Gonçalo Amaral Legal Defence fund to be closed on 28 October 2015

[faithlilly]

I'm afraid I'm more interested in the, as yet unsubstantiated, reports of the anonymous sceptic. Where did the report appear ?

Bump for Alfie.

[Alfred R Jones]

Bump for Alfie.

I'm not giving publicity or links to attention-seeking malicious gossips.

[faithlilly]

I'm not giving publicity or links to attention-seeking malicious gossips.

Then why mention it in the first place ? Are you afraid, whatever it is, is true ?

[Alfred R Jones]

Then why mention it in the first place ? Are you afraid, whatever it is, is true ?

I mentioned it because I thought when you made your comment that I replied to that it was what you were alluding to.  And no, I am not afraid that it is true, I'm afraid that it is just more idiotic mischief-making by people who  should be old enough to know better.   

Now will you ever answer my question or should I give up now?

[faithlilly]

I mentioned it because I thought when you made your comment that I replied to that it was what you were alluding to.  And no, I am not afraid that it is true, I'm afraid that it is just more idiotic mischief-making by people who  should be old enough to know better.   

Now will you ever answer my question or should I give up now?

If the report is so transparently absurd why are you so loath to bring it to the forum ?

[Alfred R Jones]

If the report is so transparently absurd why are you so loath to bring it to the forum ?

Because this forum has a rule not to post links to other forums or unsubstantiated gossip from malicious trolls.  You're badgering is becoming tiresome now.  I will ignore all further attempts you make to get any more information out of me about this- I do believe it's simply diversionary tactics on your part to avoid answering my question to you.  Never mind....

[faithlilly]

Because this forum has a rule not to post links to other forums or unsubstantiated gossip from malicious trolls.  You're badgering is becoming tiresome now.  I will ignore all further attempts you make to get any more information out of me about this- I do believe it's simply diversionary tactics on your part to avoid answering my question to you.  Never mind....

When you answer my question I'll be more than happy to answer yours Alfie.

[mercury]

Because this forum has a rule not to post links to other forums

No, it's the exact opposite, you can link but not quote

[Mr Gray]

It's all the same thing, isn't it ?

no

[Miss Taken Identity]

I do believe many McCann supporters are of the opinion that Amaral is being supported because he wrote a book, a nasty book by their oinion,however, Many I spoke to, this includes  myself, it may be a rubbish, boring book and he may be an evil, corrupt, sardine munching ex cop, BUT he has the right to freedom of expression as does everyone else.

 And as the court has descided they agree with this!
 With regards to liable claims- The McCanns failed to prove this in a court setting they initiated! ( by sneaky, snidy means).

The book did not stop any search for their daughter which they claimed-nor did it affect any claim that if the book was not written their daughter would be brought home safe to them.

I accept that the book would have been upsetting to them, but losing a daughter to a 'paedo gang'? would be more on my mind AND more upsetting than a court case which turned into a witch hunt-their behaviour over this was disgraceful.

The clever judge did ask that question...what was more upsetting. I think she was trying to read their psychie...guess the answer to that one!

[Miss Taken Identity]

it was already announced that there is sufficient funds to cover the impending court costs, if anything is left over Amaral can chose a Portuguese chilrens charity. And if More money is required in the future, they can begin another collection. Makes sense to me.

[misty]

it was already announced that there is sufficient funds to cover the impending court costs, if anything is left over Amaral can chose a Portuguese chilrens charity. And if More money is required in the future, they can begin another collection. Makes sense to me.

If there is more than sufficient money in the fund, why is someone appealing for one final "Fiver Flood" into the GFM to support GA? What's the rush, when you can donate directly to the PJGA a/c?

[Miss Taken Identity]

If there is more than sufficient money in the fund, why is someone appealing for one final "Fiver Flood" into the GFM to support GA? What's the rush, when you can donate directly to the PJGA a/c?

I have no idea. who is asking for the fiver flood? ask them.

[G-Unit]

I do believe many McCann supporters are of the opinion that Amaral is being supported because he wrote a book, a nasty book by their oinion,however, Many I spoke to, this includes  myself, it may be a rubbish, boring book and he may be an evil, corrupt, sardine munching ex cop, BUT he has the right to freedom of expression as does everyone else.

 And as the court has descided they agree with this!
 With regards to liable claims- The McCanns failed to prove this in a court setting they initiated! ( by sneaky, snidy means).

The book did not stop any search for their daughter which they claimed-nor did it affect any claim that if the book was not written their daughter would be brought home safe to them.

I accept that the book would have been upsetting to them, but losing a daughter to a 'paedo gang'? would be more on my mind AND more upsetting than a court case which turned into a witch hunt-their behaviour over this was disgraceful.

The clever judge did ask that question...what was more upsetting. I think she was trying to read their psychie...guess the answer to that one!

A very good post. After all, it was no surprise to them what the police thought, it had been splashed all over the papers.

[ferryman]

I do believe many McCann supporters are of the opinion that Amaral is being supported because he wrote a book, a nasty book by their opnion,however, Many I spoke to, this includes  myself, it may be a rubbish, boring book and he may be an evil, corrupt, sardine munching ex cop, BUT he has the right to freedom of expression as does everyone else.

 And as the court has decided they agree with this!
 With regards to liable claims- The McCanns failed to prove this in a court setting they initiated! ( by sneaky, snidy means).

The book did not stop any search for their daughter which they claimed-nor did it affect any claim that if the book was not written their daughter would be brought home safe to them.

I accept that the book would have been upsetting to them, but losing a daughter to a 'paedo gang'? would be more on my mind AND more upsetting than a court case which turned into a witch hunt-their behaviour over this was disgraceful.

The clever judge did ask that question...what was more upsetting. I think she was trying to read their psychie...guess the answer to that one!

I think the judge tried to steer her judgment clear of pronouncements that might provide Amaral with ripe grounds of appeal.

That's probably why she found it not proved that a book declaring Madeleine 'definitely dead' in some way harmed the search for Madeleine.

Quite self-evidently it did, and does ....