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

[sadie]

Indeed John!

There seems to be an astonishing amount placed on  Mr Amarals guilt with regards to Little Maddie's misfortune/fate. The parents have absolved themselves of any responsibility, and the huge part they played in THEIR daughters demise.

Team McCANN really do believe they have the same influence and 'pull' in Portugal as they do with the UK press.

Team McCann and the 'slags mags' UKs MSM, made millions out of that little girls plight.
...And here they are shouting off again for more money!!
Uttlery disgusting in my view.

They have no shame, or self respect, or moral decency about them.  Claiming money for a child who they have not seen for 7 years!

This is about reputation management nothing more-nothing less.

You seem to have "Miss"ed a lot of things "Miss" Taken Identity.

1)  Their name has been destroyed by Amaral.  Seems they have ben badly libelled in his book and Seems to me that they have been slandered too.  If so they are entitled to any financial rewards that might come their way ... as any other person would be

2)  They have to STOP the continuing lies and disinformation put out about them.

3)  Until now any monies acrued, from such libel cases, which should be compensation for them, they have given to the Madeleine Search fund. 

4)  It seems likely if this pattern of giving continues that any monies that they do get awarded will go towards the future search for Madeleine, should SY stop searching for any reason,  Lack of funds, Diplomatic reasons, Political pressure come to mind as possible reasons why this might happen some time in the future

[Angelo222]

Not really.  Two people in a foreign resort that they genuinely believed was safe.  And they are only questioning the so often incorrect statements in his book and on television.  IMO.
But I do respect your right to your opinion.

It was a safe resort as long as parents took a few basic precautions such as not leaving toddlers on their own for hours on end.

The courts have already confirmed that Amaral had the right to publish his book regardless of minor discrepancies in it and I for one cant wait for the sequel.

 

[Eleanor]

It was a safe resort as long as parents took a few basic precautions such as not leaving toddlers on their own for hours on end.

The courts have already confirmed that Amaral had the right to publish his book regardless of minor discrepancies in it and I for one cant wait for the sequel.

Regardless of minor discrepancies?  Don't make me laugh.  Anyone could write any old rubbish if that was acceptable.  Although that wouldn't surprise me in Portugal.

But I do agree about the sequel.  Not that I think he will risk it.

[Miss Taken Identity]

quote"You seem to have "Miss"ed a lot of things "Miss" Taken Identity.

1)  Their name has been destroyed by Amaral.  Seems they have ben badly libelled in his book and Seems to me that they have been slandered too.  If so they are entitled to any financial rewards that might come their way ... as any other person would be

2)  They have to STOP the continuing lies and disinformation put out about them.

3)  Until now any monies acrued, from such libel cases, which should be compensation for them, they have given to the Madeleine Search fund.

4)  It seems likely if this pattern of giving continues that any monies that they do get awarded will go towards the future search for Madeleine, should SY stop searching for any reason,  Lack of funds, Diplomatic reasons, Political pressure come to mind as possible reasons why this might happen some time in the future"unquote

Your sarcasm is duly noted- and deemed pathetic in it's entirety.

1.  They destroyed their own reputation by their disgraceful behavior- drinking and eating whilst their children were alone! Badly libeled? so much pain that would have caused them-considering what their 3 year old toddler has probably endured, due to their action or lack of as it turns out. Blood money!  that is what it is-money on the back of their daughters plight!

2.Lies and disinformation? would you be talking about people not believing them? They can't stop people not  trusting them and it isn't illegal. even if it was- what mother would go to court for blood money because of what people 'think'.

3. ah the 'fund'  piggy bank for the 'trips' to look for Maddie in 4 star hotels etc. It is a 'piggy bank'  for the 'Family'

4. They can do what the Needams family do.. go it alone! I am sure Bens parents were also accused of things- they didn't go suing people! They searched for their son! Not paid lackies.

[Mr Moderator]

Amaral even says something in his book about that, although I would have to hunt down the specific passage ...

