if the Mcanns lose can GA counter sue them? ( this is NOT about the mcanns)

[Luz]

for the years of slander by the mcanns and pros?? the mcanns and pros  have said terrible things about GA  and his  family and have ruined   a policemans career  and his reputation  all for having   a police  opinion   as part of his job i would imagine he wuld havea case to counter sue   
 

heads up this is nothing  about the mcanns   this is about   GA  and his rights not  everything is about the mcanns

In any civil case there is always ground for a counter-suing. I am not familiar with the actual process but, since it is a request for compensation over alleged damages and suffering by the complainants, there is ample ground for a counter-suing, if not for more, for the arrest of goods (books)  by the Publishers, suppression TV dissemination of the documentary by Media Producers, money and belongings, by Amaral.
A couple of years ago Amaral spoke about suing the McCann, but if he didn't counter-sue now I doubt he will ever do it (only my opinion).

[gilet]

In any civil case there is always ground for a counter-suing. I am not familiar with the actual process but, since it is a request for compensation over alleged damages and suffering by the complainants, there is ample ground for a counter-suing, if not for more, for the arrest of goods (books)  by the Publishers, suppression TV dissemination of the documentary by Media Producers, money and belongings, by Amaral.
A couple of years ago Amaral spoke about suing the McCann, but if he didn't counter-sue now I doubt he will ever do it (only my opinion).

And if he never counter-sued that would suggest very strongly that he did not believe such a case would succeed or he would have done so. He is certainly not averse to going to court over matters.

[carlymichelle]

In any civil case there is always ground for a counter-suing. I am not familiar with the actual process but, since it is a request for compensation over alleged damages and suffering by the complainants, there is ample ground for a counter-suing, if not for more, for the arrest of goods (books)  by the Publishers, suppression TV dissemination of the documentary by Media Producers, money and belongings, by Amaral.
A couple of years ago Amaral spoke about suing the McCann, but if he didn't counter-sue now I doubt he will ever do it (only my opinion).

 for  example he could have sued over  them  taking his  books  off the shelves right? and then keeping them off the shelves when  it  was  proved  they were ok to sell??

[gilet]

for  example he could have sued over  them  taking his  books  off the shelves right? and then keeping them off the shelves when  it  was  proved  they were ok to sell??

But he didn't.

Wake up and smell that coffee.

You really don't get it do you?

[TTSOFAFM]

no one is putting  GA    above  maddie it  was a  simple  ??    this case has  ripped  apart many  lives including  GA  and his daughters are  you  saying     that his daughter  deserved to be caught in the middle of a divorce  probably  caused by the stress of this case??   police work doesnt    stay at work they bring it  home with them

Are you saying it is OK for the McCanns not to fight for the right to keep the search for their child going?  By GA's book and that documentary shown on TVI it leaves the reader and viewer with the opinion that Madeleine McCann is deceased.

People ignore this part of the archiving dispatch

The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
 
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated. If not, let us see: the information concerning a previous alert of the media - before the police - was not confirmed, the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory, and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous.
 
Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child's death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the 'Ocean Club' resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal.

It was because of this that the archiving dispatch concluded with,

b) The archiving of the Process concerning arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
 

Madeleine McCann is a missing child.  She has a right to be classed as a missing child.  And anybody who promotes the fact that Madeleine McCann is deceased can do so without evidence to back up that claim.  To do so without evidence is libellous and defamatory.  And to keep saying Madeleine McCann is deceased, hampers the search for a missing child.  Her parents are well within their rights to have their missing daughter classed as missing and not deceased.

The mess Goncalo Amaral finds himself in, is his own doing. It is not the fault of the McCanns.  He was the person that defrauded his brother.  He was the person who stood accused of torture.  He was the person who committed perjury by falsifying testimony.  So please stop with this poor Goncalo card, it is worthless as the Ace he keeps persistently claiming is up his sleeve.

[carlymichelle]

In any civil case there is always ground for a counter-suing. I am not familiar with the actual process but, since it is a request for compensation over alleged damages and suffering by the complainants, there is ample ground for a counter-suing, if not for more, for the arrest of goods (books)  by the Publishers, suppression TV dissemination of the documentary by Media Producers, money and belongings, by Amaral.
A couple of years ago Amaral spoke about suing the McCann, but if he didn't counter-sue now I doubt he will ever do it (only my opinion).

plus with the cost too of another court  case

[Rachel Granada]

plus with the cost too of another court  case

Yes.  He's had a few of those, hasn't he?

[Rachel Granada]

8-)(--) sigh and they say we so called   anti carry pitchforks  they wave theirs  around more then we  do

Are you not going to address the points that have been made, carlymichelle?

[carlymichelle]

Its a reasonable question that Carlymichelle asks Gilet and the answer is yes of course, Amaral is free to sue at any time.

Also, your post is in error in that nobody claims that they purposely killed their daughter.

The Amaral book is based on evidence, the same evidence which the AG used to complete his report.

they dont seem to like me asking this question  you  saw all the lynch mobbing coming out but i think it is a fair  question

[Rachel Granada]

Its a reasonable question that Carlymichelle asks Gilet and the answer is yes of course, Amaral is free to sue at any time.

Also, your post is in error in that nobody claims that they purposely killed their daughter.

The Amaral book is based on evidence, the same evidence which the AG used to complete his report.

Evidence?  I didn't see anything about a fridge in the AG report...

[carlymichelle]

Its a reasonable question that Carlymichelle asks Gilet and the answer is yes of course, Amaral is free to sue at any time.

Also, your post is in error in that nobody claims that they purposely killed their daughter.

The Amaral book is based on evidence, the same evidence which the AG used to complete his report.  It is unfortunate that this evidence points to two very different scenarios but there you have it.

i would imagine  he could also sue internet  users if he wanted too

[Luz]

for  example he could have sued over  them  taking his  books  off the shelves right? and then keeping them off the shelves when  it  was  proved  they were ok to sell??

Yes. As well as for the arrest of his belongings and earnings if he wins this present trial.

[ferryman]

Any dammed cop who gets convicted of falsifying documents to cover up a vile and vicious crime connected to the case he is leading is utterly disgraced.

Any cop who makes his own wife so frightened she has to beg his boss for help is an utter disgrace.

Any cop who gets booted off a case for breaking secrecy laws and talking to journalists is an absolute disgrace.

Any cop who tries to profit from a case which he failed to solve is an absolute disgrace.

Any cop who dumps his daughter's pet dog in a bin is a disgrace.

Any cop who associates online with s..m who boast about damaging posters put up to find a missing child is an absolute disgrace?

Any cop who rips off his own brother of a small fortune is an absolute disgrace.

Now who has done all that and who would hero worship such a disgraced person?

Ah that would be Goncalo Amaral and the hero-worshippers?

Well, they would be the people like you who have some bizarre fetishistic liking for such a disgraced person.

Just reading through the posts on these threads:

The point I underline.  I know he says it in his book, but I'm actually far from convinced he did, simply because I cannot conceive that a pet dog would be roaming free at night.

A pet cat, maybe, but a pet dog?

Be that detail true or false, the worst is far worse: he used that apparent anecdote as the basis of his "thesis" that Gerry hid Madeleine's body on the beach.

That is lamentable, shambolic, policing (at most charitable) ...

[carlymichelle]

A little experience. Let's see if the author of the post likes it:


YOUR WORDS, NOT mine.

[ferryman]

There has never been unbridled free-speech, and thank goodness ...