Given the Appellate Courts decision, is the libel trial a foregone conclusion?

[Mr Gray]

The supreme court hasn't ruled on libel...there wouldn't be a libel trial if they had

[John]

The supreme court hasn't ruled on libel...there wouldn't be a libel trial if they had

You confuse the alleged book libel which was quashed with the current proceedings which are about compensation.

[Mr Gray]

You confuse the alleged book libel which was quashed with the current proceedings which are about compensation.

I confuse nothing...libel has not been decided...you will find out the truth shortly

[Mr Gray]

so are you saying its not a libel trial as well

[stephen25000]

so are you saying its not a libel trial as well

You have been saying for sometime libel has already been established in this case.

[Brietta]

Very definitely a libel trial which for some reason Dr Amaral was anxious should be heard in camera.
 
** SNIP **
The parents of Madeleine McCann were left devastated by a book written by a former Portuguese detective that accused them of covering up her death, a court in Lisbon heard on Thursday.

Madeleine's mother, Kate, flew to Portugal for the opening day of a libel trial against Goncalo Amaral, who led the initial investigation into Madeleine's disappearance from a holiday resort in Praia da Luz in May 2007, shortly before her fourth birthday.

Speaking at the end of the first day of proceedings, she said: "I am here today for Madeleine and strongly hope for justice. I am here to stop the damage that has been caused and is still being caused, directly and in directly, to the search for our daughter. And to stop the suffering being caused to our family by the theories in Goncalo Amaral's book and documentary."

The McCanns are suing Amaral for €1.2m in damages, saying the book was defamatory and helped poison public opinion against the couple.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/sep/12/mccann-libel-trial-opens

[faithlilly]

Very definitely a libel trial which for some reason Dr Amaral was anxious should be heard in camera.
 
** SNIP **
The parents of Madeleine McCann were left devastated by a book written by a former Portuguese detective that accused them of covering up her death, a court in Lisbon heard on Thursday.

Madeleine's mother, Kate, flew to Portugal for the opening day of a libel trial against Goncalo Amaral, who led the initial investigation into Madeleine's disappearance from a holiday resort in Praia da Luz in May 2007, shortly before her fourth birthday.

Speaking at the end of the first day of proceedings, she said: "I am here today for Madeleine and strongly hope for justice. I am here to stop the damage that has been caused and is still being caused, directly and in directly, to the search for our daughter. And to stop the suffering being caused to our family by the theories in Goncalo Amaral's book and documentary."

The McCanns are suing Amaral for €1.2m in damages, saying the book was defamatory and helped poison public opinion against the couple.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/sep/12/mccann-libel-trial-opens

If the libel trial had been held in camera there would have been no news reports and no tabloid articles detailing Amaral's claims against the McCanns. Don't you think that is what the McCanns should have been appealing for too to protect their twins from hearing of the proceedings in the playground ?

[John]

Sorry, a bit distracted by the football.  The attempt to ban Amaral's book initially was successful but as we all know the Supreme Court reversed that decision.  The Supreme Court therefore determined that the book was not libellous.  The current legal action claims that the book caused damage to the plaintiff's reputations and to the search.  It is also a libel case but based on a different strategy, it also seeks damages.

[Alfred R Jones]

Sorry, a bit distracted by the football.  The attempt to ban Amaral's book initially was successful but as we all know the Supreme Court reversed that decision.  The Supreme Court therefore determined that the book was not libellous.  The current legal action claims that the book caused damage to the plaintiff's reputations and to the search.  It is also a libel case but based on a different strategy, it also seeks damages.

How can it be a libel case if the book has been deemed "not libellous"? 

[John]

How can it be a libel case if the book has been deemed "not libellous"?

I suppose one can bring as many libel cases as one wants as long as the money is there to do so?

[Brietta]

If the libel trial had been held in camera there would have been no news reports and no tabloid articles detailing Amaral's claims against the McCanns. Don't you think that is what the McCanns should have been appealing for too to protect their twins from hearing of the proceedings in the playground ?

Your concern for the twins is laudable.

What a great pity there are so many who do not share your sentiments.  Protecting the McCann twins from the abuse they will be exposed to on the internet and social media concerning their parents and Madeleine will be impossible.

[faithlilly]

Your concern for the twins is laudable.

What a great pity there are so many who do not share your sentiments.  Protecting the McCann twins from the abuse they will be exposed to on the internet and social media concerning their parents and Madeleine will be impossible.

But you will agree that by supporting Amaral in his bid to have the case heard in camera the McCanns would, even in a small way, be helping to protect their children from the publicity the libel trial has ultimately generated ?

[faithlilly]

Justice should be transparent and should be seen to be done.  There will be no obfuscation of any of the court proceedings.

There is absolutely no way the Drs McCann can protect their children from the deranged inhabitants of the world wide web and their vile comments.

The publicity generated by the libel trial is small beer in comparison to the organised campaigns directed at them their parents, their extended family and their friends.

I believe the McCanns obtained one of their injunctions against Amaral's book without Amaral being informed so it seems the McCanns don't exactly share your principals with regard to justice.

While I agree the McCanns can't protect their children from everything, they can at least do their utmost to negate the harm wherever possible.

[Brietta]

I believe the McCanns obtained one of their injunctions against Amaral's book without Amaral being informed so it seems the McCanns don't exactly share your principals with regard to justice.

While I agree the McCanns can't protect their children from everything, they can at least do their utmost to negate the harm wherever possible.

If the Drs' McCann lawyers got an injunction through the Portuguese courts without Dr Amaral's lawyers knowing anything about it ... Dr Amaral's lawyers must have been negligent in the extreme.
Unless you can provide a cite to what you state as a belief ... I think your statement is so improbable as to be beyond belief.

[faithlilly]

If the Drs' McCann lawyers got an injunction through the Portuguese courts without Dr Amaral's lawyers knowing anything about it ... Dr Amaral's lawyers must have been negligent in the extreme.
Unless you can provide a cite to what you state as a belief ... I think your statement is so improbable as to be beyond belief.

Anyone who has followed this case for any length of time will have knowledge of this.