COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Portuguese Police Investigation :: McCanns v Dr Gonçalo Amaral + ECHR
Page 1 of 1 • Share
COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Tony Bennett 06.05.15 8:51
COMPLAINT IS MADE ABOUT THIS ARTICLE:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The text of the article below, the complaints are interleaved - in blue
++++++++++++++++++++
COMPLAINT
Mr David Dinsmore
Editor
The Sun
1 London Bridge Place
LONDON
SE1 9GF
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Independent Press Standards Organisation
Gate House
1 Farringdon Street
London EC4M 7LG
Telephone: 0300 123 2220
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Tuesday 5 May 2015
Internet article, 3 May 2015, by Ben PERRIN: Exclusive
Exclusive by Ben PERRIN
Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill
COMPLAINT: Dr Goncalo Amaral is described as ‘The Maddie lie cop’. He did not lie about anything. He has held and holds an opinion about the case based on the facts as he sees them.
The court case in Lisbon which required him to pay the McCanns 500,000 euros compensation did not say that he lied about anything. I can say this as I have studied an English translation of the full, lengthy decision of the judge, which runs to over 50 pages of A4. There is no accusation within that judgment that Dr Amaral lied.
The core decision of the judge in the Lisbon court was that in balancing the respective rights of the parties, she had to consider Dr Goncal Amaral’s right under the European Convention of Human Rights to freedom of expression with the McCanns’ Convention right to have their reputation preserved. She came down on the side of the McCanns.
It is relevant also to point out that this judgment defies earlier rulings of the Portuguese Court of Appeal (October 2010) and the Portuguese Supreme Court (March 2011) which decided that Dr Amaral’s book should not be banned. Below I set out the core ruling in those two judgments:
QUOTE
We thus arrive at this conclusion. It seems important to stress the following:
The indicative facts that led to the McCanns being made formal suspects [arguidos] in the initial investigation were not deemed by the Ministry of Justice to be sufficient to lead to anyone being charged with any criminal offence. But those very same facts, seen through another prism and from another foundation, may well lead to a different conclusion from that reached by the Justice Ministry. The evidence that was deemed to be insufficient for a criminal prosecution can be understood in a different way, for example in an interpretation that can quite legitimately be published as a work of literature, so long as the said interpretation does not offend the fundamental rights of anyone involved. And as we have stated above, we have explained why the interpretation in Dr Amaral’s book does not offend the McCanns’ rights.
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. The contents of the book do not violate any of the McCanns’ [the applicants’] fundamental rights.
The actions of its being written and published are justified under the constitutional rights which belong to all of us by virtue of the European Convention on Human Rights and by Articles 37 and 38 of the Portuguese Republic’s Constitution.
Since that is the view we have taken on the matter, it follows that the decision made by the court [in September 2009 and confirmed by the court in February 2010 must be revoked.
The appeal by the defendant Goncalo Amaral in these proceedings is therefore allowed.
UNQUOTE
In both cases, these higher Portuguese courts awarded costs against the McCanns.
The Sun’s story tells its readers that Dr Amaral is a liar.
The recent court decision in the libel case did not rule anywhere that he had ‘lied’. The judge simply ruled that, in her judgment, his opinion on the case should hot have been published. That is wholly different from the charge of ‘lying’ which the Sun has levelled against Dr Amaral.
The Oxford Dictionary defines a ‘lie’ as ‘a deliberately false statement’. There was nothing in the Lisbon judgment decision that remotely accuses him of making a false statement of any kind, deliberate or otherwise.
Remedy sought
The Sun must publish a withdrawal of their false claim that Dr Amaral lied and must apologise for it. It should explain in any correction which IPSO may authorise that the judge merely said that he was not entitled to publish his opinion. The Sun should add that the judge’s decision contradicted the earlier decisive rulings of the two highest Portuguese courts that under the European Convention on Human Rights Dr Amaral was entitled to publish his thesis.
I add that I do not complain on Dr Amaral’s behalf. My complaint is founded on a seven-year long in-depth study of various aspects of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and a detailed working knowledge of the six-year-long libel trial of Dr Amaral in particular. I simply do not agree to any British newspaper covered by IPSO printing outright unthruths.
++++++++++
TEXT
BRIT trolls are helping pay the legal bills of an ex-cop who said Madeleine McCann's parents were behind her disappearance.
Hundreds of donations have flooded into a sick online campaign for shamed Goncalo Amaral 56.
COMPLAINT: There are three complaints about the above two sentences so far as accuracy and distortion are concerned:
1) The claim that donors to Dr Amaral’s fund are ‘trolls’
2) The claim that they are ‘sick’, and
3) The claim that Dr Amaral is jutifiably referred to as ‘shamed’.
