Libel trial summing up - daily mail

Tony Bennett wrote:

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:Will Goncalo be able to get his book published in the UK if the McCanns lose the damages trial?

Or will the McCanns start the whole ruddy process over again in the UK?

I'm not sure that's the point Woofer and this will be a sharp intake of breath to people on the forum - I'm not happy that Goncalo allegedly made so much money from a book he wrote. I've been sooo afraid of saying this.

I'm behind GA for writing a book that told the truth of the investigation. 100% behind him.

I'm behind GA for being totally annihilated by the UK press, the PJ, the McCanns and fighting back. 100% behind him.

What I'm not behind GA for is a large amount of money earned from a book. This is what's biting him on the bum in a courtroom imo.

I have nothing but respect for GA to write and have published his opinions. The point I'm trying to make (so very badly) is that had GA not been taken to task by the McCanns, he'd have made an awful lot of money out of it.

But all that has to be balanced against the fact that in writing the book...

1. He sacrificed his career

2. He lost the right to a police salary for the rest of his career - I think he had another 7 years (?) to go before he could retire on his police pension, and

3. His final police pension (when he finally gets it) will be worth 25% or more less than it would otherwise have been.

ALSO

4. Had the McCanns obtained an injunction when the book was pubished (July 2008), he wouldn't have made any money - instead the McCanns waited until September 2009 to get the injunction, by which time the book had sold 220,000 copies in Portugal and had sold tens of thousands more copies in nince other European countries where his book had been translated. Why did they wait?  I think any fair Portuguese judxge would he bound to take that into account

and

5. His gains from selling the book have been frozen and he has had to shell out probably a six-figure sum in solicitors' costs.


The other great shame is that if Goncalo Amaral's book is ever published in England, it will be seriously out-of-date - so much more is known now as a result of the combined efforts of various compliers, researchers and translators of Madeleine McCann-related information

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:Will Goncalo be able to get his book published in the UK if the McCanns lose the damages trial?

Or will the McCanns start the whole ruddy process over again in the UK?

I'm not sure that's the point Woofer and this will be a sharp intake of breath to people on the forum - I'm not happy that Goncalo allegedly made so much money from a book he wrote. I've been sooo afraid of saying this.

I'm behind GA for writing a book that told the truth of the investigation. 100% behind him.

I'm behind GA for being totally annihilated by the UK press, the PJ, the McCanns and fighting back. 100% behind him.

What I'm not behind GA for is a large amount of money earned from a book. This is what's biting him on the bum in a courtroom imo.

I have nothing but respect for GA to write and have published his opinions. The point I'm trying to make (so very badly) is that had GA not been taken to task by the McCanns, he'd have made an awful lot of money out of it.

Oh dear, this is another 'I'll fetch me coat' post. I'm hovering over the 'send' button.

IAmNotMerylStreep wrote:

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:Will Goncalo be able to get his book published in the UK if the McCanns lose the damages trial?

Or will the McCanns start the whole ruddy process over again in the UK?

I'm not sure that's the point Woofer and this will be a sharp intake of breath to people on the forum - I'm not happy that Goncalo allegedly made so much money from a book he wrote. I've been sooo afraid of saying this.

I'm behind GA for writing a book that told the truth of the investigation. 100% behind him.

I'm behind GA for being totally annihilated by the UK press, the PJ, the McCanns and fighting back. 100% behind him.

What I'm not behind GA for is a large amount of money earned from a book. This is what's biting him on the bum in a courtroom imo.

I have nothing but respect for GA to write and have published his opinions. The point I'm trying to make (so very badly) is that had GA not been taken to task by the McCanns, he'd have made an awful lot of money out of it.

Oh dear, this is another 'I'll fetch me coat' post. I'm hovering over the 'send' button.

So you're 100% behind him writing a book but not making money from it?
What do you expect to happen when someone writes a book?
Should he have sold it for 1p?
Maybe you haven't noticed but AnnaEsse translated his book from French into English and published her work on the internet for all to see. Amaral did not sue her for loss of earnings. He seemed quite happy for his work to be made available for FREE.

Tony Bennett wrote:

aquila wrote:

Woofer wrote:Will Goncalo be able to get his book published in the UK if the McCanns lose the damages trial?

Or will the McCanns start the whole ruddy process over again in the UK?

