McCanns v Amaral trial is NOT LIBEL!

Dr What wrote:It does seem perverse that these duties of confidentiality are imposed on officials.....and yet Portuguese law allows the case files, which are presumably also equally confidential, to be published
and available for the whole world to read! Where's the confidentiality in that? These case files have been produced by officials who have also these same duties of confidentiality imposed on them.

The difference is that the case files were authorised for release formally by the Portuguese legal system whereas Amaral seems to have decided to use his information without permission and against the requirements of the Portuguese Civil Code.  Additionally the case files do not state clearly that the Mccanns are guilty, whereas statements by Amaral do say this.

OxfordBloo wrote:

Dr What wrote:It does seem perverse that these duties of confidentiality are imposed on officials.....and yet Portuguese law allows the case files, which are presumably also equally confidential, to be published
and available for the whole world to read! Where's the confidentiality in that? These case files have been produced by officials who have also these same duties of confidentiality imposed on them.

The difference is that the case files were authorised for release formally by the Portuguese legal system whereas Amaral seems to have decided to use his information without permission and against the requirements of the Portuguese Civil Code.  Additionally the case files do not state clearly that the Mccanns are guilty, whereas statements by Amaral do say this.

Leave it to the lawyers. The Portuguese lawyers.

Wow  - Detective Amaral's choice of words in this statement. Hadn't seen this before. Spotted on a Textusa blog. In the comments section, 2nd Feb 2015.

"Strangled" - twice. "Asphixiated"; "death"; "I am alive"; "destroy" - OMG....

Just how many more lives are going to be ruined by this murderous juggernaut that is the out-of-control TM DISGRACE.

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

A Message from Gonçalo Amaral 

Dear Friends,

The civil suit that was filed against me by the McCann couple is in its final stages, and the decision concerning material facts, which to me seems rather favourable, is already known. A period for legal allegations ensues, after which we will await the verdict, which I envision will translate into my longed for acquittal and the consequent lifting of the attachments that have caused me such extensive financial difficulties over the past five years. This means that it has been only due to your help that I have been able to financially sustain the ongoing lawsuit, which nonetheless cannot be said about my increasingly strangled personal life.

I say strangled because in reality I am experiencing a very serious crisis on an emotional as well as a financial level. This is due to those who have tried to asphyxiate me financially, wishing for my civil death and wanting to place me in a position where I would be unable to react judicially. After five years (counted since the civil suit was filed) the parents of the child that mysteriously disappeared on the 3rd of May of 2007 in the Algarve were not able to fully achieve what they intended. I am alive, I'm able to financially sustain the civil suit, although not much more than that...

Concerning my emotional crisis, I ask you to understand that for me, this whole struggle is not only about the fundamental discovery of the truth, because no matter how optimistic I may be, I can never forget the demand for damages amounting to 1.200.000 Euro that was filed by the couple, which, if absurdly it would be granted, will completely destroy me on all levels.

To all of you, thank you very much.


Gonçalo Amaral


Lisboa, February 2, 2015



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

I remember Amaral's message being discussed here, j.rob.  Many of us found it upsetting to read.

Glad you haven't given up!

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

OxfordBloo wrote:

Dr What wrote:It does seem perverse that these duties of confidentiality are imposed on officials.....and yet Portuguese law allows the case files, which are presumably also equally confidential, to be published
and available for the whole world to read! Where's the confidentiality in that? These case files have been produced by officials who have also these same duties of confidentiality imposed on them.

The difference is that the case files were authorised for release formally by the Portuguese legal system whereas Amaral seems to have decided to use his information without permission and against the requirements of the Portuguese Civil Code.  Additionally the case files do not state clearly that the Mccanns are guilty, whereas statements by Amaral do say this.

It was known the case was going to shelved for a while.

What Amaral did in private with information available to him before the shelving is his own business.

What Amaral did after the shelving is release a book containing information that was now available to the public. There is NO law that states a time limit for releasing a book.

What he did in the book was give his opinion on the evidence in that it pointed to the same thing (ie. concealment of a body) as could be found in the public files.

