Amaral doesn't have to turn anywhere. It was already proven that he didn't commit any crime by the publication of his book - condition to demand a compensation for defamation. But as can be read in here (sorry for the extension of the quotes), no such crime was committed.
From the Appeals Court that lifted the ban on the book:
«The book that was written by the first defendant, Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, presents a thesis that was at one time defended by several participants in the police investigation: that little Madeleine died accidentally and that her parents, here the first applicants, were suspected of concealing the cadaver.
This defendant was the Coordinating Inspector of the investigation into the case of the disappearance, thus being the most qualified police officer who intervened in the investigation until the time when, through a decision from the Judiciary Police’s (PJ) directory, he was removed from that function.
In that role, the defendant was deeply involved in the entire investigation and had the opportunity to formulate all of the possible conclusions about the case, while it was under investigation.
Approximately 5 months later, Dr. Gonçalo Amaral was removed from the investigation through a decision of the PJ's directory.
As he clarifies several times throughout the book, the author felt the need to write it right away in order to, as he says, "recover my good name, which was publicly dragged through the mud while the institution that I served for 26 years, the Portuguese Judiciary Police, did not allow me to defend myself, nor defended me institutionally. I asked for permission to speak out in that sense, a request that remains unanswered to this day. I fully respected the PJ's rules, and remained in silence. Nevertheless, said silence was tearing my dignity apart.
Later on, I was removed from the investigation. I then decided that it was time for me to defend myself in a public way. Therefore, I immediately requested my retirement, so I could regain the plenitude of my freedom of expression."
This is a first point – and one that is not small – that should be registered: the author feels he is the victim of injustice and wants to re-establish the truth, at least his truth or his vision of truth, even more so as he felt that his honour was being diminished and the police force that he owed obedience to did not allow him to reply, as a police officer, to those attacks against his professional pride and his honour as a qualified criminal investigation police officer.»
(...)
«We do not see that the right of the book's author, the defendant, can be limited by a right to the reservation of intimacy that suffered voluntary limitations by their holders, the applicants.
In the same way, concerning the applicants' right to image and a good name: upon placing the case in the public square and giving it worldwide notoriety, the applicants opened all doors to all opinions, even those that are adversarial to them. »
(...)
«In a concise manner:
The book at stake in this process – "Maddie – the Truth of the Lie" – which was written by the defendant Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, has the main motivation of defending his personal and professional honour, as the author points out right away in the preface and throughout his text.
The contents of the book does not offend any of the applicants' fundamental rights.
The exercise of its writing and publication is included in the constitutional rights that are secured to everyone by the European Convention on Human Rights and by the Portuguese Republic’s Constitution, namely in its articles 37º and 38º.»
[Lisbon and Appeals Court, 14.10.2010
The Appellate Court Judges,
Francisco Bruto da Costa
Catarina Arelo Manso
António Valente]
Everyone is free to interpret the data available and to formulate their opinions as long as they are well funded on the evidence.
When a person is harassed and accused of wrong doing, when such has not happened, I believe it is legitimate to bring those that are guilty of such actions to Trial, to respond for it. If it was with me I would be putting an action against such persons, and not for money but for a prison sentence, just as happened with Leonor Cipriano that was convicted for lying in Court.