I'm not sure that's the point Woofer and this will be a sharp intake of breath to people on the forum - I'm not happy that Goncalo allegedly made so much money from a book he wrote. I've been sooo afraid of saying this.

I'm behind GA for writing a book that told the truth of the investigation. 100% behind him.

I'm behind GA for being totally annihilated by the UK press, the PJ, the McCanns and fighting back. 100% behind him.

What I'm not behind GA for is a large amount of money earned from a book. This is what's biting him on the bum in a courtroom imo.

I have nothing but respect for GA to write and have published his opinions. The point I'm trying to make (so very badly) is that had GA not been taken to task by the McCanns, he'd have made an awful lot of money out of it.

But all that has to be balanced against the fact that in writing the book...

1. He sacrificed his career

2. He lost the right to a police salary for the rest of his career - I think he had another 7 years (?) to go before he could retire on his police pension, and

3. His final police pension (when he finally gets it) will be worth 25% or more less than it would otherwise have been.

ALSO

4. Had the McCanns obtained an injunction when the book was pubished (July 2008), he wouldn't have made any money - instead the McCanns waited until September 2009 to get the injunction, by which time the book had sold 220,000 copies in Portugal and had sold tens of thousands more copies in nince other European countries where his book had been translated. Why did they wait?  I think any fair Portuguese judxge would he bound to take that into account

and

5. His gains from selling the book have been frozen and he has had to shell out probably a six-figure sum in solicitors' costs.


The other great shame is that if Goncalo Amaral's book is ever published in England, it will be seriously out-of-date - so much more is known now as a result of the combined efforts of various compliers, researchers and translators of Madeleine McCann-related information

XTC wrote:

In my humble opinion the cleverest move made by the legal teams was to get Mr Amaral's assets frozen.

This way you could sue but your opponnent could not sue - due to lack of cash.

Yes, but not only that, let us solemnly recall that this decision and other draconian decisions made by the court on the same occasion (September 2008) were made at a secret, ex parte hearing, behind closed doors - the first Amaral knew about it was while he was sitting drinking coffee at a restaurant, and the manager summoned him exclaiming: 'Snr Amaral, your book's been banned!'  Amaral wrote this up in 'The English Gag', Chapter 6, titled 'TERRIBLE NEWS', the English translation of which is on the forum here:   

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  

We now have the scenario wherein the PJ are just going thorugh the motions of acceding to SY's requests which is in my view the equivalent of saying to the past Portuguese investigators (and the present ones) that "if you weren't incompetent then you must have missed what we have allegedly spotted - sorry about that old chaps but we are British therefore we know better than you at crimefighting".

It looks exactly that way to me as well. And all our super-duper Met detectives can do is sit on a chair and watch from the sidelines while PJ officers actually carry out the formal interviews

As we will find out in the future all the 'progress' being made will not make a flea hop* towards finding Madeleine, instead it is becoming more apparent to me at least that the whole show is not the discovery of Madeleine's whereabouts but more of a diversion so that she is not found.

Agreed again.

P.S. As far as I'm aware Mr Amaral's book is not "banned" in the UK - it's just that no publisher will pick it up and run with it.

That's a correct statement.


______________________
* Fleas can jump a remarkable 13 inches. And here's exactly how they do it: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

margaret wrote:I would agree with you Aquila but Mr.Amaral vas vilified almost from the word go, so I don't blame him one bit for putting his side across and speak up for Madeleine.

Do we know how much he really made? After taxes and anything else, then his accounts have been frozen, his marriage failed was it really worth it?

Still, having said that I think he deserves every penny, I'd like to see him announce an English version will be available too for those who don't know it's on the Internet free, just to piss certain people off. It would certainly be a best seller, unlike Summers book who sold out his credibility so he didn't get sued.

aquila wrote:There are some great posts on this thread and due to the considered and valid opinions of others I've changed my own.

Here's a crunch issue for me.

Did the McCanns wait until Gonçalo's book gained a high circulation and income to institute libel proceedings?

Their claim for £1M in personal damages couldn't have been realised had the book and the documentary not produced a substantial income. So did they wait until it was financially beneficial to sue rather than trying to shut down the circulation of the book in its infancy whilst they were still in effect able to have some control over their reputation/profile in the media?

plebgate wrote:Rocky had a family to feed so without his police job how was he expected to do that?   

I don't care how much he made or will make from the sale of his book/s, he was the lead investigator and in his opinion and experience things did not add up.   He came to a conclusion and wrote about it. 