Amaral wrote in his book at page 84,

"The police officers may make a declaration of arguido status as they think fit."

As already posted, this status must be validated within a period of 10 days.

[Eleanor]

Amaral wrote in his book at page 84,

"The police officers may make a declaration of arguido status as they think fit."

As already posted, this status must be validated within a period of 10 days.

So someone validated this even though the law changed a couple of days after The McCanns were made arguidos?

[Miss Taken Identity]

Quote" "The police officers may make a declaration of arguido status as they think fit."unquote

Just like the 4 PDL 'suspects' were made arguidos? at the request of SY.

[Angelo222]

Regardless of minor discrepancies?  Don't make me laugh.  Anyone could write any old rubbish if that was acceptable.  Although that wouldn't surprise me in Portugal.

But I do agree about the sequel.  Not that I think he will risk it.

He has promised many more revelations in the new book.

[Eleanor]

He has promised many more revelations in the new book.

That stand alone piece of evidence that never seems to materialise, mayhap.

The silly, old fool will get himself banged up if he isn't careful.  Or sectioned, more like.  MI5, Aces, Political Interference.  Satellite Photos.
Or perhaps he wants another Libel Trial after this one is over.

[Lace]

What an embarrassment he must be to the Portuguese police who are together with SY trying to investigate the case.   

Whilst they are digging sites,  questioning people etc.   He is shouting that they put Madeleine in a coffin which was ready to be cremated.

You can imagine him being carted off by the white coats shouting these things can't you.

[Carana]

Good post Carana but you must realise that the judge in this trial will have to take on board the actions by the McCanns and their friends just as the court did in revoking the book ban.  The McCanns want to place the blame at Amarals door but they must accept that they are also culpable in what went on imo.

I'm not quite sure what you are referring to.

If you mean the fact that they weren't in the apartment when she disappeared and their active engagement with the media to highlight her profile as a missing child, then, yes, I expect that those aspects will have been submitted by the defence as potential damage limitation.

Just as I expect that negative coverage by PT tabloids, repeated by the UK tabloids and again repeated as confirmation of "...according to the UK press..." by the PT tabloids the next day preceded the book will also be submitted. The fact that many of the allegations in the press came from garbled PJ leaks in the first place won't count in the libel trial (from what I've gathered from the Murat appeal in which his lawyer had submitted a complaint along the same lines).

[Carana]

Just a few thoughts...

In PT civil law, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, unless there is a legal presumption that reverses it.

- In the Murat appeal, the judges found that one existed as he was suing the press. It's not clear to me whether the publication of a book, a TV "documentary" and his various TV interviews count as "press" as most of that section of law seems to refer to newspapers. He has had numerous interviews published in newspapers (or other rags), and used to have a regular column in CdaM. What I'm not sure about is whether potentially libellous material in those interviews / articles are being considered within this trial or whether it will only be limited to the book and documentary.

- I'm also wondering about whether the legal presumption of innocence would apply in this case. It was mentioned in the Murat appeal, but not specifically concerning the applicable presumption in his case, although perhaps it didn't need to be.

The rights that he appears to be defending concern his right to freedom of expression to defend his honour and to contribute to the truth and therefore justice for Madeleine.

However, since the injunction trial, his "honour" has taken a bashing. Back then his suspended conviction over a different case hadn't been upheld at that point and he had political ambitions, which fizzled out.

His lack of understanding of several aspects of the case undermines his credibility as an experienced professional. To what extent the fact that he was speaking out as a "citizen" as opposed to a retired professional (with the inherent credibility factor) will be taken into account remains to be seen.

[sadie]

quote"You seem to have "Miss"ed a lot of things "Miss" Taken Identity.

1)  Their name has been destroyed by Amaral.  Seems they have ben badly libelled in his book and Seems to me that they have been slandered too.  If so they are entitled to any financial rewards that might come their way ... as any other person would be

2)  They have to STOP the continuing lies and disinformation put out about them.

