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: Mr Moderator on July 20, 2014, 04:33:15 PM
-
Gonçalo Amaral explains...
Posting on his Facebook page Gonçalo De Sousa Amaral, Dr Amaral attempts to set out what the current trial in Lisbon is all about. This forum has seen many offerings by members on the subject so heres hoping for some clarity.
Enjoy!
(http://i.imgur.com/OCjYTPp.jpg?1)
21 Jul 2014
Dear friends,
Upon reading the news about the most recent trial session, I am certain that the vast majority of journalists don't know what is being discussed in court, and have not reported correctly.
Let us be clear. What is at stake is to find out:
- Whether the writing of my book "Maddie: A Verdade da Mentira" was a lawful or unlawful action;
- Whether or not the plaintiffs have suffered damages and whether or not there are facts to prove it;
- Whether or not it is possible to establish a causal nexus between the book and such damages.
This is what is at stake.
Concerning the book's lawfulness, I suggest to anyone who has doubts to read the Lisbon Appellate Court's decision within the injunction that preceded the current action. The truth is that for the Appellate Court's Illustrious Judges, as can be concluded from that decision, the lawfulness of the book's publication is indisputable.
With proof of the lawfulness of the book, the matter should rest here, without the need to investigate anything further, namely concerning the damages that the plaintiffs complain about.
Nonetheless, we should note that even if the lawfulness may still be at stake, there is still the need to establish a causal nexus between the publication and the damages that the plaintiffs complain about, such as deep depression, social isolation, etc. And, of course, to prove that said damages, no matter where they originate from, really exist.
Concerning the social part, it seems obvious to me, if we pay attention to the countless social events that the plaintiffs have participated in, including speeches at the British Parliament, interviews on television shows like Oprah Winfrey's, gala dinners with illustrious personalities, namely British, among others, that said social isolation is totally false.
Concerning the depressions, although they are in no way proved within the case, in my opinion, in fact it would be very strange if they didn't exist. The disappearance of a daughter, whether she is dead or alive, whether or not she was abducted, has to originate enormous consequences of that kind. How strange would it be if that wasn't the case! But about this issue I won't say anything further, given that the plaintiffs seem to attribute to me and my book all of their pain, as if said disappearance, followed by their arguido status and other circumstances that surround the case, were of no importance, or weren't more than enough!
Unfortunately, due to clearly dilatory manoeuvres from the plaintiffs, that have once more forced a postponement of the hearing, I am afraid that the trial will drag on – as they clearly wish - and we won't have a sentence soon, as I wish would happen, and as I long for. Furthermore, the judicial holidays have already started and, as the Illustrious Judge explained, with the new judiciary organisation coming into force on the 1st of September, the process' slowness will be considerably increased.
However, my trust in Portuguese justice remains steadfast.
All that is left for me is to recognise and thank you for all the support that I have received, from all those that believe in justice and in truth, without which it would have been impossible for me to fight this lawsuit. Or to lead me to ponder, as I do, to file a lawsuit against the McCann couple and others, in order to be compensated for the enormous damages that they have caused me already, on all levels, such as moral, professional and financial.
The time to judicially react to all those who have put my privacy, my intimacy, my freedom of expression and opinion, and my survival conditions at stake is approaching.
They have tried to assassinate me civilly, but due to the support and solidarity of all of you, they were not successful.
Thank you very much,
Lisboa July 21st, 2014
Gonçalo Amaral
-
Interesting item from GA Facebook page...
So Amaral is pondering whether to launch his own lawsuit against the McCanns and others. Interesting.
-
So Amaral is pondering whether to launch his own lawsuit against the McCanns and others. Interesting.
Well he should have a field day on here.
-
Unfortunately, due to clearly dilatory manoeuvres from the plaintiffs, that have once more forced a postponement of the hearing, I am afraid that the trial will drag on – as they clearly wish -, and we won’t have a sentence soon, as I wish would happen, and as I long for.
Erm... Who suddenly raised the WOC issue? Who sacked his lawyer on what was supposed to have been the last day of hearings?
-
Interesting item from GA Facebook page...
do you have a link to the page
-
do you have a link to the page
Here it is Davel, but you have to sign in.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Goncalo-Amaral/109627122399764
What has been posted is copied from another site.
