Lets exam this 'Judge gave Amarals thesis equal status' malarkey. It seems that some people use selective quotes to try prove a point when they forget that those selected statements read in context doesn't necessarily carry the same meaning as what the person using the out of context statements are claiming.
We have the case of a missing child and then we have the issue of the book that was written on the case.
The judges comment stems from the court case in which Amaral was being sued for libel; his theory that the parents are responsible for Madeleine’s death and concealment of her body.
The entire 'tone' of the court proceedings was to establish if Amaral had the right to express his views, which is not the same as determining whether his theory was correct. That was clearly demonstrated by the so called facts he stated in the book which were contrary to the facts in the police files. Take the interpretation of the forensic reports as an example.
The court case was based on whether Amaral had the right to freely express his opinion. And whether that freedom overruled the right of the McCann's being libelled.
The difficulty lies in the fact that the Portuguese and English (UK) law differ in their approach to libel laws. While you can’t publish the book in the UK because it breaches libel laws, it is allowed in Portugal under freedom of expression where it seems libel takes second place to an individual’s right to have ones reputation protected against harm. In other words being called or indirectly labelled a child murderer without evidence, which would stand up in a court of law, harms ones reputation.
Taking into context the reason for court case against Amarals book, it is clear that the judges expressed their ruling on the basis that Amaral had as much right to state his theory as did the Attorney General or any other whose professional view WAS based on fact; ruling not based on factual correctness of the theory but the right to express himself. The equality demonstrated on grounds of right of expression and not any other grounds.
In summary: The judge made a ruling on the issue of Amaral being able to exercise his right of expression/freedom of expression, but this DOES NOT VALIDATE THE CONTENT of the theory but mealy the principle that he was allowed to express that theory. In this context (as it was implied in the first instance). The expression/the right to voice his theory carried as much weights as any other, but it does not imply that the contents of that theory is correct or has any equal weight to any other.
Conclusion: It is therefore incorrect to claim the judges said Amarals theory holds as much weight as any others.
