McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Portuguese Police Investigation :: McCanns v Dr Gonçalo Amaral + ECHR
Page 5 of 7 • Share
Page 5 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
It was not a libel case.Joss wrote:How can the judge exclude libel when the damages was because of the said libel. Otherwise there would of been no damages case. It was due to what GA said in his book, all of it, the damages & the libel that caused said damages. You can't have one without the other.OxfordBloo wrote:No. She based it on clear Portuguese laws.Joss wrote:I have only seen the translated versions of what the judge said. Didn't she base this judgement on jurisprudence?OxfordBloo wrote:They are not the Judge's opinion but direct quotes from Portuguese laws as passed by their legislature.Jurisprudence
From the Latin term juris prudentia, which means "the study, knowledge, or science of law"; in the United States, more broadly associated with the philosophy of law.
Legal philosophy has many branches, with four types being the most common. The most prevalent form of jurisprudence seeks to analyze, explain, classify, and criticize entire bodies of law, ranging from contract to tort to [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. Legal encyclopedias, law reviews, and law school textbooks frequently contain this type of jurisprudential scholarship.The second type of jurisprudence compares and contrasts law with other fields of knowledge such as literature, economics, religion, and the social sciences. The purpose of this type of study is to enlighten each field of knowledge by sharing insights that have proven to be important in advancing essential features of the compared discipline.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The jurisprudence argued as regarding the exclusion of libel.
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
It is part of the Judgement, just after the similar references to the laws that require police officers to maintain the confidence of privileged information and to maintain the innocent status of people not found guilty.Richard IV wrote:Not sure where OxfordBloo got this from
""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."
The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."
But if legit, it seems GA was still bound under the police retirement law if he continued to receive a pension from them.
All in the judgement. Not my ideas.
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Can Amaral now sue every UK publication that have reported the case has a libel trial? Semantics works both ways.
TheTruthWillOut- Posts : 733
Activity : 754
Likes received : 19
Join date : 2011-09-27
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Where on the internet are these laws from Portugal stated on any legal websites, apart from what the judge said?OxfordBloo wrote:They are not the Judge's opinion but direct quotes from Portuguese laws as passed by their legislature.
The laws that are in question here are the ones you quote the judge determined that GA was not allowed to state his opinions from the investigation because of his being an ex PJ officer, and sworn to some type of secrecy, so a big no no for him to have written his book. Also that according to what you cite the judge states, that GA accused the McC's of being guilty of certain crimes in the case of their missing child, and should of upheld that the McC's were innocent until proven guilty. Apart from that i think its all pretty straightforward.
I think i understand the gist of your posts?
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
No, it was a damages because of the libel case, about what GA said, because if he hadn't of said anything there wouldn't of been a case or trial.OxfordBloo wrote:It was not a libel case.Joss wrote:How can the judge exclude libel when the damages was because of the said libel. Otherwise there would of been no damages case. It was due to what GA said in his book, all of it, the damages & the libel that caused said damages. You can't have one without the other.OxfordBloo wrote:No. She based it on clear Portuguese laws.Joss wrote:I have only seen the translated versions of what the judge said. Didn't she base this judgement on jurisprudence?OxfordBloo wrote:They are not the Judge's opinion but direct quotes from Portuguese laws as passed by their legislature.Jurisprudence
From the Latin term juris prudentia, which means "the study, knowledge, or science of law"; in the United States, more broadly associated with the philosophy of law.
Legal philosophy has many branches, with four types being the most common. The most prevalent form of jurisprudence seeks to analyze, explain, classify, and criticize entire bodies of law, ranging from contract to tort to [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. Legal encyclopedias, law reviews, and law school textbooks frequently contain this type of jurisprudential scholarship.The second type of jurisprudence compares and contrasts law with other fields of knowledge such as literature, economics, religion, and the social sciences. The purpose of this type of study is to enlighten each field of knowledge by sharing insights that have proven to be important in advancing essential features of the compared discipline.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The jurisprudence argued as regarding the exclusion of libel.
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
And how then could the higher court have determined he was within his rights to write his book on the investigation and unban it?Richard IV wrote:Not sure where OxfordBloo got this from
""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."
The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."
But if legit, it seems GA was still bound under the police retirement law if he continued to receive a pension from them.
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
The laws are quoted with their full reference to the Portuguese legal code.Joss wrote:Where on the internet are these laws from Portugal stated on any legal websites, apart from what the judge said?OxfordBloo wrote:They are not the Judge's opinion but direct quotes from Portuguese laws as passed by their legislature.