The term ‘troll’ has come in the mainstream press to have two meanings. The original meaning of ‘troll’ on the internet was to refer to those who might be described as ‘time-wasters’ or ‘disruptors’ – those who joined forums and chat rooms but who did not contribute positively to discussions but, instead, disrupted and distracted the others. It has also more recently been used to describe those who use the internet and social media sites to make nasty, sometimes appalling, comments about others. On occasions this merges into criminal behaviour where people make threats of violence.
I accept both current usages. I suggest that the Sun in using the term ‘trolls’ in this article does so in the latter sense i.e. people making nasty comments. The late Brenda Leyland, who committed suicide after being exposed by SKY News for making nasty comments about the McCanns, was for example labelled an ‘internet troll’ by the mainstream British media.
On point (1) it is conceded that a few of those who have made donations – and there have been hundreds – might on occasions have made nasty remarks about the McCanns and might be called ‘trolls’ by the press. Unless the Sun has evidence that most of these hundreds of donors are nasty people making nasty remarks about the McCanns, their blanket description of all the donors as ‘trolls’ is inaccurate and distorted and, moreover, deeply offensive to those who may have very legitimate reasons for donating to help Dr Amaral with his legal expenses. IPSO should insist that this comment should be withdrawn.
On point (2), the word ‘sick’, as used in this context, is clearly meant to suggest that all the hundreds who have donated are mentally ill, or have mental health ‘issues’. Again, unless the Sun has evidence that all or most of the donors are have mental health issues, IPSO should insist on grounds of accuracy and distortion that the Sun withdraw and apologise for their use of the terms ‘sick’.
On point (3), it is claimed that Dr Amaral is ‘shamed’. It is unclear why he should be regarded as ‘shamed’:
a) He had a very successful career as a senior detective
b) He solved another notorious ‘missing child’ case, tjhat of Joana Cipriano, by arresting and successfully prosecuting her murderers – her mother and uncle
c) He was removed from the investigation into the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann only because he openly criticised the British police and security services for interfering with his investigation – a complaint with a great deal of evidence to support it - and not because of any incompetence in his investigation
d) The concluding reports of the Head of the Portuguese Police and the Regional Attorney-General were clear in praising the comprehensive and thorough work of the team led by Dr Amaral
e) Despite the temporary banning of his book ‘The Truth About A Lie’ for 13 months, both the Portuguese Court of Appeal and the Portuguese Supreme Court, Portugal’s two highest courts, ruled that Dr Amaral was fully entitled to publish and sell his hypothesis on the case, also ruling that his conclusions were solidly based on the facts.
It is true that Dr Amaral was found guilty by a court of filing a false report. However, that criminal case was brought by the murderer of her own child, a woman that Dr Amaral had successfully convicted for her crime, and who lied comprehensively in court and elsewhere. Her claims of torture were not substantiated by the court, and claims that Dr Amaral had filed a false report were based on slender evidence. That is scarcely a sufficient basis for calling him ‘shamed’. The claim is a distortion (Clause 1(iii)).
++++++++++
TEXT
Today marks the eighth anniversary since Madeleine vanished from Praia da Luz, Portugal, when she was three years old.
An ex-British policeman is among those supporting the "injustice" of Amaral losing a libel case over allegations in his controversial book The Truth of the Lie.
He claimed that Maddie's parents Kate 47, and Scots- born Gerry 46 faked her abduction after she died. Amaral is set to launch a costly appeal after being ordered to pay the couple from Rothley, Leics, a total of £434,000.
Leanne Baulch, 22, of Birmingham is listed as organiser of the gofundme webpage "Legal Defence for Goncalo Amaral"- which aims to raise £25,000.
Some donors called the libel ruling in Lisbon a "perversion of justice"
John Green paid £10 and wrote "I am a retired policeman and will never understand how criminal proceedings have never been taken against the McCann's.
Mary Benusis said her £50 was in memory of a Twitter troll found dead after being exposed as being behind vile social media messages about the McCanns.
Speaking after winning the six year battle with Amaral, Kate McCann said "It was about stopping awful lies which hindered the search for Madeleine".
Last night a family spokesman declined to comment.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The text of the article below, the complaints are interleaved - in blue
++++++++++++++++++++
COMPLAINT
Mr David Dinsmore
Editor
The Sun
1 London Bridge Place
LONDON
SE1 9GF
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Independent Press Standards Organisation
Gate House
1 Farringdon Street
London EC4M 7LG
Telephone: 0300 123 2220
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Tuesday 5 May 2015
Internet article, 3 May 2015, by Ben PERRIN: Exclusive
Exclusive by Ben PERRIN
Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill
COMPLAINT: Dr Goncalo Amaral is described as ‘The Maddie lie cop’. He did not lie about anything. He has held and holds an opinion about the case based on the facts as he sees them.
