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

[Luz]

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

In here some people use it. I believe that there are limits that should not be overcome, but, as the Supreme Court's said in their appeal decision: if you put yourself in the public arena you cannot expect people refraining from talking about you.

I do not consider that my response to the abuse was dignifying, but I just wanted to show that it is not correct to insult and defame persons.

[Montclair]

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

Here in Portugal, people are allowed to discuss cases and that is why police files and court files and decisions are released for the public to see. This is called transparency. Even if a judge comes to a decision people are allowed to disagree and criticise if they wish.

[Montclair]

The problem is that Amaral goes further and says that the McCanns are involved in the death of their child.

Gonçalo Amaral has never said that the McCanns were involved in the death of Madeleine, he has always said that he believes that she died in a tragic accident.

[LagosBen]

Gonçalo Amaral has never said that the McCanns were involved in the death of Madeleine, he has always said that he believes that she died in a tragic accident.

Really? But he did suggest that they kept her frozen then transported her weeks later didn't he? Or am I wrong?

[Luz]

Really? But he did suggest that they kept her frozen then transported her weeks later didn't he? Or am I wrong?

You are wrong 

Formulating theories that could account to explain certain data are not closed explanations but mere speculation when one attempts to discuss the case.

[Angelo222]

Really? But he did suggest that they kept her frozen then transported her weeks later didn't he? Or am I wrong?

Yes he did put forward that theory in attempting to square the hire car dog alerts.  Problem for him as usual however was that it was only a theory.  Many other theories have been put forward but they all fall at the proof stage as does the abduction theory itself

[Redblossom]

You are wrong 

Formulating theories that could account to explain certain data are not closed explanations but mere speculation when one attempts to discuss the case.

Exactly
Thats what policemen do
Plenty of Uk ones  speculated in various documentaries in 2007 including the theory the Mccanns staged the abduction...dont see them being sued..what he wrotein his book was based on the investigation, others finsings,  his experience and his conclusion....for people to argue that even the existence of the book would stop them looking out, as IF, anyone was still looking out at the time, let alone reading  would stop them reporting a Madeleine they spotted is so totally baseless....and condescensing of peoples own thoughts and intellect, its akin to saying a book brainwashed them

which is preposterous in the extreme

[Mr Moderator]

Please remember the subject matter of this thread which asks the question, can Amaral counter sue if the McCanns lose their current libel case?