Re: The January 2015 McCanns v Amaral hearing on the facts - what did the Portuguese Court of Appeal say about the facts?

by Smokeandmirrors 21.01.15 22:45

Tony Bennett wrote:
SuspiciousMinds wrote:I want to know why the judge specifically used the example of Jane Tanner's 'informal' recognition of Robert Murat. Why is that particularly pertinent in this case when it involves neither of the McCanns directly, and doesn't appear to reflect on them personally?
I don't think it is pertinent EXCEPT that no doubt the McCanns made much in their pleadings to the court of every sentence they could find in Amaral's book that couldn't be strictly proved from the files.

Maybe finding nothing about the 'unofficial' identity parade in the files was just the clearest and biggest example.

Yet the fact that this incident actually happened is confirmed by Jane Tanner herself and by others; the only thing Tanner maintains is that she wasn't quite so insistent on the fact that it was Murat she'd seen on 3 May as Amaral maintains.

If I'm asked to choose Amaral's version or Tanner's...I choose Amaral's.

Did Tanner confirm it in the rogatories? I wonder how much of the files the Judge actually would have read herself, how familiar she is with the case in it's entirety? I imagine she's pretty aux fait with it and the press over there was a lot more robust in it's assertions than ours has been by all accounts.

by SuspiciousMinds 21.01.15 22:50

Tony Bennett wrote:
SuspiciousMinds wrote:I want to know why the judge specifically used the example of Jane Tanner's 'informal' recognition of Robert Murat. Why is that particularly pertinent in this case when it involves neither of the McCanns directly, and doesn't appear to reflect on them personally?
I don't think it is pertinent EXCEPT that no doubt the McCanns made much in their pleadings to the court of every sentence they could find in Amaral's book that couldn't be strictly proved from the files.

Maybe finding nothing about the 'unofficial' identity parade in the files was just the clearest and biggest example.

Yet the fact that this incident actually happened is confirmed by Jane Tanner herself and by others; the only thing Tanner maintains is that she wasn't quite so insistent on the fact that it was Murat she'd seen on 3 May as Amaral maintains.

If I'm asked to choose Amaral's version or Tanner's...I choose Amaral's.

But if that's the best example they could find... surely that backs up Amaral's case. They really couldn't find a single thing he wrote about the McCanns in his book that wasn't backed up by evidence in the police files? Wow. Well done Dr. Amaral! clapping

by ultimaThule 21.01.15 23:05

Letterwriter wrote:What I'm interested in is not "Did the book upset the McCanns."

Of course it would - true or not.

What will be interesting is whether Mr Amaral has the right to publish anyway. Whether their upset is a "tort" demanding compensation or whether it is just one of those things a person has to deal with as someone else goes about their lawful business.

Going purely on what has emerged in the last 12 hours, and notwithstanding the fact that some of what has been reported may have become distorted in translation, the tort you've raised would appear to be the crux of the matter and will no doubt be addressed by counsels for both sides in their written submissions on points of law arising from the judge's determinations today, Letterwriter.

by ultimaThule 21.01.15 23:17

Smokeandmirrors wrote:
plebgate wrote:
Smokeandmirrors wrote:I read this as the Judge recognising MUCH of what Amaral says is FACT and not scurrilous nonsense, as the McCanns would have us believe. The use of the word facts is significant IMO.
Yes I agree - significant indeed Smokeandmirrors, imo too.

Rocky will be laughing again soon I do believe.
We obviously don't want to get our hopes up prematurely, but fingers crossed.

If, and I mean IF the transcripts we have seen from previous court days is 100% accurate, I'd say the judge is no fool. She shoved the Ma Healy off saying she had nothing of interest/use to say or words very si,milar, she disallowed the McCanns to force themselves forwards when it was their wish to do so, there was the cringeworthy Wright episode with a crib sheet, and that woman who said she's seen the book for sale in England, which of course she hadn't, so it was all a bit cr@p from Team McCann - AND they had YEARS to prepare, so no excuse for their shabby performance IMO.

Notwithstanding the episode of his crib sheet, during the cringeworthy testimony of Wright the judge stated that 'two facts were established':
1) 'The British dogs detected the scent of human and also that consistent with cadaver' and
2) 'These dogs detected the smell of human blood in the car rented by the McCanns', Sandm yes

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

by Christina 21.01.15 23:43

This is fascinating. I've been watching off and on and didn't realise this was happening today. Have read the 36 points and yes, it looks as the immediate above comments have said. Dr Amaral's statements are nearly all taken as proven. It looks to me as though the McCanns will be using the appeal process from here to eternity...

A couple of points I'm not sure of:

14. Authors Kate MacCann and Gerald MacCann feel a deep shame and an indescribable ill-being because they are considered, by most people who know the theories of defendant Gonçalo Amaral, as having responsibility in the death of their daughter, being so cowardly that they have hidden her cadaver, simulating abduction, all of this to avoid criminal accusations?

Proved that the couple felt badly about being considered responsible over the hiding of their daughter's body and simulating her abduction by those who believe in Mr Amaral's thesis.

The judge states that it is not possible to determine what most people who have read or seen Mr Amaral's thesis actually think.
She adds that the plaintiffs failed to prove shame, even with Kate stating it was not shame that she felt.
The judge once more believes it is expectable that the plaintiffs would feel badly about being considered to be responsible for hiding the body and staging an abduction - not, the judge stresses, about being responsible for their daughter's death, as is commonly, and mistakenly, believed.

The only wording in this I don't like is the penultimate word "mistakenly". "Perhaps mistakenly" or something I could live with. Mistakenly isn't proven either, in my view.

The other is:

13. Because of the statements made by defendant Gonçalo Amaral in the book, in the documentary and in the interview to Correio da Manhã, authors Kate MacCann and Gerald MacCann suffer permanent anguish, insomnia, lack of appetite, anxiety and irritability, preoccupation and indefinable fear?

Proved.

The judge adds that this psychological state is pre-existent to the book, the documentary and the interview and was not caused by the book. Nonetheless, it cannot be reasonable to believe that the book, the documentary and the interview had no effect on the couple, i.e. It had an effect but that is perfectly normal.

So yeah but no but, on my reading. Other points seem to be proven but not in the McCanns favour. One about the twins I'm also not sure of. But it seems to me to be mostly for the Defendants. The TV company may be a tiny bit liable, but I can't see the rest being so.

Thanks for the information and link to read the most info from source that there is.

Thank you.

by aiyoyo 22.01.15 0:19

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

With thanks to Anne Guedes.

by ultimaThule 22.01.15 0:28

From your link, aiyoyo, 'The other issue was related to the WOC issue. From this day on, the claimants have 30 days to hand over the London Court's authorization to have Madeleine McCann represented by her parents in this trial. Meanwhile the trial is suspended. After the 30 days delay, which of course can happen to be shorter, the lawyers will have ten days to hand in their "allegations of law".'

Given that the McCanns have had some 6/7 months to procure the necessary documentation and given that, as party to the proceedings, in any application made in respect of the Ward/Wardship they will have been served with the relevant Orders, I would expect any delay to be consideraby shorter than 30 days.

That said, I have a feeling the McCanns may attempt to obtain an extension to the time limit imposed by the judge.

by Christina 22.01.15 0:50

Aiyoyo

Thanks so much for that. Already I'm seeing a bit more completely on it. Will carry on reading - didn't know how to find Ann Guedes' work (other than links I'd forgotten) after I looked at that Justice site to find her reports, which then disappeared. Good to know where her reports are now - am back reading and want to know what happened in the fairest fashion. Ann is that to me. Cheers.

From AG's report Ms Duarte didn't deem it important enough to attend..

For the claimants, Dr Ricardo Afonso (representing Dra Isabel Duarte)
For the defence, Dr Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, Dra Fatima de Oliveira Esteves, Dr Henrique Costa Pinto. Dr Miguel Coroadinha (TVI) was absent.

The Judge asked the lawyers to read the document in case they needed clarification on some points or had any objection, suggesting it wasn't definitive. In fact it is on this document that the lawyers who solicited it at the last hearing (all of them) will build their "allegations of law", i.e indicate how they would interpret the law on these topics. The judge left the court room, leaving the lawyers at their reading.

by Christina 22.01.15 1:25

ultimaThule

So true. It's interesting how much time they will always take advantage of. And protract. More time..

