Goncalo Amaral interviewed after the Appeal Court decision.

[Robittybob1]

when you supply proof of parental involvement or proof of maddie leaving the apartment on her own then the possibility of an abductor exists

What is the logic behind that statement?

[Robittybob1]

How did the PJ get hold of Kate's diary?
From the interview:

"Kate's diary, seized a few months later, revealed the whole machinery set up by the family to feed the abduction thesis"

"The diary is among a number of personal items prosecutors want from the parents of missing Madeleine McCann, sources close to the investigation have said.

Portuguese police have passed on a request to the British authorities to take the possessions from the family's home in Rothley, Leicestershire, according to reports."  http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/society/law_order/whats%2Bin%2Bkate%2Bmccanns%2Bdiary/797747.html

[Robittybob1]

Leaking the content of Kate's diary to the press is not a good look for the PJ.  In the interview GA tries to make ground referring to the diary seems he is trying to justify this.  The diary was never released officially into the public domain there fore I'd say it sits badly that Goncalo refers to a personal document.

Leveson: "..... The diary was seized by the Portuguese police and I have a, just to make it clear, I have an understanding that the Portuguese authorities required it to be returned with no copies kept but that it some way it found it, its way to the…"

[Eleanor]

Leaking the content of Kate's diary to the press is not a good look for the PJ.  In the interview GA tries to make ground referring to the diary seems he is trying to justify this.  The diary was never released officially into the public domain there fore I'd say it sits badly that Goncalo refers to a personal document.

Leveson: "..... The diary was seized by the Portuguese police and I have a, just to make it clear, I have an understanding that the Portuguese authorities required it to be returned with no copies kept but that it some way it found it, its way to the…"

The Copies taken by The PJ were ordered to be destroyed by a Portuguese Judge.  This didn't happen.  A clear breach of Portuguese Law.

[stephen25000]

The Copies taken by The PJ were ordered to be destroyed by a Portuguese Judge.  This didn't happen.  A clear breach of Portuguese Law.

There have been multiple leaks from both sides in this case.

[Robittybob1]

There have been multiple leaks from both sides in this case.

One side is suppose to be upholding the law not breaking it.

[barrier]

One side is suppose to be upholding the law not breaking it.

Aren't both supposed to do that,or are you saying its ok for one but lets criticise the other.

[stephen25000]

One side is suppose to be upholding the law not breaking it.

Really.

If the McCann's were leaking material from 'sources close to the Mccanns', they were breaking the law.

[G-Unit]

Although it's taken as a fact that the PJ leaked Kate's diary I don't think there's any evidence that they did?

[kizzy]

The diary was wrote to be read, by others IMO

[Eleanor]

Although it's taken as a fact that the PJ leaked Kate's diary I don't think there's any evidence that they did?

They obviously didn't destroy the copies, as ordered.  Or do you think someone else took a copy while The PJ weren't watching?

[Brietta]

Although it's taken as a fact that the PJ leaked Kate's diary I don't think there's any evidence that they did?

Extract from the transcript: Leveson Inquiry

GARNHAM The third suggested clarification, Sir, is this, and it is in fact me rather seeking a clarification from Mr. Sherborne. He mentioned a little while ago that Mr…, that the diary of Mrs. McCann had been obtained in some way or other from the police. That obviously caused us a little concern. I suspect its the Portuguese…

LEVESON I read that as the Portuguese police.

SHERBORNE I thought I had said actually it was the Portuguese police but if I didn’t make that clear, it was the Portuguese police.

GARNHAM I am grateful for that. That will enable…

LEVESON Yes well, as I recollect, and I don’t know whether I’m giving evidence of this from what I’ve read or from the statements or whether Mr. Sherborne said it. The diary was seized by the Portuguese police and I have a, just to make it clear, I have an understanding that the Portuguese authorities required it to be returned with no copies kept but that it some way it found it, its way to the…

GARNHAM I suspect that comes from the statement of Mr. McCann but it doesn’t matter as long as the position is dealt with.
https://madeleinemccannthetruth.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/leveson-inquiry-kate-mccanns-diary/

[G-Unit]

They obviously didn't destroy the copies, as ordered.  Or do you think someone else took a copy while The PJ weren't watching?

