So what's next in the libel trial saga?

[Mr Gray]

Hasnt it been said time and time again that the McCanns and their pals were the primary reason why the investigation was shelved?  The archiving report states unequivocally that the McCanns lost the opportunity to clear their name by refusing to cooperate with the police.  Nuff said imo.

the case was shelved because there was no evidence that the mccanns had committed a crime

[Matthew Wyse]

the ban was overturned because the book had not been proved libellous...that's what this trial will decide

Wrong.  This trial will decide if the parents are entitled to damages. 

the case was shelved because there was no evidence that the mccanns had committed a crime

Wrong again.  The case was shelved because of a lack of evidence and a failure by the tapas group to cooperate.

[Mr Gray]

No.

He made an hypothesis.

Where has the hypothesis of accidental death been disproved exactly ?

and you say 'innocent' of what exactly ?

What this case is all about is a personal vendetta against Amaral and the pursuance of money.

None of which would have occurred if the mccanns had taken care of their children properly.

his book is called The Truth...that is not a hypothesis

[stephen25000]

his book is called The Truth...that is not a hypothesis

Where has accidental death been disproved ?

The book I believe is called ' the truth of the lie'

[Matthew Wyse]

his book is called The Truth...that is not a hypothesis

Tell me Davel.   Have you read the court reports?

[Eleanor]

Well she is armed with an Appeal court verdict stating that the book was a logical interpretation of the facts.

Then in terms of damage done it is entirely quantifiable in terms of measuring the impact of the book's message through the circulation of its contents through media outlets.

Yet none of the the McCann witnesses offered any statistics about the number of negative articles produced as a result of the book's launch.  Why don you think that is?

Although if a previous court argues that the book does not offend the McCann 's rights as the starting point, then surely the impact of said book should not be of any consideration.

In another words if a PT court has ruled the book as legitimate in terms of its contents then how can its impact then lead to libel?

Either the book is libellous and should be banned (which it wasn't), or it's not libellous and ok to be sold therefore the impact of its message makes no difference because in the first instance it does not offend the McCann's rights.

Obfuscate all you like.  There is a Trial going on, so it must be about something.

Negative articles in UK had more or less ceased by then, for obvious reasons.  And it isn't just about The Book anyway.

[Eleanor]

Didn't The Judge mention something about the book cover and new revelations?  What were those new revelations?

[Albertini]

the ban was overturned because the book had not been proved libellous...that's what this trial will decide

They stated that the applicant's rights weren't violated (i.e. it wasn't libellous):

In any case, the fact is that the indications that were mentioned above were sufficient to make the McCann couple arguidos.

The subsequent collection and production of evidence, namely the forensics evidence that was collected and treated in laboratory, weakened that conviction and thus the couple stopped being arguidos.

What is certain is that since the start of the investigation there were incongruent and even contradictory situations concerning the witness statements; the telephone records of calls that were made and received on mobile phones that belonged to the couple and to the group of friends that were on holidays with them; the movements of people right after the disappearance of the little girl was noticed, concerning the state in which the bedroom from where the child disappeared from was found (closed window? open window? partially open window?) etc., and the mystery would only become even thicker due to the clues that were left by the already mentioned sniffer dogs.

All of this is reported in detailed manner in the book that is at stake here, reproducing the contents of some of the case files, which also had an effect on the above mentioned final dispatch that was signed by two Public Ministry Magistrates.

In the book, we do not verify any reference to any facts that are not in that dispatch.

Where the author differs from the Prosecutors who have written the dispatch, is in the logical, police-work-related and investigative interpretation that he does of those facts.

In that aspect, we stand before the exercise of freedom of opinion, which is a domain in which the author is an expert, as he was a criminal investigator for 26 years.

Finally, concerning the damage to the right to usufruct from the penal process’ guarantees, namely the right to a fair investigation and the right to freedom and safety, we still cannot understand how it is possible for said rights to be offended by the contents of a book that describes facts from the investigation, although it parts from the interpretation that the Public Ministry’s Magistrates made of those facts, yet offering based, solidly built and logical interpretations.

We thus reach a point where it seems to be important to stress the following: the indicative facts that led to the applicants’ constitution as arguidos within the inquiry were later on not valued by the Public Ministry’s Magistrates in order to lead to a criminal accusation, but those very same facts, seen through another prism and with another base, may lead to a different conclusion from that which was attained by those same Magistrates – those are indications that were deemed to be insufficient in terms of evidence in a criminal investigation, but they can be appreciated in a different way, in an interpretation that is legitimate to be published as a literary work, as long as said interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved – and we have written above already why we understand that said interpretation does not offend the applicants’ rights.

In a concise manner:

The book at stake in this process – “Maddie – the Truth of the Lie” – which was written by the defendant Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, has the main motivation of defending his personal and professional honour, as the author points out right away in the preface and throughout his text.

The contents of the book does not offend any of the applicants’ fundamental rights.

Hum..... seems pretty unequivocal to me, does it not you?

[Eleanor]

So we are all sitting here discussing a Teddy Bear's Picnic, are we?

No Damage done to The McCanns.

No Libel.

No Lies.

No wonder Portugal's Legal System is in such chaos.

[Mr Gray]

They stated that the applicant's rights weren't violated (i.e. it wasn't libellous):

Hum..... seems pretty unequivocal to me, does it not you?

it would be if they had actually said what you posted but they didn't...they did not mention libel...you did

[Matthew Wyse]

So we are all sitting here discussing a Teddy Bear's Picnic, are we?

No Damage done to The McCanns.

No Libel.

No Lies.

No wonder Portugal's Legal System is in such chaos.

It isnt about libel Eleanor.  It is about damage to reputation.

[Eleanor]

It isnt about libel Eleanor.  It is about damage to reputation.

Caused by Untruths.  Okay, that's fine by me.

[Alfred R Jones]

The judge is there to hear the evidence and to rule on the Law.

At the commencement of the trial the fate of Madeleine was unknown (as it is to this day), so to say that there is no way a judgement can be made until her fate is known would imply that the judge has been allowing the trial to continue knowing the final outcome before any evidence has even been heard, unless you think she allowed it to continue in the hope that halfway through Madeleine's fate would be uncovered?

[Matthew Wyse]

Caused by Untruths.  Okay, that's fine by me.

Spot on      That is for the judge to decide.

[Alice Purjorick]

Didn't The Judge mention something about the book cover and new revelations?  What were those new revelations?

I believe the judge established the book contained no new revelations and that the statement was merely a marketing strategy. Now that is not unusual at all in many fields, the world being full of articles, in the wider sense of the word, which are the triumph of marketing over substance.