-
just more bluff and bluster from amaral....no substance
-
From Amaral.
''Reading the news about the last session of the trial I am sure that the vast majority of journalists don't know what there is to discuss, not reported correctly.
Let us be clear. What is at issue is as follows:-If the writing of my book "Maddie: the truth of the lie" was a lawful or unlawful act;
-If the authors have suffered damage and if there are facts that prove;
-Whether it is possible to establish a causal link between the book and the possibility of such damages.
This is what is at stake.
As to the lawfulness of the book, I suggest to anyone who has doubts that read the judgment of the Court of appeal of Lisbon under the restraining order that preceded the action in question. In fact, for the Ex.mos Lords Judges, as can be concluded from that decision, the lawfulness of publication of the book is undeniable.
By this I mean that, with this proven legality, it should stick around, without need to find out anything else, particularly with regard to the damage that the authors complain.
But, it should be noted, even though such lawfulness can still be concerned, there is, still, to establish a causal link between the publication and the damage that the authors complain, such as deep depressions, social isolation, etc.And, of course, prove that such damage, whatever its origin, there are in fact.
As for the social part, it seems to me obvious, if we neglect the many social events in which the authors have participated, including, gasp-if, speeches in the British Parliament, interviews in programs such as Oprah Winfrey, gala dinners as the most illustrious personalities, notably British, among many others, the so-called social distancing is totally false.
Already about the depression, though, in any way are proven in the process, in my opinion, the truth is that it would be very strange if they didn't exist. The disappearance of a child, is dead or alive, has been kidnapped or not, cannot fail to cause huge sequels of this type. It would be very strange if this does not happen. But in this respect I do not say anything, insofar as the authors seem to want to charge me and my book all your sore, as if that disappearance, plus their Constitution as defendants and other circumstances surrounding the case, by itself, did not have any importance, or they weren't more than enough!''
-
it seems that amaral is saying that accusing the mccanns of lying to the police for seven years...accusing them of perverting the course of justice...accusing them of covering up the death of their daughter...accusing them of criminal fraud re the fund...has caused them no damage...
anyone who believes that is living in fantasy land...the damage to them and their reputations is obvious
-
it seems that amaral is saying that accusing the mccanns of lying to the police for seven years...accusing them of perverting the course of justice...accusing them of covering up the death of their daughter...accusing them of criminal fraud re the fund...has caused them no damage...
anyone who believes that is living in fantasy land...the damage to them and their reputations is obvious
He's also saying that because the McCanns have managed to hold it together, live lives, earn a living, raise the twins and even relax a little in between, they haven't been damaged.
Idiot!
-
He's also saying that because the McCanns have managed to hold it together, live lives, earn a living, raise the twins and even relax a little in between, they haven't been damaged.
Idiot!
Just remind me ferryman,who was it who left their children in the first place unsupervised and unprotected ?
-
Just remind me ferryman,who was it who left their children in the first place unsupervised and unprotected ?
Let's properly define and contextualise the half-truth, shall we?
Court proceedings are, indeed, about damage, as recompense for libel that has already been, either admitted or established.
That was/is the reason for continued court proceedings after that admission or determination.
-
Let's properly define and contextualise the half-truth, shall we?
Court proceedings are, indeed, about damage, as recompense for libel that has already been, either admitted or established.
That was/is the reason for continued court proceedings after that admission or determination.
Are you the sort of person who continues talking and ignoring what other people say? It seems that way. You simple ignore the fact that the Tribunal de Relação de Lisboa in 19 October 2010 established that the book was not libellous and that the McCanns rights were not infringed. Do you happen to know of any other court decisions which established that the book was libellous because there don't seem to be any.
-
Let's properly define and contextualise the half-truth, shall we?
Court proceedings are, indeed, about damage, as recompense for libel that has already been, either admitted or established.
That was/is the reason for continued court proceedings after that admission or determination.
Amaral isn't responsible for what the mccanns did, and the subsequent disappearance of Madeleine, and all that has ensued, the mccanns are.
They are also responsible for the damage to their reputation.
Likewise, nothing Amaral said in the book was new or common knowledge.
-
Are you the sort of person who continues talking and ignoring what other people say? It seems that way. You simple ignore the fact that the Tribunal de Relação de Lisboa in 19 October 2010 established that the book was not libellous and that the McCanns rights were not infringed. Do you happen to know of any other court decisions which established that the book was libellous because there don't seem to be any.
That ex-parte session didn't consider the question of libel.
It weighed two conflicting guarantees of the Portuguese constitution: one that the right to free speech should be upheld; the other, that the right to a good name should also be upheld.
The finding sided with Amaral's right to free speech.
It also (bizarrely) found that Amaral's book was true to the case files.
Amaral's book isn't, and I'm sure the error of that finding has (now) been thoroughly exposed.
-
That ex-parte session didn't consider the question of libel.
It weighed two conflicting guarantees of the Portuguese constitution: one that the right to free speech should be upheld; the other, that the right to a good name should also be upheld.
The finding sided with Amaral's right to free speech.
It also (bizarrely) found that Amaral's book was true to the case files.
Amaral's book isn't, and I'm sure the error of that finding has (now) been thoroughly exposed.
Why bizarrely? The book is true to the case files, ponto final!
-
it seems that amaral is saying that accusing the mccanns of lying to the police for seven years...accusing them of perverting the course of justice...accusing them of covering up the death of their daughter...accusing them of criminal fraud re the fund...has caused them no damage...
anyone who believes that is living in fantasy land...the damage to them and their reputations is obvious
Soooooo damaged were their reputations that Kate was made Ambassador for missing people.
@)(++(*
-
Soooooo damaged were their reputations that Kate was made Ambassador for missing people.
@)(++(*
The irony of her being made that could not be made up.
-
Why bizarrely? The book is true to the case files, ponto final!
If you believe that - then either you haven't read the book or you haven't read the files.
-
Why bizarrely? The book is true to the case files, ponto final!
ORLY?
ETA: Sorry Benice, I didn't notice your response.
You put it so much better than I did.
If you believe that - then either you haven't read the book or you haven't read the files.
-
Something else that's long puzzled me is this: why Santos began proceedings with a plea that proceedings be in camera (or secret) to protect Madeleine lest Madeleine be alive.
Either Santos was shooting his own client in the foot, or libel had/has been admitted and court proceedings are, indeed, about assessing damage caused by proven and established libel.
That seems, to me, the most logical, rational and likely explanation.
It would also explain why Textusa, Luz (and whoever else) are keen to abolish use of the l word.
The l word has already been established, and that doesn't sit well with the image some want to project of their hero.
-
Soooooo damaged were their reputations that Kate was made Ambassador for missing people.
@)(++(*
And not forgetting of course that his evil book meant that Oprah didn't want them on her show, Lorraine wouldn't let them on the sofa & Gerry couldn't show his face at work again.
'the damage to them and their reputations is obvious..'
@)(++(*
-
Why bizarrely? The book is true to the case files, ponto final!
Libel has not been decided...the book is not true to the files...
the files state amarals thesis as one POSSIBILITY........and considers other options
amaral claims his thesis as fact and dismisses other options...can you really not see the difference
-
Libel has not been decided...the book is not true to the files...
the files state amarals thesis as one POSSIBILITY........and considers other options
amaral claims his thesis as fact and dismisses other options...can you really not see the difference
And he has often blurred the distinction between PJ thinking at the end of his tenure and the remainder of the investigation (or did not correct interviewers). The fact that the later interim report and final PJ report came to no such conclusion, nor did the archival ruling is - in his opinion - only due to "political interference" designed to hide his version of the "truth".
-
Something else that's long puzzled me is this: why Santos began proceedings with a plea that proceedings be in camera (or secret) to protect Madeleine lest Madeleine be alive.
Either Santos was shooting his own client in the foot, or libel had/has been admitted and court proceedings are, indeed, about assessing damage caused by proven and established libel.
That seems, to me, the most logical, rational and likely explanation.
It would also explain why Textusa, Luz (and whoever else) are keen to abolish use of the l word.
The l word has already been established, and that doesn't sit well with the image some want to project of their hero.
