Was Gonçalo Amaral fair game given the content of his book?

[Carana]

Presumably that wouldn't have expressed what he believes to the truth.

His primary purpose was to defend his honour, apparently. I might also be a defence against criminal libel in PT.

Excerpts of the book "The Truth of the Lie";
 
P. 11
"This book appears out of the necessity that I felt of putting back my good name that was vilified in the public domain without the PJ has allowing me to stand up for myself".




--

Maddie died in the bedroom and the abduction was staged Jornal de Notícias
 
23 July 2008
Thanks to 'astro' for translation

 
"This book appears from the need that I felt to recover my reputation that was publicly smeared while the institution that I belonged to for 26 years, the Polícia Judiciária, did not give me permission to defend myself or did it institutionally. (…) Later on, I was removed from the investigation", Gonçalo Amaral starts by explaining.

"This book also has a bigger purpose. That of contributing to the discovery of the material truth * and the realisation of justice", he refers, pointing out that the contents "does not, under any circumstance, question the work" from his colleagues at the PJ "or compromise the ongoing investigation".

In his opening note, Gonçalo Amaral indicates that "the reader will find data that he does not know, interpretations of the facts, and, naturally, pertinent questions", stressing that a criminal investigation "should not have to care about what is politically correct".

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id164.html

* The problem that I have with that statement of purpose is that the files had been made public, therefore the public didn't need him to analyse whatever material truth was in them; and he didn't seem to have understood much of his own investigation.

If he had stated that he was faced with an unprecedented situation, with inadequate resources and experience, the challenges of dealing with an international investigation, the press versus judicial secrecy... I'd have had a lot more sympathy for him.

IMO, he simply did not need to assert his allegations that this little girl is necessarily dead as "truth" in order to regain his honour.. or public sympathy.

[Montclair]

His primary purpose was to defend his honour, apparently. It's also a defence against criminal libel in PT.

Excerpts of the book "The Truth of the Lie";
 
P. 11
"This book appears out of the necessity that I felt of putting back my good name that was vilified in the public domain without the PJ has allowing me to stand up for myself".




--

Maddie died in the bedroom and the abduction was staged Jornal de Notícias
 
23 July 2008
Thanks to 'astro' for translation

 
"This book appears from the need that I felt to recover my reputation that was publicly smeared while the institution that I belonged to for 26 years, the Polícia Judiciária, did not give me permission to defend myself or did it institutionally. (…) Later on, I was removed from the investigation", Gonçalo Amaral starts by explaining.

"This book also has a bigger purpose. That of contributing to the discovery of the material truth * and the realisation of justice", he refers, pointing out that the contents "does not, under any circumstance, question the work" from his colleagues at the PJ "or compromise the ongoing investigation".

In his opening note, Gonçalo Amaral indicates that "the reader will find data that he does not know, interpretations of the facts, and, naturally, pertinent questions", stressing that a criminal investigation "should not have to care about what is politically correct".

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id164.html

* The problem that I have with that statement of purpose is that the files had been made public, therefore the public didn't need him to analyse whatever material truth was in them; and he didn't seem to have understood much of his own investigation.

If he had stated that he was faced with an unprecedented situation, with inadequate resources and experience, the challenges of dealing with an international investigation, the press versus judicial secrecy... I'd have had a lot more sympathy for him.

IMO, he simply did not need to assert his allegations that this little girl is necessarily dead as "truth" in order to regain his honour.. or public sympathy.

Gonçalo Amaral gave his opinion, which was the same as the conclusions in the 10 September 2007 report, and he had every right to since he did not want to see two people get away with committing a crime. This was further aggravated by the fact that the McCanns and their "friends" (read Clarence Mitchell) carried out a vicious campaign not only against GA but also the Portuguese authorities and people.

As for his believe that Madeleine died on the night of 3 May 2007, the McCanns, of course, are fighting that assertion because if it were true then their fund would be a fraud!

[Mr Gray]

Gonçalo Amaral gave his opinion, which was the same as the conclusions in the 10 September 2007 report, and he had every right to since he did not want to see two people get away with committing a crime. This was further aggravated by the fact that the McCanns and their "friends" (read Clarence Mitchell) carried out a vicious campaign not only against GA but also the Portuguese authorities and people.

As for his believe that Madeleine died on the night of 3 May 2007, the McCanns, of course, are fighting that assertion because if it were true then their fund would be a fraud!

And it is up to the court..not you...to decide if his opinion is libellous...the mccanns have the right to take this action...tough

[Montclair]

And it is up to the court..not you...to decide if his opinion is libellous...the mccanns have the right to take this action...tough

The appeals court in October 2010 determined that the book was not libellous and that GA's opinion was based on the facts of the case, which were already in the public domain.

The McCanns are taking everybody and his brother to court for the simple reason that they do not want anyone to see the other side of the coin and to have access to the facts. It is nothing but a PR campaign so that no one will know anything other than what the parents say.