The court case in Lisbon which required him to pay the McCanns 500,000 euros compensation did not say that he lied about anything. I can say this as I have studied an English translation of the full, lengthy decision of the judge, which runs to over 50 pages of A4. There is no accusation within that judgment that Dr Amaral lied.
The core decision of the judge in the Lisbon court was that in balancing the respective rights of the parties, she had to consider Dr Goncal Amaral’s right under the European Convention of Human Rights to freedom of expression with the McCanns’ Convention right to have their reputation preserved. She came down on the side of the McCanns.
It is relevant also to point out that this judgment defies earlier rulings of the Portuguese Court of Appeal (October 2010) and the Portuguese Supreme Court (March 2011) which decided that Dr Amaral’s book should not be banned. Below I set out the core ruling in those two judgments:
QUOTE
We thus arrive at this conclusion. It seems important to stress the following:
The indicative facts that led to the McCanns being made formal suspects [arguidos] in the initial investigation were not deemed by the Ministry of Justice to be sufficient to lead to anyone being charged with any criminal offence. But those very same facts, seen through another prism and from another foundation, may well lead to a different conclusion from that reached by the Justice Ministry. The evidence that was deemed to be insufficient for a criminal prosecution can be understood in a different way, for example in an interpretation that can quite legitimately be published as a work of literature, so long as the said interpretation does not offend the fundamental rights of anyone involved. And as we have stated above, we have explained why the interpretation in Dr Amaral’s book does not offend the McCanns’ rights.
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. The contents of the book do not violate any of the McCanns’ [the applicants’] fundamental rights.
The actions of its being written and published are justified under the constitutional rights which belong to all of us by virtue of the European Convention on Human Rights and by Articles 37 and 38 of the Portuguese Republic’s Constitution.
Since that is the view we have taken on the matter, it follows that the decision made by the court [in September 2009 and confirmed by the court in February 2010 must be revoked.
The appeal by the defendant Goncalo Amaral in these proceedings is therefore allowed.
UNQUOTE
In both cases, these higher Portuguese courts awarded costs against the McCanns.
The Sun’s story tells its readers that Dr Amaral is a liar.
The recent court decision in the libel case did not rule anywhere that he had ‘lied’. The judge simply ruled that, in her judgment, his opinion on the case should hot have been published. That is wholly different from the charge of ‘lying’ which the Sun has levelled against Dr Amaral.
The Oxford Dictionary defines a ‘lie’ as ‘a deliberately false statement’. There was nothing in the Lisbon judgment decision that remotely accuses him of making a false statement of any kind, deliberate or otherwise.
Remedy sought
The Sun must publish a withdrawal of their false claim that Dr Amaral lied and must apologise for it. It should explain in any correction which IPSO may authorise that the judge merely said that he was not entitled to publish his opinion. The Sun should add that the judge’s decision contradicted the earlier decisive rulings of the two highest Portuguese courts that under the European Convention on Human Rights Dr Amaral was entitled to publish his thesis.
I add that I do not complain on Dr Amaral’s behalf. My complaint is founded on a seven-year long in-depth study of various aspects of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and a detailed working knowledge of the six-year-long libel trial of Dr Amaral in particular. I simply do not agree to any British newspaper covered by IPSO printing outright unthruths.
++++++++++
TEXT
BRIT trolls are helping pay the legal bills of an ex-cop who said Madeleine McCann's parents were behind her disappearance.
Hundreds of donations have flooded into a sick online campaign for shamed Goncalo Amaral 56.
COMPLAINT: There are three complaints about the above two sentences so far as accuracy and distortion are concerned:
1) The claim that donors to Dr Amaral’s fund are ‘trolls’
2) The claim that they are ‘sick’, and
3) The claim that Dr Amaral is jutifiably referred to as ‘shamed’.
The term ‘troll’ has come in the mainstream press to have two meanings. The original meaning of ‘troll’ on the internet was to refer to those who might be described as ‘time-wasters’ or ‘disruptors’ – those who joined forums and chat rooms but who did not contribute positively to discussions but, instead, disrupted and distracted the others. It has also more recently been used to describe those who use the internet and social media sites to make nasty, sometimes appalling, comments about others. On occasions this merges into criminal behaviour where people make threats of violence.
I accept both current usages. I suggest that the Sun in using the term ‘trolls’ in this article does so in the latter sense i.e. people making nasty comments. The late Brenda Leyland, who committed suicide after being exposed by SKY News for making nasty comments about the McCanns, was for example labelled an ‘internet troll’ by the mainstream British media.