Under Portuguese law he has the right to opinion and freedom of expression.

They have a history of suppression in Portugal and they are fanatical about the right to freedom of speech.

This has already been tested in a higher court.

The judge was pressured somewhere along the line - in my opinion.

BlueBag wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

Dr What wrote:It does seem perverse that these duties of confidentiality are imposed on officials.....and yet Portuguese law allows the case files, which are presumably also equally confidential, to be published
and available for the whole world to read! Where's the confidentiality in that? These case files have been produced by officials who have also these same duties of confidentiality imposed on them.

The difference is that the case files were authorised for release formally by the Portuguese legal system whereas Amaral seems to have decided to use his information without permission and against the requirements of the Portuguese Civil Code.  Additionally the case files do not state clearly that the Mccanns are guilty, whereas statements by Amaral do say this.

It was known the case was going to shelved for a while.

What Amaral did in private with information available to him before the shelving is his own business.

What Amaral did after the shelving is release a book containing information that was now available to the public. There is NO law that states a time limit for releasing a book.

What he did in the book was give his opinion on the evidence in that it pointed to the same thing (ie. concealment of a body) as could be found in the public files.

Under Portuguese law he has the right to opinion and freedom of expression.

They have a history of suppression in Portugal and they are fanatical about the right to freedom of speech.

This has already been tested in a higher court.

The judge was pressured somewhere along the line - in my opinion.

There are matters of fact found by the judge:
1/ The book was published using privileged information.
2/ Amaral accused the McCanns in the book and in the interviews of being guilty when they had not been found so.

Both acts are a clear breach of the Portuguese law. The judge gives references to the exact laws involved.

That is one judge's interpretation of the law.

1/ The book was published using privileged information.

It was no longer privileged at the time of publication.

There is no law about time limits.

And Amaral as well as everyone else is entitled to an opinion based on the evidence.

I expect another judge to overturn all this.

Also these are disciplinary matters.

They have no bearing on the effect of the book on the McCanns as anyone could have written this book and given the same opinion and the judge would not be able to clutch at these particular straws.

There will be an appeal. Goncalo Amaral has stated he will appeal.

Whatever OxfordBloo thinks of the judgment is entirely irrelevant as he/she like everyone else doesn't have the faintest idea on what grounds the appeal will be made.

It's good to see some funding going towards assisting GA.

Leave it to the legals and see what transpires. It will be a lengthy process no doubt and remember GA has won on appeal in the past.

Just my opinion.

Amazing that there is so much confidence in Amaral's appeal when no legal basis has been offered for expecting the decision to be overturned, just unsubstantiated arguments that have no foundation in Portuguese law. It's surprising that some posters think they know more about Portuguese legal processes than the judge who considered the situation for months and ultimately made the verdict, backed up by pages and pages of explanation. There is a chance that, upon appeal, Amaral will lose again, be ordered to pay increased compensation plus all additional costs. He could be ruined. Therefore it would be better for him and others to accept the verdict, move on, and set about trying to establish what happened by incorporating any new information not available when the book was published. Donating to a fund without intimate knowledge of the law is rather unwise in my opinion.

BlueBag wrote:That is one judge's interpretation of the law.

1/ The book was published using privileged information.

It was no longer privileged at the time of publication.

There is no law about time limits.

And Amaral as well as everyone else is entitled to an opinion based on the evidence.

I expect another judge to overturn all this.

The judge quotes the Portuguese law that shows that Police Officers are bound by the duty of confidentiality throughout their retirement. It is very specific that retirees retain their status under the law and are bound by all restrictions that apply during their employment.

A case like this does not decide what a judge believes to be right, it decides whether specific laws have been broken. The judge lists clearly what the law is and demonstrates why it is applicable.

We may not like this, but that is what Portuguese law states.

BlueBag wrote:Also these are disciplinary matters.

They have no bearing on the effect of the book on the McCanns as anyone could have written this book and given the same opinion and the judge would not be able to clutch at these particular straws.