I also spotted the important bit at the end where AG says that's the last report as decisions will be emailed to lawyers! Wonder who'll be leaking first? In my view not much of a guess involved! I hope the decision goes to the Defendants - this is the only fair outcome.

by Joss 22.01.15 2:20

The book did not harm the McCann's, this has already been established by the Appeals Court and fully upheld by the Portugal Supreme Court in March 2011. The book written by GA is allowed to be in circulation.
So what is this trial now really all about, it certainly could not be about the book and it's supposed harm to the McCann's, otherwise the initial decision to take it off the shelves would still stand, but that is not the case.
What harm has been done to the McC's otherwise? Nothing as far as i can tell. IMO this case should of been thrown out of Court by now.

by NickE 22.01.15 5:52

Court says it was not the book of Gonçalo Amaral that "destroyed" Maddie's parents

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
21/01/2015 - 17:04

(Updated to 22:08)

McCanns filed a civil action against former inspector for defamation and damages caused by the publication of the book. Require compensation of EUR 1.2 million.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]Maddie's parents came to be made defendants in the investigation of the disappearance of the girl FRANCISCO LEONG / AFP

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

The Civil Court of Lisbon held on Wednesday it was not the book of Gonçalo Amaral Maddie: The Truth of the Lie that "destroyed" the parents of the missing British girl to May 3, 2007, in the Algarve.
"It was proof that Kate and Gerry McCann are destroyed points of moral, social and ethical. The family point of view the evidence revealed a successful effort of cohesion and mutual support, "said the judge who stresses until" the sentimental / emotional point of view is not credible that the consequences of the facts of these proceedings will to the point of destruction or far beyond the pain caused by the disappearance of their daughter. "
The state "negative emotional" parent is "pre-existing to the book," reads the court order to which the PUBLIC had access and that indicates the answer to the questions, the facts found and not tested before sentencing, in civil proceedings of the couple against former PJ inspector. The couple requires compensation of EUR 1.2 million for defamation and damages caused by the publication of the book.
Judge gives as unproven damage social nature that the McCanns claim to have suffered also with the marketing and selling of a documentary on DVD and an interview of the former coordinator of the PJ in Portimão. In the book, Amaral defends the alleged involvement of Kate and Gerry MCann in the disappearance and the child's corpse concealment.
"Against this order of the court which is not given as proven causal relationship between the book and alleged losses for the couple do not expect anything but the acquittal of Gonçalo Amaral," said the lawyer PUBLIC former inspector, Miguel Cruz Rodrigues. PUBLIC tried unsuccessfully to contact the couple's lawyer, Isabel Duarte. Gonçalo Amaral declined to comment.
The court did not leave, however, to establish that "as a result of Gonçalo Amaral defendant's statements in the book, the documentary and interview," Maddie's parents "felt anger, despair, anguish and concern, having suffered insomnia and lack appetite ". This at the same time it was given as evidence that the facts that the former inspector mentions in the book "are mostly taken place and documented" in the criminal investigation.
The court order also mentions the various witnesses interviewed by the court, some given by the parents of Maddie McCann and stress damage they believe the couple suffered. "A lot of people turned back to them" after the publication of the book, said Susan Hubbard Lorrain, married to an Anglican priest and friend of the McCanns. Also Alan Robert Pike, who provided services in the field of psychology to English couple, "said the publication of the book and the findings of the left distressed couple and one of the most devastating effects was, for them, believe that the book would influence public opinion, making people would stop looking for Madeleine. "
However, the court gives as not proven that because of the book, the interview and documentary PJ stopped collecting information and investigate the disappearance. The court also heard PJ inspectors. Ricardo Paiva, inspector who participated in the inquiry into the disappearance of British girl, stressed that "the child's death was a hypothesis in research." Also the director of the National Counter-Terrorism Unit, Luis Neves said that "the first time it was hypothesized death was by parents by suggesting the arrival of a South African expert equipped with a machine to search for buried bodies."
The court also states that for "most people" who read the book shaped thesis there is nothing to assign "responsibility" to McCann for the death of her daughter, "but before that they had" responsibilities for the concealment of his corpse. "
Maddie's parents came to be made defendants in the investigation of the disappearance of the English girl who was dismissed in 2008 for lack of evidence that there has been a crime. The investigation was reopened in October 2013 following a proposal from the PJ and face new evidentiary elements that justify further research.
Updated news to 22h08. Article replaced the Lusa Agency titled "Court gives as proven damage caused by Gonçalo Amaral Kate and Gerry mccan" by PUBLIC News