On point (1) it is conceded that a few of those who have made donations – and there have been hundreds – might on occasions have made nasty remarks about the McCanns and might be called ‘trolls’ by the press. Unless the Sun has evidence that most of these hundreds of donors are nasty people making nasty remarks about the McCanns, their blanket description of all the donors as ‘trolls’ is inaccurate and distorted and, moreover, deeply offensive to those who may have very legitimate reasons for donating to help Dr Amaral with his legal expenses. IPSO should insist that this comment should be withdrawn.
On point (2), the word ‘sick’, as used in this context, is clearly meant to suggest that all the hundreds who have donated are mentally ill, or have mental health ‘issues’. Again, unless the Sun has evidence that all or most of the donors are have mental health issues, IPSO should insist on grounds of accuracy and distortion that the Sun withdraw and apologise for their use of the terms ‘sick’.
On point (3), it is claimed that Dr Amaral is ‘shamed’. It is unclear why he should be regarded as ‘shamed’:
a) He had a very successful career as a senior detective
b) He solved another notorious ‘missing child’ case, tjhat of Joana Cipriano, by arresting and successfully prosecuting her murderers – her mother and uncle
c) He was removed from the investigation into the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann only because he openly criticised the British police and security services for interfering with his investigation – a complaint with a great deal of evidence to support it - and not because of any incompetence in his investigation
d) The concluding reports of the Head of the Portuguese Police and the Regional Attorney-General were clear in praising the comprehensive and thorough work of the team led by Dr Amaral
e) Despite the temporary banning of his book ‘The Truth About A Lie’ for 13 months, both the Portuguese Court of Appeal and the Portuguese Supreme Court, Portugal’s two highest courts, ruled that Dr Amaral was fully entitled to publish and sell his hypothesis on the case, also ruling that his conclusions were solidly based on the facts.
It is true that Dr Amaral was found guilty by a court of filing a false report. However, that criminal case was brought by the murderer of her own child, a woman that Dr Amaral had successfully convicted for her crime, and who lied comprehensively in court and elsewhere. Her claims of torture were not substantiated by the court, and claims that Dr Amaral had filed a false report were based on slender evidence. That is scarcely a sufficient basis for calling him ‘shamed’. The claim is a distortion (Clause 1(iii)).
++++++++++
TEXT
Today marks the eighth anniversary since Madeleine vanished from Praia da Luz, Portugal, when she was three years old.
An ex-British policeman is among those supporting the "injustice" of Amaral losing a libel case over allegations in his controversial book The Truth of the Lie.
He claimed that Maddie's parents Kate 47, and Scots- born Gerry 46 faked her abduction after she died. Amaral is set to launch a costly appeal after being ordered to pay the couple from Rothley, Leics, a total of £434,000.
Leanne Baulch, 22, of Birmingham is listed as organiser of the gofundme webpage "Legal Defence for Goncalo Amaral"- which aims to raise £25,000.
Some donors called the libel ruling in Lisbon a "perversion of justice"
John Green paid £10 and wrote "I am a retired policeman and will never understand how criminal proceedings have never been taken against the McCann's.
Mary Benusis said her £50 was in memory of a Twitter troll found dead after being exposed as being behind vile social media messages about the McCanns.
Speaking after winning the six year battle with Amaral, Kate McCann said "It was about stopping awful lies which hindered the search for Madeleine".
Last night a family spokesman declined to comment.
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by PeterMac 06.05.15 9:07
Hard to keep up with you !
Well done.
Well done.
PeterMac- Investigator
- Posts : 13955
Activity : 16958
Likes received : 2075
Join date : 2010-12-06 -
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Guest 06.05.15 9:14
Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill
"Maddie lie cop".
I can see the wriggle room there - plenty of it.
Although the absolute (and disgraceful) impression is that he lied, the sentence can be interpreted multiple ways.
He wrote a book called "The truth of the lie"... this makes him the lie cop.
The lie isn't necessarily his.
They'll probably argue for that.
They are pathetic low-life.
Guest- Guest
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Tony Bennett 06.05.15 9:18
The article ends with this quote from Dr Kate McCann, though:BlueBag wrote:Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill
"Maddie lie cop".
I can see the wriggle room there - plenty of it.
Although the absolute (and disgraceful) impression is that he lied, the sentence can be interpreted multiple ways.
He wrote a book called "The truth of the lie"... this makes him the lie cop.
The lie isn't necessarily his.
They'll probably argue for that.
They are pathetic low-life.
Speaking after winning the six year battle with Amaral, Kate McCann said "It was about stopping awful lies which hindered the search for Madeleine".
____________________
Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"
Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".