The laws that are in question here are the ones you quote the judge determined that GA was not allowed to state his opinions from the investigation because of his being an ex PJ officer, and sworn to some type of secrecy, so a big no no for him to have written his book. Also that according to what you cite the judge states, that GA accused the McC's of being guilty of certain crimes in the case of their missing child, and should of upheld that the McC's were innocent until proven guilty. Apart from that i think its all pretty straightforward.
I think i understand the gist of your posts?
Are you suggesting the judge was incorrect in her references to Portuguese law which could be checked by reference to the Portuguese statutes?
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Dear Oxfordbloo,
Where are you getting these perfect translations of Portuguese law from?
And did you come here to convince us that Amaral doesn't have a chance?
Where are you getting these perfect translations of Portuguese law from?
And did you come here to convince us that Amaral doesn't have a chance?
Guest- Guest
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
The higher court fond that publishing the book was legal and not libel.Joss wrote:And how then could the higher court have determined he was within his rights to write his book on the investigation and unban it?Richard IV wrote:Not sure where OxfordBloo got this from
""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."
The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."
But if legit, it seems GA was still bound under the police retirement law if he continued to receive a pension from them.
The second judgement found in common terms that
1/ Amaral "stole" the information, and
2/ Called the McCann guilty.
These two actions (nothing to do with the non-libellous status of the book) harmed the McCanns.
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Where?OxfordBloo wrote:2/ Called the McCann guilty.
He gave an opinion that the evidence points to death and concealment of a body.
Which it does.
The published files say the same.
Guest- Guest
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
They are translated from the original, but are very close to Anne Guedes version on the McCann files. You can check this on pages 41and 42 atBlueBag wrote:Dear Oxfordbloo,
Where are you getting these perfect translations of Portuguese law from?
And did you come here to convince us that Amaral doesn't have a chance?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
The judgement points out where and when he definitely stated that the McCann were said to be guilty of concealment.BlueBag wrote:Where?OxfordBloo wrote:2/ Called the McCann guilty.
He gave an opinion that the evidence points to death and concealment of a body.
Which it does.
The published files say the same.
You sill find it here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Did Amaral declare the McCanns "guilty"?
From the end of his book:
Someone is exaggerating.
All this can be found in the public files.
From the end of his book:
The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:
1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;
2. There was simulation of abduction.
3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.
4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;
5. The evidence proves the parents' negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.
Someone is exaggerating.
All this can be found in the public files.
Guest- Guest
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
So.. Oxfordbloo... can you provide us with the specifics of where the Judge said Amaral said the McCanns were guilty?
Because all I see is Amaral expressing an opinion about likely possibilities.
Just like in the public files.
Because all I see is Amaral expressing an opinion about likely possibilities.
Just like in the public files.
Guest- Guest
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
I guess i should of asked you where on the internet could i find the Portugese Legal Code? Is there a link? TIA.OxfordBloo wrote:The laws are quoted with their full reference to the Portuguese legal code.Joss wrote:Where on the internet are these laws from Portugal stated on any legal websites, apart from what the judge said?OxfordBloo wrote:They are not the Judge's opinion but direct quotes from Portuguese laws as passed by their legislature.
The laws that are in question here are the ones you quote the judge determined that GA was not allowed to state his opinions from the investigation because of his being an ex PJ officer, and sworn to some type of secrecy, so a big no no for him to have written his book. Also that according to what you cite the judge states, that GA accused the McC's of being guilty of certain crimes in the case of their missing child, and should of upheld that the McC's were innocent until proven guilty. Apart from that i think its all pretty straightforward.
I think i understand the gist of your posts?
Are you suggesting the judge was incorrect in her references to Portuguese law which could be checked by reference to the Portuguese statutes?
I don't know anything about the judge.
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Thanks BB, you beat me to it. I was about to ask where GA ever declare the McCann's of being guilty? Not to my knowledge, he didn't.BlueBag wrote:Did Amaral declare the McCanns "guilty"?
From the end of his book:The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:
1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;
2. There was simulation of abduction.
3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.
4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;
5. The evidence proves the parents' negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.
Someone is exaggerating.
All this can be found in the public files.
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Which proves the point.BlueBag wrote:Did Amaral declare the McCanns "guilty"?
From the end of his book:The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:
1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;
2. There was simulation of abduction.
3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.
4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;
5. The evidence proves the parents' negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.
Someone is exaggerating.
All this can be found in the public files.
Amaral said that the McCanns were guilty of negligence in the care of children - an offence under Portuguese Law. Not only were they not convicted but the AG stated that there was no evidence that neglect had occurred.
Additionally, saying that the McCanns 'probably' were involved in another criminal offence- concealing a death.