The judge quotes the specific laws which make it a civil legal matter under the Portuguese Civil code. They may also be disciplinary offences but the law is very clear. You can look the laws up if you wish- they are referenced above by the Judge with their dates of passing and the actual words used by the lawmakers.


Here are the references directly from the judgement:

"In the case, Kate and Gerald McCann authors never ceased to benefit from presumption of innocence and the imperative of behavior that it puts on the national enforcement and judicial authorities and all its employees and agents." 

"The police have the responsibility of defending democratic legality, protecting internal security and citizens' rights" [artº 272 of the Portuguese Constitution]."

 "The Judicial Police is the upper body of criminal police assisting in the administration of justice, organized hierarchically depending on the Minister of Justice and supervised under the law "[article 1 of the Organic Law of the Judicial Police, approved by Decree-Law No. 275-A / 2000 of November 9 as amended by Decree-Law No. 235/2005, of 30 December, then in force]."

"Criminal investigation coordinators are criminal police authorities for the purposes of criminal procedural law [article 11 paragraph g) of the same Act]."

"Under the Disciplinary Regulations of the Judicial Police the duty of confidentiality is one of the general duties of members of the Judicial Police [paragraph e) of article 5 of the Regulation approved by Decree-Law No. 196/94, of 21 July]."

"Besides this general duty of confidentiality, the organic law imposes on employees in service at the judicial police a duty of reserve, precisely that "(...) can not make public disclosures related to lawsuits or reserved nature of the subject other than what is provided for herein on public information and preventive actions among the population and also the provisions of the criminal procedure law "[paragraph 2 of article 12]. Still admissible statements "(...) subject to prior authorization by the national director or the national Deputy Directors, on pain of disciplinary proceedings, without prejudice to any criminal liability that may place" [paragraph 3 of article 12]."

"This duty is a common functional requirement on Magistrates and the criminal police. As example, in the case of Prosecutors, the ordinary law postulates that it will remain after retirement, paragraph 7 of article 148 of the Statute that "retired officers are required to the reserve required by their condition."
It is a duty that is essential to the preservation of public confidence in the institutions of administration of justice. The reserve duty protects the purposes of criminal action, but also the physical, moral, freedom and the dignity of the target for the same." 

"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."

Out of the woods wrote:Amazing that there is so much confidence in Amaral's appeal when no legal basis has been offered for expecting the decision to be overturned, just unsubstantiated arguments that have no foundation in Portuguese law. It's surprising that some posters think they know more about Portuguese legal processes than the judge who considered the situation for months and ultimately made the verdict, backed up by pages and pages of explanation. There is a chance that, upon appeal, Amaral will lose again, be ordered to pay increased compensation plus all additional costs. He could be ruined. Therefore it would be better for him and others to accept the verdict, move on, and set about trying to establish what happened by incorporating any new information not available when the book was published. Donating to a fund without intimate knowledge of the law is rather unwise in my opinion.

That is rubbish.

He has the right to appeal and should avail himself of that opportunity, if only in the amount of damages awarded.

If people wish to assist anyone appealing a case, that is their right.

I may believe that the appeal is unlikely to succeed given the law as it stands, if Amaral wants to appeal it, he should have the right to do so.

I do believe, however, that people would be better informed if they read the actual words of the judgement rather than maintain a false assumption about why the judgement was reached. It is extremely closely argued and flows directly from Portuguese and European law.

It's not rubbish if he comes out of the appeal worse off than he is at the moment. The costs will be huge and certainly not covered by the £20,000 that has been raised by the defence fund. You have stated that in your opinion the judgement was fair, so why should he appeal?

It's a gamble, and a dubious one in my opinion.

Out of the woods wrote:It's not rubbish if he comes out of the appeal worse off than he is at the moment. You have stated that in your opinion the judgement was fair, so why should he appeal?

I believe it was fair and the arguments of the judge have convinced me. I, however, am not an expert, and dominos tat cases are later overturned or amended by higher courts. his is an important right to have - to challenge a lower court's finding in a higher court.