Tony Bennett- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Angelique 06.05.15 9:26
Tony
What an enormous amount of work you do!
I do believe IPSO has been hung by it's own petard.
I am thoroughly grateful that you have taken advantage of this 'petard'.
What an enormous amount of work you do!
I do believe IPSO has been hung by it's own petard.
I am thoroughly grateful that you have taken advantage of this 'petard'.
____________________
Things aren't always what they seem
Angelique- Posts : 1396
Activity : 1460
Likes received : 42
Join date : 2010-10-19
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by plebgate 06.05.15 9:31
These newspapers should be looking to hire Tony as their legal advisors, save them a lot hassle IMO.
I wonder if these "journalists" will be able to understand the complaint against them as it has been written so eloquently - a term I believe they have never come across.
I wonder if these "journalists" will be able to understand the complaint against them as it has been written so eloquently - a term I believe they have never come across.
plebgate- Posts : 6729
Activity : 8938
Likes received : 2123
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Guest 06.05.15 9:41
I'm not disputing what the article was meant to portray.Tony Bennett wrote:The article ends with this quote from Dr Kate McCann, though:BlueBag wrote:Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill
"Maddie lie cop".
I can see the wriggle room there - plenty of it.
Although the absolute (and disgraceful) impression is that he lied, the sentence can be interpreted multiple ways.
He wrote a book called "The truth of the lie"... this makes him the lie cop.
The lie isn't necessarily his.
They'll probably argue for that.
They are pathetic low-life.Speaking after winning the six year battle with Amaral, Kate McCann said "It was about stopping awful lies which hindered the search for Madeleine".
It was a disgrace.
But they will wriggle.
They pay people a lot of money to do it.
Guest- Guest
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by plebgate 06.05.15 9:55
Yeah go on, wriggle like a bunch of worms - at least they will be made to wriggle and will not like that feeling one little bit.
plebgate- Posts : 6729
Activity : 8938
Likes received : 2123
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Copodenieve 18.05.15 21:09
This was a reply from IPSO to Gerald Bentley's complaint. It's quite shocking. Once again they are using the "Shamed cop" line and find it quite reasonable to call his supporters trolls. Now I'm not academic but even I know that is a load of tosh. I don't usually comment because I don't want to upset any threads with nonsense, but I'm annoyed!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Rubber stamp number two
-
Dear Mr Bentley,
Thank you for contacting the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) regarding your complaint about an article headlined “Online trolls pay Madeleine McCann libel detective’s legal bills on eight year anniversary”, published by the Daily Express on 4 May 2015.
On receipt of a complaint, IPSO’s Executive reviews it to ensure that it falls within our remit, and discloses a possible breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice. The Executive has now completed an assessment of your complaint under the terms of the Code. Having considered the points you have raised in full, we have concluded that your complaint does not raise a possible breach of the Code.
You said that it was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy) to refer to individuals who have contributed towards covering the legal costs of Goncalo Amaral as “trolls”. The newspaper was entitled to characterise those “funding the legal bills of a shamed Portuguese detective” as “trolls”. Further, the article included statements from a number of individuals who have made donations to Mr Amaral, as well as from the McCann family about their experiences, which would allow readers to reach their own conclusions on the matter. As such, your complaint did not raise a possible breach of Clause 1.
You also said that the article breached Clause 4 (Harassment). We should explain that the terms of Clause 4 generally relate to the conduct of journalists during the newsgathering process. Your concern that the article amounted to “harassment” to individuals who support Mr Amaral did not engage the terms of the Code, and did not raise a possible breach of Clause 4.
While we note your position that the term “troll” is offensive, we should explain that the Editors’ Code does not address issues of taste and offence. The Code is designed to address the potentially competing rights of freedom of expression and other rights of individuals, such as privacy. Newspapers and magazines have editorial freedom to publish what they consider to be appropriate provided that the rights of individuals – enshrined in the terms of the Code which specifically defines and protects these rights – are not unjustifiably infringed.
You are entitled to request the Executive’s decision to reject your complaint be reviewed by IPSO’s Complaints Committee. To do so you will need to write to us within seven days, setting out the reasons why you believe the decision should be reviewed. Please note that we are unable to accept requests for review made more than seven days following the date of this email.
We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider the points you have raised, and have shared this correspondence with the newspaper to make it aware of your concerns.
Best wishes,
Xavier Bastin
Cc Daily Express
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Rubber stamp number two
-
Dear Mr Bentley,
Thank you for contacting the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) regarding your complaint about an article headlined “Online trolls pay Madeleine McCann libel detective’s legal bills on eight year anniversary”, published by the Daily Express on 4 May 2015.