Let's look at the evidence. There were 189 pages from two exercise-books and one notepad. They were photocopied by Joao Carlos on 10th September 2007. They were described as 'two diaries' when received by the Court on 13th September. The Court ordered the photocopies to be translated and the translator returned them on 4th October. On 27th June 2008 the judge ruled that the diaries were personal and should be destroyed.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BIBLE.htm

On 13th September 2007 the Daily Mail claimed that Portuguese newspapers were printing extracts from the diary (s). It said;

Kate is alleged to have moaned about her missing daughter in her diary and the lack of help she gets from her husband with domestic chores and bringing up their three kids.
Portuguese tabloid Correio da Manha headlined its front page today: "Kate insults her children in her diary." It claimed on an inside page: "She complains frequently that her children are 'hysterical' and speaks of Madeleine as a child whose excess activity exhausts her.
"She tells also how Gerry doesn't help her with the family chores and that she has to cope alone with her two youngest children.".....Publico, a daily newspaper with a more serious reputation, also claimed Kate's worries about her children's behaviour and her difficulties disciplining them were contained in the diary.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-481645/McCanns-facing-fresh-slurs-Portuguese-press-Kates-diaries.html#ixzz4bg9NWumM
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Other details revealed by the Portuguese newspapers can be read here;

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id166.htm

 
Extracts printed by the News of the World on 14th September 2008 consisted of 135 pages covering 28th April 2007 to 31st July 2007. They claimed to have received them from a Portuguese journalist;

"appalled by the sickening smear campaign against the McCann's."

The News of the World 'diary' contained little of the information printed by the Portuguese newspapers. That information probably wasn't invented, however, because some of it appears in 'madeleine'.

I conclude that Kate's diary and notes were given to Portuguese journalists by someone. The candidates being the PJ, Court officials or the translator. Amaral wasn't the culprit; he was long gone in July 2008. If a Portuguese journalist gave (or sold) the diary to the NotW he/she gave them incomplete information or they censored it before printing.

[Robittybob1]

Aren't both supposed to do that,or are you saying its ok for one but lets criticise the other.

Is one side supposedly criminal an the other law-abiding?  Which side is which?

[Robittybob1]

Let's look at the evidence. There were 189 pages from two exercise-books and one notepad. They were photocopied by Joao Carlos on 10th September 2007. They were described as 'two diaries' when received by the Court on 13th September. The Court ordered the photocopies to be translated and the translator returned them on 4th October. On 27th June 2008 the judge ruled that the diaries were personal and should be destroyed.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BIBLE.htm

On 13th September 2007 the Daily Mail claimed that Portuguese newspapers were printing extracts from the diary (s). It said;

Kate is alleged to have moaned about her missing daughter in her diary and the lack of help she gets from her husband with domestic chores and bringing up their three kids.
Portuguese tabloid Correio da Manha headlined its front page today: "Kate insults her children in her diary." It claimed on an inside page: "She complains frequently that her children are 'hysterical' and speaks of Madeleine as a child whose excess activity exhausts her.
"She tells also how Gerry doesn't help her with the family chores and that she has to cope alone with her two youngest children.".....Publico, a daily newspaper with a more serious reputation, also claimed Kate's worries about her children's behaviour and her difficulties disciplining them were contained in the diary.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-481645/McCanns-facing-fresh-slurs-Portuguese-press-Kates-diaries.html#ixzz4bg9NWumM
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Other details revealed by the Portuguese newspapers can be read here;

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id166.htm

 
Extracts printed by the News of the World on 14th September 2008 consisted of 135 pages covering 28th April 2007 to 31st July 2007. They claimed to have received them from a Portuguese journalist;

"appalled by the sickening smear campaign against the McCann's."

The News of the World 'diary' contained little of the information printed by the Portuguese newspapers. That information probably wasn't invented, however, because some of it appears in 'madeleine'.

I conclude that Kate's diary and notes were given to Portuguese journalists by someone. The candidates being the PJ, Court officials or the translator. Amaral wasn't the culprit; he was long gone in July 2008. If a Portuguese journalist gave (or sold) the diary to the NotW he/she gave them incomplete information or they censored it before printing.

Why did the Portuguese Judge get involved?  Were the PJ planning to make these documents public and hence they needed the Judges's say so to do this?

If the PJ wanted to make them public and the Judge said "No", who is the most likely candidate to leak them?