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

[slartibartfast]

But then to some people it doesn't matter what the McCanns do or say -  they are  always wrong in some people's eyes imo.    (That's a general comment btw - not directed at anyone in particular)

Sad thing is, same is true on both sides. Some people can't entertain the fact that they may be wrong.

[Mr Gray]

Absolute proof that the desperate and childish orchestrated campaign against Mr Amaral's personal and professional life began in full strength long BEFORE he wrote the book, and WHILE he was still working on the case.
Read this article by David Rose. Please ignore the date at the top, because this article was pubished on 15th SEPT 2007.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html

This article is quite factual..its not an attack on amaral its an expose on a man who should not have been involved in the investigation because he was facing criminal charges

[Eleanor]

This article is quite factual..its not an attack on amaral its an expose on a man who should not have been involved in the investigation because he was facing criminal charges

That article says more about the campaign against The McCanns than it say about a campaign against Amaral.

[Redblossom]

When you look at their website, they seem to specialise in reputation management internationally  for Corporations.
Makes you wonder how and why they got involved with the McCanns.

As you rightly ask, who financed them?

only a benefactor or the fund

[Redblossom]

It does rather beggar belief that a detective as experienced and senior as Amaral was, apparently, failed to understand basic protocols and procedures of policing.  For example, it is basic procedure (so far as I know) of police forces around the world, and certainly of British and Portuguese police, to take individual witness statements from witnesses.

So was it mere incompetence, or a lie, that prompted Amaral to say in his book that the Gaspars gave a joint statement?

The fact that they gave separate statements is crucial, because Mr G's statement could scarcely be more different from his wife's, and runs (almost) like a glowing character-reference.

And Amaral even gets one (critical) aspect of Mrs G's statement wrong.

And you talk about orchastred attacks?

What a bunch of irrelevant nonsense!

[Redblossom]

Absolute proof that the desperate and childish orchestrated campaign against Mr Amaral's personal and professional life began in full strength long BEFORE he wrote the book, and WHILE he was still working on the case.
Read this article by David Rose. Please ignore the date at the top, because this article was pubished on 15th SEPT 2007.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-482007/Lies-beatings-secret-trials-dark-police-handling-Madeleine-case.html

That was fairly mild compared to some totally peurile and unprofessional articles in the press!


So David Rose, nicknamed the "disinformer" decided it was relevant in a "serious article" to say I met the sweaty corpulent figure slurpng his cofee, what a prize idiot, I suppose he sips his and never sweats in the heat

he needs to look no further than one of the mccanns lawyers to see what a really sweaty corpulent figure actually looks like


 

from 2.20


Plank

I wont mention tony the parsons.....spit

Oh and pegasus the articles started before sept 07 and as you say way way before his book!

[Mr Gray]

What a bunch of irrelevant nonsense!

when amaral lies...its irrelevant nonsense...now that is nonsense

[jassi]

only a benefactor or the fund

Couldn't have been cheap, though. They seem high-powered bunch with tentacles all over Westminster and related areas.  Makes me wonder why they were bothered with something as trivial ( in their world of Corporate work)

[Redblossom]

Couldn't have been cheap, though. They seem high-powered bunch with tentacles all over Westminster and related areas.  Makes me wonder why they were bothered with something as trivial ( in their world of Corporate work)

Ah, well, no idea, no comment.....

 >@@(*&)

[jassi]

But the crime is sayng "this statement" instead of "these statements" or at least thats how it has been translated


 

Talk about desperation in calling this an "orchestrated attack"

Don't you just love the way 'translation errors' are only allowed when in favour of the McCanns ? 

[Lyall]

But the crime is sayng "this statement" instead of "these statements" or at least thats how it has been translated


 

Talk about desperation in calling this an "orchestrated attack"

Ah, with it now It does seem a petty point from the GA obsessives.

[Redblossom]

Don't you just love the way 'translation errors' are only allowed when in favour of the McCanns ? 

Yes I forgot to say that in my post, but in any case, its just a  figure of speech, ths statement, this fact, this issue, etc etc

yawn

Ah, with it now It does seem a petty point from the GA obsessives.

Very.....whch translates to scraping the bottom of the barrel...and not in a million years compares to the subject here, the ongoing orchestrated personal attack on Mr Amaral over months and months...also including the PJ and in some circles whole of Portugal.....Kate Mccann included as a perpetrator on all fronts there

[Carana]

This article is quite factual..its not an attack on amaral its an expose on a man who should not have been involved in the investigation because he was facing criminal charges

I agree with that, and it does seem to be quite well researched.

I don't agree about remarks concerning his (anyone's) physical appearance unless they were relevant.

[Redblossom]

Oh and in another answer to the OP

the Mccanns are fair game for comment as also stated by the appelant court! when they "unbanned"  amarals book
Thy also wrote a book, gave hundreds of interviews, made four million plus, which they havent as promised been transparent about, evaded questions,were never cleared, exhibited strange behaviours, had discrepancies and changes in their account of events,etc etc  fair game, oh yes, absolutely and totally, its most ridiculous at best that anyone suggests no one should comment or discuss....

[Mr Gray]

Oh and in another answer to the OP

the Mccanns are fair game for comment as also stated by the appelant court! when they "unbanned"  amarals book
Thy also wrote a book, gave hundreds of interviews, made four million plus, which they havent as promised been transparent about, evaded questions,were never cleared, exhibited strange behaviours, had discrepancies and changes in their account of events,etc etc  fair game, oh yes, absolutely and totally, its most ridiculous at best that anyone suggests no one should comment or discuss....

You need to understand the difference between fair comment and libel....they are not the same