On receipt of a complaint, IPSO’s Executive reviews it to ensure that it falls within our remit, and discloses a possible breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice. The Executive has now completed an assessment of your complaint under the terms of the Code. Having considered the points you have raised in full, we have concluded that your complaint does not raise a possible breach of the Code.
You said that it was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy) to refer to individuals who have contributed towards covering the legal costs of Goncalo Amaral as “trolls”. The newspaper was entitled to characterise those “funding the legal bills of a shamed Portuguese detective” as “trolls”. Further, the article included statements from a number of individuals who have made donations to Mr Amaral, as well as from the McCann family about their experiences, which would allow readers to reach their own conclusions on the matter. As such, your complaint did not raise a possible breach of Clause 1.
You also said that the article breached Clause 4 (Harassment). We should explain that the terms of Clause 4 generally relate to the conduct of journalists during the newsgathering process. Your concern that the article amounted to “harassment” to individuals who support Mr Amaral did not engage the terms of the Code, and did not raise a possible breach of Clause 4.
While we note your position that the term “troll” is offensive, we should explain that the Editors’ Code does not address issues of taste and offence. The Code is designed to address the potentially competing rights of freedom of expression and other rights of individuals, such as privacy. Newspapers and magazines have editorial freedom to publish what they consider to be appropriate provided that the rights of individuals – enshrined in the terms of the Code which specifically defines and protects these rights – are not unjustifiably infringed.
You are entitled to request the Executive’s decision to reject your complaint be reviewed by IPSO’s Complaints Committee. To do so you will need to write to us within seven days, setting out the reasons why you believe the decision should be reviewed. Please note that we are unable to accept requests for review made more than seven days following the date of this email.
We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider the points you have raised, and have shared this correspondence with the newspaper to make it aware of your concerns.
Best wishes,
Xavier Bastin
Cc Daily Express
Copodenieve- Posts : 151
Activity : 222
Likes received : 67
Join date : 2013-10-27
Location : Leeds
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Liz Eagles 18.05.15 21:17
Apart from the seriously bad content of the response, don't you find it really odd that someone can sign off that little lot with 'best wishes'?Copodenieve wrote:This was a reply from IPSO to Gerald Bentley's complaint. It's quite shocking. Once again they are using the "Shamed cop" line and find it quite reasonable to call his supporters trolls. Now I'm not academic but even I know that is a load of tosh. I don't usually comment because I don't want to upset any threads with nonsense, but I'm annoyed!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Rubber stamp number two
-
Dear Mr Bentley,
Thank you for contacting the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) regarding your complaint about an article headlined “Online trolls pay Madeleine McCann libel detective’s legal bills on eight year anniversary”, published by the Daily Express on 4 May 2015.
On receipt of a complaint, IPSO’s Executive reviews it to ensure that it falls within our remit, and discloses a possible breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice. The Executive has now completed an assessment of your complaint under the terms of the Code. Having considered the points you have raised in full, we have concluded that your complaint does not raise a possible breach of the Code.
You said that it was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy) to refer to individuals who have contributed towards covering the legal costs of Goncalo Amaral as “trolls”. The newspaper was entitled to characterise those “funding the legal bills of a shamed Portuguese detective” as “trolls”. Further, the article included statements from a number of individuals who have made donations to Mr Amaral, as well as from the McCann family about their experiences, which would allow readers to reach their own conclusions on the matter. As such, your complaint did not raise a possible breach of Clause 1.
You also said that the article breached Clause 4 (Harassment). We should explain that the terms of Clause 4 generally relate to the conduct of journalists during the newsgathering process. Your concern that the article amounted to “harassment” to individuals who support Mr Amaral did not engage the terms of the Code, and did not raise a possible breach of Clause 4.
While we note your position that the term “troll” is offensive, we should explain that the Editors’ Code does not address issues of taste and offence. The Code is designed to address the potentially competing rights of freedom of expression and other rights of individuals, such as privacy. Newspapers and magazines have editorial freedom to publish what they consider to be appropriate provided that the rights of individuals – enshrined in the terms of the Code which specifically defines and protects these rights – are not unjustifiably infringed.
You are entitled to request the Executive’s decision to reject your complaint be reviewed by IPSO’s Complaints Committee. To do so you will need to write to us within seven days, setting out the reasons why you believe the decision should be reviewed. Please note that we are unable to accept requests for review made more than seven days following the date of this email.
We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider the points you have raised, and have shared this correspondence with the newspaper to make it aware of your concerns.
