Media Comments on McCanns v. Gonçalo Amaral trial outcome

Good to see Joana back on the case.
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 
22 APRIL 2016 | POSTED BY [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 
Rua Segura is a TV program where criminal cases & current issues are debated on CMTV. In this episode the reconstruction made by CMTV [see [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]] about the night when Madeleine disappeared was shown, followed by a very short debate with Dr. Carlos Anjos, former PJ inspector and with Prof. Rui Pereira, the former Minister of Internal Affairs………………………
 
continues at:
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 
   
together with effectively a ‘Lazz’ blog in the comments section.

Doug D wrote:Good to see Joana back on the case.
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 
22 APRIL 2016 | POSTED BY [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 
Rua Segura is a TV program where criminal cases & current issues are debated on CMTV. In this episode the reconstruction made by CMTV [see [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]] about the night when Madeleine disappeared was shown, followed by a very short debate with Dr. Carlos Anjos, former PJ inspector and with Prof. Rui Pereira, the former Minister of Internal Affairs………………………
 
continues at:
 
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 
   
together with effectively a ‘Lazz’ blog in the comments section.

Thanks for the link. It's such a good read maybe it's justifiable to post the article in full.  Maybe the admin may want to start a new thread on media comments as there may be few more to come ....

António Pinto Pereira - As I was saying, no one is forbidden of writing a book. We just can't report all the cases that we have in our professional lives and turn them into books. This is a case-study, this is the case of a lifetime and is the lifetime case of Gonçalo Amaral. Moreover, he was following with responsibilities the investigation of this crime and suddenly he was impeded, he was silenced inside the Judiciary Police itself. They told him to halt the investigation, they ordered him to stop. And at a certain point in time, they said "it's not like that". Even the organizations for which he was working said "no, it's not like that, that is an invention", and they pulled the carpet under his feet. He believed in what he was doing, has a superior knowledge to mine and to anyone else in this studio. He worked with an investigative team that had a deep knowledge of the case. And suddenly, within this context, they tell him to stop investigating. I believe that he was forced to leave from the Judiciary Police. I never understood the grounds for his departure but it's associated with this incident. Therefore, he feels outraged, it's his professional honour and integrity that are at stake and he narrates in the book that that he knows, that that he believes. What does the Court of Appeals decision say? And this Appeals' decision is remarkable. It says in essence, that the facts were exacerbated by the McCanns themselves, the parents spent their time giving interviews and talking about this case. The parents brought the case into light, not Gonçalo Amaral.  In the end, he is commentating on the same facts that the parents comment, facts which are also reported by all the newspapers and media in this country. Besides, he believes and he possesses the knowledge concerning the subject he wrote, therefore it's a freedom of press exercise issue, it's a freedom of opinion issue, which is the characteristic of a democratic state of law. In fact, I never saw a court, not one first instance court nor a superior court, condemning a person to pay 500,000 euro for defaming another. Never saw that in my entire life. I would like that the deaths in Portugal had sentences like that, because the indemnifications when someone dies are "there you go 50,000 euro" which is a far inferior sum to a medium range car. That is how I would like to see the deaths compensated. I never saw half a million euro for defamation, just like it's abnormal to prohibit the publication of a book and the circulation of that book in the market, something that I find that jeopardizes the freedom of the press.

You have to question what made the lower court judge award such a ridiculous sum, breaking historical records.  It's so ridiculous it calls into question her professionalism and reason for it?
The highest pay out in civil cases in PT wasn't much more than or less than court costs imposed on the Mccanns.

Team Amaral's legal fees isn't imposed on the Mcs, only court costs are.
Hence the financial damage and burden to Amaral and co defendants.
He is rightfully entitled to right the wrong by countersuing to seek compensation for financial loss and more.

It may be a king's ransom if Mcs have to pay out of own pockets, but court costs as listed is Euros106K. Naturally they have their own legal fees to pay to ID law firm (fairly substantial) plus supreme court appeal costs and other related costs (witnesses travel costs, documentation procuring costs etc) add that to two courts costs imposed on them of 106K, I'd say they face no more than a few hundreds thousands in total, and not million as some perceived, unless compensation to defendants is awarded against them, then maybe....their bills might run into half a million or more.