I have been puzzled by that too; I assumed it was to enable a very doctored interpretation of the proceedings to be released into the public domain; imo it has been proved that the first released ‘information’ becomes the perceived actuality and later accurate information which refutes it is totally ignored.
If there has been opportunity for it to have happened … yours is certainly the best explanation I have seen … and it would go some way to explaining Dr Amaral’s perceived despondent demeanour.
-
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id232.html
A better translation of FB page...
21 Jul 2014
Dear friends,
Upon reading the news about the most recent trial session, I am certain that the vast majority of journalists don't know what is being discussed in court, and have not reported correctly.
Let us be clear. What is at stake is to find out:
- Whether the writing of my book "Maddie: A Verdade da Mentira" was a lawful or unlawful action;
- Whether or not the plaintiffs have suffered damages and whether or not there are facts to prove it;
- Whether or not it is possible to establish a causal nexus between the book and such damages.
This is what is at stake.
Concerning the book's lawfulness, I suggest to anyone who has doubts to read the Lisbon Appellate Court's decision within the injunction that preceded the current action. The truth is that for the Appellate Court's Illustrious Judges, as can be concluded from that decision, the lawfulness of the book's publication is indisputable.
With proof of the lawfulness of the book, the matter should rest here, without the need to investigate anything further, namely concerning the damages that the plaintiffs complain about.
Nonetheless, we should note that even if the lawfulness may still be at stake, there is still the need to establish a causal nexus between the publication and the damages that the plaintiffs complain about, such as deep depression, social isolation, etc. And, of course, to prove that said damages, no matter where they originate from, really exist.
Concerning the social part, it seems obvious to me, if we pay attention to the countless social events that the plaintiffs have participated in, including speeches at the British Parliament, interviews on television shows like Oprah Winfrey's, gala dinners with illustrious personalities, namely British, among others, that said social isolation is totally false.
Concerning the depressions, although they are in no way proved within the case, in my opinion, in fact it would be very strange if they didn't exist. The disappearance of a daughter, whether she is dead or alive, whether or not she was abducted, has to originate enormous consequences of that kind. How strange would it be if that wasn't the case! But about this issue I won't say anything further, given that the plaintiffs seem to attribute to me and my book all of their pain, as if said disappearance, followed by their arguido status and other circumstances that surround the case, were of no importance, or weren't more than enough!
Unfortunately, due to clearly dilatory manoeuvres from the plaintiffs, that have once more forced a postponement of the hearing, I am afraid that the trial will drag on – as they clearly wish - and we won't have a sentence soon, as I wish would happen, and as I long for. Furthermore, the judicial holidays have already started and, as the Illustrious Judge explained, with the new judiciary organisation coming into force on the 1st of September, the process' slowness will be considerably increased.
However, my trust in Portuguese justice remains steadfast.
All that is left for me is to recognise and thank you for all the support that I have received, from all those that believe in justice and in truth, without which it would have been impossible for me to fight this lawsuit. Or to lead me to ponder, as I do, to file a lawsuit against the McCann couple and others, in order to be compensated for the enormous damages that they have caused me already, on all levels, such as moral, professional and financial.
The time to judicially react to all those who have put my privacy, my intimacy, my freedom of expression and opinion, and my survival conditions at stake is approaching.
They have tried to assassinate me civilly, but due to the support and solidarity of all of you, they were not successful.
Thank you very much,
Lisboa July 21st, 2014
Gonçalo Amaral
-
Already about the depression, though, in any way are proven in the process, in my opinion, the truth is that it would be very strange if they didn't exist. The disappearance of a child, is dead or alive, has been kidnapped or not, cannot fail to cause huge sequels of this type. It would be very strange if this does not happen.
I find the underlined phrase quite intriguing...
-
And not forgetting of course that his evil book meant that Oprah didn't want them on her show, Lorraine wouldn't let them on the sofa & Gerry couldn't show his face at work again.
'the damage to them and their reputations is obvious..'
@)(++(*
That book wasn't circulating or known by most people then ... so its evil contents weren't known either. Since then the awful stuff has been promoted, like fact, all over the internet and on chat shows.
The sceptics propaganda has been very successful. Mighty organisational skills they have. I wonder just who is behind them ?