What I do feel is that the judgement should be criticised for what it is- a logical and rigorous consideration of the law, and not, as some would have us believe, merely the caprice of the judge. I feel that people would be much better served if the understood and considered the judge's arguments before suggesting that they are in error.

Out of the woods wrote:It's not rubbish if he comes out of the appeal worse off than he is at the moment. The costs will be huge and certainly not covered by the £20,000 that has been raised by the defence fund. You have stated that in your opinion the judgement was fair, so why should he appeal?

It's a gamble, and a dubious one in my opinion.

It seems that costs as such are generally borne equally by both parties, and each side is responsible for their own legal expenses, so the cost is not as high as it would be in a common law system.

His best (and potentially most successful) course is to challenge the amount of damages. The judge's reasoning for setting high damages is less set in law than the judgement on the offence itself.

A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

I have not said that the judge got it right. Having read what the judge has written about specified Portuguese laws has made me re-evaluate my previous belief that Amaral's right to free speech would protect him. The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

The McCann's claim was that Amaral's actions
1/ Harmed them
2/ Harmed their children
3/ Harmed the future investigations.

The judge found that 2 and 3 were not proved.

The judge found that the McCann were not harmed by the newspaper and TV coverage, even when based on Amaral's book because of the right to free speech.

The judge found that Amaral had breached his responsibility to the state and to others in that he
1/ had used information gained in the course of his duties against the provisions of Portuguese law, and
2/ had accused the McCanns of being guilty of criminal offences when specifically prohibited from doing so, as a retired police officer, by Portuguese law.

As these two acts were illegal, the judge found that the McCann's rights had been abrogated by Amaral and so he was liable for causing them harm and was responsible for compensating them for that harm.

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

That is exactly my point.

Disciplinary matters have no impact on the effect of the book on the McCanns and should not have been used as reason for awarding damages.

Anyone could have written that book and expressed the same opinions after the files were made public.

The right to publish the book had already been tested in Portuguese courts.

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

The McCann's claim was that Amaral's actions
1/ Harmed them
2/ Harmed their children
3/ Harmed the future investigations.

The judge found that 2 and 3 were not proved.
Meaning 1 was proved?
The judge found that the McCann were not harmed by the newspaper and TV coverage, even when based on Amaral's book because of the right to free speech.

The judge found that Amaral had breached his responsibility to the state and to others in that he
1/ had used information gained in the course of his duties against the provisions of Portuguese law, and
2/ had accused the McCanns of being guilty of criminal offences when specifically prohibited from doing so, as a retired police officer, by Portuguese law.

As these two acts were illegal, the judge found that the McCann's rights had been abrogated by Amaral and so he was liable for causing them harm and was responsible for compensating them for that harm.

Highlighted in red they were either harmed or weren't,contradiction there.

BlueBag wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

That is exactly my point.

Disciplinary matters have no impact on the effect of the book on the McCanns and should not have been used as reason for awarding damages.

Anyone could have written that book and expressed the same opinions after the files were made public.

The right to publish the book had already been tested in Portuguese courts.

They are not 'disciplinary matters', but clear breaches of Portuguese civil law. The judge quoted exactly which laws were breached.

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

The McCann's claim was that Amaral's actions
1/ Harmed them
2/ Harmed their children
3/ Harmed the future investigations.

The judge found that 2 and 3 were not proved.
Meaning 1 was proved?
The judge found that the McCann were not harmed by the newspaper and TV coverage, even when based on Amaral's book because of the right to free speech.

The judge found that Amaral had breached his responsibility to the state and to others in that he
1/ had used information gained in the course of his duties against the provisions of Portuguese law, and
2/ had accused the McCanns of being guilty of criminal offences when specifically prohibited from doing so, as a retired police officer, by Portuguese law.

As these two acts were illegal, the judge found that the McCann's rights had been abrogated by Amaral and so he was liable for causing them harm and was responsible for compensating them for that harm.

Highlighted in red they were either harmed or weren't,contradiction there.