That said, going by PT historical civil cases pay out, compensation isn't going break Mcs bank. Unless another crazy judge like the one that presides in the first instance court presides in counter sue compensation case, then Mcs may face bankruptcy.

aiyoyo wrote:Thanks for the link. It's such a good read maybe it's justifiable to post the article in full.  Maybe the admin may want to start a new thread on media comments as there may be few more to come ....

Good idea...new thread for media comments started aiyoyo.


 22 April 2016 | Posted by [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]   [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]  


Rua Segura is a TV program where criminal cases & current issues are debated on CMTV. In this episode the reconstruction made by CMTV [see [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]] about the night when Madeleine disappeared was shown, followed by a very short debate with Dr. Carlos Anjos, former PJ inspector and with Prof. Rui Pereira, the former Minister of Internal Affairs.

Anchor - This disappearance continues to be shrouded in mystery. Moving on to the next point, the Court of Appeals decision which revoked the sentence that obliged Gonçalo Amaral to pay half a million euro to the parents of Maddie McCann. Carlos, is this ruling a victory for Gonçalo Amaral? Is it also, in some way, a victory for the thesis defended by the former PJ inspector?

Carlos Anjos - No, I don't think so. I do think that it redresses some fairness, some justice. The arguments of the Court of Appeals in my view... I could not comprehend the decision of the 1st instance court. I have a better understanding of this decision, and I understand this decision because knowing the Maddie case as I know, I followed it at the time, and having read the book that Gonçalo wrote, there isn't much in that book that is not on the process. In other words, Gonçalo did an overview of the process, wrote the facts, he had worked on the process, and the only novelty that exists in the book and not on the process is that the process doesn't arrive to a conclusion about what happened to Maddie. It's not able to, that is, there is no proof to indicate that the McCanns were responsible for the death of their daughter. A process does not provide opinions, in a penal process or a criminal one we are limited to ascertain facts. Gonçalo has exactly that factual description of what was proven, the reconstitution of what happened, and then according to all of his knowledge of the process, and of all the information that was compiled throughout the process and with the declarations of the McCanns, he concludes in the book that what had happened was a determined situation: that the child had died earlier due to negligence or due to an accidental death and that the responsibility was of the McCanns, but that was already public knowledge. That was on the process and the process was public. That's why I don't understand the 1st instance court, because it's exactly what the Court of Appeals has now said, that there is nothing in Gonçalo's book that wasn't already public knowledge.

Anchor - Professor I ask you as well to make a brief comment, in this case can the Supreme court of justice have a decisive role taking into account that the McCann's lawyer will appeal.

Rui Pereira - No doubt. But very briefly, in here we usually comment on criminal processes, however this is not a criminal process.

Carlos Anjos - It's a civil process.

Rui Pereira - This is a civil process, in actual fact, the lawyers of the McCann family asked for compensation for damages on the basis of the harm of the rights to have a good name and image of the McCann couple. And why? Because it is easier to be indemnified in a civil process rather than in a criminal process alleging that a crime of slander and libel was committed. It's a tactic, a tactic known in procedural terms. Given the monetary value of the compensation asked, there is still the possibility to appeal to the Supreme Court, that will have the last word. What is at stake is to know, if in reality, was there any unlawful act that caused harm to the good name and image of the McCann couple.

in CMTV, Rua Segura T6 EP78, April 20, 2016 (debate not online, except the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.])


In the morning talk show Você na TV, broadcast by TVI, there is a criminal cases debate segment of which I'll post an extract. The full segment can be found at the link bellow. I found the comment by the lawyer and university professor Dr. António Pinto Pereira to be essential for a better perspective.

António Pinto Pereira - I actually think that it makes perfect sense the writing of this book in this particular case. Evidently a doctor can write a book, or a lawyer, or a judge, a police officer, in fact the decision of the court appeals...