-
Where did he state that?
He didn't Carana, he was at the Christmas carol service with them.
-
Why did the mccanns feel the need to meet 'celebs' ?
Was it to obtain kudos ?
-
Why did the mccanns feel the need to meet 'celebs' ?
Was it to obtain kudos ?
Publicity for the Madeleine search, Stephen
Am surprised you didn't understand that without having to be told.
-
Why did the mccanns feel the need to meet 'celebs' ?
Was it to obtain kudos ?
The queue would seem to be reducing in length though; lawks a mussy
-
Publicity for the Madeleine search, Stephen
Am surprised you didn't understand that without having to be told.
They didn't need that sadie.
There was an abundance of that already.
It was to do with their egos and no more than that.
If not for Madeleine's disappearance, who would have heard of them ? 8(0(*
P.S. Meeting 'celebs' hasn't helped find Madeleine, has it ?
-
They didn't need that sadie.
There was an abundance of that already.
It was to do with their egos and no more than that.
If not for Madeleine's disappearance, who would have heard of them ? 8(0(*
It's not important who would have heard of them for themselves. But it is VERY important for the search for Madeleine. They know this.
In the early days kate hated the publicity, but she got on and did it, for Madeleine.
-
It's not important who would have heard of them for themselves. But it is VERY important for the search for Madeleine. They know this.
In the early days kate hated the publicity, but she got on and did it, for Madeleine.
Hated publicity ?
Nope, they reveled in it especially gm.
P.S. You don't need 'celebs' to search. 8)-)))
-
Already about the depression, though, in any way are proven in the process, in my opinion, the truth is that it would be very strange if they didn't exist. The disappearance of a child, is dead or alive, has been kidnapped or not, cannot fail to cause huge sequels of this type. It would be very strange if this does not happen.
I find the underlined phrase quite intriguing...
I think, what he's driving at, is that the McCanns are bound to be down-at-the-mouth about Madeleine's absence, whatever the reason for that absence and however it came about ...
But above all, nothingtodowithmeguv ...
-
I think, what he's driving at, is that the McCanns are bound to be down-at-the-mouth about Madeleine's absence, whatever the reason for that absence and however it came about ...
But above all, nothingtodowithmeguv ...
'nothingtodowithmeguv'
Singularly appropriate.
Madeleine's disappearance was nothing to do with Amaral, and the book didn't impede the search.
-
How can Amaral claim that content of a book, published and prepared in breach of judicial secrecy, is lawful?
Does anyone know?
-
I think, what he's driving at, is that the McCanns are bound to be down-at-the-mouth about Madeleine's absence, whatever the reason for that absence and however it came about ...
But above all, nothingtodowithmeguv ...
Just when the arguido status had been lifted and the media attention should have refocused on the fact that a litte girl was still missing, an ex-head of the investigtion launches a best-seller (with pre- and post-archival promotional interviews) stating that they WERE involved. All this based on nothing of any significance aside from eyebrow-raising "misunderstandings".
And that's just the book...
-
How can Amaral claim that content of a book, published and prepared in breach of judicial secrecy, is lawful?
Does anyone know?
In one interview, he stated that he'd written it from memory...
-
How can Amaral claim that content of a book, published and prepared in breach of judicial secrecy, is lawful?
Does anyone know?
Quite aside from the actual allegations and "misunderstandings", it would be impossible to hand over the text, have it formatted, what I presume to be photoshopped "drawings" of actual case file photos prepared, printed and have a book ready for distribution three days after the archival ruling.
However, that breach of judicial secrecy is a minor issue compared to the numerous inaccuracies leading to unsubstantiated conclusions.
That said, I still find that the "documentary" and his interviews to be worse than his book for several reasons:
- The content of what he has stated since appears to be embellished, either by himself or by the interviewers (with little or any correction on his part).
- A book by the former head of the investigation was bound to be a best-seller, but it would have been forgotten if more objective information had then been conveyed in the PT press. Instead, the constant stream of interviews and column inches reinforced the public perception that Madeleine was dead and that the McCanns were somehow involved.
- The so-called "documentary" has numerous flaws, but an audiovisual medium has an added impact.
-
I think it is fairer to say Kate and Gerry hated BAD publicity-hence they got a PR machine in place really,really quickly I mean Really quickly.
I mean for non practicing Catholics they got to meet the pope? WTF was that about.
Did anyone ever find out why they went to Oprah? was Maddie 'spotted' in USA?...And who was looking after the twins on these missions? You know what a bother it is for them to have to arrange for the twins to get looked after every time they go to Portugal? the global travel seeking and searching but have been a baby sitting nightmare.
The people of the Commonwealth are not looking for Maddie anymore, they are playing games...
Team McCann don't like what Amaral wrote..lol oh dear.
-
It seems that Gonçalo has laid bare some issues which were discussed here not so long ago.
He confirms my own view that the Appellate Court has already determined the status of the book so the question of defamation or what he refers to as 'lawfullness' is effectively null and void. He also confirms that it is for the plaintiffs to prove that they sustained damages and provide appropriate evidence. Finally, he makes reference to a counter-claim for damages, something which I have aired on several occasions as being a real possibility.
-
I think it is fairer to say Kate and Gerry hated BAD publicity-hence they got a PR machine in place really,really quickly I mean Really quickly.
I mean for non practicing Catholics they got to meet the pope? WTF was that about.
Did anyone ever find out why they went to Oprah? was Maddie 'spotted' in USA?...And who was looking after the twins on these missions? You know what a bother it is for them to have to arrange for the twins to get looked after every time they go to Portugal? the global travel seeking and searching but have been a baby sitting nightmare.
The people of the Commonwealth are not looking for Maddie anymore, they are playing games...
Team McCann don't like what Amaral wrote..lol oh dear.
Sure the Drs McCann hoped for publicity by appearing on Oprah; not for themselves but to publicise their missing daughter, Madeleine. Very simple explanation, really for anyone who thinks before opening their mouth to put their foot in it.
Madeleine had been missing for two years; children change so quickly and Madeleine was no longer the four year old who was kidnapped; her parents were anxious to publicise the updated image of how she would look as a six year old; they could hardly find a bigger or better vehicle to promote that image of Madeleine than Oprah’s prime time show.
McCanns reveal Madeleine ‘older’ picture on Oprah
Kate and Gerry McCann release picture of how their missing daughter might look aged six
BY Danielle Dsane LAST UPDATED AT 18:02 ON Fri 1 May 2009
Two years after she disappeared, the parents of Madeleine McCann have released a photo from a forensic imaging artist that shows Madeleine how she might look now.
Kate and Gerry McCann plan to show the image when they are interviewed by Oprah Winfrey on Monday May 4, and hope that it will be seen worldwide, as the hunt for their daughter continues.
The photo was put together by an expert in age progression at the United States National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children using childhood pictures of Madeleine's parents.
It shows Madeleine as she would look aged six.
Madeleine went missing from the holiday apartment where here family was staying in Praia da Luz, Portugal, on May 3, 2007. Since then, despite a huge international search and unprecedented media coverage, no concrete evidence has appeared to explain where she might have gone. •
http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/23535/mccanns-reveal-madeleine-%E2%80%98older%E2%80%99-picture-oprah
That was before the show was aired; but absolutely no ambiguity at all about why they appeared on it as can be seen from the following ...
The title of the show surely gives one a clue, then who really cares about that when the opportunity arises to get a dig in. ]"Exclusive - The McCanns and the New Search for Madeleine"
McCanns make Oprah appearance
Kate and Gerry McCann have appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show and released an image of how their missing daughter Madeleine might look now, ahead of the second anniversary of her disappearance.
Courtesy The Oprah Winfrey Show: "Exclusive - The McCanns and the New Search for Madeleine" will be broadcast on Tuesday 5th May at 8pm on Diva TV.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8030184.stm
-
... As for the social part, it seems to me obvious, if we neglect the many social events in which the authors have participated, including, gasp-if, speeches in the British Parliament, interviews in programs such as Oprah Winfrey, gala dinners as the most illustrious personalities, notably British, among many others, the so-called social distancing is totally false...
IMO it is Mr Amaral who will ultimately be applauded for his bravery
-
IMO it is Mr Amaral who will ultimately be applauded for his bravery
More accurately, supporters of Amaral's cowardice will mock the McCanns' bravery, just as they have from the outset.
Any idiot (with a modicum of literacy) could cobble together a half-baked litany of poorly thought out and factually threadbare depictions purporting to represent an 'account' of events whose reality is far removed from the content of the book and (I gather) film ...
Courage has been shown by the victims of Amaral's half-truths and outright lies, Kate and Gerry McCann.
-
More accurately, supporters of Amaral's cowardice will mock the McCanns' bravery, just as they have from the outset.
Any idiot (with a modicum of literacy) could cobble together a half-baked litany of poorly thought out and factually threadbare depictions purporting to represent an 'account' of events whose reality is far removed from the content of the book and (I gather) film ...
Courage has been shown by the victims of Amaral's half-truths and outright lies, Kate and Gerry McCann.
Your posts become more contemptible as time progresses.
-
I always have thought that The Video and The TV Interviews were much worse than The Book. I suspect that if Amaral had stopped at The Book then this Trial would not have come to pass.
-
Your posts become more contemptible as time progresses.
In Your Opinion, presumably.
-
So Amaral is pondering whether to launch his own lawsuit against the McCanns and others. Interesting.
is it six years now that amaral has been pondering about taking legal action....his problem is that with his criminal conviction many of the descriptions of him easily defensible
-
IMO it is Mr Amaral who will ultimately be applauded for his bravery
Bravery? you jest.
Having failed to make a legal case against the McCanns, and been humiliatingly removed from the case. He saw his opportunity to get his revenge and make money at the same time. Hence the Jag. The hat. The earring. The parties.
Now he is whining because he is facing a libel trial.
And yes, it is a Libel Trial - no matter what his supporters claim.
-
Bravery? you jest.
Having failed to make a legal case against the McCanns, and been humiliatingly removed from the case. He saw his opportunity to get his revenge and make money at the same time. Hence the Jag. The hat. The earring. The parties.
Now he is whining because he is facing a libel trial.
And yes, it is a Libel Trial - no matter what his supporters claim.
No doubt this will remain an ongoing reason for, er, debate, for some time to come.
Libel? Defamation? Damage? Whatever.
Personally, I think that Portugal has a problem with the definition of Free Speech, which is related to it's not so long ago fascist past. So The Law obfuscates to keep the peasants happy, or confused.
But I expect that The Judge will know the difference between the right to free speech and the right to a reputation.
Mrs. Do As You Would Be Done By. As my old Nana used to say.
-
I don't think this post tells us anything we didn't already know. McCanns have to prove the book caused them damage...that is very easy. Contrary to other peoples thoughts they do not have to prove anything in amarals book is incorrect
-
There is no doubt that Amaral's position as the Coordinator of this investigation, even if only briefly, did carry more weight than any old hobbledy hoi looking to make a few bob.
The PJ would not allow him to do this while he still worked for them. This should tell us something.
-
More accurately, supporters of Amaral's cowardice will mock the McCanns' bravery, just as they have from the outset.
Any idiot (with a modicum of literacy) could cobble together a half-baked litany of poorly thought out and factually threadbare depictions purporting to represent an 'account' of events whose reality is far removed from the content of the book and (I gather) film ...
Courage has been shown by the victims of Amaral's half-truths and outright lies, Kate and Gerry McCann.
On July 11 2007 GM was invited to and given a standing ovation at the Police Bravery Awards, by peeps including Prince Windsor and Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
It is good to know that the "no stone unturned" search did not omit the Dorchester Hotel in London.
Mr Amaral was not invited - he would certainly have turned down the invitation anyway, as he was working on a very important missing child case at the time.
-
There is no doubt that Amaral's position as the Coordinator of this investigation, even if only briefly, did carry more weight than any old hobbledy hoi looking to make a few bob.
The PJ would not allow him to do this while he still worked for them. This should tell us something.
Well, certainly in the court of public opinion as he was supposed to be a seasoned officer who was the head of the investigation - therefore his opinion would count more than the average João on a blog/forum soapbox.
His totally bizarre understanding of the dogs and forensics would pass over the heads of any casual reader who hadn't actually checked what the files actually stated.
ETA: to be fair to Amaral, he did state at some point that what he had stated was limited to what he had access to until he was taken off the case. Ok... and some of the clarification came later. However, if he hadn't read the files, how could he have known that, e.g., a later Martin Smith statement (after Amaral's departure) had only said that he was 60-80% sure based on the manner of carrying a child? (Amaral chose the 80% end of the spectrum, and then stated that Martin Smith was certain that it was Gerry, but never mind.)
He can't have it both ways. Or perhaps he can in Portugal. Who knows?
-
The book verdict has already been explained. Amaral fought on the grounds of freedom of expression and this was accepted.
The ban on the book was lifted. get over it.
It is the verdict of the book causing pain and suffering and isolation to the family (even though they cannot provide evidence of Maddies 'suffering' as they claim they do not know where she is!) and this is about Money...Let's all keep that in mind this is about Money for the McCanns- will they sue the 'abductors' if they are ever found? hmmm
-
The book verdict has already been explained. Amaral fought on the grounds of freedom of expression and this was accepted.
The ban on the book was lifted. get over it.
It is the verdict of the book causing pain and suffering and isolation to the family (even though they cannot provide evidence of Maddies 'suffering' as they claim they do not know where she is!) and this is about Money...Let's all keep that in mind this is about Money for the McCanns- will they sue the 'abductors' if they are ever found? hmmm
Good point.
However, as we already know, kate mccann has apparently 'forgiven' the abductor(s).
-
The book verdict has already been explained. Amaral fought on the grounds of freedom of expression and this was accepted.
The ban on the book was lifted. get over it.
It is the verdict of the book causing pain and suffering and isolation to the family (even though they cannot provide evidence of Maddies 'suffering' as they claim they do not know where she is!) and this is about Money...Let's all keep that in mind this is about Money for the McCanns- will they sue the 'abductors' if they are ever found? hmmm
the book ban has been lifted on freedom of speech grounds....now we have the libel trial
-
Amaral libeled the twins and Maddie? wow! how could he!! that is shocking- I mean shocking, I never knew he could go so low!
I hope they get a zillion pounds each....imagine a police man treating the good name of children so wickedly!
But wait.... the children are not suing Amaral for libel, they do not have lawyers representing them, or expert doctors offering diagnosis. Hmm... just the needy- greedy parents. ( The true victims in this whole case)
-
Amaral libeled the twins and Maddie? wow! how could he!! that is shocking- I mean shocking, I never knew he could go so low!
I hope they get a zillion pounds each....imagine a police man treating the good name of children so wickedly!
But wait.... the children are not suing Amaral for libel, they do not have lawyers representing them, or expert doctors offering diagnosis. Hmm... just the needy- greedy parents. ( The true victims in this whole case)
You don't really understand what's going on do you?
-
I don't need to do that.
I just need to read his book and compare it with the files.
As Judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro was at pains to point out to various persons during the proceedings it is her job and no one elses to compare the book with the PJ files and rule on it.
-
As Judge Maria Emília de Melo e Castro was at pains to point out to various persons during the proceedings it is her job and no one elses to compare the book with the PJ files and rule on it.
Very true ... particularly when she seemed underwhelmed by the book not living up to what it says on it's cover. Misleading advertising or something along those lines she said.
-
Very true ... particularly when she seemed underwhelmed by the book not living up to what it says on it's cover. Misleading advertising or something along those lines she said.
And if the case was about misrepresentation the McCanns would have it in the bag.
-
Very true ... particularly when she seemed underwhelmed by the book not living up to what it says on it's cover. Misleading advertising or something along those lines she said.
Yes you are correct, but the issue that was under discussion at the time was whether the book revealed anything that was not already in the public domain after the archiving of the process. Seemingly there were no amazing revelations and it was publishers hype as the judge said.
-
And if the case was about misrepresentation the McCanns would have it in the bag.
it is and they have
-
Yes you are correct, but the issue that was under discussion at the time was whether the book revealed anything that was not already in the public domain after the archiving of the process. Seemingly there were no amazing revelations and it was publishers hype as the judge said.
I noticed there was no ace up any sleeves either.