Goncalo Amaral's appeal

Chris Roberts posted on ‎The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ facebook group:

5 hrs · Edited ·

Goncalo Amaral’s appeal is as we know in the pipeline and the fund for that appeal continues to grow day by day.
I have heard it said by some that the latest judgment is in isolation to the 2010 Court of appeal judgment and because of that the 2015 judgment is irrelevant to it because the two trials were on different issues of the whole. Ergo, some say that his appeal is certain to fail.

Naïve but that’s to be expected from those blinded by hate.

Unusually there is however actually a modicum of truth in those “opinions” but as always, the devil is in the detail.

To briefly recap, the 2015 trial judge awarded damages to the McCanns for alleged damage caused by Amaral’s book and the 2010 Appeal Court hearing lifted the injunction on that book, much to the chagrin of the McCanns at the time.

They are therefore totally different cases and any connection between them is really a fairly tenuous link. On that basis one easily would think that the current appeal would indeed be doomed to failure…….except for one crucial and salient point.

In 2010 three High Court judges examined all of the evidence the McCanns presented and inter alia found and ruled that any and all damage alleged by the McCanns was either to be expected in the circumstance or perhaps most significantly, self inflicted as for example the “invasion of privacy”.

Given the McCann’s self publicising “strategy”, it’s not dissimilar to putting your hand into the flames and then trying to sue whoever sold you the matches.

That evidence has not changed, although augmented perhaps by young Sean imagining a Goncalo interview on the school bus radio, and yet acting on the very same evidence the judge in the recent trial found for the McCanns.

It is not only illogical ( with other potential adjectives readily available ) but it over rules the judgment handed down not only by the High Court of Appeal but also that of the Supreme Court.

All three courts have heard the SAME evidence and the appeal will now go back up the line to very same courts who discounted their allegations that the book caused damage.

For Goncalo’s appeal to fail, the higher courts must reconsider their earlier judgments and decide that they were wrong in favour of the decision of an inferior court. The specific case really doesn't matter because all evidence has been fully examined and by the superior courts, the McCanns were found "wanting" to say the least.

Now, I’m a gambling man and I understand perfectly well how the odds on say the Grand National are formulated. I really don’t think you’d find a bookie prepared to take a bet on the appeal failing because as I said, the devil is in the detail and that’s why Team McCann did their very best to sabotage the Goncalo appeal fund.

Welcome to gravity Mr and Mrs McCann.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/JillHavernCompleteMysteryofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/1645245112386642/

Thanks for posting this -

re the comment: Now, I’m a gambling man and I understand perfectly well how the odds on say the Grand National are formulated. I really don’t think you’d find a bookie prepared to take a bet on the appeal failing because as I said, the devil is in the detail and that’s why Team McCann did their very best to sabotage the Goncalo appeal fund.

How did Team Mc Cann try to sabotage the Goncal appeal fund?  I'm sure they did and will continue to try and do so, but how did the author think they tried to do this. At first, and to some extent I still do, think that the 'Wayback machine issues' was a good attempt to ensure that the fund for Amaral got forgotten. I know others disagree and understand why.

I'm not a legal eagle but the last verdict AGAIN puts an ban on the book, amongst other things.  In that judge Emilia or what's her name did stick her tongue out to a higher court. The arguments of the 3 judges that overturned the ban are basically the same arguments against a claim.

I have had few optimistic moments in this case, but this is one of them.