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

[Montclair]

It would have been a waste of time as it did not matter whether or not the book was truthful or full of lies. It was not a defamation case.

Whether Amaral's statements had been gospel truth or devilish lies made no difference.

the only question was- were the McCanns harmed by his unlawful activities.

His unlawful activities? Was Gonçalo Amaral prosecuted for them? AFAIK, no.

[OxfordBloo]

seee johns new thread GA is  taking it all the  way they may not see  this money fora long time if ever

The problem is that he has beenfound liable becasue of matters of fact rather than evidence or opinion.

He did deny their innocence and he did use privileged information. They are matters of fact.

His only appeal would be that retired police officers do not owe a duty of confidentiality and to respect innocence, something that the judge makes a very clear case for based on Portuguese and European law.

[Mr Gray]

seee johns new thread GA is  taking it all the  way they may not see  this money fora long time if ever

and as amarals assets are frozen amaral will not see any of his own money and be basically broke

[OxfordBloo]

His unlawful activities? Was Gonçalo Amaral prosecuted for them? AFAIK, no.

Unlawful (civil law) versus illegal (criminal law). Unlawful refers to a civil action that causes a tort against a person in  this case. What he did was not contrary to the criminal law, but contrary to civil law.

For instance it is not illegal (criminal) to deny Bed and Breakfast Accommodation to Gay couples as it is not a criminal offence, but it is unlawful as it gives rise to a tort than can be pursued in a civil case.

[Eleanor]

The problem is that he has beenfound liable becasue of matters of fact rather than evidence or opinion.

He did deny their innocence and he did use privileged information. They are matters of fact.

His only appeal would be that retired police officers do not owe a duty of confidentiality and to respect innocence, something that the judge makes a very clear case for based on Portuguese and European law.

So not much chance of winning an Appeal then.  Unless some other Judge decides that he owed The Justice System nothing at all.

His Perjury Conviction was based on Fact and he lost that Appeal.

[Carana]

It would have been a waste of time as it did not matter whether or not the book was truthful or full of lies. It was not a defamation case.

Whether Amaral's statements had been gospel truth or devilish lies made no difference.

the only question was- were the McCanns harmed by his unlawful activities.

Ok, I can understand that. But would an appeal only be on points of law? Or can new evidence be introduced? If it is only about points of law, wouldn't it have been useful to present countering evidence from the beginning?

[OxfordBloo]

Ok, I can understand that. But would an appeal only be on points of law? Or can new evidence be introduced? If it is only about points of law, wouldn't it have been useful to present countering evidence from the beginning?

There are only two grounds for appeal- Law or Facts.

He did accuse the Mccanns. He did use privileged information.

The only appeal is that the Judge was wrong about the legal constraints on police officers' behaviour.

[Carana]

There are only two grounds for appeal- Law or Facts.

He did accuse the Mccanns. He did use privileged information.

The only appeal is that the Judge was wrong about the legal constraints on police officers' behaviour.

And possibly countering jurisprudence on the amount of damages?

[OxfordBloo]

And possibly countering jurisprudence on the amount of damages?

I don't understand what those words mean.

[Alfred R Jones]

It is NOT about a right to a good name. It is about the right to be allowed peaceful enjoyment of life. Amaral violated that by using material that he acquired unlawfully and declared their guilt when constrained to defend their innocence.

You didn't address my question though.  So - the principle that the right to a good name (or if you prefer the right to be allowed peaceful enjoyment of life) trumps freedom of speech only applies in certain cases, but is not a fundamental principle of the Human Rights act?

[OxfordBloo]

You didn't address my question though.  So - the principle that the right to a good name (or if you prefer the right to be allowed peaceful enjoyment of life) trumps freedom of speech only applies in certain cases, but is not a fundamental principle of the Human Rights act?

There are certain rights to Privacy that have emerged from cases before the ECHR that impinge on this.

This case is NOT about the right to a good name. it is not a Libel case. It is not a case of defamation.

It is merely a case about the misuse of privileged information and breach of legal restraints on officers of the law which result in harm to an individual.

Defamation is not the only harm that can happen to an individual and this case was about harm other than defamation.

Ex police officxers do not have the right to accuse the innocent of being guilty or to use privileged information. Amaral did this in order to make a profit and now he has been sanctioned for it. The truth or otherwise of his book is immaterial.

[Alice Purjorick]

Alice Purjorick

Re: So what's next in the libel trial saga?
« Reply #1384 on: February 06, 2015, 09:32:07 AM »

It might turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory for the McCanns.
It seems to me only their own claim for about 450k is left standing, the unit of currency seems to be a movable feast and the actual value of damages if any to be ruled upon by the judge.
 

[Alfred R Jones]

There are certain rights to Privacy that have emerged from cases before the ECHR that impinge on this.

This case is NOT about the right to a good name. it is not a Libel case. It is not a case of defamation.

It is merely a case about the misuse of privileged information and breach of legal restraints on officers of the law which result in harm to an individual.

Defamation is not the only harm that can happen to an individual and this case was about harm other than defamation.

Ex police officxers do not have the right to accuse the innocent of being guilty or to use privileged information. Amaral did this in order to make a profit and now he has been sanctioned for it. The truth or otherwise of his book is immaterial.

I get all that - what I'm struggling with is - in the judgment the Judge states explicitly that the right to a good name trumps the right to freedom of speech, but she doesn't stipulate that this right only applies in certain circumstances.  Surely if it is a principle of the Human Rights Act then it applies to all, not just some.  You have stated that the video maker and publisher are not bound by this principle and that their rights to freedom of speech are greater than the McCanns' right to a good name (or peaceful enjoyment of life).  Do you see where I'm coming from?

[OxfordBloo]

I get all that - what I'm struggling with is - in the judgment the Judge states explicitly that the right to a good name trumps the right to freedom of speech, but she doesn't stipulate that this right only applies in certain circumstances.  Surely if it is a principle of the Human Rights Act then it applies to all, not just some.  You have stated that the video maker and publisher are not bound by this principle and that their rights to freedom of speech are greater than the McCanns' right to a good name (or peaceful enjoyment of life).  Do you see where I'm coming from?

I find your post incomprehensible. Please provide the quotes that you think support your reasoning as I do not recognise it as a correct summary of the situation.

[Carana]

I don't understand what those words mean.

Sorry. My question is whether or not he could find legal grounds to reduce the extent of damages awarded against him.