That is not what I said.

The judge totally rejected harm to the children or to the progress of the case. She then went on to consider whether there was harm to the McCann. She found that the newspaper and TV coverage did not cause harm to the McCanns because they were protected under their right to free speech, but she found that the rights of a retired police officer differed and had less protection because of specific Portuguese laws that limited the freedom of retired police officers; so she found that the McCann were harmed and due compensation.

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

The McCann's claim was that Amaral's actions
1/ Harmed them
2/ Harmed their children
3/ Harmed the future investigations.

The judge found that 2 and 3 were not proved.
Meaning 1 was proved?
The judge found that the McCann were not harmed by the newspaper and TV coverage, even when based on Amaral's book because of the right to free speech.

The judge found that Amaral had breached his responsibility to the state and to others in that he
1/ had used information gained in the course of his duties against the provisions of Portuguese law, and
2/ had accused the McCanns of being guilty of criminal offences when specifically prohibited from doing so, as a retired police officer, by Portuguese law.

As these two acts were illegal, the judge found that the McCann's rights had been abrogated by Amaral and so he was liable for causing them harm and was responsible for compensating them for that harm.

Highlighted in red they were either harmed or weren't,contradiction there.

That is not what I said.

The judge totally rejected harm to the children or to the progress of the case. She then went on to consider whether there was harm to the McCann. She found that the newspaper and TV coverage did not cause harm to the McCanns because they were protected under their right to free speech, but she found that the rights of a retired police officer differed and had less protection because of specific Portuguese laws that limited the freedom of retired police officers; so she found that the McCann were harmed and due compensation.

Some tortuous logic here.

They were harmed or they were not regardless of the right of free speech.

The judge can't find for the McCanns on a disciplinary matter specific to one person.

Also.. the issue of Amaral's right to free speech has already been decided by a higher court.

Portugal's attorney general, having reviewed the investigation, has ruled there is no evidence to suggest that the McCanns are anything other than entirely innocent.
The court said the decision to block sales of the book had broken "a constitutional and universal right: that of opinion and freedom of expression."
"The contents of the book do not breach the basic rights of the plaintiffs," the court said, according to the Jornal de Noticías newspaper's website.

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

BlueBag wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

The McCann's claim was that Amaral's actions
1/ Harmed them
2/ Harmed their children
3/ Harmed the future investigations.

The judge found that 2 and 3 were not proved.
Meaning 1 was proved?
The judge found that the McCann were not harmed by the newspaper and TV coverage, even when based on Amaral's book because of the right to free speech.

The judge found that Amaral had breached his responsibility to the state and to others in that he
1/ had used information gained in the course of his duties against the provisions of Portuguese law, and
2/ had accused the McCanns of being guilty of criminal offences when specifically prohibited from doing so, as a retired police officer, by Portuguese law.

As these two acts were illegal, the judge found that the McCann's rights had been abrogated by Amaral and so he was liable for causing them harm and was responsible for compensating them for that harm.

Highlighted in red they were either harmed or weren't,contradiction there.

That is not what I said.

The judge totally rejected harm to the children or to the progress of the case. She then went on to consider whether there was harm to the McCann. She found that the newspaper and TV coverage did not cause harm to the McCanns because they were protected under their right to free speech, but she found that the rights of a retired police officer differed and had less protection because of specific Portuguese laws that limited the freedom of retired police officers; so she found that the McCann were harmed and due compensation.

Some tortuous logic here.

They were harmed or they were not regardless of the right of free speech.

The judge can't find for the McCanns on a disciplinary matter specific to one person.

It is not at all 'tortuous' though it is interesting that you use that adjective.

Civil law in common law countries involves the concept of 'tort' which shares the same root. In non common law countries the concept is better described as 'harm'.

People can be harmed in many ways- be demeaned, assaulted, denied their rights under the law, have their goods appropriated, etc. All of these cause harm.

Some harms are however allowed- free speech may allow some demeaning, prisoners have some rights legally removed, the state taxes people, etc.