The judgement contains that very list as proof that Amaral did say that the McCanns were not innocent of those criminal offences.
I was about to quote that section from the translation but you have saved me the bother.
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Has GA officially submitted an appeal yet? If not, how long does he have to apply?
TheTruthWillOut- Posts : 733
Activity : 754
Likes received : 19
Join date : 2011-09-27
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Right, I am done for the time being.
The judgement quotes Portuguese Law that restricts police and ex police in their statements about cases.
The judge found that Amaral's behaviour transgressed that law.
The judge found that such transgressions harmed the McCann.
It was not a question of libel.
The judgement is appealable.
We shall eventually know the outcome.
The judgement quotes Portuguese Law that restricts police and ex police in their statements about cases.
The judge found that Amaral's behaviour transgressed that law.
The judge found that such transgressions harmed the McCann.
It was not a question of libel.
The judgement is appealable.
We shall eventually know the outcome.
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
IIRC it was forty days, so another few weeks.TheTruthWillOut wrote:Has GA officially submitted an appeal yet? If not, how long does he have to apply?
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Not sure, i have not seen any statement made by Goncalo Amaral in that regard, only that he will appeal, and i think that it could take quite some time.TheTruthWillOut wrote:Has GA officially submitted an appeal yet? If not, how long does he have to apply?
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Yes Oxfordbloo.. your mission is acomplished.
Anyway...
This was in the judgement regards retirement:
Yes retired JUDGES.
I bet she couldn't find anything about retired police officiers.
Edit..
At least anything that removes their right to freedom of expression and opinion.
Anyway...
This was in the judgement regards retirement:
Even so the statements, when admissible,
(…) are subjects to prior authorisation provided by the national director or the national deputy directors, at risk of disciplinary proceedings, maintaining the eventual criminal liability [art 12-3]. ( [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ) The duty of reserve is a functional requirement common to magistrates and organs of criminal police. As an example, in the case of the magistrates of the Public Ministry, the ordinary law postulates that this duty will remain after retirement, establishing the article 148-7 of the Statute that retired judges must respect the reserve required by their condition.
Yes retired JUDGES.
I bet she couldn't find anything about retired police officiers.
Edit..
At least anything that removes their right to freedom of expression and opinion.
Guest- Guest
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
But you said that Amaral stated the McCann's were guilty of concealment. Which he didn't.OxfordBloo wrote:Which proves the point.BlueBag wrote:Did Amaral declare the McCanns "guilty"?
From the end of his book:The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:
1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;
2. There was simulation of abduction.
3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.
4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident;
5. The evidence proves the parents' negligence concerning the care and safety of the children.
Someone is exaggerating.
All this can be found in the public files.
Amaral said that the McCanns were guilty of negligence in the care of children - an offence under Portuguese Law. Not only were they not convicted but the AG stated that there was no evidence that neglect had occurred.
Additionally, saying that the McCanns 'probably' were involved in another criminal offence- concealing a death.
The judgement contains that very list as proof that Amaral did say that the McCanns were not innocent of those criminal offences.
I was about to quote that section from the translation but you have saved me the bother.
Please stop hopping around on a pinhead.
Rogue-a-Tory- Posts : 647
Activity : 1115
Likes received : 454
Join date : 2014-09-10
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
It's also the judge who is dancing around on a pinhead.
She has found the requirement to reserve in law for retired Judges... and extended that to all public figures in a slight of hand.
She has found the requirement to reserve in law for retired Judges... and extended that to all public figures in a slight of hand.
Guest- Guest
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
You conveniently overlook the following from the judgement:BlueBag wrote:Yes Oxfordbloo.. your mission is acomplished.
Anyway...
This was in the judgement regards retirement:Even so the statements, when admissible,
(…) are subjects to prior authorisation provided by the national director or the national deputy directors, at risk of disciplinary proceedings, maintaining the eventual criminal liability [art 12-3]. ( [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ) The duty of reserve is a functional requirement common to magistrates and organs of criminal police. As an example, in the case of the magistrates of the Public Ministry, the ordinary law postulates that this duty will remain after retirement, establishing the article 148-7 of the Statute that retired judges must respect the reserve required by their condition.
Yes retired JUDGES.
I bet she couldn't find anything about retired police officiers.
Edit..
At least anything that removes their right to freedom of expression and opinion.
""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."
The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
No:BlueBag wrote:It's also the judge who is dancing around on a pinhead.
She has found the requirement to reserve in law for retired Judges... and extended that to all public figures in a slight of hand.
""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."
The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."
