Australian Ch7 documentary claims new lead in search for missing Madeleine McCann.

[jassi]

The Supreme Court of Portugal, which is fast becoming a farce imo.

Oh Yes ? With whom?

[carlymichelle]

our australian news  site ninemsn has reported pat brown is going to sue our australian channel 7 media i hope she  does  i didnt   watch it as i have bene busy all weekend but it sounds like they took her  out of context

[Mr Gray]

Evidently, you don't comprehend the Supreme Court Judgement, and the fact that the legal action is over in Portugal.

I do understand it
The court decide amarals right to free speech allowed him to defame the McCanns
Don't just say rubbish
Tell me what is incorrect with that post

[Eleanor]

Oh Yes ? With whom?

Well, certainly me.  And my opinion does count for something.

[Eleanor]

our australian news  site ninemsn has reported pat brown is going to sue our australian channel 7 media i hope she  does  i didnt   watch it as i have bene busy all weekend but it sounds like they took her  out of context

Meanwhile, Mrs Livingstone, what did you think of The Play?

[stephen25000]

I do understand it
The court decide amarals right to free speech allowed him to defame the McCanns
Don't just say rubbish
Tell me what is incorrect with that post

The Mccanns lost.

What do you fail to understand about that ?

[ferryman]

Posters are forgetting that defamation is an opinion unless and until it's tested in court. The McCanns learned that lesson on the one occasion when their complaints were legally examined.

Posters are not 'forgetting' at all.

Libel, in its simplest form, is lies that lower reputation.

Except (seemingly) in Portugal, where lies that lower reputation (apparently) pass muster if you call those lies 'opinion'.

Certainly by English libel law, even Amaral's lie that 'no one talked about murder' would be libel, since Amaral was either too incompetent to understand that he headed up a murder enquiry; or lied that he didn't (despite understanding that he did) in a (perversely) successful bid to keep his book the right side of the libel laws.

[stephen25000]

Well, certainly me.  And my opinion does count for something.

In what way Eleanor ?

We are all posters on here, venting our opinions.

..and absolutely no influence whatsoever in Portugal or it's legal system.

[Mr Gray]

The Mccanns lost.

What do you fail to understand about that ?

If you read my post that's exactly what I have said

[John]

so pat browns going to sue....not often I agree with rdh

@Richard D. Hall wrote:
If Pat Brown signed a contract I would recommend reading the small print.  I would be surprised if it does not say words to the effect that they CAN mis-represent what she is saying.  Their contracts normally state that they take ownership of the content and they can edit it in any way they like.


Richard on this occasion is absolutely right

Not to the extent that it defames her though.

[stephen25000]

Not to the extent that it defames her though.

It would appear that she might have a very good case.

[jassi]

If you read my post that's exactly what I have said

Hold the Front Page - Davel agrees with Stephen   

[stephen25000]

Hold the Front Page - Davel agrees with Stephen   

We must have transported to another Quantum Reality.

[John]

I do understand it
The court decide amarals right to free speech allowed him to defame the McCanns
Don't just say rubbish
Tell me what is incorrect with that post

Can I remind that Madeleine's disappearance is still an open book (excuse pun).

[John]

Hold the Front Page - Davel agrees with Stephen   

Yes, both agreed to disagree long ago