Did Goncalo Amaral misrepresent Harrison's findings?

[mercury]

Not at all.

Harrison's abstract musings were the basis of Amaral's wild fantasies.

So now seasoned police officers /experts opinions are abstract musings...nice try...Mark Harrison was not a poet!!!
Mr Amarals opinions likewise, of a seasoned police officer were not wild fantasies

You're off your rocker as they say...similar to lawyers who go for the extreme  in the hope they get something after all

[ferryman]

So now seasoned police officers /experts opinions are abstract musings...nice try...Mark Harrison was not a poet!!!
Mr Amarals opinions likewise, of a seasoned police officer were not wild fantasies

You're off your rocker as they say...similar to lawyers who go for the extreme  in the hope they get something after all

Harrison's musings were abstract musings.

Amaral's misinterpretation of what Harrison said was just that ...

[mercury]

Harrison's musings were abstract musings.

Amaral's misinterpretation of what Harrison said was just that ...

Ths whole forum has seen you try to make black seem white even when it's been shoved  in your face that it isn't so I'm not arguing the toss with you again, it's thoroughly pointless, you carry on playing though, you will, of course, fail

[ferryman]

You have quoted Harrison's "abstract musings" I.e. Report. If you are suggesting that the PJ were wrong in taking notice of Harrison's report, hmmm.

Amaral never acknowledged Harrison in this anecdote about Amaral's own, dead, dog and his (Amaral's) attempts to bury him.

Rather, Amaral plagiarised Harrison's work and wove in his own fantasy to reach a "finding" of Gerry "hiding" Madeleine's body on the beach.

[slartibartfast]

Amaral never acknowledged Harrison in this anecdote about Amaral's own, dead, dog and his (Amaral's) attempts to bury him.

Rather, Amaral plagiarised Harrison's work and wove in his own fantasy to reach a "finding" of Gerry "hiding" Madeleine's body on the beach.

Not libel then.

[pathfinder73]

Actually, there is a detail I missed, but scarcely one that helps Amaral.

Amaral said that Madeleine had been hidden on the beach, and when asked whether, by that, he meant buried, replied, we do not know.

That comes from Harrison's reference to large, immovable boulders where he says (sic) it would be possible to secrete the body of a small child.

That all ties in with a sequence Amaral relates in his book where he is called away from a meeting in the small hours by his distraught wife.  She has found the body of their dog with head injuries and Amaral attempts to dig a hole to bury it, but finds the ground hard to dig.

And the inspiration hits Amaral how much "easier" it would be to hide, rather than bury, a body.

Perish the very suggestion that all might have had something to with Harrison's observation that it would be possible to conceal the body of a small child in large, free-standing rocks on the beach ....

(Mark Harrison)

That is common sense that the nearby beach/sea would be an important area of interest to the police. Madeleine could have been taken there in the dark away from street lights/eye witnesses. Mark Harrison knew it and the Smiths reinforced that theory so I agree if you follow the evidence. The man they saw knows the answer and if he's innocent he can come forward to sue me if he dares. I'm sure SY would love that to happen after 8 years The prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann case finally comes out of hiding to sue Pathfinder 

[Admin]

I take this to be the most questionable passage from Dr Amaral's book

After a week of intense work, Harrison presents the results of his study to my coordinating group. Even if we were expecting it, his conclusions confirm our worst fears. The most plausible scenario is the following: there is no doubt that Madeleine is dead, and her body is hidden somewhere in the area around Praia da Luz. He praises the quality of the work carried out by the Portuguese authorities in trying to find the little girl alive. According to him, the time has come to redirect the searches in order to find, this time, a body hidden in the surrounding area.

Amaral merely states what in his opinion was the most plausible scenario given the results received from Harrison. He does not state that his opinion and those expressed by Harrison are the same,  in reality a somewhat subtle difference.

Harrison was too street savvy to make specific accusations in his Reports, however, Amaral felt he was not similiarly constrained by Portuguese law.

[ferryman]

Amaral merely states what in his opinion was the most plausible scenario given the results received from Harrison. He does not state that his opinion and those expressed by Harrison are the same,  in reality a somewhat subtle difference.

Harrison was too street savvy to make specific accusations in his Reports, however, Amaral felt he was not similiarly constrained by Portuguese law.

Which one?

Madeleine's concealed remains on the beach?

Madeleine driven dead to Huelva, Spain?

Or (more latterly) Madeleine's body slipped into the coffin of a dead woman just before cremation?

[G-Unit]

I think you are confusing the injunction with the libel trial

The (final) ruling in the injunction was that Amaral was entitled to express his opinion.

The libel trial ruled on whether that opinion could be considered factual, or at any rate, was based on purported facts that had not been proven untrue.

In direct contradiction of the higher court the libel trial judge said he was not allowed to express his opinion. Nothing to do with the truth or otherwise of his opinion, but because he was an ex policeman and had been involved in the investigation. He did two things wrong; he used his position which allowed him privileged access to the files and he failed to uphold the presumption of innocence as a retired policeman should.

[Mr Gray]

In direct contradiction of the higher court the libel trial judge said he was not allowed to express his opinion. Nothing to do with the truth or otherwise of his opinion, but because he was an ex policeman and had been involved in the investigation. He did two things wrong; he used his position which allowed him privileged access to the files and he failed to uphold the presumption of innocence as a retired policeman should.

do you have a cite for this

[ferryman]

In direct contradiction of the higher court the libel trial judge said he was not allowed to express his opinion. Nothing to do with the truth or otherwise of his opinion, but because he was an ex policeman and had been involved in the investigation. He did two things wrong; he used his position which allowed him privileged access to the files and he failed to uphold the presumption of innocence as a retired policeman should.

He did three things wrong: the two you mention, and he produced a book and a film that fabricated, misrepresented and distorted the fact.

Add to that, a fourth thing; he disseminated falsehoods in interviews.

Other than that, he was OK  .....

[Montclair]

Why not?

Some people erroneously insist that the libel trial was a damages trial.

And the (developing) saga of the appeal is interesting, to say the least.

Just what are Amaral's grounds of appeal?

To be clear, defamation is falsehoods (in Portugal, proved) that lower reputation. 

In the above extract we have a number of proved falsehoods that assuredly lower reputation, written by Amaral in his book, sold in vast numbers across countries of Europe.

There are many more examples.

And some people as yourself, keep insisting that the damages trial was a libel trial.

[ferryman]

You have quoted Harrison's "abstract musings" I.e. Report. If you are suggesting that the PJ were wrong in taking notice of Harrison's report, hmmm.

I am saying that Amaral was wrong to use Harrison's abstract musings as a basis for his own, wild, fantasies. 

Still more wrong to misrepresent what Harrison said.

[Mr Gray]

And some people as yourself, keep insisting that the damages trial was a libel trial.

it specifically mentioned defamation in the judgement

[stephen25000]

it specifically mentioned defamation in the judgement

Where was the word libel used in the court documents ?