Defamation and defamatory ...

[AnneGuedes]

Humiliated the McCanns ? Was he even a pain in the neck ?

[amaraltheofficeboy]

an unnecessary thorn in their side who had a lot of influence over how Portuguese people viewed the Mccanns.

[AnneGuedes]

an unnecessary thorn in their side who had a lot of influence over how Portuguese people viewed the Mccanns.

Imo the Portugueses felt mainly humiliated in this case. They're certainly not interested in Mr Amaral nor in Mr and Mrs McCann.

[faithlilly]

Your jingoism aside, the overturning of the ban certainly cannot be ignored and is probably the reason the McCanns were advised to negotiate for a settlement.

I agree with your initial contention Faith but not your last one.

The overturning of the ban is strange but could be put down to the vagaries of Portuguese Courts.

It was the Court of Appeal in Lisbon which granted the libel action against the Morning Post but which Court was it which overturned the book ban?  Was it also the Lisbon Court?

The McCanns offered to settle so it is up to Mr Amaral to make an offer of compensation.  The problem for him though is that in settling the action he will have acknowledged that he wronged the McCanns.

What I don't understand is why, if the McCanns are in an unassailable position of strength, they would be prepared to  'settle'  with Amaral at all

I mean, if they have him over a barrel, as you an others seem to be suggesting,  then why not just take him to court, publically humiliate him, and take him for every penny he's got ?

My own feeling is that the McCanns are offering to settle out of court for the most obvious of reasons ...  they are not that confidant that they will win

I think it depends, to a very large extent, what the McCanns want from the settlement.

Money is a secondary consideration, because the fund is awash with proceeds from the sale of Kate's book.  Above all, the McCanns want a judicial ruling that Amaral's book is, indeed, a work of lies, distortion and defamation.

And there would actually be a certain, delicious, irony in Amaral slinking off into the sunset with the majority of the cash locked away in a bank account bulging his own pockets, in return for a judicial ruling that his work is, indeed, a work of libel and (perhaps) a bit over for the fund.

In a country where face means so much, Amaral will be depicted as a man who kept hold of most of what matters most to him (cash) yet sold his principles down the line with a book judicially condemned as a work of libel and fiction ...

Ally that to certainty that the book will never see light of day again, and I think the McCanns will be content; Amaral's humiliation complete ...

Strange how the OFM webmaster would not admit publically that Kate had told her that they did not request a settlement yet admitted as much in a private email. Seems Kate doesn't want to be publically connected to a comment that later on turns out to be false.

[Benice]

Your jingoism aside, the overturning of the ban certainly cannot be ignored and is probably the reason the McCanns were advised to negotiate for a settlement.

I agree with your initial contention Faith but not your last one.

The overturning of the ban is strange but could be put down to the vagaries of Portuguese Courts.

It was the Court of Appeal in Lisbon which granted the libel action against the Morning Post but which Court was it which overturned the book ban?  Was it also the Lisbon Court?

The McCanns offered to settle so it is up to Mr Amaral to make an offer of compensation.  The problem for him though is that in settling the action he will have acknowledged that he wronged the McCanns.

What I don't understand is why, if the McCanns are in an unassailable position of strength, they would be prepared to  'settle'  with Amaral at all

I mean, if they have him over a barrel, as you an others seem to be suggesting,  then why not just take him to court, publically humiliate him, and take him for every penny he's got ?

My own feeling is that the McCanns are offering to settle out of court for the most obvious of reasons ...  they are not that confidant that they will win

I think it depends, to a very large extent, what the McCanns want from the settlement.

Money is a secondary consideration, because the fund is awash with proceeds from the sale of Kate's book.  Above all, the McCanns want a judicial ruling that Amaral's book is, indeed, a work of lies, distortion and defamation.

And there would actually be a certain, delicious, irony in Amaral slinking off into the sunset with the majority of the cash locked away in a bank account bulging his own pockets, in return for a judicial ruling that his work is, indeed, a work of libel and (perhaps) a bit over for the fund.

In a country where face means so much, Amaral will be depicted as a man who kept hold of most of what matters most to him (cash) yet sold his principles down the line with a book judicially condemned as a work of libel and fiction ...

Ally that to certainty that the book will never see light of day again, and I think the McCanns will be content; Amaral's humiliation complete ...

Strange how the OFM webmaster would not admit publically that Kate had told her that they did not request a settlement yet admitted as much in a private email. Seems Kate doesn't want to be publically connected to a comment that later on turns out to be false.

I'm presuming that a confidentiality clause was signed up to by both parties at the onset of negotiations -ie. that no public announcements would be made.    As far as I know neither party have made any public official comments about who it was who suggested exploring the possibility of an out of court settlement.
 

[Eleanor]

No settlement was reached, so it is unlikely that we will ever know what happened in this instance.  But it is interesting that the time limit first quoted by those who profess to be in the know was six months, when in fact it was thirty days, so I am not placing too much importance on what they have to say.

As for Defamation and Defamatory.  They are just two parts of the same thing in this Case.

[faithlilly]

Your jingoism aside, the overturning of the ban certainly cannot be ignored and is probably the reason the McCanns were advised to negotiate for a settlement.

I agree with your initial contention Faith but not your last one.

The overturning of the ban is strange but could be put down to the vagaries of Portuguese Courts.

It was the Court of Appeal in Lisbon which granted the libel action against the Morning Post but which Court was it which overturned the book ban?  Was it also the Lisbon Court?

