Pick any sentence from Kate's book.

[Alfie]

The twins are going to need to be tough to read about their Mummy and Daddy.  So the McCanns should try and write a bestseller.  Goncalo would have run out of ammo.

I'd suggest a book about Amaral's career focusing on the cock-ups in the McCann case, the perjury conviction, the bizarre way in which the Cipriano case was conducted, the alleged marital violence and infidelities and drunkenness etc.  No one would be able to complain that it wasn't Kates right to publish such a book, surely?

[ferryman]

Someone convince me both parties did not write books to show the author in the best light and the "opposing side" in the worst light rather than be on some high moral plane as purported.
Sr Amaral's book has the advantage that it was declared in court there was nothing in the book that was not in the files and the book did not infringe the McCanns rights.

Heaps in the book is not in the files.

Tell me where, in the files, it says Amaral contradicted and "corrected" Prior on interpretation of the forensic files?

Tell me where, in the files, it says the FSS produced a "preliminary" report and a "final" report?

Tell me where, in the files, it says that Harrison changed the enquiry to one for a little girl assumed dead.

That's just for starters.

No, what seems to have smoothed way for Amaral to claim his ill-gotten gains is Kate's book.

Simple as that.

Amaral quit the PJ to free himself up to write any (otherwise) libellous twaddle he wanted and quitting the PJ gave him precisely that latitude ....

[G-Unit]

How is that any more offensive or outrageous than accusing specific individuals of heinous crimes including, cover up, body occultation and fraud? 

Whilst we're at it can you answer my question about rights please?  Would Amaral have had no right whatsoever to say the above in your view?

My opinion is that no-one has the right to make unfounded allegations.
The difference imo is that had Amaral done it there would have been outrage in the UK. I can imagine the headlines;

Disgraced Portuguese ex cop accuses authorities in the UK of being scared to speak out against the McCanns

[ferryman]

My opinion is that no-one has the right to make unfounded allegations.
The difference imo is that had Amaral done it there would have been outrage in the UK. I can imagine the headlines;

Disgraced Portuguese ex cop accuses authorities in the UK of being scared to speak out against the McCanns

Do you dispute that Amaral is disgraced?

[faithlilly]

I'd suggest a book about Amaral's career focusing on the cock-ups in the McCann case, the perjury conviction, the bizarre way in which the Cipriano case was conducted, the alleged marital violence and infidelities and drunkenness etc.  No one would be able to complain that it wasn't Kates right to publish such a book, surely?

Alleged being the word Alfie. There is nothing to back up the rumours of infidelity and drunkeness but the pro- McCann rumour mill.

[Carana]

Alleged being the word Alfie. There is nothing to back up the rumours of infidelity and drunkeness but the pro- McCann rumour mill.

Are you sure about that, Faith?  &%+((£

[Alfie]

My opinion is that no-one has the right to make unfounded allegations.
The difference imo is that had Amaral done it there would have been outrage in the UK. I can imagine the headlines;

Disgraced Portuguese ex cop accuses authorities in the UK of being scared to speak out against the McCanns

If it is your opinion that no one has the right to make unfounded allegations then surely your admonishment must also extend to Amaral? 

IIRC Amaral has already criticised the UK authorities along similar lines to the imaginary headline you've written above...?

[Alfie]

Alleged being the word Alfie. There is nothing to back up the rumours of infidelity and drunkeness but the pro- McCann rumour mill.

Shouldn't be any reason why Kate shouldn't profit from writing about them in a book is there?

[jassi]

Why should she want to?

[Alfie]

I don't recall their being mass outrage in this country when Amaral said this last year:

When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out.

“Don’t forget that the British secret services followed the case right from the beginning. I don’t know if that information will be made available but if it’s like the United States, it takes years to have access to confidential information.”

There he is alleging a British cover up at the highest level, and his evidence is - what exactly?  Did the country go into meltdown over his remarks?  I think most people never heard them, or if they did they rolled their eyes at this absurd little man.

[Alfie]

Why should she want to?

For the same reasons Amaral wrote his book maybe?  Money?  Spite? 

[Alice Purjorick]

Regarding the underlined bit.... are you sure about that??

That's not my recollection.

OK fair doos so you do not recall that bit. Lets dump that and deal with my basic postulation.
Now convince me of the first sentence. That is my sticking point.
Why do the red team think Kate's book is the second coming and that Sr Amarals book is a pack of lies and the blue team think vice versa ?. I don't see any rational reasoning for it other than Winwood, Clapton & Baker ie Blind Faith.
"You" have been arguing the same point from the same stances for about 5 years and can now only keep repeating yourselves to no convincing end.

[jassi]

For the same reasons Amaral wrote his book maybe?  Money?  Spite?

Yes, that would figure.

[Brietta]

Someone convince me both parties did not write books to show the author in the best light and the "opposing side" in the worst light rather than be on some high moral plane as purported.
Sr Amaral's book has the advantage that it was declared in court there was nothing in the book that was not in the files and the book did not infringe the McCanns rights.

There was nothing in Kate McCann's book which could be even remotely construed as a character assassination or defamation of anyone.
The same cannot be said of Goncalo Amaral's book ... although it does seem that writing defamatory, unfounded accusations is acceptable in Portuguese courts.

Perhaps Kate should have written her book in Portugal and used a Portuguese publisher.  Maybe she could do that for the next one.

[Alice Purjorick]

There was nothing in Kate McCann's book which could be even remotely construed as a character assassination or defamation of anyone.
The same cannot be said of Goncalo Amaral's book ... although it does seem that writing defamatory, unfounded accusations is acceptable in Portuguese courts.

Perhaps Kate should have written her book in Portugal and used a Portuguese publisher.  Maybe she could do that for the next one.

Why don't you read my original post and reply to what I said and not what you say I said or think I said or what you you want to argue with.
That MO is becoming tiresome in the extreme.