Best wishes,
Xavier Bastin
Cc Daily Express
Liz Eagles- Posts : 11153
Activity : 13562
Likes received : 2218
Join date : 2011-09-03
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Copodenieve 18.05.15 21:32
I agree. It is so damned condescending.aquila wrote:Apart from the seriously bad content of the response, don't you find it really odd that someone can sign off that little lot with 'best wishes'?Copodenieve wrote:This was a reply from IPSO to Gerald Bentley's complaint. It's quite shocking. Once again they are using the "Shamed cop" line and find it quite reasonable to call his supporters trolls. Now I'm not academic but even I know that is a load of tosh. I don't usually comment because I don't want to upset any threads with nonsense, but I'm annoyed!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Rubber stamp number two
-
Dear Mr Bentley,
Thank you for contacting the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) regarding your complaint about an article headlined “Online trolls pay Madeleine McCann libel detective’s legal bills on eight year anniversary”, published by the Daily Express on 4 May 2015.
On receipt of a complaint, IPSO’s Executive reviews it to ensure that it falls within our remit, and discloses a possible breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice. The Executive has now completed an assessment of your complaint under the terms of the Code. Having considered the points you have raised in full, we have concluded that your complaint does not raise a possible breach of the Code.
You said that it was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy) to refer to individuals who have contributed towards covering the legal costs of Goncalo Amaral as “trolls”. The newspaper was entitled to characterise those “funding the legal bills of a shamed Portuguese detective” as “trolls”. Further, the article included statements from a number of individuals who have made donations to Mr Amaral, as well as from the McCann family about their experiences, which would allow readers to reach their own conclusions on the matter. As such, your complaint did not raise a possible breach of Clause 1.
You also said that the article breached Clause 4 (Harassment). We should explain that the terms of Clause 4 generally relate to the conduct of journalists during the newsgathering process. Your concern that the article amounted to “harassment” to individuals who support Mr Amaral did not engage the terms of the Code, and did not raise a possible breach of Clause 4.
While we note your position that the term “troll” is offensive, we should explain that the Editors’ Code does not address issues of taste and offence. The Code is designed to address the potentially competing rights of freedom of expression and other rights of individuals, such as privacy. Newspapers and magazines have editorial freedom to publish what they consider to be appropriate provided that the rights of individuals – enshrined in the terms of the Code which specifically defines and protects these rights – are not unjustifiably infringed.
You are entitled to request the Executive’s decision to reject your complaint be reviewed by IPSO’s Complaints Committee. To do so you will need to write to us within seven days, setting out the reasons why you believe the decision should be reviewed. Please note that we are unable to accept requests for review made more than seven days following the date of this email.
We would like to thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider the points you have raised, and have shared this correspondence with the newspaper to make it aware of your concerns.
Best wishes,
Xavier Bastin
Cc Daily Express
Copodenieve- Posts : 151
Activity : 222
Likes received : 67
Join date : 2013-10-27
Location : Leeds
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by sonic72 18.05.15 23:40
Let's not forget this awful headline.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
sonic72- Posts : 342
Activity : 416
Likes received : 72
Join date : 2012-09-09
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Copodenieve 19.05.15 9:01
I sometimes wonder if the authors of this type of rubbish know that they are writing lies, or they just believe what they have been told or what they have read in other newspapers. But then I think, how could anyone write an article for the public without researching the subject properly. I would not write about something I did not know about. It just makes you look stupid.sonic72 wrote:Let's not forget this awful headline.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Copodenieve- Posts : 151
Activity : 222
Likes received : 67
Join date : 2013-10-27
Location : Leeds
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by sonic72 19.05.15 19:37
Copodenieve wrote:I sometimes wonder if the authors of this type of rubbish know that they are writing lies, or they just believe what they have been told or what they have read in other newspapers. But then I think, how could anyone write an article for the public without researching the subject properly. I would not write about something I did not know about. It just makes you look stupid.
Surely Amaral could sue them for this headline? It's a total lie and an attack on his character.
As for the reply from IPSO, I think it's pretty clear that they've been got at, which reinforces that there's some kind of cover up in place.
sonic72- Posts : 342
Activity : 416
Likes received : 72
Join date : 2012-09-09
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by plebgate 19.05.15 20:00
Typical quango reply. Not in the least bit surprised.
Nothing changes EVER.
Nothing changes EVER.
plebgate- Posts : 6729
Activity : 8938
Likes received : 2123
Join date : 2013-02-01
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Copodenieve 19.05.15 22:31
I honestly believe that not far in the future things will change as far as Mr. Amaral's affair is concerned. After all, we are talking about free speech here which is a matter of concern for one and all. He is gaining more and more support and people are starting to voice their opinion. Only two years ago, when I first saw Mr. Bennett's on line booklet, I posted it on my wall on facebook and was slammed by friends for doing so. It caused a terrible row and I was even informed by one that I would be arrested for posting it. However, I have recently noticed that an awful lot of my friends are now members of anti McCann facebook groups. They still don't comment, but they are reading.
I come from an Industrial area in West Yorkshire were the majority are working class and decedents from Irish Immigrants. They buy the Sun and usually believe what they read, yet now after so much information being posted on facebook they are starting to realise that they are being misinformed.
Most of you on here are probably from upper class, so I thought you might like to know how people feel from my area. At least I don't hear of anyone defending the McCann's round these parts any more.
I come from an Industrial area in West Yorkshire were the majority are working class and decedents from Irish Immigrants. They buy the Sun and usually believe what they read, yet now after so much information being posted on facebook they are starting to realise that they are being misinformed.
Most of you on here are probably from upper class, so I thought you might like to know how people feel from my area. At least I don't hear of anyone defending the McCann's round these parts any more.
Copodenieve- Posts : 151
Activity : 222
Likes received : 67
Join date : 2013-10-27
Location : Leeds
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by lj 20.05.15 16:51
Copodenieve wrote:I honestly believe that not far in the future things will change as far as Mr. Amaral's affair is concerned. After all, we are talking about free speech here which is a matter of concern for one and all. He is gaining more and more support and people are starting to voice their opinion. Only two years ago, when I first saw Mr. Bennett's on line booklet, I posted it on my wall on facebook and was slammed by friends for doing so. It caused a terrible row and I was even informed by one that I would be arrested for posting it. However, I have recently noticed that an awful lot of my friends are now members of anti McCann facebook groups. They still don't comment, but they are reading.
I come from an Industrial area in West Yorkshire were the majority are working class and decedents from Irish Immigrants. They buy the Sun and usually believe what they read, yet now after so much information being posted on facebook they are starting to realise that they are being misinformed.
Most of you on here are probably from upper class, so I thought you might like to know how people feel from my area. At least I don't hear of anyone defending the McCann's round these parts any more.
Lot of "normal" people here copodenieve! I agree the tide is turning. It will still take a while though before MSM will do a 180.
____________________
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?" Gerry
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
lj- Posts : 3329
Activity : 3590
Likes received : 208
Join date : 2009-12-01
Re: COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULINGS - No.3, Ben Perrin in the Sun, 3 May 2015, "Trolls fork out for Maddie lie cop's court bill"
by Copodenieve 20.05.15 18:58
lj wrote:Copodenieve wrote:I honestly believe that not far in the future things will change as far as Mr. Amaral's affair is concerned. After all, we are talking about free speech here which is a matter of concern for one and all. He is gaining more and more support and people are starting to voice their opinion. Only two years ago, when I first saw Mr. Bennett's on line booklet, I posted it on my wall on facebook and was slammed by friends for doing so. It caused a terrible row and I was even informed by one that I would be arrested for posting it. However, I have recently noticed that an awful lot of my friends are now members of anti McCann facebook groups. They still don't comment, but they are reading.
I come from an Industrial area in West Yorkshire were the majority are working class and decedents from Irish Immigrants. They buy the Sun and usually believe what they read, yet now after so much information being posted on facebook they are starting to realise that they are being misinformed.
Most of you on here are probably from upper class, so I thought you might like to know how people feel from my area. At least I don't hear of anyone defending the McCann's round these parts any more.
Lot of "normal" people here copodenieve! I agree the tide is turning. It will still take a while though before MSM will do a 180.
Copodenieve- Posts : 151
Activity : 222
Likes received : 67
Join date : 2013-10-27
Location : Leeds
Similar topics» COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULING: No. 2, The Sun, 2 May 2015
» COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULING: No. 1 - Daily Express, 29 April 2015
» DAILY STAR Report “Trolls: Internet trolls are backing a court libel case against the McCanns”. - DECISION BY IPSO
» LAST DAY OF LIBEL TRIAL 8th July 2014 DISCUSSION AND NEWS
» Sick trolls raised £25k for McCann cop's court appeal - Jerry Lawton, Daily Star, 2 Jun 2015
» COMPLAINTS TO IPSO ABOUT RECENT PRESS COVERAGE OF THE MADELEINE MCCANN LIBEL TRIAL RULING: No. 1 - Daily Express, 29 April 2015
» DAILY STAR Report “Trolls: Internet trolls are backing a court libel case against the McCanns”. - DECISION BY IPSO
» LAST DAY OF LIBEL TRIAL 8th July 2014 DISCUSSION AND NEWS
» Sick trolls raised £25k for McCann cop's court appeal - Jerry Lawton, Daily Star, 2 Jun 2015
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Portuguese Police Investigation :: McCanns v Dr Gonçalo Amaral + ECHR
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