3)  Until now any monies acrued, from such libel cases, which should be compensation for them, they have given to the Madeleine Search fund.

4)  It seems likely if this pattern of giving continues that any monies that they do get awarded will go towards the future search for Madeleine, should SY stop searching for any reason,  Lack of funds, Diplomatic reasons, Political pressure come to mind as possible reasons why this might happen some time in the future"unquote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your sarcasm is duly noted- and deemed pathetic in it's entirety.

1.  They destroyed their own reputation by their disgraceful behavior- drinking and eating whilst their children were alone! Badly libeled? so much pain that would have caused them-considering what their 3 year old toddler has probably endured, due to their action or lack of as it turns out. Blood money!  that is what it is-money on the back of their daughters plight!

2.Lies and disinformation? would you be talking about people not believing them? They can't stop people not  trusting them and it isn't illegal. even if it was- what mother would go to court for blood money because of what people 'think'.

3. ah the 'fund'  piggy bank for the 'trips' to look for Maddie in 4 star hotels etc. It is a 'piggy bank'  for the 'Family'

4. They can do what the Needams family do.. go it alone! I am sure Bens parents were also accused of things- they didn't go suing people! They searched for their son! Not paid lackies.

No sarcasm there.

You have an interesting perspective.  Very interesting !

So peeps cannot eat in what they thought was a safe environment checking their children in a better way than most hotels did?  And they cannot have a glass or two of wine with their meal? 

They were not to expect that something tragic and as far as I am aware something that had never happened berfore, would happen to their little girl.  The apartment patio area was externally illuminated and in view of the tapas group, who were only a little over 50 metres away.   The apartment was, they believed, locked on the other side.

According to the wine waiter, who should know,  their drinking was very moderate. 



"Blood"  money to try and raise money to look for their missing daughter.  What an interesting mind you have.


And "piggy bank for  trips" to stay in 4* hotels" to look for maddy.  "A piggy bank for the family"   I wonder what any ordinary reader will think of you saying that.


SY have searched for Ben and we all applaud that.  The Mccanns did go it alone for about 4 years and if SY for any reason have to give up, they will go it alone again.



Imo, SY are looking foir more than just the perps in this .... but that's another story.

[Mr Gray]

It was a safe resort as long as parents took a few basic precautions such as not leaving toddlers on their own for hours on end.

The courts have already confirmed that Amaral had the right to publish his book regardless of minor discrepancies in it and I for one cant wait for the sequel.

he courts have confirmed that amarlal has a right to publish the book now another court will decide if it is libellous

[Mr Gray]

Just a few thoughts...

In PT civil law, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, unless there is a legal presumption that reverses it.

- In the Murat appeal, the judges found that one existed as he was suing the press. It's not clear to me whether the publication of a book, a TV "documentary" and his various TV interviews count as "press" as most of that section of law seems to refer to newspapers. He has had numerous interviews published in newspapers (or other rags), and used to have a regular column in CdaM. What I'm not sure about is whether potentially libellous material in those interviews / articles are being considered within this trial or whether it will only be limited to the book and documentary.

- I'm also wondering about whether the legal presumption of innocence would apply in this case. It was mentioned in the Murat appeal, but not specifically concerning the applicable presumption in his case, although perhaps it didn't need to be.

The rights that he appears to be defending concern his right to freedom of expression to defend his honour and to contribute to the truth and therefore justice for Madeleine.

However, since the injunction trial, his "honour" has taken a bashing. Back then his suspended conviction over a different case hadn't been upheld at that point and he had political ambitions, which fizzled out.

His lack of understanding of several aspects of the case undermines his credibility as an experienced professional. To what extent the fact that he was speaking out as a "citizen" as opposed to a retired professional (with the inherent credibility factor) will be taken into account remains to be seen.

If the burden of proof is on the mccanns...which I believe it isn't...why have all amarals witnesses being trying to prove his book is faithful to the files and none of the mccanns witnesses have tried to prove the mccanns innocent