If he goes on to make substantially more from civil litigation at some time in the future, then good luck to him I say.

One day Tony Bennett may be able to write a book and make money and I hope that this is the case as I think there are many who would like to buy and read all about his experiences and emotions having gone through the court process also.

Joss wrote:

plebgate wrote:Rocky had a family to feed so without his police job how was he expected to do that?   

I don't care how much he made or will make from the sale of his book/s, he was the lead investigator and in his opinion and experience things did not add up.   He came to a conclusion and wrote about it. 

If he goes on to make substantially more from civil litigation at some time in the future, then good luck to him I say.

One day Tony Bennett may be able to write a book and make money and I hope that this is the case as I think there are many who would like to buy and read all about his experiences and emotions having gone through the court process also.

To sum up: The main purpose of the book at issue in these proceedings - ‘Maddie: The Truth About A Lie’ - which was written by the defendant, Dr Goncalo Amaral – is to defend his personal and professional integrity, as the author himself points out straightaway in his preface, and throughout the text. 

I agree, and i would support anyone that has been affected in such a way to lose their livelihood because of the McCann PR machine of greed, and the fact they want to destroy anyone with an alternate opinion about what dead beat parents they were for what happened to Madeleine. They make me sick.

aquila wrote:

Joss wrote:

plebgate wrote:Rocky had a family to feed so without his police job how was he expected to do that?   

I don't care how much he made or will make from the sale of his book/s, he was the lead investigator and in his opinion and experience things did not add up.   He came to a conclusion and wrote about it. 

If he goes on to make substantially more from civil litigation at some time in the future, then good luck to him I say.

One day Tony Bennett may be able to write a book and make money and I hope that this is the case as I think there are many who would like to buy and read all about his experiences and emotions having gone through the court process also.

To sum up: The main purpose of the book at issue in these proceedings - ‘Maddie: The Truth About A Lie’ - which was written by the defendant, Dr Goncalo Amaral – is to defend his personal and professional integrity, as the author himself points out straightaway in his preface, and throughout the text. 

I agree, and i would support anyone that has been affected in such a way to lose their livelihood because of the McCann PR machine of greed, and the fact they want to destroy anyone with an alternate opinion about what dead beat parents they were for what happened to Madeleine. They make me sick.

Dr Amaral didn't lose his livelihood within the Portuguese Police. He resigned. He wasn't sacked if my understanding is correct.

aquila wrote:There are some great posts on this thread and due to the considered and valid opinions of others I've changed my own.

Here's a crunch issue for me.

Did the McCanns wait until Gonçalo's book gained a high circulation and income to institute libel proceedings?  Apparently so. If they had only wanted to stop the book, all they'd to do is to apply for injunction on it immediately.  Even in their late timing suit, had they asked to stop of circulation with seeking monetary compensation, that would give credence to their suit.


Their claim for £1M in personal damages couldn't have been realised had the book and the documentary not produced a substantial income. So did they wait until it was financially beneficial to sue rather than trying to shut down the circulation of the book in its infancy whilst they were still in effect able to have some control over their reputation/profile in the media?  From her own bewk Kate would have known the largest chuck of profit came from serialisation and not from circulation alone.  She would have known there's no way Amaral's book circulation profit could have reached anywhere near the £M level mark, yet they demanded an unrealistic amount, over and above realistic book profit.
 What does this prove?  Greed? More than greed I'd think, evilness is their underlying trait. They set out to destroy the man totally demanding every cent they believed Amaral should afford and should pay for their hatred of him.  Kate said so in her bewk, she wants him to feel fear.  

And their lawyer in his closing argument focused on them being wrongly arguidoed (only their own perception that it was wrong of course) and not that they were able to produce any proof to substantiate their claim that the MG, MH and the UK Police were against it.  It goes to confirm being made arguidos under Amaral watch is a terribly sore point with them, one that they are not prepared to forget or forgive the man who suspected them.  They blamed him for their plight in other words.  And, they're so bigoted they believed they can come to Court and spin the truth.

What comes through in their belated suit is - they hate the man with every malicious cell in their body and they won't rest until they destroy him.