The Judgement found that although the McCanns had been demeaned by the Press and TV, this was legal because of their right to free speech. However the judge pointed out that the Portuguese parliament had passed laws that specifically limited the rights of retired police officers such as Amaral from exercising free speech when it involved information gained through their privileged position or making statements about non convicted people being guilty.

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

The McCann's claim was that Amaral's actions
1/ Harmed them
2/ Harmed their children
3/ Harmed the future investigations.

The judge found that 2 and 3 were not proved.
Meaning 1 was proved?
The judge found that the McCann were not harmed by the newspaper and TV coverage, even when based on Amaral's book because of the right to free speech.

The judge found that Amaral had breached his responsibility to the state and to others in that he
1/ had used information gained in the course of his duties against the provisions of Portuguese law, and
2/ had accused the McCanns of being guilty of criminal offences when specifically prohibited from doing so, as a retired police officer, by Portuguese law.

As these two acts were illegal, the judge found that the McCann's rights had been abrogated by Amaral and so he was liable for causing them harm and was responsible for compensating them for that harm.

Highlighted in red they were either harmed or weren't,contradiction there.

That is not what I said.

Stop squiggling, you did and I just quoted what you said with some contradictions highlighted in red.

BlueBag wrote:Also.. the issue of Amaral's right to free speech has already been decided by a higher court.

Portugal's attorney general, having reviewed the investigation, has ruled there is no evidence to suggest that the McCanns are anything other than entirely innocent.
The court said the decision to block sales of the book had broken "a constitutional and universal right: that of opinion and freedom of expression."
"The contents of the book do not breach the basic rights of the plaintiffs," the court said, according to the Jornal de Noticías newspaper's website.

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

That decision was about whether the book itself was open to banning. It was not. That has not changed. The book can be read and copies distributed freely still. That is not and never has been in doubt.

This case though does not involve the book itself, but whether in its production and promotion, Amaral acted in such a way as to cause damage to the McCanns separate from any potential (but legal) damage caused by the publication of the book.

Because Portuguese law bans retired police officers from using privileged information and also bans statements about the guilt of innocent persons, the judge found that Amaral's behaviour had harmed the McCanns because of that unlawful behaviour as he had ignored his duty under the law to remain silent in this situation.

The trial is not about libel, but about general harm to the McCanns separate to libel.

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

WMD wrote:

OxfordBloo wrote:

BlueBag wrote:A judge's interpretation of the law can be overturned and has been many times in the past.

Anyone reading some posts in this thread would think there is no point appealing (or donating).

Dear Oxfordbloo... did you join this forum just to tell us that the judge got it right?

Have you been here before under another name?

The judge explains why a police officer does not have that protection for information gained because of his privilege and why such a retired officer is specifically banned by Portuguese law from accusing the innocent of being guilty. The laws are so clearly stated as to make a successful appeal unlikely. He may well be successful in challenging he amount of damages awarded.

But did the McCanns take him to court over this,if not how can it be found against him,that must surely be for another court.

The McCann's claim was that Amaral's actions
1/ Harmed them
2/ Harmed their children
3/ Harmed the future investigations.

The judge found that 2 and 3 were not proved.
Meaning 1 was proved?
The judge found that the McCann were not harmed by the newspaper and TV coverage, even when based on Amaral's book because of the right to free speech.

The judge found that Amaral had breached his responsibility to the state and to others in that he
1/ had used information gained in the course of his duties against the provisions of Portuguese law, and
2/ had accused the McCanns of being guilty of criminal offences when specifically prohibited from doing so, as a retired police officer, by Portuguese law.

As these two acts were illegal, the judge found that the McCann's rights had been abrogated by Amaral and so he was liable for causing them harm and was responsible for compensating them for that harm.

Highlighted in red they were either harmed or weren't,contradiction there.

That is not what I said.

Stop squiggling, you did and I just quoted what you said with some contradictions highlighted in red.

Meaning one was proved eventually- not as libel, but as other harm caused by Amaral acting against Portuguese law and consequently harming the McCanns.