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

[Estuarine]

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

Next contestant is Dr Ivel. Specialist subject stating the bleedin' obvious.

[Mr Gray]

Next contestant is Dr Ivel. Specialist subject stating the bleedin' obvious.

It might seem obvious to you but  others cant seem to understand the difference....

[Eleanor]

Libel is only an opinion.  Unless it is lies.  It's a bit of a toss up as to which is which.  However, neither are acceptable.

[pegasus]

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

IMO the  anti-Amaral "Lies" article in SEPT 2007 is every bit as non-factual and externally provided as was the much earlier propaganda intended solely to decieve the UK public re wmds.

[John]

As proven above, the attack on Mr Amaral started long before his book.

It's a well tried and tested technique.  Discredit the investigator and you discredit the investigation!

As I have pointed out many of the vile remarks re the McCanns on here would not be allowed in a school enviroment

Anything in particular Dave?

[Mr Gray]

It's a well tried and tested technique.  Discredit the investigator and you discredit the investigation!

I think amaral managed to discredit himself...he didn't need any help...and therefore discredited the investigation...he was sacked

[John]

I think amaral managed to discredit himself...he didn't need any help...and therefore discredited the investigation...he was sacked

You could say that about the McCanns as well Dave.  They were shit parents and Mrs Healey agreed.  Leaving three small children alone in a strange apartment night after night was asking for trouble.

Back on topic, I believe Gonçalo knew exactly what he was doing when he set out to reveal the truth of the lie.  He would not have gone down the road he did had he not been forced to do so.  Sometimes you just have to stand up for what you believe in regardless of the cost.

[John]

Never fear, our censors will delete anything which crosses the line. 

ps  any more Dave?

[Mr Gray]

Never fear, our censors will delete anything which crosses the line. 

ps  any more Dave?

That was actually by one of the mods

[Mr Gray]

You could say that about the McCanns as well Dave.  They were shit parents and Mrs Healey agreed.  Leaving three small children alone in a strange apartment night after night was asking for trouble.

Back on topic, I believe Gonçalo knew exactly what he was doing when he set out to reveal the truth of the lie.  He would not have gone down the road he did had he not been forced to do so.  Sometimes you just have to stand up for what you believe in regardless of the cost.

I think amaral was  a complete fool...if he had wanted to write the book he could have done it in  away that wasn't libellous...suggested things that may have happened...he didn't dream the mcccanns would sue him in portugal

[Estuarine]

I think amaral was  a complete fool...if he had wanted to write the book he could have done it in  away that wasn't libellous...suggested things that may have happened...he didn't dream the mcccanns would sue him in portugal

Did I miss something? Has the judge ruled?

[jassi]

He'll only prove to be foolish if he loses the case and has to pay a hefty sum.
If he wins, he won't be looking foolish at all.
The judge will decide - eventually.

[Cariad]

I guess that if Dr Amaral is fair game for writing a book, Dr K Mccann is too.

Should I start referring to her as 'mccann, the disgraced former GP'? 

[Mr Gray]

I guess that if Dr Amaral is fair game for writing a book, Dr K Mccann is too.

Should I start referring to her as 'mccann, the disgraced former GP'?

 
That would probably be libellous...amaral is a convicted criminal so we can call him disgraced

[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

What is not factual in this article?