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

by Guest 22.01.15 8:02

Some would respectfully suggest a civil malpractice suit would now be called for, against a certain renowned Portuguese attorney of the female persuasion, wouldn't it?

ooops

by G-Unit 22.01.15 8:42

Express hail McCann victory. Interestingly no comments allowed, I wonder why?

Sorry, we are unable to accept comments about this article at the moment.

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

by Searcher 22.01.15 9:00

If the negative emotional state is pre-existing, then how can a newspaper hail a victory? This is far from clear.

by **Tony Bennett** 22.01.15 9:07

G-Unit wrote:Express hail McCann victory. Interestingly no comments allowed, I wonder why?

++++++

Sorry, we are unable to accept comments about this article at the moment.

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

Two positive pro-McCann remarks by the judge trumpeted by the Daily Express.

Two dozen negative, pro-Amaral ones completely ignored.

That's the state of Britain's mainstream media in 2015:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Kate and Gerry McCann win court victory in £1million libel battle against ex-police chief

MADELEINE McCann’s parents won a key victory in their £1million libel battle against an ex-police chief yesterday.
Published: 00:01, Thu, January 22, 2015

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]GETTY
Kate and Gerry McCann made headway in their libel case against Goncalo Amaral

A Portuguese judge ruled that the couple were “emotionally hurt” by the former detective’s book about the three-year-old’s disappearance from Praia da Luz in the Algarve in May 2007.

She also said Goncalo Amaral appeared to breach secrecy rules by including confidential official files in the book.

Kate and Gerry McCann are hoping for a final judgment in the case next month.

by plebgate 22.01.15 9:21

Haven't got time to look again, but was this in Ann G's reporting yesterday.

I thought there were no other journalists present, but may be wrong.

by **Tony Bennett** 22.01.15 9:24

Searcher wrote:If the negative emotional state is pre-existing, then how can a newspaper hail a victory? This is far from clear.

What it seems to mean is that the judge is pronouncing that Gerry and Kate were emotionally distressed by losing Madeleine...

...but that Dr Amaral's book made this emotional distress even worse...

I wonder if these pictures were produced in evidence...?

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

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

by woodforthetrees 22.01.15 9:25

Very interesting read.

From what i can decipher from those points and comments....

The McCanns will unfortunately win, but will get nowhere near the £1.2m they are claiming, for the following reasons:

- Amaral is within his right to write his theory and publish it
- The above is exactly that...a theory, an unproved/concluded case, therefore until proven, the impact of what's written can not be quantified accurately
- The twins will get £ zero. Reason for this being, the McCanns have admitted that the twins are not aware of Amarals theory, therefore have not suffered the 'additional upset'
- The judge has already stated that they are already 'destroyed' from losing their daughter, therefore this only adds to it a bit.

IMO it will be a win win for both parties....The McCanns will get a payout of say £150k, kids get nothing, Amaral has his assets freed and is then free to continue selling his book/theory worldwide, with the following clauses:

- certain text will have to be removed/edited and a '2nd edition' only be available for distribution.
- Upon conclusion of the case (if it ever happens), if the outcome is different to that theorized in the book, it is withdrawn from sale.

Keeps everybody happy. Lawyers get paid, McCans get a nice little bung, Amaral gets his assets release and the world continues to debate on the demise of poor Madeleine.

All IMO of course.

by NickE 22.01.15 9:29

Corrieo Da Manha:
'"Couple destroyed before book" - Judge says no proved damage to parents following book about Maddie.' [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **Tony Bennett** 22.01.15 9:33

woodforthetrees wrote:Very interesting read.

From what i can decipher from those points and comments....

The McCanns will unfortunately win, but will get nowhere near the £1.2m they are claiming, for the following reasons:

- Amaral is within his right to write his theory and publish it
- The above is exactly that...a theory, an unproved/concluded case, therefore until proven, the impact of what's written can not be quantified accurately
- The twins will get £ zero. Reason for this being, the McCanns have admitted that the twins are not aware of Amarals theory
- The judge has already stated that they are already 'destroyed' from losing their daughter, therefore this only adds to it a bit.

