Madeleine McCann's parents win €500k in damages against former police chief.

[faithlilly]

Good news. It would seem that in just over a day the appeal fund set up by well wishers for Amaral has reached over £2000.

[Eleanor]

The damages were not awarded for libel. Libel was excluded previously. They were awarded for damages caused by the unlawful actions of a public servant.

The 82 page judgement does not mention the words "Libel" or "Defamation" once.

What Unlawful Action?

[jassi]

Good news. It would seem that in just over a day the appeal fund set up by well wishers for Amaral has reached over £2000.

I saw on another forum that the dirty tricks brigade was out last night trying to get the appeal fund shut down.

[OxfordBloo]

Were such a case to be heard on England it would have been part Criminal and part Civil.

Amaral would have been charged either with Misconduct in a Public Office or under the Official Secrets Act.

The McCanns would have been free to sue not for Libel (the actual words being covered by rights to free speech) but could have sued for emotional distress or even Bodily Harm. Damages might have been awarded against Amaral for causing such harm, but it would not be for defamation, but for distress in the same way that a reckless driver can be sued for the distress caused by a road traffic accident or the way victims of sexual offences can claim damages for distress. 

[OxfordBloo]

What Unlawful Action?

It is unlawful for a member of the Portuguese Police to either use information gained in the course of an investigation and not otherwise released to communicate to others particularly for personal financial gain. Additionally it is unlawful for such a person (legally involved, not just as a citizen) to suggest that someone not convicted of a crime is other than totally innocent- this is seen as part of the Guarantee of the presumption of innocence.

In England the police never say they 'know' who committed a crime when no trial has taken place, even when the facts strongly suggest it- euphemisms are used such as 'investigations are continuing' or 'we haves suspects but are keeping an open mind'.

[OxfordBloo]

I saw on another forum that the dirty tricks brigade was out last night trying to get the appeal fund shut down.

I read somewhere that the funding page had been pulled.

[faithlilly]

I read somewhere that the funding page had been pulled.

Thanks to the work of a few tenacious supporters it has been reinstated. 

[Lyall]

Were such a case to be heard on England it would have been part Criminal and part Civil.

Amaral would have been charged either with Misconduct in a Public Office or under the Official Secrets Act.

The McCanns would have been free to sue not for Libel (the actual words being covered by rights to free speech) but could have sued for emotional distress or even Bodily Harm. Damages might have been awarded against Amaral for causing such harm, but it would not be for defamation, but for distress in the same way that a reckless driver can be sued for the distress caused by a road traffic accident or the way victims of sexual offences can claim damages for distress.

And they would have to prove it.

[jassi]

Thanks to the work of a few tenacious supporters it has been reinstated.

I believe that any money raised is protected from falling into the hands of the McCanns, which might encourage  people to donate.  I certainly wouldn't want to donate if I thought they could get their sticky little paws on it.   

[Eleanor]

It is unlawful for a member of the Portuguese Police to either use information gained in the course of an investigation and not otherwise released to communicate to others particularly for personal financial gain. Additionally it is unlawful for such a person (legally involved, not just as a citizen) to suggest that someone not convicted of a crime is other than totally innocent- this is seen as part of the Guarantee of the presumption of innocence.

In England the police never say they 'know' who committed a crime when no trial has taken place, even when the facts strongly suggest it- euphemisms are used such as 'investigations are continuing' or 'we haves suspects but are keeping an open mind'.

Thank You.  Many of us have wondered about this but were unable to find any confirmation.

Can you explain why Amaral wasn't arrested?

[Mr Gray]

That is the crux of it, the Judge has spoken.  The case was all about damages and damages alone.

As regards the last comment, this again is stated clearly in the judgement.  Any award is based on amongst other factors, the illegal earnings so if the earnings were small thus the award would have been small and so on.