Their lawyer argued their case as if arguing libel, when libel contention was never filed (but implied of course during court seesions when that was not the knub of the matter before Court).
They filed personal damages caused by the book , and not that book libels them. To argue libel they would first have to contend it, that would require them to list out explicitly which bits in the book they alleged were libelous of them and filed these allegations/charges accordingly with court.  But they never dare do that in their suit for obvious reason or they will be taking on the Portuguese State and will have to take the stand under cross examinations.  What they did during court sessions was to try to introduce their libellous contention of the book, which the Judge constantly had to intervene whenever their lawyers strayed into that, telling them she's not there to try the validity of the truth or not of the book.

As far as I understand the proceedings, the case before court is that the book caused them those adverse health conditions and personal damages.  Both sides have to demonstrate if the book (nonwithstanding the validity or otherwise of its contents) is the cause of all those negative state/condition they claimed they suffered vs without the book were their negative mental and emotional state of health etc already suffered and lived anyway having other attributory factors as cause.





  

WMD wrote:

aquila wrote:There are some great posts on this thread and due to the considered and valid opinions of others I've changed my own.

Here's a crunch issue for me.

Did the McCanns wait until Gonçalo's book gained a high circulation and income to institute libel proceedings?

Their claim for £1M in personal damages couldn't have been realised had the book and the documentary not produced a substantial income. So did they wait until it was financially beneficial to sue rather than trying to shut down the circulation of the book in its infancy whilst they were still in effect able to have some control over their reputation/profile in the media?

I've thought of that,but  they wanted an out of court settlement at one stage,did they just ask for any proceeds at that stage,it wasn't a million euro then was it?

Joss wrote:

aquila wrote:

Joss wrote:

plebgate wrote:Rocky had a family to feed so without his police job how was he expected to do that?   

I don't care how much he made or will make from the sale of his book/s, he was the lead investigator and in his opinion and experience things did not add up.   He came to a conclusion and wrote about it. 

If he goes on to make substantially more from civil litigation at some time in the future, then good luck to him I say.

One day Tony Bennett may be able to write a book and make money and I hope that this is the case as I think there are many who would like to buy and read all about his experiences and emotions having gone through the court process also.

To sum up: The main purpose of the book at issue in these proceedings - ‘Maddie: The Truth About A Lie’ - which was written by the defendant, Dr Goncalo Amaral – is to defend his personal and professional integrity, as the author himself points out straightaway in his preface, and throughout the text. 

I agree, and i would support anyone that has been affected in such a way to lose their livelihood because of the McCann PR machine of greed, and the fact they want to destroy anyone with an alternate opinion about what dead beat parents they were for what happened to Madeleine. They make me sick.

Dr Amaral didn't lose his livelihood within the Portuguese Police. He resigned. He wasn't sacked if my understanding is correct.

Yes you're right he did resign after being booted from the case, but McC's successfully destroyed his livelihood from other means, half his pension etc. And his assets frozen.

aquila wrote:There are some great posts on this thread and due to the considered and valid opinions of others I've changed my own.

Here's a crunch issue for me.

Did the McCanns wait until Gonçalo's book gained a high circulation and income to institute libel proceedings?

Their claim for £1M in personal damages couldn't have been realised had the book and the documentary not produced a substantial income. So did they wait until it was financially beneficial to sue rather than trying to shut down the circulation of the book in its infancy whilst they were still in effect able to have some control over their reputation/profile in the media?

Tony Bennett wrote:

aquila wrote:There are some great posts on this thread and due to the considered and valid opinions of others I've changed my own.

Here's a crunch issue for me.

Did the McCanns wait until Gonçalo's book gained a high circulation and income to institute libel proceedings?

Their claim for £1M in personal damages couldn't have been realised had the book and the documentary not produced a substantial income. So did they wait until it was financially beneficial to sue rather than trying to shut down the circulation of the book in its infancy whilst they were still in effect able to have some control over their reputation/profile in the media?

I think the answer to your bolded question must be 'YES'.  'And that's an emphatic 'yes'.' (in joke). 

Goncalo Amaral and his publishers announced their intention to publish a book sometime in the spring of 2008.

The book was published in July 2008. At that time, Clarence Mitchell warned Goncalo Amaral that if he went ahead and published his book, he had 'better take care'. Goncalo Amaral noted this in his book, saying that he didn't think Mitchell 'meant it in a nice way'.

The McCanns could have sued at this point and injuncted the book.

They waited.

As they waited, the book sold tens of thousands of copies in Portugal.

As they waited, a documentary film was made by TVi, watched by a 2.2 million audience in Portugal.