The McCanns offered to settle so it is up to Mr Amaral to make an offer of compensation.  The problem for him though is that in settling the action he will have acknowledged that he wronged the McCanns.

What I don't understand is why, if the McCanns are in an unassailable position of strength, they would be prepared to  'settle'  with Amaral at all

I mean, if they have him over a barrel, as you an others seem to be suggesting,  then why not just take him to court, publically humiliate him, and take him for every penny he's got ?

My own feeling is that the McCanns are offering to settle out of court for the most obvious of reasons ...  they are not that confidant that they will win

I think it depends, to a very large extent, what the McCanns want from the settlement.

Money is a secondary consideration, because the fund is awash with proceeds from the sale of Kate's book.  Above all, the McCanns want a judicial ruling that Amaral's book is, indeed, a work of lies, distortion and defamation.

And there would actually be a certain, delicious, irony in Amaral slinking off into the sunset with the majority of the cash locked away in a bank account bulging his own pockets, in return for a judicial ruling that his work is, indeed, a work of libel and (perhaps) a bit over for the fund.

In a country where face means so much, Amaral will be depicted as a man who kept hold of most of what matters most to him (cash) yet sold his principles down the line with a book judicially condemned as a work of libel and fiction ...

Ally that to certainty that the book will never see light of day again, and I think the McCanns will be content; Amaral's humiliation complete ...

Strange how the OFM webmaster would not admit publically that Kate had told her that they did not request a settlement yet admitted as much in a private email. Seems Kate doesn't want to be publically connected to a comment that later on turns out to be false.

I'm presuming that a confidentiality clause was signed up to by both parties at the onset of negotiations -ie. that no public announcements would be made.    As far as I know neither party have made any public official comments about who it was who suggested exploring the possibility of an out of court settlement.

You are probably right Benice which makes you wonder why Kate, via her webmaster, made any comment about it at all.

[Rachel Granada]

debunker said: I would suggest that the way they have used the courts so far points to a reason. They only sued the Express Group who were admittedly the most vociferous and most defamatory. Once that action jhad been settled, the whole British Press (and foreign press distributing in the UK) stopped the defamation. They did not sue other media as it was stopping more than the money that was the goal. Job Done. The McCanns have largely ignored the internet, the forums and the blogosphere except where people were gaining traction with defamation. They sent a cease and desist letter to Amazon abot a pretendy profiler and had her book withdraw. Amazon will not sell any other book that would be defamatory. Job Done. Tony Bennett left the blogosphre and started defamation in the real world. He has been stopped. Job Done. They did not even bankrupt him as was their right.

I suggest that the major aim with Amaral is for him to stop the defamation. I suspect that there is some sort of similar offer as to Tony Bennett- give up the fight to defame and we will stop pursuing you for money.

I agree with all you've said, db.  In my opinion, it's not about the money for Kate and Gerry McCann.  They just want these people to stop. They could have got the papers into court and got 5 times the payout.  They didn't. They could have bankrupted Bennett - they didn't.  Ed Smethurst could have pursued the £50k damages from Bennett - he didn't.  They just want these people to stop.

I have a point for debate; If they were involved in Madeleine's disappearance, why on earth would they have dared to mount legal action - especially against the UK Press as they were still arguido at this time.  Why did they push for the SY Review? Surely if they were involved, they would have just breathed a big sigh of relief in July 2008 when the case was shelved, and slunk away never to be heard of again?

[Redblossom]

What are you talking about Faithlilly?

This

http://twittweb.com/adds+hope+hoping+john+b-30375486

[DCI]

What are you talking about Faithlilly?

This

http://twittweb.com/adds+hope+hoping+john+b-30375486

And the woman that did it, couldn't help bragging about it, could she? Its no secret on Haverns who it was. I even got a PM 

[registrar]

Quite, they could have slinked away quietly

Having lived in the Netherlands and NZ before and having skills that are applicable in any country in the world

They could have just done that - shipped out - but they haven't

And yesterday's newspapers are, as we know -  today's chip papers. There soon would have been no media noise about them - had they moved abroad.

They persued their search for their first born - based in the UK - determined that Madeleine (or indeed her body) is findable.

And who in their right mind could begrudge them that? 

[registrar]

dbl post

[registrar]

What are you talking about Faithlilly?

This

http://twittweb.com/adds+hope+hoping+john+b-30375486

Oh dear, that - written shortly before Blacksmith lost the plot completely and vanished off the face of the earth.  And these are the desperate, nonsensical scraps to which the fervent "sceptics" cling to for comfort to reassure themselves that they are on the right track.  Pitiful really.

To quote Blacksmith - is being desperate indeed
The guy never had any credibility - most sane '[ censored word] realised this about 6 months ago
when he went into meltdown

[AnneGuedes]

I have a point for debate; If they were involved in Madeleine's disappearance, why on earth would they have dared to mount legal action - especially against the UK Press as they were still arguido at this time.  Why did they push for the SY Review?

May be because no body, no case.

[Redblossom]

What are you talking about Faithlilly?

This

http://twittweb.com/adds+hope+hoping+john+b-30375486

Oh dear, that - written shortly before Blacksmith lost the plot completely and vanished off the face of the earth.  And these are the desperate, nonsensical scraps to which the fervent "sceptics" cling to for comfort to reassure themselves that they are on the right track.  Pitiful really.

No the point is that the exchange took place on the OFM website which some people say is a myth, it is not, I saw it myself, and Blacksmiths retelling of being threatened with legal action is laughable at best, foot goal etc