OxfordBloo- Posts : 68
Activity : 68
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2015-05-01
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
But he doesn't have anymore rights, the McCann's took them all from him a long time ago.OxfordBloo wrote:You conveniently overlook the following from the judgement:BlueBag wrote:Yes Oxfordbloo.. your mission is acomplished.
Anyway...
This was in the judgement regards retirement:Even so the statements, when admissible,
(…) are subjects to prior authorisation provided by the national director or the national deputy directors, at risk of disciplinary proceedings, maintaining the eventual criminal liability [art 12-3]. ( [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ) The duty of reserve is a functional requirement common to magistrates and organs of criminal police. As an example, in the case of the magistrates of the Public Ministry, the ordinary law postulates that this duty will remain after retirement, establishing the article 148-7 of the Statute that retired judges must respect the reserve required by their condition.
Yes retired JUDGES.
I bet she couldn't find anything about retired police officiers.
Edit..
At least anything that removes their right to freedom of expression and opinion.
""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."
The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
From the judgement regards retired Police officers, she quotes some previous edict:
That is not a removal of freedom of expression or opinion.
It's a duty to not adversely affect the functioning of the service in a serious way or affect prestige/dignity of the Administration.
Amaral hasn't done that.
But the judge has constructed a house of straw against Amaral.
There is even so a "bond to the civil service", which materialises in conserving the titles and the position of the function exercised and the rights and duties that are not dependent on activity status "(emphasis added). The same note concluded that "the retired remains subject to duties of private conduct translated in particular in the abstention of practice of facts integrators of crimes that have a relevant connection with the functions previously carried out and thus affect actually the functioning of the service or in a serious way the dignity and the prestige of the function or of the Administration
That is not a removal of freedom of expression or opinion.
It's a duty to not adversely affect the functioning of the service in a serious way or affect prestige/dignity of the Administration.
Amaral hasn't done that.
But the judge has constructed a house of straw against Amaral.
Guest- Guest
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Exactly.BlueBag wrote:From the judgement regards retired Police officers, she quotes some previous edict:There is even so a "bond to the civil service", which materialises in conserving the titles and the position of the function exercised and the rights and duties that are not dependent on activity status "(emphasis added). The same note concluded that "the retired remains subject to duties of private conduct translated in particular in the abstention of practice of facts integrators of crimes that have a relevant connection with the functions previously carried out and thus affect actually the functioning of the service or in a serious way the dignity and the prestige of the function or of the Administration
That is not a removal of freedom of expression or opinion.
It's a duty to not adversely affect the functioning of the service in a serious way or affect prestige/dignity of the Administration.
Amaral hasn't done that.
But the judge has constructed a house of straw against Amaral.
Joss- Posts : 1960
Activity : 2154
Likes received : 196
Join date : 2011-09-19
Re: McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!
Dancing on a pin.OxfordBloo wrote:No:BlueBag wrote:It's also the judge who is dancing around on a pinhead.
She has found the requirement to reserve in law for retired Judges... and extended that to all public figures in a slight of hand.
""Retired criminal investigation officers ... retain special rights, and as holders of an ID card for recognition of its quality and rights enjoyed [paragraphs 1 and and 2 of article 149 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police and Ordinance No. 96/2002 31 January]."
The Retirement Statute [approved by Decree-Law 498/72 of 9 December] establishes, from its original wording, the respective artº 74, paragraph 1, "the retired, and holder right to retirement pension, remains bound to the civil service, keeping the titles and the category of the position he held and the rights and duties that do not depend on active employment."
There is no removal of the right to freedom of expression or opinion so long as the service is not adversely affected.
I notice Amaral hasn't been disciplined for anything by the service.
Guest- Guest
Page 5 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Similar topics
» MCCANN v AMARAL TRIAL: Marinho Pinto will give evidence in person for the McCanns against Gonçalo Amaral in the final chapter of this 3-year-long libel claim
» Libel Trial: McCanns fearful of going to Portugal because of 'Amaral's bizarre behaviour'
» McCanns v Amaral Libel Trial scheduled to begin Thursday 12 September
» MCCANN V AMARAL LIBEL TRIAL - UPDATES ONLY NO DISCUSSION
» Goncalo Amaral plans SECOND book after winning libel trial
» Libel Trial: McCanns fearful of going to Portugal because of 'Amaral's bizarre behaviour'
» McCanns v Amaral Libel Trial scheduled to begin Thursday 12 September
» MCCANN V AMARAL LIBEL TRIAL - UPDATES ONLY NO DISCUSSION
» Goncalo Amaral plans SECOND book after winning libel trial
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Portuguese Police Investigation :: McCanns v Dr Gonçalo Amaral + ECHR
Page 5 of 7
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum