The Supreme Court in Portugal will shortly decide the McCann v Amaral damages case.

[Alice Purjorick]

Key point being that the book was published after the investigation was shelved ....

Anne Guide's version: No proof the book harmed the search for Madeleine

(Quite different and not what the judge said).

What ever; the Court of Appeal, however, overturned the original judgement that Sr Amaral should not profit from the book as he was a retired public servant but remained bound by his responsibilities as such and any resultant proceeds of his should be given to Drs McCann.
The Supreme Court will be looking at the merit of that judgement and nowt else.
I believe the lady's name is Guedes not Guides, Charon....

[ferryman]

The book didn't harm the investigation because it was published after the investigation was shelved.

The judge didn't comment on the search for Madeleine (which, of course, extends to the present day) ....

[G-Unit]

Key point being that the book was published after the investigation was shelved ....

Anne Guide's version: No proof the book harmed the search for Madeleine

(Quite different and not what the judge said).

If you can point us to a quote from Anne Guedes that would be much appreciated. [I assume it's the same person?]

[John]

The book didn't harm the investigation because it was published after the investigation was shelved.

The judge didn't comment on the search for Madeleine (which, of course, extends to the present day) ....

Really, who is searching?

[G-Unit]

The book didn't harm the investigation because it was published after the investigation was shelved.

The judge didn't comment on the search for Madeleine (which, of course, extends to the present day) ....

Perhaps because it wasn't mentioned by the McCanns or their lawyers? Except, of course, when speaking to the media.

[Robittybob1]

I've just finished reading the online version of Amaral's book and I was wondering why the McCanns found it defamatory.  Amaral is obviously confused and factually wrong about many things.  If the judges see things like I do they should split the first award in half.  For Amaral's book was to help find Madeleine some of the profits should go toward the Find Madeleine fund as a goodwill gesture.

[jassi]

I've just finished reading the online version of Amaral's book and I was wondering why the McCanns found it defamatory.  Amaral is obviously confused and factually wrong about many things.  If the judges see things like I do they should split the first award in half.  For Amaral's book was to help find Madeleine some of the profits should go toward the Find Madeleine fund as a goodwill gesture.

I don't think there is any goodwill left in this saga.

[Robittybob1]

I don't think there is any goodwill left in this saga.

This is a Court Order.  Enforced goodwill.

[jassi]

This is a Court Order. Enforced goodwill.

Why should it do that?  Is it not a contradiction in term?

[Carana]

I've just finished reading the online version of Amaral's book and I was wondering why the McCanns found it defamatory.  Amaral is obviously confused and factually wrong about many things.  If the judges see things like I do they should split the first award in half.  For Amaral's book was to help find Madeleine some of the profits should go toward the Find Madeleine fund as a goodwill gesture.

Why would someone who'd clearly "misunderstood" so many aspects, but who has an ego /sense of entitlement / disgruntlement / honour / financial stakes the size of the Michelin Man deliberately sit on a pin?

[Robittybob1]

Why would someone who'd clearly "misunderstood" so many aspects, but who has an ego /sense of entitlement / disgruntlement / honour / financial stakes the size of the Michelin Man deliberately sit on a pin?

Was that original Carana?  It was rather good. Thanks for the entertainment. 

[mercury]

Hurry up supreme court

Its time

[ferryman]

It's a curious race, between those who want the Supreme Court to bring down the dice (one way or the other) in the libel trial, and those who want Operation Grange to (finally) reveal the mystery of what happened to Madeleine and bring perpetrators to book.

Dunno.

It'll be a bit odd if Operation Grange bring third-parties (not remotely the McCanns or any of their friends) to book for crime(s) against Madeleine, and the Portuguese Supreme Court finds Amaral is entitled to express a view contrary to that of the Prosecutors in the (archived) process.

Not sure what to think.

Actually, I am sure what to think ....

[sadie]

It's a curious race, between those who want the Supreme Court to bring down the dice (one way or the other) in the libel trial, and those who want Operation Grange to (finally) reveal the mystery of what happened to Madeleine and bring perpetrators to book.

Dunno.

It'll be a bit odd if Operation Grange bring third-parties (not remotely the McCanns or any of their friends) to book for crime(s) against Madeleine, and the Portuguese Supreme Court finds Amaral is entitled to express a view contrary to that of the Prosecutors in the (archived) process.

Not sure what to think.

Actually, I am sure what to think ....

What an injustice that would be.

Surely the Portuguese would rail against such a thing ?   But of course they are used to the Salazar, old style, so called Justice.   

They might accept things that we would not.

My PT friend even thought that torture was OK to force a "confession" ...cos using that they were able to "solve" crimes.

I hope and think I made him reconsider it and change his mind.   But it was deeply entrenched in his mind that it was OK

[mercury]

It's a curious race, between those who want the Supreme Court to bring down the dice (one way or the other) in the libel trial, and those who want Operation Grange to (finally) reveal the mystery of what happened to Madeleine and bring perpetrators to book.

Dunno.

It'll be a bit odd if Operation Grange bring third-parties (not remotely the McCanns or any of their friends) to book for crime(s) against Madeleine, and the Portuguese Supreme Court finds Amaral is entitled to express a view contrary to that of the Prosecutors in the (archived) process.

Not sure what to think.

Actually, I am sure what to think ....

Well, you know i know every tom dick and harry knows that is not ever going to happen now so why worry about it vis a vis a legal case, have a cigar instead