IMO it will be a win win for both parties...The McCanns will get a payout of say £150k, kids get nothing, Amaral is then free to continue selling his book/theory worldwide, with the following clauses:

- certain text will have to be removed/edited and a '2nd edition' only be available for distribution.
- Upon conclusion of the case (if it ever happens), if the outcome is different to that theorised in the book, it is withdrawn from sale.

Keeps everybody happy. Lawyers get paid, McCans get a nice little bung, Amaral gets his assets released and the world continues to debate on the demise of poor Madeleine.

All IMO of course.

I suspect that your assessment might not be too wide of the mark - though if the McCanns get anything, I predict it will be less than £150,000.

In which case - coupled with the absolutely unforgivable delay by the Portuguese judicial system in reaching a verdict on Amarals' book - it will rank as a travesty of truly historic proportions

by woodforthetrees 22.01.15 9:40

Tony Bennett wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:Very interesting read.

From what i can decipher from those points and comments....

The McCanns will unfortunately win, but will get nowhere near the £1.2m they are claiming, for the following reasons:

- Amaral is within his right to write his theory and publish it
- The above is exactly that...a theory, an unproved/concluded case, therefore until proven, the impact of what's written can not be quantified accurately
- The twins will get £ zero. Reason for this being, the McCanns have admitted that the twins are not aware of Amarals theory
- The judge has already stated that they are already 'destroyed' from losing their daughter, therefore this only adds to it a bit.

IMO it will be a win win for both parties...The McCanns will get a payout of say £150k, kids get nothing, Amaral is then free to continue selling his book/theory worldwide, with the following clauses:

- certain text will have to be removed/edited and a '2nd edition' only be available for distribution.
- Upon conclusion of the case (if it ever happens), if the outcome is different to that theorised in the book, it is withdrawn from sale.

Keeps everybody happy. Lawyers get paid, McCans get a nice little bung, Amaral gets his assets released and the world continues to debate on the demise of poor Madeleine.

All IMO of course.
I suspect that your assessment might not be too wide of the mark - though if the McCanns get anything, I predict it will be less than £150,000.

In which case - coupled with the absolutely unforgivable delay by the Portuguese judicial system in reaching a verdict on Amarals' book - it will rank as a travesty of truly historic proportions

I agree Tony, a travesty, but as you well know with these types of cases, often the 'wider picture' is considered in the background therefore compromise is often used to moderately please all parties whilst there are still many unknowns.

thumbup

by aiyoyo 22.01.15 9:59

The judge states that it is not possible to determine what most people who have read or seen Mr Amaral's thesis actually think.

If it 's not possible to determine what readers actually think of Dr. Amaral's thesis then the Mcs damages claims are nothing more than their perception mirrors on their pre-existing conditions. A condition that surely must be a given when they lost their daughter and when they were arguidos. That's why they were asked for the comparison of three situations on their intensity of grief/devastation.

They can't realistically expect the Court (or the world) to believe that the pain (allegedly) caused by the book was far greater than the pain of losing Maddie. It's utterly ludicrous to expect people to believe it! Otherwise what does that suggest - that they believed a book is more important than Madeleine ?

She adds that the plaintiffs failed to prove shame, even with Kate stating it was not shame that she felt.
The judge once more believes it is expectable that the plaintiffs would feel badly about being considered to be responsible for hiding the body and staging an abduction - not, the judge stresses, about being responsible for their daughter's death, as is commonly, and mistakenly, believed.

Pretty much mirrors Dr. Amaral/investigator's thesis.

That's pretty much a "summed-it-all-up" statement, the BE ALL and END ALL argument that the McCanns' train has come off the rail.

by Joss 22.01.15 10:35

Why would the McCann's get any monetary compensation at all? They have not proven their case against Goncalo Amaral. And i certainly don't think the Judge will rule against the initial ruling about the book seeing the verdict has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Portugal, why would she? Even if she wanted to, i don't think it is possible. There is no case from what i read. The McC's could just as well say all the so called internet trolls have caused them distress as well. Are they going to sue all of them as well, seeing as the info is in the public domain? And what about some of the other docos that are out in cyberspace that go against the McC's version of what happened to Madeleine, is that causing them problems too?

by woodforthetrees 22.01.15 10:47

Joss wrote:Why would the McCann's get any monetary compensation at all? They have not proven their case against Goncalo Amaral. And i certainly don't think the Judge will rule against the initial ruling about the book seeing the verdict has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Portugal, why would she? Even if she wanted to, i don't think it is possible. There is no case from what i read. The McC's could just as well say all the so called internet trolls have caused them distress as well. Are they going to sue all of them as well, seeing as the info is in the public domain? And what about some of the other docos that are out in cyberspace that go against the McC's version of what happened to Madeleine, is that causing them problems too?

They don't have to prove their case against Amaral, the shelving of the PJ case and the various closed/on-going investigations since the shelving are enough for that. Additional distress and defamation is easy to prove based on number of 'views' of the book/DVD and the increase in anti-McCann comments seen since the publishing. However, the exactly amount of additional distress (i.e the value of the compensation) is almost impossible to quantify. If they get a tiny payout, they will appeal, if it's big they'll smile and walk away.

I agree, the book will not be banned, even if they do win a payout, as the theory is neither proven or dis-proven (i.e there are on-going investigations)

re the bit in bold... they cannot do this as they have publicly stated that they actively avoid going on twitter and facebook to avoid the trolls. As such, it would get thrown out of court at the first hurdle.

Also, internet trolls don't profit from hate messages, therefore there is no incentive for the McCanns to go after them.

re other stuff on the internet e.g Richard Halls documentary.... he has stated it's free, therefore no prospect of compo from him to the McCanns, so it would be a 100% cost to them to get this removed. I think they are nearly out of money now so until they get the next payout, these will be lower down the list of priorities.

With the Amaral case, they are basically stating that he has has defamed their character based on unproven information, which is at this point in time, true. Not only that, but there is proof he has profited from doing so which means he also has the means to compensate them for this defamation.

by Liz Eagles 22.01.15 11:08

I'm finding it difficult to form any sort of opinion due to the missing elements yet to be posted.

by NickE 22.01.15 11:13

Amaral supporters optimistic following judge’s rulings in McCanns’ libel case Kate and Gerry McCann seemed to suffer a setback on Wednesday in suing former detective Gonçalo Amaral over his controversial book about the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine. In Lisbon’s Palace of Justice, Judge Maria Emília Melo e Castro handed lawyers in the civil action a written statement evaluating as proven or not a list of 37 points on which she intends to base her verdict. Neither the McCanns nor Amaral were present. Amaral supporters said afterwards that the statement made them feel cautiously optimistic. The McCanns are seeking €1.2 million in damages for the severe distress they say has been caused to them by the book, A Verdade da Mentira (‘The Truth of the Lie’) and a subsequent documentary. The judge ruled that while statements in the book had psychologically affected the McCanns, the great anguish suffered by the couple over their missing daughter preceded the book’s publication rather than being a consequence of it. She pointed out that the book was very largely based on facts in police files. Nowhere did Amaral claim that the McCanns had killed their daughter, only the theory that they had hidden Madeleine’s body and fabricated a story about abduction, said the judge. In personal statements to the court last July, both Kate and Gerry McCann spoke not only of the great harm they believed had been caused to their family by allegations in the book, but that the allegations had hampered the search for Madeleine. The judge said it had not been proved that the Polícia Judiciária stopped collecting information and investigating the disappearance because of the book’s contents. Amaral insisted last year that the lawfulness of his book was “indisputable” because of a decision of the Appellate Court in Lisbon that overturned an earlier ruling banning it. The McCanns now have time to seek and present authorisation from the British High Court to formally represent their daughter in this case. Madeleine was made a ward of court at the instigation of her parents in April 2008. This could have a bearing on the amount of any compensation eventually awarded. This long-running case in Lisbon has been suspended several times over the past five years, including in January 2013 when the court allowed the two sides to try to reach a private settlement. No agreement was reached. No date has been set for a verdict but it is thought to be more than two months away. Even when it comes, the verdict will probably not be the end of the matter. An appeal is likely. Also, Amaral has let it be known that he is considering instigating a counter defamation lawsuit against the McCanns to seek compensation for the enormous damages on different levels he claims they have caused him. - See more at: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by aiyoyo 22.01.15 11:16

woodforthetrees wrote:
They don't have to prove their case against Amaral, ........