The criterion to be followed in determining the "quantum" of the compensation is equity, should be considered the degree of litigant's fault, the seriousness of the offence and, because particularly relevant in this case, the value of benefits earned by one with the offence.
The offense committed to the good name of the injured had very wide dissemination (paragraphs 27, 28, 30 and 47), having been the subject of intense media coverage both in Portugal and in the UK.
District of Lisbon
Lisbon - Inst. Central - 1st Civil Chamber - J15
Palace of Justice, Border Marquis Street - 1098-001 Lisboa
Phone: 213846400 Fax: 213874221 Mail: lisboa.centralcivel@tribunais.org.pt
Proc.Nº 1454 / 09.5TVLSB
It has been shown that as a result of the same Kate and Gerald McCann authors suffered personal injury that deserve the protection of law (paragraphs 81, 82 and 83).
The same offense allowed the defendant earn the amount of about Euro 382,000.00 of income (paragraphs 33 and 62, and noted that the latter relates to the proceeds with the sale of the DVD so that it takes little strict, but or so it stops being materially true, because if the DVD was only sold at the end of April 2009, the process for their marketing began on March 7, 2008 with the contract concluded with the defendant VC Films, and this defendant the payment of Euros 40,000.00 documented on pages. 2095).
In light of these vectors, it is deemed appropriate and proportionate compensation petitioned by those authors, which is Euro 250,000.00 (two hundred and fifty thousand euros) for each, to be added under paragraph 3 of article 805º code Civil, default interest at the statutory rate of civil interest, from the date of Gonçalo Amaral defendant's quote for action (January 5, 2010 -. fl ​​151) until full payment.

perhaps all those who say damages were not paid for defamation explain what the judge means by "the offence committed to the good name of the injured"......that's defamation...aka..libel

[misty]

I believe that any money raised is protected from falling into the hands of the McCanns, which might encourage  people to donate.  I certainly wouldn't want to donate if I thought they could get their sticky little paws on it.   

It's not just Amaral who has had a donation fund closed by GoFundMe. Ms. Baulch may have jumped the gun a little. Certainly other supporters are recommending donations be made into that private bank account which attracts no admin fees (or protection for suckers).
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/anti-gay-bakers-told-pay-135-000-couple-182021820.html?bcmt_s=m#QF2T9yl
*snipped*
 The Kleins, who closed their store in September 2013 amid all the negative publicity and now operate it from their home, say the ruling could bankrupt their family of seven.

A GoFundMe page raised more than $100,000 for them before it was shut down on Friday.

The website said it does not allow donations for anyone found to be in violation of the law.

"Satan's really at work," the Kleins said on their Facebook page.

They urged supporters to donate instead through the website of Samaritan's Purse, a Christian aid group.

An Indiana pizzeria raised more than $840,000 through GoFundMe after a backlash when its owners made anti-gay comments.

But GoFundMe said the parlour had not broken that state's law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[John]

perhaps all those who say damages were not paid for defamation explain what the judge means by "the offence committed to the good name of the injured"......that's defamation...aka..libel

Not in Portugal Dave, as you know by now the laws are completely different to England.

[John]

As I remember the judge in the injunction hearing in January 2010 used the same arguments in her verdict to uphold the book ban and that decision was eventually overturned by the Tribunal de Relação in October 2010. So nothing is water tight. The TdR stated that, although Gonçalo Amaral was a public servant, he was also a citizen with the same rights to freedom of expression and opinion as anyone else. This same court also stated that as the McCanns used the press and media for their advantage, they therefore could not expect not be subject to adverse opinion.

As for the book ban, in Portuguese law, the decision made by the Tribunal de Relação is jurisprudence and cannot be overturned by a lower court, that is the civil court. This could be a very important point for the appeal.

BTW, the lawyers have finally received today official notification and have 40 days to make their appeal.

Just catching up on things so thank you for explaining this Montclair. The legal issues in Portugal appear to be a minefield but what you state makes sense.  On the other hand the judge has made a ruling on the basis that the McCann rights were infringed by the book and the dvd so not banning them probably wasn't an option?  It will be interesting to see what an appeal court makes of it all.

[John]

Somebody needs to correct the world media if this was not a libel trial. Almost every headline has the word "libel" in it.

The British press and at least one British-run newspaper in Portugal have used the terms defamation and libel but we have to be careful to distinguish the adjective from the noun.  In the strictest Portuguese legal sense the case was not one of defamation or libel per se but merely a claim for damages representing a breach of two former arguido's rights to be considered innocent until proven guilty.