
The supreme courts judgement in the overturning of the Amaral book ban pretty much annuls any libel case claims
No it doesn't. That was merely a hearing on whether there should be what is called in US terms 'prior restraint'- that the book should be banned until the libel hearing itself took place.
-
Murat is getting quite adept at litigation, it seems
Is there any chance he might seek redress from Kate McCann regarding her book ?
I know that just five months ago, his mother was speaking of her bitter disappointment that Kate had added to their misery by repeating, in the book, allegations made against her son
( I'm reading Kate's book, and I must say, I can't really see what Jenny Murat is getting at )
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Nobody was there, Benice, it's a judgement on a judgement... the Supreme Court considered there was no motive for a ban. Supreme Courts rarely lose an opportunity to show their superiority. But they don't have the last word. An appeal was possible. And was made.
Without the other party being aware?
-
Murat is getting quite adept at litigation, it seems
Is there any chance he might seek redress from Kate McCann regarding her book ?
I know that just five months ago, his mother was speaking of her bitter disappointment that Kate had added to their misery by repeating, in the book, allegations made against her son
( I'm reading Kate's book, and I must say, I can't really see what Jenny Murat is getting at )
No, I couldn't either. Selective reporting again, I suspect.
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
Here's hoping, Martha - here's hoping. I'm very glad to hear that Robert Murat has fought back against the poisonous PT press and won.
If the Portuguese judges can see through what happened with Mr Murat then this can only open the flood gates to further actions by any of the tapas 9 who may have been defamed by the PJ or the Press.
-
icabodcrane
I know that just five months ago, his mother was speaking of her bitter disappointment that Kate had added to their misery by repeating, in the book, allegations made against her son
( I'm reading Kate's book, and I must say, I can't really see what Jenny Murat is getting at )
so your speculative question is based on something you don't agree with.
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
Here's hoping, Martha - here's hoping. I'm very glad to hear that Robert Murat has fought back against the poisonous PT press and won.
If the Portuguese judges can see through what happened with Mr Murat then this can only open the flood gates (to further actions by any of the tapas 9 who may have been defamed by the PJ or the Press.
Excellent post, Angelo222 8@??)(
-
Well if Murat wants another one, here he is.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-COSTA.htm
This is info Amaral used in his book. So had he been collecting statements from day one, for his comic book?
The statement was given before the case was 2 weeks old.
To be honest this could be, a disgruntled employee, of Murats father.
-
Does anyone have a full translation of the decision?
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
Here's hoping, Martha - here's hoping. I'm very glad to hear that Robert Murat has fought back against the poisonous PT press and won.
If the Portuguese judges can see through what happened with Mr Murat then this can only open the flood gates to further actions by any of the tapas 9 who may have been defamed by the PJ or the Press.
You cant be defamed by the police
Cite....
You certainly can in the UK.
It is very difficult the other way- the police are a public service and as part of a Democratic society they are expected to soak up a considerable amount of false criticism before a libel action is likely to succeed (slightly different with libel against an individual in the police, depending on the situation.)
For certain acts the Police have qualified privilege, but that has definite limits and could easily result in a case for defamation.
-
Well if Murat wants another one, here he is.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-COSTA.htm
This is info Amaral used in his book. So had he been collecting statements from day one, for his comic book?
The statement was given before the case was 2 weeks old.
To be honest this could be, a disgruntled employee, of Murats father.
I will not soil my eyes by reading Amaral's so-called book. Someone PLEASE tell me that Amaral didn't put the "sex with a cat" claim in his book? If he did, then I hope that Murat takes the appropriate action - if there is anything left after Kate and Gerry McCann have finished with him and his brother, and the PT Tax authorities have been paid out.
-
Well if Murat wants another one, here he is.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-COSTA.htm
This is info Amaral used in his book. So had he been collecting statements from day one, for his comic book?
The statement was given before the case was 2 weeks old.
To be honest this could be, a disgruntled employee, of Murats father.
I will not soil my eyes by reading Amaral's so-called book. Someone PLEASE tell me that Amaral didn't put the "sex with a cat" claim in his book? If he did, then I hope that Murat takes the appropriate action - if there is anything left after Kate and Gerry McCann have finished with him and his brother, and the PT Tax authorities have been paid out.
Yes he did, Rachel.
If you don't want to soil your eyes read the statement, made.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-COSTA.htm
-
Well if Murat wants another one, here he is.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-COSTA.htm
This is info Amaral used in his book. So had he been collecting statements from day one, for his comic book?
The statement was given before the case was 2 weeks old.
To be honest this could be, a disgruntled employee, of Murats father.
I will not soil my eyes by reading Amaral's so-called book. Someone PLEASE tell me that Amaral didn't put the "sex with a cat" claim in his book? If he did, then I hope that Murat takes the appropriate action - if there is anything left after Kate and Gerry McCann have finished with him and his brother, and the PT Tax authorities have been paid out.
Yes he did, Rachel.
If you don't want to soil your eyes read the statement, made.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-COSTA.htm
That is such a good example of qualified privilege.
The witness has QP as it is part of a statement to the police.
A Police Officer would have QP when including this in a report to the Prosecutor.
It may even have QP if it is in the files (IS IT?)
Amaral as a private citizen has no QP so is guilty of defamation.
-
Well if Murat wants another one, here he is.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-COSTA.htm
This is info Amaral used in his book. So had he been collecting statements from day one, for his comic book?
The statement was given before the case was 2 weeks old.
To be honest this could be, a disgruntled employee, of Murats father.
I will not soil my eyes by reading Amaral's so-called book. Someone PLEASE tell me that Amaral didn't put the "sex with a cat" claim in his book? If he did, then I hope that Murat takes the appropriate action - if there is anything left after Kate and Gerry McCann have finished with him and his brother, and the PT Tax authorities have been paid out.
Yes he did, Rachel.
If you don't want to soil your eyes read the statement, made.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-COSTA.htm
Thank you DCI. I didn't think it was possible for Amaral to sink any lower in my eyes, but he has done. Here's hoping that Isabel Duarte and the team wipe the floor with him at the forthcoming trial.
-
OK, I have loaded a google translation of the judgment onto my word processor. I will pull out all references to "abduction" one at a time and add them in edits:
"The key to crime may be in" G "and the Judicial Police investigates" T ", which gives its name to the foreign real estate online with" A "and" I ". The suspect English is for now the only defendant, the German was questioned and the investigation into the abduction of the little "F" "any professional connections" to "A" are being scrutinized past, says the "NEWSPAPER 1" fountain of PJ . »
«" N "insists the" NEWSPAPER 1 "in the" professional relationship "with" A ", but called her home at 23:30 the night of the murder, two hours after the abduction of Madeleine.
«" G "tells us that only knew of the abduction of the little" F "for his daughter" R "... living in England, and that he" called at 7:00 a.m. the next day, "Friday. "She saw on television and told me, that's when I wanted to help put together the bank on the street where people could give information about the girl."
The mother believes that only defendant because "the British journalist who suspected him." Just could not explain the "NEWSPAPER 1" the call "N" to "A" or two hours after the abduction and via your mobile phone, even when their relationship "is just professional."
There is another reference I won't add because it is tied in with some unpleasant allegations against Murat I don't want to repeat on the open forum.
-
You cant be defamed by the police
Try telling that to former cop Amaral. If a policeman makes a comment in public or writes something for a newspaper wrongly alleging that a person has committed a crime then they leave themselves open to a libel suit. That is why any reputable police officer will only say such things under the judicial authority and protection of a court. I am not sure about Portugal but in the UK Counsel are so protected against libel suits in the same way when they allege something in court.
-
You cant be defamed by the police
Try telling that to former cop Amaral. If a policeman makes a comment in public or writes something for a newspaper wrongly alleging that a person has committed a crime then they leave themselves open to a libel suit. That is why any reputable police officer will only say such things under the judicial authority and protection of a court. I am not sure about Portugal but in the UK Counsel are so protected against libel suits in the same way when they allege something in court.
Is exactly right.
If Amaral had confined his suspicions to the official process, he'd have been fine. Almeida is fine, for precisely that reason.
At least so far as I am aware, he has never repeated anything publicly outside the process he said within it, so can't be touched for libel.
-
You cant be defamed by the police
Try telling that to former cop Amaral. If a policeman makes a comment in public or writes something for a newspaper wrongly alleging that a person has committed a crime then they leave themselves open to a libel suit. That is why any reputable police officer will only say such things under the judicial authority and protection of a court. I am not sure about Portugal but in the UK Counsel are so protected against libel suits in the same way when they allege something in court.
April 26, 2008 - 09:00
If Maddie: Inspector will disclose the whole puzzle of the night of May 3
Mystery also in film
What really happened the night of May 3, in Praia da Luz, where Madeleine McCann disappeared, one of the passages will be more 'explosive' of the book that the inspector's PJ Gonçalo Amaral is you want to write and, later, transformed into documentary.
The CM knows that the researcher of PJ - who coordinated the case in the first months and is now about to leave the police after having applied for retirement (see support) - already has almost finished the book. As the CM revealed yesterday will have the title 'the Truth Lie'.
The contents have already been examined by a publisher, which also proposed the publication in English. According to BC source said next of Gonçalo Amaral, "yet there is no date certain for the launch," but, apparently, will only be after the lifting of the secrecy of justice in the investigation process still ongoing at the Ministry of Public Portimao.
On the intention to rebuild the media event on film, should proceed in documentary style, and also there is already producing interested. "Will clarify all the lie that has been created and calling into question the institutions that investigated and are linked to the case," revealed the CM the same source, who already desfolhou passages from future publication.
PORMENORES DETAILS
SEGREDO SECRECY
The publication of the controversial book should only happen after the lifting of the secrecy of justice."The intention is to restore the truth of what happened that night and did not find problems to the author," explained the 'CM' source close to Gonçalo Amaral.
REFORMA REFORM
Despite being about to pass the reform, adding 38 years of service - 26 in eight more police, military service plus 20% of subsidy - Gonçalo Amaral is in danger of being punished by the disciplinary publication of the book. Even in retirement, the inspector must comply with the regulation of the police disciplinary.
Rui Pando Gomes
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/nacional/portugal/misterio-tambem-em-filme
-
Amaral could have written a book to defend his honour in a different way. And no one would have batted an eyelid.
He could have explained the general situation, his efforts, the lack of a protocol, training, how difficult it all was, bla, bla, WITHOUT his conclusion.
He didn't. He chose to assert that this little girl was dead. Not just in his book, nor just in the TV documentary with which he is closely asociated, but also in his extensive promo tour of interviews.
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
Robert Murat wins slander case as Kate McCann visits Luz
by Brendan de Beer, in General · 09-05-2013 10:23:00 · 2 Comments
A Lisbon court has ruled national daily Correio da Manhã pay a total of 15,000 euros to Robert Murat who was dragged into the case of missing British toddler Madeleine McCann after volunteering to act as a translator between Portuguese authorities and the McCanns.
(http://theportugalnews.com/uploads/news/page5_Robert_Murat.jpg)
In its judgement, the court found that publishing false allegations such as “Robert Murat is a predator who visits sites containing sexual violence” was not in the public interests and infringed upon his rights.
The newspaper frequently quoted anonymous police sources and alleged leaks by investigators in their coverage of the case to substantiate its claims.
“This is the 33-year old Englishman police believe dragged little Maddie from the bed in which she was sleeping up to the house where he lives with his mother”, the newspaper wrote in May 2007 shortly after Mr Murat was declared a person of interest or arguido and questioned by police in a marathon 19-hour-long interrogation session in Portimão.
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
It's the Fascist mind set. He had been getting away with this sort of carry on for years, and never thought anyone would question him.
All in my opinion, of course,
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
I really don't understand ... in what way, specifically, will Murat winning a libel case against a Portuguese newspaper, affect the McCann's libel case against Amaral ?
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
John, the prosecutor didn't "decide to drop the investigation", he had to because of RM's arguido status that had already been extended twice, the maximum. RM wasn't made arguido because of this convict who told those ugly things about him and influenced the UK profilers for whom he was the ideal predator, it was mainly because ROB, RM and FP stated he was around on the 3rd of May night whereas he pretended to be with his mum. I'm not saying ROB etc. were lying, I think they confused RM with another guy, also fluent in English and Portuguese, and also with glasses.
-
You cant be defamed by the police
Try telling that to former cop Amaral. If a policeman makes a comment in public or writes something for a newspaper wrongly alleging that a person has committed a crime then they leave themselves open to a libel suit. That is why any reputable police officer will only say such things under the judicial authority and protection of a court. I am not sure about Portugal but in the UK Counsel are so protected against libel suits in the same way when they allege something in court.
April 26, 2008 - 09:00
If Maddie: Inspector will disclose the whole puzzle of the night of May 3
Mystery also in film
What really happened the night of May 3, in Praia da Luz, where Madeleine McCann disappeared, one of the passages will be more 'explosive' of the book that the inspector's PJ Gonçalo Amaral is you want to write and, later, transformed into documentary.
The CM knows that the researcher of PJ - who coordinated the case in the first months and is now about to leave the police after having applied for retirement (see support) - already has almost finished the book. As the CM revealed yesterday will have the title 'the Truth Lie'.
The contents have already been examined by a publisher, which also proposed the publication in English. According to BC source said next of Gonçalo Amaral, "yet there is no date certain for the launch," but, apparently, will only be after the lifting of the secrecy of justice in the investigation process still ongoing at the Ministry of Public Portimao.
On the intention to rebuild the media event on film, should proceed in documentary style, and also there is already producing interested. "Will clarify all the lie that has been created and calling into question the institutions that investigated and are linked to the case," revealed the CM the same source, who already desfolhou passages from future publication.
PORMENORES DETAILS
SEGREDO SECRECY
The publication of the controversial book should only happen after the lifting of the secrecy of justice."The intention is to restore the truth of what happened that night and did not find problems to the author," explained the 'CM' source close to Gonçalo Amaral.
REFORMA REFORM
Despite being about to pass the reform, adding 38 years of service - 26 in eight more police, military service plus 20% of subsidy - Gonçalo Amaral is in danger of being punished by the disciplinary publication of the book. Even in retirement, the inspector must comply with the regulation of the police disciplinary.
Rui Pando Gomes
http://www.cmjornal.xl.pt/detalhe/noticias/nacional/portugal/misterio-tambem-em-filme
The contents have already been examined by a publisher, which also proposed the publication in English.
Written in April 2008, some 4 months before the case was archived.
Oh dear.
Dr Amaral has slipped on (yet another!) banana skin ...
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
I really don't understand ... in what way, specifically, will Murat winning a libel case against a Portuguese newspaper, affect the McCann's libel case against Amaral ?
I never mentioned the McCanns Icabodcrane? This win for Robert will not do Mr Amaral any favours in the long run and adds to his already damaged credibility.
Didn't some of the tapas 9 put Mr Murat in the frame too? They might be next?
-
Didn't some of the tapas 9 put Mr Murat in the frame too? They might be next?
The McCanns' friends have never said anything more than that they saw Murat out and about on the night.
They have never suggested Murat is somehow implicated in Madeleine's disappearance.
And most important, they have never repeated anything outside the process (at least publicly)
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
$$$, John. Despite deploring the intense media interest in this case which he erroneously blamed for hampering his investigation, he saw the world-wide interest as a God-given opportunity to cash in - and to restore his very tarnished reputation at the same time. We can hope that he is about to face nemesis after his hubris ....
-
There's possibly more hubris in people (no, I will not use The word) who comfortably and securely hide behind pseudos than in Gonçalo Amaral who doesn't (but could have after all). So I wouldn't totally dismiss nemesis.. Unless Greek gods were pure mythology.
-
Why do you think Mr Amaral put his neck on the line Anne?
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Benice, yes, it was what is known as an ex-parte judgment, meaning simply that one side to the dispute (the McCann side) was not represented.
Now, what some of a certain persuasion will tell you is that we, in UK, also have ex-parte judgments.
We do.
But always in situations (such as custody disputes over children) where the party on whose behalf an ex-parte judgment is made is deemed to be in peril and in need of rescue.
It would never, ever, happen in circumstances such as those that led to the overturning of the injunction on Amaral's book ...
-
Why do you think Mr Amaral put his neck on the line Anne?
I think it's related to marialvism.
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
I really don't understand ... in what way, specifically, will Murat winning a libel case against a Portuguese newspaper, affect the McCann's libel case against Amaral ?
I never mentioned the McCanns Icabodcrane? This win for Robert will not do Mr Amaral any favours in the long run and adds to his already damaged credibility.
Didn't some of the tapas 9 put Mr Murat in the frame too? They might be next?
Statements to the police are privileged- as long as they did not say it also to the papers.
-
Why do you think Mr Amaral put his neck on the line Anne?
I think it's related to marialvism.
Is that the Portuguese equivalent to what we in the UK refer to as elitism?
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
I really don't understand ... in what way, specifically, will Murat winning a libel case against a Portuguese newspaper, affect the McCann's libel case against Amaral ?
I never mentioned the McCanns Icabodcrane? This win for Robert will not do Mr Amaral any favours in the long run and adds to his already damaged credibility.
Didn't some of the tapas 9 put Mr Murat in the frame too? They might be next?
But you quoted an article about Murat winning a libel action against a Portuguese newspaper, and followed with the conclusion that there was no doubt that the writing is well and truely on the wall for Amaral
In what way does this libel award affect Amaral at all ? ... let alone to the extent where 'the writing is on the wall' for him ?
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
I really don't understand ... in what way, specifically, will Murat winning a libel case against a Portuguese newspaper, affect the McCann's libel case against Amaral ?
I never mentioned the McCanns Icabodcrane? This win for Robert will not do Mr Amaral any favours in the long run and adds to his already damaged credibility.
Didn't some of the tapas 9 put Mr Murat in the frame too? They might be next?
But you quoted an article about Murat winning a libel action against a Portuguese newspaper, and followed with the conclusion that there was no doubt that the writing is well and truely on the wall for Amaral
In what way does this libel award affect Amaral at all ? ... let alone to the extent where 'the writing is on the wall' for him ?
There's no doubt Madeleine was abducted.
The question at issue is who abducted her (obviously not Murat) ...
-
Why do you think Mr Amaral put his neck on the line Anne?
I think it's related to marialvism.
Is that the Portuguese equivalent to what we in the UK refer to as elitism?
Not at all, John. If you're interested in History and have a bit of time, I can pm you a link.
-
In what way is the libel award made to Murat this week detrimental to Amaral ?
-
In what way is the libel award made to Murat this week detrimental to Amaral ?
It establishes the point that Madeleine was abducted but leaves open the question of who abducted her. (Obviously not Murat)
Amaral claims Madeleine was not abducted; rather that her parents (and their friends) simulated an abduction ...
-
In what way is the libel award made to Murat this week detrimental to Amaral ?
It establishes the point that Madeleine was abducted but leaves open the question of who abducted her. (Obviously not Murat)
Amaral claims Madeleine was not abducted; rather that her parents (and their friends) simulated an abduction ...
The libel action Murat won against a Portuguese newspaper established that Madeleine was 'abducted' ?
In what way did it do that ?
-
In what way is the libel award made to Murat this week detrimental to Amaral ?
It establishes the point that Madeleine was abducted but leaves open the question of who abducted her. (Obviously not Murat)
Amaral claims Madeleine was not abducted; rather that her parents (and their friends) simulated an abduction ...
The libel action Murat won against a Portuguese newspaper established that Madeleine was 'abducted' ?
In what way did it do that ?
Read my earlier post.
-
In what way is the libel award made to Murat this week detrimental to Amaral ?
I wish I knew, Icabodcrane. There's an impassable gap between Robert M and Gonçalo A. Can't posters see how the MC case destroyed totally RM's private life for many months ? A guy like you and me, may be not the nice kind, but with no idea of abducting little girls !
A convict, possibly trying to clean his name, told disgusting things against him, GA mentions it as r... that fed the UK profilers. I'm glad Robert M for whom I neither felt sympathy nor antipathy managed to have those journalists condemned. But I think this case isn't similar to the MC libel action against GA. The MC, for example, never appeared in the street in disguise or did they ?
-
In what way is the libel award made to Murat this week detrimental to Amaral ?
It establishes the point that Madeleine was abducted but leaves open the question of who abducted her. (Obviously not Murat)
Amaral claims Madeleine was not abducted; rather that her parents (and their friends) simulated an abduction ...
The libel action Murat won against a Portuguese newspaper established that Madeleine was 'abducted' ?
In what way did it do that ?
Read my earlier post.
I don't need to read your earlier posts
There is no way a libel trial could 'establish' whether Madeleine was abducted or not ... not even the libel trial against Amaral will be able to do that
-
It is your prerogative to ignore the evidence that the court was satisfied Madeleine was abducted if that is what you choose to do ...
-
It is your prerogative to ignore the evidence that the court was satisfied Madeleine was abducted if that is what you choose to do ...
What are you talking about ? ... this court was tasked with judging whether or not a newspaper had libelled Robert Murat, and nothing more
It certainly wasn't asked to ... and nor would it dare .... proclaim a legal judgement that Madeleine had been 'abducted'
-
In what way is the libel award made to Murat this week detrimental to Amaral ?
It establishes the point that Madeleine was abducted but leaves open the question of who abducted her. (Obviously not Murat)
Amaral claims Madeleine was not abducted; rather that her parents (and their friends) simulated an abduction ...
The libel action Murat won against a Portuguese newspaper established that Madeleine was 'abducted' ?
In what way did it do that ?
Read my earlier post.
I don't need to read your earlier posts
There is no way a libel trial could 'establish' whether Madeleine was abducted or not ... not even the libel trial against Amaral will be able to do that
The "RM" ruling takes good care not to mention any name. RM is A. Madeleine is herself in one occurrence (quotation of an article), otherwise she's the British girl who disappeared.
-
It is your prerogative to ignore the evidence that the court was satisfied Madeleine was abducted if that is what you choose to do ...
What are you talking about ? ... this court was tasked with judging whether or not a newspaper had libelled Robert Murat, and nothing more
It certainly wasn't asked to ... and nor would it dare .... proclaim a legal judgement that Madeleine had been 'abducted'
" N "insists the" NEWSPAPER 1 "in the" professional relationship "with" A ", but called her home at 23:30 the night of the murder, two hours after the abduction of Madeleine.
There is clear disassociation, there, between the action of Murat and the (separate and distinct) assertion (the court's assertion) of Madeleine's abduction.
-
It is your prerogative to ignore the evidence that the court was satisfied Madeleine was abducted if that is what you choose to do ...
What are you talking about ? ... this court was tasked with judging whether or not a newspaper had libelled Robert Murat, and nothing more
It certainly wasn't asked to ... and nor would it dare .... proclaim a legal judgement that Madeleine had been 'abducted'
" N "insists the" NEWSPAPER 1 "in the" professional relationship "with" A ", but called her home at 23:30 the night of the murder, two hours after the abduction of Madeleine.
There is clear disassociation, there, between the action of Murat and the (separate and distinct) assertion (the court's assertion) of Madeleine's abduction.
Ferryman, a bit of rigour, please. Teach yourself Portuguese or pay a professional to translate and then come back !
-
It is your prerogative to ignore the evidence that the court was satisfied Madeleine was abducted if that is what you choose to do ...
What are you talking about ? ... this court was tasked with judging whether or not a newspaper had libelled Robert Murat, and nothing more
It certainly wasn't asked to ... and nor would it dare .... proclaim a legal judgement that Madeleine had been 'abducted'
" N "insists the" NEWSPAPER 1 "in the" professional relationship "with" A ", but called her home at 23:30 the night of the murder, two hours after the abduction of Madeleine.
There is clear disassociation, there, between the action of Murat and the (separate and distinct) assertion (the court's assertion) of Madeleine's abduction.
Well that's fair enough ( I hadn't read that previously ) ... I can see where your arguement is grounded, and I apologise for assuming you were jumping to conclusions
I still feel, though, that a libel trial cannot legally or authoratively conclude what happened to the missing child, given that it is not, and should not, be within it's remit to do so
-
Lol !
“N” insiste ao “JORNAL 1” na “relação profissional” com “A”, mas ligou-lhe para casa às 23h30 da noite do crime, duas horas depois do rapto de Madeleíne. E nem à Judiciária explica porquê. Não conta as “outras actividades” que tem no Algarve, diz só que é “especialista em informática”, mas quando os inspectores o foram buscar, quarta-feira à tarde, já tinha os ficheiros dos seus dois computadores apagados.»
Do you know who N is ? She ?
Is "crime" murder ?
It's the only occurrence of "rapto", a quotation of a newspaper which has been condemned !
-
Ferryman, a bit of rigour, please. Teach yourself Portuguese or pay a professional to translate and then come back !
I beg your pardon, Ferryman, I was mean. I wish I had time to translate the document for you.
-
Ferryman, I think the judgement is merely citing what the newspapers were claiming at the time. I do not believe there is anything in this judgement which declares that Madeleine McCann was abducted.
-
Why do you think Mr Amaral put his neck on the line Anne?
I think it's related to marialvism.
I find it most interesting that you relate the concept of Marialvism to Amaral's actions. I find myself agreeing with you.
My understanding is that the closest word (though not a perfect translation by any means) in English is probably "machismo". But it is a machismo which is tied to Portuguese history and which also comes with its own history.
It is the knight on his horse, the father seeking revenge for the death of a child, the gladiator in the arena, the bullfighter who tackles the strongest bull, the man who seeks to prove his honour and his virility. It is linked to the role of noble and serf and has strength in the south of the country and in areas of great landowning dyn a sties. (getting round the word censor)
I can see how this might relate to Amaral. He saw his dismissal from the case as a slight to his masculinity, as a stain on his honour and he was determined to do whatever was necessary to redeem that honour.
But marialvism is not simply a question of basic machismo, or manly honour: it has a darker side too. An integral aspect of the concept is the dominance of the male over the female, an absolute need for inequality between the sexes, the practice of hegemonic masculinity. Though there is no explicit reliance on the Church in marialvism it relies on the concepts of the Immaculate Conception, Annunciation, etc. to define the woman and her role and it repeats the paternalism found in both mediaeval society and the Church to construct a role for women.
"O machismo ou exibição viril, atributo do marialva, obediência à “voz do sangue”, é incompatível com a aceitação da igualdade em soberania dos amantes." - Cardoso Pires
The machismo or display of virility, aspect of marialvism, obedience to the "voice of blood", is incompatible with an acceptance of equality in the domain of lovers"
If as you claim (and as I agree) Amaral is at least in part driven by marialvism regarding his honour, I have to wonder to what extent the equally pervasive strand of the concept (hegemonic masculinity) is also a driving factor in his make-up?
And I wonder to what extent the concept of hierarchy is relevant to Amaral?
Cardoso Pires quotes Bacelar;
"As atitudes boçais do português... não provêm tão-somente da sua boçalidade nativa mas de um certo culto snob da brutalidade e do desdém pelas coisas do espírito considerados como traços de boa autocracia."
"The attitudes of the uncultured Portuguese ... don't merely come from his native coars eness but from a certain snob worship of brutality and contempt for the things of the spirit considered traits of good autocracy."
If you believe that Amaral's action is imbued with the "honra e vergonha" (honour and shame) aspect of marialvism then surely it is fair to question to what extent other aspects of the concept underpin his actions?
(http://i1296.photobucket.com/albums/ag1/gilet2013/marialvismo_zps9a13fdfe.jpg)
From "Fado and the Place of Longing" by Richard Elliott.
-
Thank you for that exposition, Gilet. I, too, did some research today on the concept of Marialvismo and read the extract you quoted.
I would agree with you and AnneGuedes that what we have seen of Amaral's behaviour in this case seems to reveal aspects of this concept. It would explain his intense dislike of Kate McCann -he would have seen her as the very antithesis of the ideal woman.
-
Gender, Masculinity
and Power in
Southern Portugal
Social Anthropology, 5, 2, 141-158
1997
Miguel Vale de Almeida
MIGUELVALEDEALMEIDA.NET
1997
http://site.miguelvaledealmeida.net/wp-content/uploads/gender-masculinity-and-power.pdf
-
In attributing Amaral's actions to " Marialvismo" I think you are attributing more nobility to the man's actions than is warranted.
I can recall the Jaguar Car bought and flaunted with the proceeeds of the book, the earring, the birthday party etc. And all the while owing significant sums to the state, to his own brother, his house about to be reposessed, jeaopodising the roof over his wife and daughters heads......
So before we get too romantic about his motivation, lets look at another couple of words: Greed. Mysogony.
-
In attributing Amaral's actions to " Marialvismo" I think you are attributing more nobility to the man's actions than is warranted.
I can recall the Jaguar Car bought and flaunted with the proceeeds of the book, the earring, the birthday party etc. And all the while owing significant sums to the state, to his own brother, his house about to be reposessed, jeaopodising the roof over his wife and daughters heads......
So before we get too romantic about his motivation, lets look at another couple of words: Greed. Mysogony.
You could be right and greed and misogyny may be the underlying factors. But Marialismo could still be relevant. It would give him the excuse to behave in that way. In a society where such machismo and homogenic masculinity is seen as something to be praised and even respected then it would be natural for people to seek such praise and respect (even if their actual motives are not actually in the honourable tradition).
-
No wonder he got so upset when his girl friend tried to dump him. He threatened to kill her husband and to abduct her child.
-
Ferryman, a bit of rigour, please. Teach yourself Portuguese or pay a professional to translate and then come back !
I beg your pardon, Ferryman, I was mean. I wish I had time to translate the document for you.
Thank you Anne, appreciated.
I am grateful that there are so many here bi-lingual or even multilingual, because their ability to dissect texts in different languages brings us all greater insight and understanding
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Yes, although on a nit-picking point of pedantry, there is a legal distinction between that considered libellous (adjective), meaning, tending to lower reputation, but without being actionable, and libel (noun), meaning both lowering reputation and being actionable.
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Yes, although on a nit-picking point of pedantry, there is a legal distinction between that considered libellous (adjective), meaning, tending to lower reputation, but without being actionable, and libel (noun), meaning both lowering reputation and being actionable.
Where do you get those interesting definitions from?
-
li·bel·ous also li·bel·lous (lb-ls)
adj.
Involving or constituting a libel; defamatory.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/libellous
libellous
Pronunciation: /ˈlʌɪb(ə)ləs/
(US also libelous)
Translate libellous | into French | into German | into Italian
Definition of libellous
adjective
containing or constituting a libel:
a libellous newspaper story
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/libellous
li·bel·ous [lahy-buh-luhs] Show IPA
adjective
containing, constituting, or involving a libel; maliciously defamatory.
Also, especially British, li·bel·lous.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/libellous
libellous
(US libelous) /ˈlaɪbələs/ adjective
Definition
› LAW making false or unfair statements that are likely to damage the reputation of a person or organization:
The content of the website was not judged to be libellous.
Bloggers should take care to avoid making libellous remarks.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/business-english/libellous
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Yes, although on a nit-picking point of pedantry, there is a legal distinction between that considered libellous (adjective), meaning, tending to lower reputation, but without being actionable, and libel (noun), meaning both lowering reputation and being actionable.
Where do you get those interesting definitions from?
Mainly it is an inference I have drawn from reading legal summaries of cases, where the distinction seems to be quite clear.
Not sure you'd get the distinction drawn out from dictionary definitions.
But I'm quite happy to be corrected if I'm wrong ...
I see you've dived in with a dictionary definition.
-
In attributing Amaral's actions to " Marialvismo" I think you are attributing more nobility to the man's actions than is warranted.
I can recall the Jaguar Car bought and flaunted with the proceeeds of the book, the earring, the birthday party etc. And all the while owing significant sums to the state, to his own brother, his house about to be reposessed, jeaopodising the roof over his wife and daughters heads......
So before we get too romantic about his motivation, lets look at another couple of words: Greed. Mysogony.
You could be right and greed and misogyny may be the underlying factors. But Marialismo could still be relevant. It would give him the excuse to behave in that way. In a society where such machismo and homogenic masculinity is seen as something to be praised and even respected then it would be natural for people to seek such praise and respect (even if their actual motives are not actually in the honourable tradition).
I agree with what you say Gilet. But not only did Amaral's cultural attitudes (his honour) seriously influence his decision making, but other cultural differences worked against the McCann IMO.
No-one would bat an eyelid at children going to bed at 7.00p.m. in the UK, but in Portugal children stay up for many hours longer as a matter of course.
It's quite normal in the UK for priests/vicars etc to give pastoral care to parishioners suffering great anguish, but in Portugal you only call a priest if someone has died.
British 'reserve' and the 'stiff upper lip' concept is not a part of Portugese culture as far as I know.
All of the above cultural differences - together with difficulties associated with the language barrier, spelt 'bad news' for the McCanns - as instead of 'explanations 'being given by Amaral, they were used against them to deliberately heighten suspicion. IMO
-
In attributing Amaral's actions to " Marialvismo" I think you are attributing more nobility to the man's actions than is warranted.
I can recall the Jaguar Car bought and flaunted with the proceeeds of the book, the earring, the birthday party etc. And all the while owing significant sums to the state, to his own brother, his house about to be reposessed, jeaopodising the roof over his wife and daughters heads......
So before we get too romantic about his motivation, lets look at another couple of words: Greed. Mysogony.
Oh, I can assure you that I don't attribute any romanticism to Amaral's motivation, or to the concept of Marialismo. Personally, I despise the idea of hegemonic masculinity because it underlies and tends to excuse domestic violence.
I agree that Amaral's main reasons for writing his book are greed and misogyny.
-
Like I said. A Fascist Mind Set.
-
But marialvism is not simply a question of basic machismo, or manly honour: it has a darker side too. An integral aspect of the concept is the dominance of the male over the female, an absolute need for inequality between the sexes, the practice of hegemonic masculinity. Though there is no explicit reliance on the Church in marialvism it relies on the concepts of the Immaculate Conception, Annunciation, etc. to define the woman and her role and it repeats the paternalism found in both mediaeval society and the Church to construct a role for women.
Marialvism is a concept of masculinity based on honour (aristocracy's value) opposed to rationalism (bourgeoisie's value).
In spite of a show off of paternalism the women have the real power, it's not per chance that Jesus' mother appeared in Fatima. They manipulate the strings, back stage.
The marialva is neither individualist nor libertine, he's nothing to do with Don Juan.
It's a model, connoted with reactionary mentality, like the saudade (no translation in English, but one in German, Sehnsucht), the fado (fatum) and the sebastianism, an ideal which in fact no man achieves but might control and orientate choices and actions and be expressed in the way of speaking, gestures and behaviour with others.
One thing is to try and understand Gonçalo Amaral, another to try and understand why he was made an anti-hero. Do only cultural factors explain this ?
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Yes, although on a nit-picking point of pedantry, there is a legal distinction between that considered libellous (adjective), meaning, tending to lower reputation, but without being actionable, and libel (noun), meaning both lowering reputation and being actionable.
Where do you get those interesting definitions from?
Mainly it is an inference I have drawn from reading legal summaries of cases, where the distinction seems to be quite clear.
Not sure you'd get the distinction drawn out from dictionary definitions.
But I'm quite happy to be corrected if I'm wrong ...
I see you've dived in with a dictionary definition.
I am afraid that unless you can find examples of how libellous is used in this strange way instead if its well attested use as the adjective/adverb of the noun or verb libel.
Otherwise you are just using it in a non-normative manner- your own private language.
-
Read a few legal texts and get back to me.
I'm not going to derail this thread.
-
Thread moved
-
It was my understanding that in Portugal freedom of speech trumped the individual's right not to be slandered and libelled so my question was whether this recent decision in favour of Murat might be taken as a promising sign from the McCanns' point of view?
I think that the reversal of the ban on the book led people to believe this when that is not the case. As I understand the ban was overturned because the book had not yet been shown to be libellous as the case had not been heard. That ruling did not show that the book was not libellous.
That makes perfect sense Davel.
What I find incomprehensible is that the McCanns were apparently not legally represented at the court case when the ban was overturned. Can anyone confirm whether that is actually true please? If it is - I find that to be quite astonishing.
Nobody was there, Benice, it's a judgement on a judgement... the Supreme Court considered there was no motive for a ban. Supreme Courts rarely lose an opportunity to show their superiority. But they don't have the last word. An appeal was possible. And was made.
As I keep on saying, the Supreme Court ruling was not on the question of whether the material was defamatory, but was about whether it was so damaging that the book be kept from the public until the defamation case was held. It is still quite possible that the book will be found defamatory.
-
Please note edit to the thread title.
-
Here is another article which I came across this evening referring to the successful libel action. There can be no doubt that the writing is well and truly on the wall for Mr Amaral.
I cannot understand how a detective with such experience could have made such a bad error of judgment. Can anyone suggest a motive for putting his whole life's work in jeopardy for the sake of a stupid hunch?
http://algarvedailynews.com/news/9710-correio-da-manha-pays-robert-murat-damages
I really don't understand ... in what way, specifically, will Murat winning a libel case against a Portuguese newspaper, affect the McCann's libel case against Amaral ?
I never mentioned the McCanns Icabodcrane? This win for Robert will not do Mr Amaral any favours in the long run and adds to his already damaged credibility.
Didn't some of the tapas 9 put Mr Murat in the frame too? They might be next?
But you quoted an article about Murat winning a libel action against a Portuguese newspaper, and followed with the conclusion that there was no doubt that the writing is well and truely on the wall for Amaral
In what way does this libel award affect Amaral at all ? ... let alone to the extent where 'the writing is on the wall' for him ?
Mr Amaral was the coordinator in the investigation which promoted 'arguido' or official suspect status against Gerry, Kate and Robert Murat based on flawed reasoning and false allegations. The newspaper which libeled Robert Murat did so on the basis of leaks by the police. The appeal court which awarded the €15,000 damages to Murat acknowledged this in their decision. This will inevitably have an effect on any future such actions and in particular the civil action being brought against Amaral by the McCanns.
-
In attributing Amaral's actions to " Marialvismo" I think you are attributing more nobility to the man's actions than is warranted.
I can recall the Jaguar Car bought and flaunted with the proceeeds of the book, the earring, the birthday party etc. And all the while owing significant sums to the state, to his own brother, his house about to be reposessed, jeaopodising the roof over his wife and daughters heads......
So before we get too romantic about his motivation, lets look at another couple of words: Greed. Mysogony.
You could be right and greed and misogyny may be the underlying factors. But Marialismo could still be relevant. It would give him the excuse to behave in that way. In a society where such machismo and homogenic masculinity is seen as something to be praised and even respected then it would be natural for people to seek such praise and respect (even if their actual motives are not actually in the honourable tradition).
I agree with what you say Gilet. But not only did Amaral's cultural attitudes (his honour) seriously influence his decision making, but other cultural differences worked against the McCann IMO.
No-one would bat an eyelid at children going to bed at 7.00p.m. in the UK, but in Portugal children stay up for many hours longer as a matter of course.
It's quite normal in the UK for priests/vicars etc to give pastoral care to parishioners suffering great anguish, but in Portugal you only call a priest if someone has died.
British 'reserve' and the 'stiff upper lip' concept is not a part of Portugese culture as far as I know.
All of the above cultural differences - together with difficulties associated with the language barrier, spelt 'bad news' for the McCanns - as instead of 'explanations 'being given by Amaral, they were used against them to deliberately heighten suspicion. IMO
Yep. I have the same perception concerning cultural differences and the misunderstandings that they have apparently led to.
-
I totally agree, family matters so much more in Portugal than it does in the UK. They don't stick their old folk into nursing homes to the same extent which happens in the UK. Elderly grandparents are part of the extended family in Portugal and not something to be farmed out to the nearest old folks home and more often than enough totally forgotten about. You wouldn't get the average Portuguese family leaving their children in an apartment while they went out for an evenings wining and dining.
-
what's all this about cultural analysis - he wrote the book for money.
-
I totally agree, family matters so much more in Portugal than it does in the UK. They don't stick their old folk into nursing homes to the same extent which happens in the UK. Elderly grandparents are part of the extended family in Portugal and not something to be farmed out to the nearest old folks home and more often than enough totally forgotten about. You wouldn't get the average Portuguese family leaving their children in an apartment while they went out for an evenings wining and dining.
If you don't mind my saying - I think that's a bit of a sweeping statement John. There are thousands of family members caring for elderly relatives in their homes - in fact the subject of these 'carers' has been discussed on the News here during the last few days. My own friend took care of her mother until she died aged 94 a couple of years ago. She had alzeimers - and it was very difficult - but the idea of putting her in a home wasn't an option to my friend.
Yes Portuguese family members wouldn't leave their children asleep in bed - because they would take them with them to wine and dine late into the evening. But that has more to do with the climate than family values IMO.
-
The newspaper which libeled Robert Murat did so on the basis of leaks by the police. The appeal court which awarded the €15,000 damages to Murat acknowledged this in their decision.
No John. The newspaper apparently was briefed by the same person, a convict (he didn't say that to the CdM),who briefed the PJ.
Cumpre desde já concluir, que como resulta de todos os elementos dados como provados, não se pode concluir que as informações veiculadas sejam falsas ou obtidas em violação do segredo justiça. Quanto a este último aspecto, a verdade é que nenhuma prova foi feita e no que toca às notícias divulgadas e no que toca à falsidade das notícias, também nenhuma prova cabal se fez da sua falsidade, sendo certo que os Réus lograram provar ter verificado as fontes, cruzando a informação, ponderando as notícias.
-
Personally, I find a Policeman driving his young daughter around when he was drunk to be quite terrifying. He also threatened to kill his wife, and the husband of his mistress and to abduct her daughter.
Is this Cultural? Or is it a left over from The Salazar Regime when PJ Officers were unquestionable.
Nothing ever came of the complaints against Amaral on any count. All of which are a matter of record.
-
what's all this about cultural analysis - he wrote the book for money.
I can't disagree with that. However, I do think the cultural analysis is interesting and adds to the thread.
-
We all know that there was a language problem which created difficulties. No one's fault initially.
Using this problem to bring suspicion on The McCanns was a disgrace. And believe me, it was used for such a purpose.
-
It doesn't really matter who breached Robert Murat's rights under Portuguese Law, beyond who pays. The Court has ruled that someone did.
This is what Amaral did to The McCanns. So of course this ruling will affect Amaral's Trial. Unless individual Courts please themselves, of course, which is always a possibility in Portugal.
-
The newspaper which libeled Robert Murat did so on the basis of leaks by the police. The appeal court which awarded the ?15,000 damages to Murat acknowledged this in their decision.
No John. The newspaper apparently was briefed by the same person, a convict (he didn't say that to the CdM),who briefed the PJ.
Cumpre desde já concluir, que como resulta de todos os elementos dados como provados, não se pode concluir que as informações veiculadas sejam falsas ou obtidas em violação do segredo justiça. Quanto a este último aspecto, a verdade é que nenhuma prova foi feita e no que toca às notícias divulgadas e no que toca à falsidade das notícias, também nenhuma prova cabal se fez da sua falsidade, sendo certo que os Réus lograram provar ter verificado as fontes, cruzando a informação, ponderando as notícias.
Not according to another Portuguese Press article...
"The newspaper frequently quoted anonymous police sources and alleged leaks by investigators in their coverage of the case to substantiate its claims."
-
The newspaper which libeled Robert Murat did so on the basis of leaks by the police. The appeal court which awarded the ?15,000 damages to Murat acknowledged this in their decision.
No John. The newspaper apparently was briefed by the same person, a convict (he didn't say that to the CdM),who briefed the PJ.
Cumpre desde já concluir, que como resulta de todos os elementos dados como provados, não se pode concluir que as informações veiculadas sejam falsas ou obtidas em violação do segredo justiça. Quanto a este último aspecto, a verdade é que nenhuma prova foi feita e no que toca às notícias divulgadas e no que toca à falsidade das notícias, também nenhuma prova cabal se fez da sua falsidade, sendo certo que os Réus lograram provar ter verificado as fontes, cruzando a informação, ponderando as notícias.
Not according to another Portuguese Press article...
"The newspaper frequently quoted anonymous police sources and alleged leaks by investigators in their coverage of the case to substantiate its claims."
I quoted the acórdão, not an article.
-
Have we got a Rolling Eyes Smilie?
-
Anne, with the greatest of respect to you, I think that it is becoming clearer and clearer that the source of these foul smears on Robert Murat's good name came from the PJ.
-
Can you link to the acórdão please Anne?
-
A friend of Carana found it
http://www.dgsi.pt/jtrl.nsf/33182fc732316039802565fa00497eec/8ae65886ef70827180257b63003d7a75?OpenDocument
-
A friend of Carana found it
http://www.dgsi.pt/jtrl.nsf/33182fc732316039802565fa00497eec/8ae65886ef70827180257b63003d7a75?OpenDocument
Thanks Anne, I must have missed that post.
It would be helpful if someone could translate it for us?
-
John:
Mr Amaral was the coordinator in the investigation which promoted 'arguido' or official suspect status against Gerry, Kate and Robert Murat based on flawed reasoning and false allegations. The newspaper which libeled Robert Murat did so on the basis of leaks by the police. The appeal court which awarded the €15,000 damages to Murat acknowledged this in their decision. This will inevitably have an effect on any future such actions and in particular the civil action being brought against Amaral by the McCanns. [/u]
I have to wonder about this, given the differences between common law which relies on precedence and codified law which doesn't. As I understand it, under the system which is used in Portugal, previous judgments have no bearing on future cases, unlike the common law system where precedence is the overriding consideration.
