Page 3 of 3 • Share •
If they take him to court for breaching the secrecy then they have to also sue both the mccanns and tanner for the self same thing
- Elite Member
Number of posts : 431
Age : 52
Location : uk
Registration date : 2009-11-17
MCXLIII wrote:And what makes you think that?viv wrote:I think Goncalo will lose on the injunction but win on damages, he will not have to pay them any or very little. Going for him over the judicial secrecy and the lawyer smugly announcing she only managed to work that out when hearing the evidence does not make her sound very smart really does it? I think they know they will win the case on injunction but have no real claim for damages and even if they do, the publishers will pay. The McCanns need to destroy the reputation of Goncalo to improve their own, hence they need to demonstrate he is a criminal. But whilst he obviously did breach the secrecy of justice, so did they and the fact is the PJ have not chosen to prosecute either for those breaches, so will they want to now? Unfortunately I do think it is possible they would want to make an example of Goncalo for doing this.
All he has to do is prove that the contents of the book are based on the official documentation which is now on public domain.
Besides, the theory of the death in the apartment is not even his, but derives from the reports of chief inspector Tavares de Almeida, which in turn derives from reports from other experts, including British.
Soon you will be reaching the conclusion that anyone involved in that investigation and that at some point wrote a damaging report about the McCann's can be successfully prosecuted.
And why stop there? Suing the Portuguese State could be the next logical step. After all, all the 'libellous' statements have their origin in an official document.
The complaint about the breach of the secrecy of justice is a completely separate issue and will have no bearing on the outcome of this case.
What remains to be seen is if the Public Prosecutor will take this matter any further or simply archive it.
This type of ‘crime’ does not require a complaint from a private individual, e.g. the McCann’s or anyone else.
It is the obligation of the Public Prosecutor Services to investigate such crimes if and when they are known.
We all know that the book was published a few days after the archival of the investigation and this issue was raised at the time. If the PPS didn’t investigate this last year, they will look very foolish by doing so now.
This is just another episode in the war of detrition waged against Amaral.
I think he has proved that suspecting the McCanns of being involved in the death of their child was an official part of the police investigation but no one was ever in any doubt about that. When you are faced with parents who are telling very obvious lies about the disappearance of their little girl it is quite obvious the police are going to investigate them for homicide. But what he has not proved is what he said in the documentary and subsequently "the little girl is dead"; "I will prove..how she died" (in an interview). I am not sure that he made such strong comments presenting them as facts in the book and think that if he had only written the book, the McCanns probably would not have had a legal cause of action against him because this was far more like just expressing his own opinion rather than trying to assert the death of Maddie as a fact. My thinking here is born out by the fact that his litigious couple took no action for almost a year on the book. But then again, they waited almost a year against the Daily Express and I do think they like to try and maximise the amount of cash they can extract. Effectively, I think they were waiting for Goncalo to just carry on, so they could make more money out of it!
Goncalo has already been injuncted from saying the little girl is dead, this is his appeal against that. IMO, the court will be most impressed by the view of the prosecutor who very clearly stated no evidence had been found to confirm whether she is dead or alive and uphold the injunction on policy grounds that no police officer should be pre judging the outcome of an unsolved and very serious criminal case. Not because she likes Kate and Gerry McCann. But if there is some way the judge can make Goncalo right I would be very happy with that, I just do not think that there is. It is not the place of a police officer to pronounce on guilt or what suspects did, it is merely his job to investigate.
I do agree that making a complaint now about breaching the secrecy of justice is just part of the McCann's war of attrition against Goncalo Amaral. Their aim has always been pretty simple, blacken his character to whiten their own. I also agree that the police were obviously clearly aware at the time that both they and Goncalo had breached the secrecy of justice and took no action against either side. But I do think a different view would be held about the actions of a former senior police officer and he may be at risk of a further prosecution. Although I hope not! I know that from UK's point of view, they are going to be extremely upset about the actions of Goncalo in putting a great deal of detail about this case into the public domain which would prejudice the investigation and the chances of successfully prosecuting the McCanns and others, most especially if they actually did kill Madeleine.
Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum