Should the €500k plus interest have been confiscated by the State?

[stephen25000]

We are all well aware about the reason for the award. Nothing to do with Liabel. The lack of evidence of 'pain and suffering', and negative impact on the 'search' 'caused' by the book should have had the 'case' thrown out. And technically it was- on those grounds. They were awarded 'lottery money due to something which should have been dealt with by a criminal court- if a crime had been committed  by Amaral.

So, if Sr Amaral is arrested, charged and convicted of his book writing criminality then the chances of him being fined €50000.00 is..well...not realistic now is it?

So there you have it...parents who facilitated their daughters fate ( whatever that was /is) get fame, money and those who disbelieve their version (one of many) accounts of what happened that night go freee... live happily ever after...

They used the laws to protect themselves which shows them to be cruel in the eyes of many.

The truth is out there waiting to be found!

Excellent post.

[Benice]

Sorry to disappoint you but the McCanns with their lawyer Isabel Duarte filed a complaint for breach of judicial secrecy in 2010 and nothing came of it!

Maybe Portugal should think about getting rid of the laws re judicial secrecy or start applying them?

It seems to me that Judicial Secrecy laws have been abused by some members of the PJ against people who they have decided are guilty of a crime -  and who they wish to turn public opinion against  - before the case even gets to court - mainly through the media.     At the same time their 'victim's  are told that if they do the same they will be arrested for breaking the secrecy laws.

Surely that state of affairs urgently needs to be addressed?

[Miss Taken Identity]

I do believe that Team McCann were also feeding the 'press' via 'family friends' and did they not break the law by procuring private investigators?  Oh dearie dearie me  I saw  POT CALLING A KETTLE BLACK!

[Alice Purjorick]

The rule is "having been a policeman, even though retired, thou shalt not publish a book accusing people of committing crimes".

 

In that case it is immaterial whether he started to write the book in or out of office.
My view is if he broke the law he should be punished as that law demands. There are those who seem to think the punishment should go up on an exponential scale because he started to write the book whilst remaining in office.

[Miss Taken Identity]

In that case it is immaterial whether he started to write the book in or out of office.
My view is if he broke the law he should be punished as that law demands. There are those who seem to think the punishment should go up on an exponential scale because he started to write the book whilst remaining in office.

...and going by some posts on here the same 'some' would be standing at the tree, with the Garrott, gleefully awaiting the hanging!- with or without a trial!

But Kate n Gerry will spend the money wisely I am sure. BUT then, the others being sued did not have to pay anything- they must be 'innocent'- so no liable there then!

[Carana]

In that case it is immaterial whether he started to write the book in or out of office.
My view is if he broke the law he should be punished as that law demands. There are those who seem to think the punishment should go up on an exponential scale because he started to write the book whilst remaining in office.

As I'm not convinced that he actually turned up for work, I expect that he had time on his hands. Writing it isn't an issue, but sharing elements of the files is a breach.

On the other hand, from what I can gather of the ruling on that point, it doesn't seem to be so much the fact that he broke judicial secrecy that is a major issue, but rather the timing of the publication of it (and the associated promo tour) that deflected coverage away from the AG's somewhat different conclusion (based as it was on an analysis of the full dossier, not cherry-picked details from the first few months).

[Carana]

Maybe Portugal should think about getting rid of the laws re judicial secrecy or start applying them?

It seems to me that Judicial Secrecy laws have been abused by some members of the PJ against people who they have decided are guilty of a crime -  and who they wish to turn public opinion against  - before the case even gets to court - mainly through the media.     At the same time their 'victim's  are told that if they do the same they will be arrested for breaking the secrecy laws.

Surely that state of affairs urgently needs to be addressed?

There has been a change in the application of judicial secrecy apparently towards becoming more of an exception rather than the rule. Not sure if I can dig anything up on that, but JP might.

[Miss Taken Identity]

There has been a change in the application of judicial secrecy apparently towards becoming more of an exception rather than the rule. Not sure if I can dig anything up on that, but JP might.

And the laws broken by the McCanns? Private investigators, and Brian Kennedy talking to witnesses?
or is this just a one way assassination?

[John]

Getting back on track again, the judgement went to great lengths to explain why the award of €250,000 to each parent plus accumulated interest was made.  Question is however, was such an amount excessive in the circumstances?

How can one possibly equate Amaral's earnings from his book and DVD etc with the sufferings of the plaintiffs?

[ferryman]

There has been a change in the application of judicial secrecy apparently towards becoming more of an exception rather than the rule. Not sure if I can dig anything up on that, but JP might.

Way back, I remember seeing a revised model of the way information about a current investigation might be imparted into the wider domain and I recall being struck that it seemed to mirror the way information about UK investigations is released, with laws very similar to our own sub juducie laws, and a definite relaxation on the (official!) position of absolutely zero information being released.

[Jean-Pierre]

In that case it is immaterial whether he started to write the book in or out of office.
My view is if he broke the law he should be punished as that law demands. There are those who seem to think the punishment should go up on an exponential scale because he started to write the book whilst remaining in office.

It is immaterial. And the reason why it is seen as not a very good idea for current or ex police officers writing books or making documentaries accusing suspects in their cases of committing crimes is, I hope, obvious. 

The fact that the files would eventually be made public, and Amarals "rights" are not relevant. 

I suspect that had he written a very similar book, and taken part in a very similar documentary, but had extended it to included the PP / AG statements in July 2008, he would have "gotten away with it"   But would his story have sold so well "I thought the parents had dunnit, the police investigated and the PP decided they hadn't" is not terribly compelling.

The crux of the judgement is that he had taken away the McCanns right to innocence in the eyes of the law - as a police officer he really should have known better.

[Eleanor]

It is immaterial. And the reason why it is seen as not a very good idea for current or ex police officers writing books or making documentaries accusing suspects in their cases of committing crimes is, I hope, obvious. 

The fact that the files would eventually be made public, and Amarals "rights" are not relevant. 

I suspect that had he written a very similar book, and taken part in a very similar documentary, but had extended it to included the PP / AG statements in July 2008, he would have "gotten away with it"   But would his story have sold so well "I thought the parents had dunnit, the police investigated and the PP decided they hadn't" is not terribly compelling.

The crux of the judgement is that he had taken away the McCanns right to innocence in the eyes of the law - as a police officer he really should have known better.

He probably did know, but it hadn't yet occurred to him that The State were no longer accepting the word of The PJ as absolute.

Personally, I think that any injured party should get the sum total of any profit made which caused distress.

[Miss Taken Identity]

Getting back on track again, the judgement went to great lengths to explain why the award of €250,000 to each parent plus accumulated interest was made.  Question is however, was such an amount excessive in the circumstances?

How can one possibly equate Amaral's earnings from his book and DVD etc with the sufferings of the plaintiffs?

Well John Indeed!

I thought it was established that the book did not cause suffering to the extent the McCanns claimed, and coulldn't evidence! and also it was due to Sr Amaral position with regards to access to files-which is claimed on here as being'criminal'?

[John]

Well John Indeed!

I thought it was established that the book did not cause suffering to the extent the McCanns claimed, and coulldn't evidence! and also it was due to Sr Amaral position with regards to access to files-which is claimed on here as being'criminal'?

Yes, I should have said sufferings in part.

Surely if Amaral broke the secrecy laws this was a mantle for criminal prosecutors to pursue and not something a Judge in a civil trial should have concerned herself with?

[Carana]

Way back, I remember seeing a revised model of the way information about a current investigation might be imparted into the wider domain and I recall being struck that it seemed to mirror the way information about UK investigations is released, with laws very similar to our own sub juducie laws, and a definite relaxation on the (official!) position of absolutely zero information being released.

My impression is that Portugal is moving forward at an accelerated rate, but change takes time and resources.

The previous blanket judicial secrecy was an open invitation for a potentially corrupt relationship between the PJ and the media. As we know, there are scandals over such corruption in probably every country, but the absence of a police media relations service can only make it more endemic, IMO.

As a PT newspaper editor once said: "Judicial secrecy is like traffic regulations. Everyone knows they exist, but no one takes any notice."

Establishing a win-win functional service required rethinking the laws. If the laws have been revised, then that may pave the way, but establishing one will presumably require more resources - including a clear strategy (which itself would presumably involve change management).