Here in Portugal, the law is transparent and everyone has access to court decisions and they even have the right to disagree with verdicts and to discuss them openly. Even if the judge were to decide that GA committed libel (IMO, unlikely) I still would have the right to say I don't agree with her decision and to discuss it.

[Mr Gray]

The appeals court in October 2010 determined that the book was not libellous and that GA's opinion was based on the facts of the case, which were already in the public domain.

The McCanns are taking everybody and his brother to court for the simple reason that they do not want anyone to see the other side of the coin and to have access to the facts. It is nothing but a PR campaign so that no one will know anything other than what the parents say.

Here in Portugal, the law is transparent and everyone has access to court decisions and they even have the right to disagree with verdicts and to discuss them openly. Even if the judge were to decide that GA committed libel (IMO, unlikely) I still would have the right to say I don't agree with her decision and to discuss it.

so whats the present trial about...

[Montclair]

so whats the present trial about...

This present trial is a civil case for damages. If you don't agree with what I say, there is no need to be insulting and aggressive, which seems to me to the reaction of someone who does not know how to answer the comment.

[Carana]

@ Montclair,

Let's go back to the beginning... WHO carried out vicious attacks against Amaral? And WHO made vicious attacks against the McCanns?

[stephen25000]

in your opinion

NO, FACT.

[Mr Gray]

NO, FACT.

we don't care what you think of our childcare arrngements

[jassi]

Gonçalo Amaral gave his opinion, which was the same as the conclusions in the 10 September 2007 report, and he had every right to since he did not want to see two people get away with committing a crime. This was further aggravated by the fact that the McCanns and their "friends" (read Clarence Mitchell) carried out a vicious campaign not only against GA but also the Portuguese authorities and people.

As for his believe that Madeleine died on the night of 3 May 2007, the McCanns, of course, are fighting that assertion because if it were true then their fund would be a fraud!

It would only be fraud if it could be be proved that the McCanns knew her to be dead.
There may or may not have been fraudulent use of the funds, but that would be a different issue.

[stephen25000]

we don't care what you think of our childcare arrngements

OMG.

A Freudian Slip, or what.   

[Mr Gray]

This present trial is a civil case for damages. If you don't agree with what I say, there is no need to be insulting and aggressive, which seems to me to the reaction of someone who does not know how to answer the comment.

If you would stop posting your incorrect opinions as fact it would make things easier...civil damages for what...you said the court has already found in amarals favour...its  a libel trial..

the judgement you are referring to was an interim judgement and has no bearing on the decision of this trial..the libel trial...yes thats what I said...the libel trial because it is a libel trial

[Mr Gray]

OMG.

A Freudian Slip, or what.   

no a wind up

[Benice]

What you seem to forget is that everything he wrote in his book is corraborated by the police files which are also in the public domain. Also, the McCanns attempt to sue him was only accepted on their 3rd attempt and the book ban was eventually overturned. IMO, this libel case should never have come to the light of day.

No it most certainly is not.        Please show me the corroberation that on the morning of the 2nd May Madeleine asked her parents why they hadn't come the night before when she cried.

Also from his book:
Quote
The report mentions that the twins were asleep in their bed, but there is no proof to confirm it; on the contrary, in the photographs, you can see empty cots, where only the mattresses remain - the sheets and blankets having been removed. Why have their beds been stripped? If the sheets had not been removed, traces of their presence could have been found there.
Unquote

Please show corroboration from the files which shows there is no proof that the twins were asleep in their cots.

QUOTE
With amazement the police officers discover a series of books and manuals exclusively intended for police services and government agencies.
UNQUOTE

Where is the corroboration for that untrue statement in the files?

Quote
In Ireland, the Smiths are watching the BBC news, which is broadcasting the event. For them, it's a shock: that person, they recognise him. That way of carrying his child, that way of walking...It's the man they saw at around 10pm on May 3rd,  
Unquote

Where is the corroboration in the files that the Smith family positively 100% identified Gerry as the man they saw on 3rd May?

QUOTE
Jane Tanner formally identifies Robert Murat.
UNQUOTE

Where is the corroboration for that in the files?   Where is her 'formal' statement.   There is none - because it didn't happen.

QUOTE
2. It seems that the McCanns' friends have reported Maddie's disappearance to the press before informing the police about it
UNQUOTE

Where is the corroboration for that accusation?   There is none, and the AGs report makes that quite clear.

Quote from AG
None of the indications which led to their being made suspects was substantiated later; there was no proof of them having notified the media before the police, the laboratory did not confirm the traces found by the dogs, and the initial e-mail indications transcribed above later turned out to be harmless.
Unquote

Unless you can provide the above corroboration  then your claim that everything in Amaral's books is corroborated in the police files is a blatently untrue.   









 

[stephen25000]

no a wind up