Manuel Luís Goucha (host) - I just remembered, especially because the Judiciary police's work was called into question during the investigations.

José Paulino (PJ chief inspector) - Of course, but it's usually said that the police is like a punch bag, still it should continue to respond with restraint. And we can't react, the police can't react.

António Pinto Pereira - As I was saying, no one is forbidden of writing a book. We just can't report all the cases that we have in our professional lives and turn them into books. This is a case-study, this is the case of a lifetime and is the lifetime case of Gonçalo Amaral. Moreover, he was following with responsibilities the investigation of this crime and suddenly he was impeded, he was silenced inside the Judiciary Police itself. They told him to halt the investigation, they ordered him to stop. And at a certain point in time, they said "it's not like that". Even the organizations for which he was working said "no, it's not like that, that is an invention", and they pulled the carpet under his feet. He believed in what he was doing, has a superior knowledge to mine and to anyone else in this studio. He worked with an investigative team that had a deep knowledge of the case. And suddenly, within this context, they tell him to stop investigating. I believe that he was forced to leave from the Judiciary Police. I never understood the grounds for his departure but it's associated with this incident. Therefore, he feels outraged, it's his professional honour and integrity that are at stake and he narrates in the book that that he knows, that that he believes. What does the Court of Appeals decision say? And this Appeals' decision is remarkable. It says in essence, that the facts were exacerbated by the McCanns themselves, the parents spent their time giving interviews and talking about this case. The parents brought the case into light, not Gonçalo Amaral. In the end, he is commentating on the same facts that the parents comment, facts which are also reported by all the newspapers and media in this country. Besides, he believes and he possesses the knowledge concerning the subject he wrote, therefore it's a freedom of press exercise issue, it's a freedom of opinion issue, which is the characteristic of a democratic state of law. In fact, I never saw a court, not one first instance court nor a superior court, condemning a person to pay 500,000 euro for defaming another. Never saw that in my entire life. I would like that the deaths in Portugal had sentences like that, because the indemnifications when someone dies are "there you go 50,000 euro" which is a far inferior sum to a medium range car. That is how I would like to see the deaths compensated. I never saw half a million euro for defamation, just like it's abnormal to prohibit the publication of a book and the circulation of that book in the market, something that I find that jeopardizes the freedom of the press.

Manuel Luís Goucha (host) - That used to happen before 1974 [see [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]].

António Pinto Pereira - Yes, but it doesn't happen in the current democratic state of law, it doesn't happen in the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] nor should it ever happen.

Manuel Luís Goucha (host) - Of course.

António Pinto Pereira - I believe this decision by the Lisbon court of Appeals to be truly remarkable and I have to congratulate the three Appellate judges that promulgated it. Now, there is going to be an appeal to the Supreme court, the process is not over yet and let's see what will be the Supreme insight over this.

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

What does the Court of Appeals decision say? And this Appeals' decision is remarkable. It says in essence, that the facts were exacerbated by the McCanns themselves, the parents spent their time giving interviews and talking about this case. The parents brought the case into light, not Gonçalo Amaral. In the end, he is commentating on the same facts that the parents comment, facts which are also reported by all the newspapers and media in this country. Besides, he believes and he possesses the knowledge concerning the subject he wrote, therefore it's a freedom of press exercise issue, it's a freedom of opinion issue, which is the characteristic of a democratic state of law. In fact, I never saw a court, not one first instance court nor a superior court, condemning a person to pay 500,000 euro for defaming another. Never saw that in my entire life. I would like that the deaths in Portugal had sentences like that, because the indemnifications when someone dies are "there you go 50,000 euro" which is a far inferior sum to a medium range car. That is how I would like to see the deaths compensated. I never saw half a million euro for defamation, just like it's abnormal to prohibit the publication of a book and the circulation of that book in the market, something that I find that jeopardizes the freedom of the press. 

Manuel Luís Goucha (host) - That used to happen before 1974 [see [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]].

António Pinto Pereira - Yes, but it doesn't happen in the current democratic state of law, it doesn't happen in the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] nor should it ever happen.

Manuel Luís Goucha (host) - Of course.

António Pinto Pereira - I believe this decision by the Lisbon court of Appeals to be truly remarkable and I have to congratulate the three Appellate judges that promulgated it. Now, there is going to be an appeal to the Supreme court, the process is not over yet and let's see what will be the Supreme insight over this.



It appears that the whole case is based on a 'never before have we seen it' ... Looks like the McCanns may have filed already if Pereira is saying that the process isn't over until we have the SC 'insight'!

MayMuse wrote:

It appears that the whole case is based on a 'never before have we seen it' ... Looks like the McCanns may have filed already if Pereira is saying that the process isn't over until we have the SC 'insight'!

And that is the reason for having an Appeal Process - to correct any 'mistakes' that might have been made (for whatever reason - incompetence / bribery / blackmail / threat) by a lower-court judge.   In this case it appears that the judge not only got the decision wrong, but also made a financial award that was entirely without precedent or justification.

The unanimous decision of the 3 appeal judges corrected the error, and if the McCanns were in any way reasonable, that would be that.  If not, then it's hard to imagine how the McCann lawyers could even write a coherent a case to present to the Supreme Court.  I'm assuming that the reported reason: "we are seething at the result" is unlikely to be good enough...  

Exactly, I just cannot see how ID can present anything remotely convincing to the SC, after all surely she must have used every 'leaf' out of the law-book thus far? So what's new? IMO nothing... Not that it counts

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It appears that the whole case is based on a 'never before have we seen it' ... Looks like the McCanns may have filed already if Pereira is saying that the process isn't over until we have the SC 'insight'

A good lawyer won't file hastily. Last we heard she told the Press she hasn't assembled legal arguments. It's quite obvious nothing jumps out of the Judgement that she can jump on otherwise she would be all over it like a rash.
She will have an uphill task....to assemble legal arguments (not facts not evidence but points of law).

Let's hope that Mrs' lawyer advises her not to start calling the Appeal Judges  effing tossers.

Newbie here, so not sure if this is the correct place to post but have you all seen the Sunday Express article this morning?

"THE legal battle between Kate and Gerry McCann and former Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral may end with a face-to-face confrontation at the European Court of Human Rights."

Patience wrote:Newbie here, so not sure if this is the correct place to post but have you all seen the Sunday Express article this morning?

"THE legal battle between Kate and Gerry McCann and former Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral may end with a face-to-face confrontation at the European Court of Human Rights."

Hi and welcome.

Yes, I've just posted that in Latest News!

I'll post this information to this thread, too:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Today at 9:47 am


This is in today's Corrieo da Manha. This is a Google translation:

24.04.2016  09:30

Investigate the cremated body thesis "
Gonçalo Amaral calls for analysis and reconstruction.
By Sergio A. Vitorino, Tania Laranjo


Gonçalo Amaral, former coordinator of the Judicial investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in May 2007, in the Algarve, of course: "With the failure of all research and millions spent, we just wanted to discredit our line of research [ Maddie died accidentally and parents hid the body], it is time to refocus the investigation. "

Gonçalo Amaral said yesterday the CM that is now in Portugal, "start with the reconstruction that was never made and the laboratory analysis of evidence that was never truly analyzed, as the hair in the trunk of the car where Madeleine fluids were found."

The investigator in the reform states that it is necessary to follow leads as the "incineration Madeleine's body in a coffin of a British súbdita" and access the medical records of the girl in the UK, which has never been allowed.

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

Get'emGonçalo wrote:

Patience wrote:Newbie here, so not sure if this is the correct place to post but have you all seen the Sunday Express article this morning?

"THE legal battle between Kate and Gerry McCann and former Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral may end with a face-to-face confrontation at the European Court of Human Rights."

Hi and welcome.

Yes, I've just posted that in Latest News!

Great, and thank you for the welcome.