As they waited, the book was translated and published in nine different countries.

As they waited, tens of thousands more copies of the book were sold across Europe.

As they waited, AnnaEsse translated the book, enabling hundreds of thousnads, maybe millions, to read it in English.

As they waited, the sales figures for the book rose, to the financial benefit of Goncalo Amaral and Guerra e Paz, the publishers.

As they waited, sales of the book topped 220,000 copies.

As they waited, in June 2009 it was reported that net profits on the book had risen to about 1.2 million euros (approx £1 million).

Then, the McCanns pounced...

aiyoyo wrote:

Joss wrote:

aquila wrote:

Joss wrote:

plebgate wrote:Rocky had a family to feed so without his police job how was he expected to do that?   

I don't care how much he made or will make from the sale of his book/s, he was the lead investigator and in his opinion and experience things did not add up.   He came to a conclusion and wrote about it. 

If he goes on to make substantially more from civil litigation at some time in the future, then good luck to him I say.

One day Tony Bennett may be able to write a book and make money and I hope that this is the case as I think there are many who would like to buy and read all about his experiences and emotions having gone through the court process also.

To sum up: The main purpose of the book at issue in these proceedings - ‘Maddie: The Truth About A Lie’ - which was written by the defendant, Dr Goncalo Amaral – is to defend his personal and professional integrity, as the author himself points out straightaway in his preface, and throughout the text. 

I agree, and i would support anyone that has been affected in such a way to lose their livelihood because of the McCann PR machine of greed, and the fact they want to destroy anyone with an alternate opinion about what dead beat parents they were for what happened to Madeleine. They make me sick.

Dr Amaral didn't lose his livelihood within the Portuguese Police. He resigned. He wasn't sacked if my understanding is correct.

Yes you're right he did resign after being booted from the case, but McC's successfully destroyed his livelihood from other means, half his pension etc. And his assets frozen.

When the establishment is against you, your position is untentable, and will be unbearable if you stayed on.

aiyoyo wrote:They withdrew permission to Portugal TV station to broadcast their mockumentary.  
You've got to wonder at the reason.  They've got to have a very good reason for not wanting it  broadcast in Portugal, but that reason was never forthcoming even when this matter was raised in Court.

Any sane person would think they'd want their version to be heard far and wide as possible, and also they would want it aired particularly in the country the child disappeared from. Documentary is made usually for purpose of search, to help public jog memory, and to aid in the look out for the missing person.  But, not them, they did a documentary not for portuguese audience.  Very ODD.

• the injunction was not immediately applied for but appears to have been delayed until an 'economically worthwhile' amount had been raised by the book.  If that is found to be the case then the claim for the damages caused to reputation and health must fall if the suffering claimed by the plaintiffs could have been averted by early legal intervention/injunction but was allowed to be prolonged
  
• the focus, irrelevant to this case, on the claim that they were unjustly arguidoed and that the concerns of the British police etc were ignored, brought forward and deflected by the judge time and again may reveal another purpose for bringing the action than that stated in the citation
  
• the apparent failure to present convincing evidence that their suffering was wholly , or if in part to what specific degree caused by the publication of the book alone
  

aquila wrote:There are some great posts on this thread and due to the considered and valid opinions of others I've changed my own.

Here's a crunch issue for me.

Did the McCanns wait until Gonçalo's book gained a high circulation and income to institute libel proceedings?

Their claim for £1M in personal damages couldn't have been realised had the book and the documentary not produced a substantial income. So did they wait until it was financially beneficial to sue rather than trying to shut down the circulation of the book in its infancy whilst they were still in effect able to have some control over their reputation/profile in the media?

jeanmonroe wrote:
What they are demanding
£430,000 damages for Madeleine which will be used to continue the search for her.    But since she is WOC this may well fail,and since no serious search has ever even been started . . .
£215,000 for each parent for the emotional distress the book has caused them. They say they suffer 'permanent anxiety, insomnia, lack of appetite, irritability and an indefinable fear'. The writ also says Kate McCann is 'steeped in a deep and serious depression'.
Very deep, very serious, very depressed.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]" />
£86,000 for each of their twins Sean and Amelie, who could hear his allegations when they start school in September.   They could also, of course just read the PJ files and the interim report and the archiving report. It is unlikely that the book will be published in English in the UK anyway. Long since out of date.