What is libel on the Madeleine McCann board?

[Robittybob1]

with robs approval

And you won't get it, unless John OKs it.

[Holly Goodhead]

welcome back Holly...something i have repeatedly said...Libel has to cause significant damage to reputation....nothing here would do that

  Davel.  (I've recently taken on an Edwardian property so had my hands full.  On the jungle garden now but I'm being a bit big girls blousy as its too cold for that at the moment).

[Robittybob1]

That’s perfectly fine.  Calling a man a liar is not libel, we’ve learned something here today.

I made the distinction of the role he was in: public or private.

[Robittybob1]

amaral couldnt prove his theory. In the case of repeated libel...does the clock start ticking again

Not according to Carter-Ruck.  It starts from the first instance.  Personally, I find that rule a bit odd, but that's what they say.

[Robittybob1]

I think if John approved Faithlilly’s post we can pretty much stop worrying about libel as an issue at all.

From a lawyer's point of view, anything said here isn't really new, something went wrong recently. 

[Robittybob1]

Its still libelous to say  a public figure is lying

Try and prove that please?

[faithlilly]

So can I say that IMO Grimes judgement in PDL may have been influenced by a conflict of interest

And you have, many times.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Only an idiot would say that.  Wolters HAS Not solved the case yet.

Only an idiot would say Amaral solved the case in 2007 yet we had a highly esteemed moderator liking the post.   So either say what you like or have rules to make both statements impermissable.  Which is it to be?

[G-Unit]

Hilarious.  I can provide a claim that authors make money from books, like Faithlilly provided a cite that people can sell their stories to the papers, so would that let me off the hook libel wise?  Also I never said “purely for monetary gain”, YOU said that.

Just to be absolutely clear I posted a quote from Amaral saying he requested early retirement in order to be able to express himself freely. That statement is supported by what he himself wrote in the foreword to A Verdade da Mentira.

You stated as a fact that he resigned in order to cash in on the case. I have seen nothing to support your statement except speculation.

In other words you accused him of lying about his reason for retiring and were unable to offer proof of that so-called fact.

[Mr Gray]

Try and prove that please?

It's not that important because it allows me to say what I want about Amaral...

[Vertigo Swirl]

Just to be absolutely clear I posted a quote from Amaral saying he requested early retirement in order to be able to express himself freely. That statement is supported by what he himself wrote in the foreword to A Verdade da Mentira.

You stated as a fact that he resigned in order to cash in on the case. I have seen nothing to support your statement except speculation.

In other words you accused him of lying about his reason for retiring and were unable to offer proof of that so-called fact.

I did not accuse him of lying.  Provide a cite or withdraw your claim.  It is entirely consistent to claim you are resigning in order to "excercise freedom of speech" with publishing a book which enables you to do just that.  What do you think he actually meant by being able to speak freely?  Chatting about the case with his mates down the pub?  Of course not, he made it absolutely clear that he intended to speak publicly about the case, and that included writing his book and talking about it on TV.  The initial print run of his book was 40000, he made a public appearance at a bookshop in Lisbon on the day of publication at which there was a queue of hundreds waiting to get their book signed, and you don't think cashing in on the case ever crossed his mind beforehand?  Do me a favour!
In any case, all by the by: As Faithlilly has now confirmed, the forum is OK with members making unevidenced claims against individuals of hustling, taking money for media interviews and telling lies in those interviews, so kindly rescind my warning for libel as hers was.  Thank you. 

[barrier]

It makes no difference.  If someone writes a book it is fair game for someone to claim they did it for the money.

With out evidence thereof ?

[barrier]

welcome back Holly...something i have repeatedly said...Libel has to cause significant damage to reputation....nothing here would do that

So it  can be said  the McCann's dunnit with out recourse.

[Mr Gray]

I did not accuse him of lying.  Provide a cite or withdraw your claim.  It is entirely consistent to claim you are resigning in order to "excercise freedom of speech" with publishing a book which enables you to do just that.  What do you think he actually meant by being able to speak freely?  Chatting about the case with his mates down the pub?  Of course not, he made it absolutely clear that he intended to speak publicly about the case, and that included writing his book and talking about it on TV.  The initial print run of his book was 40000, he made a public appearance at a bookshop in Lisbon on the day of publication at which there was a queue of hundreds waiting to get their book signed, and you don't think cashing in on the case ever crossed his mind beforehand?  Do me a favour!
In any case, all by the by: As Faithlilly has now confirmed, the forum is OK with members making unevidenced claims against individuals of hustling, taking money for media interviews and telling lies in those interviews, so kindly rescind my warning for libel as hers was.  Thank you.

Rob says can't libel Wolters as he's a public figure so it's OK to libel Amaral

[G-Unit]

I did not accuse him of lying.  Provide a cite or withdraw your claim.  It is entirely consistent to claim you are resigning in order to "excercise freedom of speech" with publishing a book which enables you to do just that.  What do you think he actually meant by being able to speak freely?  Chatting about the case with his mates down the pub?  Of course not, he made it absolutely clear that he intended to speak publicly about the case, and that included writing his book and talking about it on TV.  The initial print run of his book was 40000, he made a public appearance at a bookshop in Lisbon on the day of publication at which there was a queue of hundreds waiting to get their book signed, and you don't think cashing in on the case ever crossed his mind beforehand?  Do me a favour!
In any case, all by the by: As Faithlilly has now confirmed, the forum is OK with members making unevidenced claims against individuals of hustling, taking money for media interviews and telling lies in those interviews, so kindly rescind my warning for libel as hers was.  Thank you.

I don't know what other reasons, if any, Amaral expressed for resigning. Please provide a cite where he claimed/admitted it was to make money by writing a book. Unless you can do that you are expressing your opinion, not posting a fact as you claim.

Faithlilly's posts and the resulting actions have nothing to do with your posts and my actions. If you feel unfairly treated there are procedures which you can use to appeal, and they don't include endlessly complaining on public threads imo.