Defamation and defamatory ...

[Eleanor]

There is no capitulation.  No one has capitulated.  So what the f*ck are we talking about?  Why is anyone spending so much time on something that hasn't happened?

Amaral will lose because he has Libelled The McCanns without any proof.  Whether or not his theory is correct is entirely beside the point.

[faithlilly]

@ Martha

I have made my position perfectly clear. Shall we now let the reader decide the truth of the matter ?

[amaraltheofficeboy]

I have decided

[AnneGuedes]

The reader will decide, good idea.

[Mrs. B]

Dear me, no judge would allow hearsay in a court of law, let alone hearsay by email addressed to someone with a fake identity. I do hope for Amaral's sake that he has something better to pin his defense strategy on, if not, he is truly done for.

[AnneGuedes]

The reader will decide, good idea.

And what have you decided, dear reader...? >@@(*&)

Nothing, Martha, I didn't read this topic !

[ferryman]

The giveaway is that the contentious article has not been pulled, just pulled from Blacksmith's blog (available elsewhere).

If there really were legal issues, the blog would not be available at all

[ferryman]

Am I right that Blacksmith is claiming he was threatened with legal action over his article?

[ferryman]

Am I right that Blacksmith is claiming he was threatened with legal action over his article?

Allegedly so.

In which case Blacksmith is a dunderhead, because the article is still available, just not on his blog.

If he was genuinely worried about legal action, he would be sure there was no trace of the article:

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

For example, one article of Blacksmith's I took apart in a blog you will find no trace of other than on the blog I wrote ...

[John]

Let's see if the Find Madeleine Campaign are prepared to offer any answers at this point in time which will put an end to these rumours.  We have written to them asking for clarification.  Given their past efforts though I wouldn't hold my breath!

[AnneGuedes]

The reader will decide, good idea.

And what have you decided, dear reader...? >@@(*&)

Nothing, Martha, I didn't read this topic !

Always best to read the topic before commenting I find.

Sure, as you will note, Martha, I made no comment on the topic.

[Carana]

Let's see if the Find Madeleine Campaign are prepared to offer any answers at this point in time which will put an end to these rumours.  We have written to them asking for clarification.  Given their past efforts though I wouldn't hold my breath!

To be honest, I wouldn't expect them to. Whatever negotiations may or may not have taken place are a private matter between the McCanns and Amaral.

[icabodcrane]

Let's see if the Find Madeleine Campaign are prepared to offer any answers at this point in time which will put an end to these rumours.  We have written to them asking for clarification.  Given their past efforts though I wouldn't hold my breath!

To be honest, I wouldn't expect them to. Whatever negotiations may or may not have taken place are a private matter between the McCanns and Amaral.

The substance of the negotiations may be private,  but that is not what is being asked about

There is no reason at all for the McCanns not to clear up the simple question :

Did Amaral approach you for an out of court settlement  ...  or did you approach him ?

[Carana]

Let's see if the Find Madeleine Campaign are prepared to offer any answers at this point in time which will put an end to these rumours.  We have written to them asking for clarification.  Given their past efforts though I wouldn't hold my breath!

To be honest, I wouldn't expect them to. Whatever negotiations may or may not have taken place are a private matter between the McCanns and Amaral.

The substance of the negotiations may be private,  but that is not what is being asked about

There is no reason at all for the McCanns not to clear up the simple question :

Did Amaral approach you for an out of court settlement  ...  or did you approach him ?

If you were in private litigation with someone, would you feel obliged to divulge what may be sub judice information to satisfy the curiosity of some anonymous noseyparker on the Internet?

[icabodcrane]

Let's see if the Find Madeleine Campaign are prepared to offer any answers at this point in time which will put an end to these rumours.  We have written to them asking for clarification.  Given their past efforts though I wouldn't hold my breath!

To be honest, I wouldn't expect them to. Whatever negotiations may or may not have taken place are a private matter between the McCanns and Amaral.

The substance of the negotiations may be private,  but that is not what is being asked about

There is no reason at all for the McCanns not to clear up the simple question :

Did Amaral approach you for an out of court settlement  ...  or did you approach him ?

If you were in private litigation with someone, would you feel obliged to divulge what may be sub judice information to satisfy the curiosity of some anonymous noseyparker on the Internet?

When the McCanns first took legal action against Amaral the media were fully briefed on their intentions.  A lengthy and detailed statement was given, and the Mirror even claimed to have been given a copy of the complete 24 page writ  ( parts of which were printed )

There was no reticence on the McCanns' part in that instance, and no element of  'sub judice' in their open declarations

There is a marked difference this time round