Are you sure ? What was their purpose then when they sent their witnesses to take the stand ? And when Gerry & Kate bulldozed their way to take the stand - what was that for - if not an attempt to prove their case......?

With the Amaral case, they are basically stating that he has has defamed their character based on unproven information, which is at this point in time, true. You do realise it is NOT a libel case dont you?

Not only that, but there is proof he has profited from doing so which means he also has the means to compensate them for this defamation.
Why did they not sue the Portuguese State for defamation then for releasing the files?

by Joss 22.01.15 11:21

aquila wrote:I'm finding it difficult to form any sort of opinion due to the missing elements yet to be posted.

Thats fair enough. I guess it remains to be seen as to what other info. will be available if at all.

by Joss 22.01.15 11:25

woodforthetrees wrote:
Joss wrote:Why would the McCann's get any monetary compensation at all? They have not proven their case against Goncalo Amaral. And i certainly don't think the Judge will rule against the initial ruling about the book seeing the verdict has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Portugal, why would she? Even if she wanted to, i don't think it is possible. There is no case from what i read. The McC's could just as well say all the so called internet trolls have caused them distress as well. Are they going to sue all of them as well, seeing as the info is in the public domain? And what about some of the other docos that are out in cyberspace that go against the McC's version of what happened to Madeleine, is that causing them problems too?
They don't have to prove their case against Amaral, the shelving of the PJ case and the various closed/on-going investigations since the shelving are enough for that. Additional distress and defamation is easy to prove based on number of 'views' of the book/DVD and the increase in anti-McCann comments seen since the publishing. However, the exactly amount of additional distress (i.e the value of the compensation) is almost impossible to quantify. If they get a tiny payout, they will appeal, if it's big they'll smile and walk away.

I agree, the book will not be banned, even if they do win a payout, as the theory is neither proven or dis-proven (i.e there are on-going investigations)

re the bit in bold... they cannot do this as they have publicly stated that they actively avoid going on twitter and facebook to avoid the trolls. As such, it would get thrown out of court at the first hurdle.

Also, internet trolls don't profit from hate messages, therefore there is no incentive for the McCanns to go after them.

re other stuff on the internet e.g Richard Halls documentary.... he has stated it's free, therefore no prospect of compo from him to the McCanns, so it would be a 100% cost to them to get this removed. I think they are nearly out of money now so until they get the next payout, these will be lower down the list of priorities.

With the Amaral case, they are basically stating that he has has defamed their character based on unproven information, which is at this point in time, true. Not only that, but there is proof he has profited from doing so which means he also has the means to compensate them for this defamation.

Yes they do have a case to prove against GA, of any damages he has caused them.

by woodforthetrees 22.01.15 14:27

aiyoyo wrote:
woodforthetrees wrote:
They don't have to prove their case against Amaral, ........

Are you sure ? What was their purpose then when they sent their witnesses to take the stand ? And when Gerry & Kate bulldozed their way to take the stand - what was that for - if not an attempt to prove their case......?
Yes, sure. I have no idea whey went off on one to try and discredit the dogs etc but that's most probably why the judge told Gerry to shut up...i.e that is not what this case is about. OG and PJ are arguing who/what/why. This case is all about whether Amarals 'theory' defamed them or not

With the Amaral case, they are basically stating that he has has defamed their character based on unproven information, which is at this point in time, true. You do realise it is NOT a libel case dont you?
Yes... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

Not only that, but there is proof he has profited from doing so which means he also has the means to compensate them for this defamation.
Why did they not sue the Portuguese State for defamation then for releasing the files?
Because the Portuguese state released the PII files due to being pressured to do so. Please note, these are NOT the full case files, just the PII ones. More importantly, , the Portuguese state haven't been SELLING/profiteering from their findings, therefore the McCanns don't have a guaranteed pot of gold to go for

The January 2015 McCanns v Amaral hearing on the facts - what did the Portuguese Court of Appeal say about the facts?