-
Previous judgements have influence :
“Em face do lesado, quer haja subsequência (adequada) de causas, quer haja causas cumulativas ou mera coincidência de causas de natureza distinta, qualquer dos responsáveis é obrigado a reparar todo o dano.”.
Sendo assim tal responsabilidade solidária, como expressamente se prevê no art.º 497º, n.º 1, do Código Civil.
Apenas nas relações internas dos vários responsáveis o regime oscila, em função das culpas daqueles e das consequências que delas advieram, “desde a solidariedade perfeita até à solidariedade só aparente.”.
Estabelecendo-se porém a presunção de igualdade das culpas das pessoas responsáveis, cfr. n.º 2, do mesmo art.º.
No sentido de uma tal solidariedade se havendo pronunciado, relativamente a hipótese afim, o Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, no seu Acórdão de 18-06-2009
-
Google translation:
In the face of the victim, whether there substring (appropriately) causes either there or causes cumulative coincidence of causes of a different nature, any of those responsible are required to repair all the damage. ".
Therefore such liability, as expressly provides in art. # 497, no. 1 of the Civil Code.
Only in the internal relations of the various responsible regime fluctuates, depending on those faults and consequences which were derived "from a perfect solidarity to the only apparent solidarity.".
Settling but the presumption of equality of faults of responsible persons, cf. n. # 2 of that article. thereof.
In such a sense of solidarity there is pronounced, the hypothesis regarding order, the Supreme Court, in its judgment of 18-06-2009
-
The question here is whether each accused has to repair all damages or only those he's responsible for. The conclusion of the quoted acórdão is equality of the faults and solidarity in repair.
-
Extract, quote: (my underlining)
In civil jurisprudence nations, by contrast, a judge’s decision only applies to the particular case at hand. In France, for example, a decision often consists of little more than a statement of the verdict, followed by citation of the relevant statutes, without any elaborate interpretation. Other courts in future cases are expected to appeal directly to the statutes, not a previous court’s interpretation of the statute. In some civil law countries, such as Italy, there is an expectation that the lower courts will interpret the law in the same way as the Supreme Court, but there is no strict requirement that they will do so. Indeed, there would be no way to enforce this, as case law does not constitute a formal precedent; only the statutes passed by legislators are binding.
Unquote
http://www.arcaneknowledge.org/histpoli/commoncivil.htm
Common Law and Civil Jurisprudence, D J Castellano, 2009
-
The question here is whether each accused has to repair all damages or only those he's responsible for. The conclusion of the quoted acórdão is equality of the faults and solidarity in repair.
I think we may be talking at cross-purposes here, but I'm too busy right now to pursue this until later today.
-
Jurisprudence in countries of germano-romanic law is considerably less important than precedent established in a previous legal case in Common Law. The judge has a certain freedom in interpreting the statutes but his decision can't be used to solve a Law issue and in principle applies only to a singular case.
-
Jurisprudence in countries of germano-romanic law is considerably less important than precedent established in a previous legal case in Common Law. The judge has a certain freedom in interpreting the statutes but his decision can't be used to solve a Law issue and in principle applies only to a singular case.
Yes, I am aware of this difference, but you stated in your post at the top of this page: "Previous judgements have influence," followed by a passage in Portuguese which I can't read, but presume reinforces your statement.
The current discussion centred around whether the ruling in the Murat case would have any influence on the forthcoming McCann v Amaral libel trial, and I suggested that I thought not, given that the Portuguese legal system is codified, meaning that each case is judged on its merits, rather than (as in the English system) on precedent.
Your subsequent comment quoted here seems to agree with me, rather than with your statement "previous judgements have influence."
-
I find it interesting only in so far as Free Speech is concerned, which I have been led to believe takes precedents in Portugal.
Amaral presented his book as a theory or opinion, which he has a right to hold and publish. This Case would suggest that this is not so.
-
I find it interesting only in so far as Free Speech is concerned, which I have been led to believe takes precedents in Portugal.
Amaral presented his book as a theory or opinion, which he has a right to hold and publish. This Case would suggest that this is not so.
Who led you to believe that Eleanor?
you might find more of what they say is totally wrong.
-
I find it interesting only in so far as Free Speech is concerned, which I have been led to believe takes precedents in Portugal.
Amaral presented his book as a theory or opinion, which he has a right to hold and publish. This Case would suggest that this is not so.
Who led you to believe that Eleanor?
you might find more of what they say is totally wrong.
From statements made by various Portuguese Bloggers and Posters who frequently quote the relevant part of The Portuguese Constitution. Relevant to them, that is.
I know that a lot of what has been said is incorrect, but Portuguese Law is a minefield, and some of the Court decisions are bizarre to say the least.
Consequently, I have been reluctant to place too much hope in the outcome of The Libel Trial. So this ruling has suggested that Freedom of Speech isn't quite the unalienable right that some would have us believe.
-
They (the Portuguese bloggers and posters) who for years have quoted that part of the constitution consistently omit the additional section about the responsibilities that go with the right to freedom of speech ....
-
They (the Portuguese bloggers and posters) who for years have quoted that part of the constitution consistently omit the additional section about the responsibilities that go with the right to freedom of speech ....
Yep. I was about to post the same thing.
-
They (the Portuguese bloggers and posters) who for years have quoted that part of the constitution consistently omit the additional section about the responsibilities that go with the right to freedom of speech ....
Rather like Mr. Tony Bennett did. It seems to be a common fault with people who are forever screeching about their rights. The majority of us don't need it because we don't go around libelling and abusing people.
-
Yes. The Portuguese constitution also guarantees the right of citizens to a good name ...
-
Yes. The Portuguese constitution also guarantees the right of citizens to a good name ...
Very much the same the world over. And I can hardly see Portugal ruling that anybody can do around saying whatever they like.
I shall have a few things to say about The Judges in this Case if they do, as would be my right.
In fact, I shall make a point of noting the names of The Judges.
-
Jurisprudence in countries of germano-romanic law is considerably less important than precedent established in a previous legal case in Common Law. The judge has a certain freedom in interpreting the statutes but his decision can't be used to solve a Law issue and in principle applies only to a singular case.
Yes, I am aware of this difference, but you stated in your post at the top of this page: "Previous judgements have influence," followed by a passage in Portuguese which I can't read, but presume reinforces your statement.
The current discussion centred around whether the ruling in the Murat case would have any influence on the forthcoming McCann v Amaral libel trial, and I suggested that I thought not, given that the Portuguese legal system is codified, meaning that each case is judged on its merits, rather than (as in the English system) on precedent.
Your subsequent comment quoted here seems to agree with me, rather than with your statement "previous judgements have influence."
The Murat acórdão shows that previous decisions can eventually inspire judges, if they feel like it, but any decision applies only to a specific case.