INTERVIEW WITH AMARAL

.Gonçalo Amaral, the former Judiciary Police Coordinator on the ban overturn to his book ‘Maddie - A Verdade da Mentira’.


by Paulo Marcelino

What did you feel upon learning about the decision taken by the Lisbon Appeals Court, which invalidated the interim injunction brought by the McCann couple against the book?

I had a sensation of freedom and the certainty that democracy had been strengthened.

What impact had on you the decision made at the first instance court, one year ago, that banned the sale of your book and forbade you from speaking publicly about the case?

It was very heavy for me and for my family. It had nefarious consequences and damages are still being assessed. It was extremely violent.

Will you speak about the case again?

I am considering to exercise the right of freedom that was returned to me.

Will the book be again be put up for sale?

The publisher will immediately recover the confiscated books in order to place them at the bookshops. And we will take other initiatives into consideration, including the publication in England.

Interesting that he is thinking of translating the Book into English.

I like this sentence
"I am considering to exercise the right of freedom that was returned to me."

I think before we get too carried away with this, the lifting of the injunction merely gives Amaral the right
to freedom of Speech. The Trial will determine whether his remarks are libellous and damage the McCanns
reputation. No one can say whether Madeleine is alive or dead and this will be the crux of the Trial. The verdict
could go either way.

I think Panda is right. We've had a great two days with a much-needed boost after so many months. But the McCanns are devious, their little gang show no signs - yet - of breaking ranks and the Press seem to have gone to sleep over the latest developments. I just hope that they have twigged that astute members of public are now very suspicious of the "more agony for Kate" headlines and the Press are keeping their powder dry until more events develop. This story is on the back-burner for the time being - but revenge is always better when served nice and cold.

Keepingmum

I"m sure the McCanns will be advised not to appeal because this will delay the Trial. Another point, I think
if Murat"s case is heard before the McCanns, the outcome of that is very important for the McCanns. If it is
found that that Jane Tanner and the Tapas 3 deliberately misled the Police, the McCanns will be very suspect .

I predict that the British media will have a field day IF GA counter sues. It`ll be unbearable, poor McCanns, disgraced cop heaps more misery by claiming damages from poor parents, holding up the search etc etc etc.
In fact, I`m surprised they haven`t already picked up the tweets and blogs suggesting GA may take action.

I`m sure Clarrie is working out how to spin this as we speak !!!

Panda wrote:Interesting that he is thinking of translating the Book into English.

getting a publisher in the uk and circumnavigating our libel laws will be a challenge.

GA: "It was very heavy for me and for my family. It had nefarious consequences and damages are still being assessed. It was extremely violent."


Let's hope when the righteous Dr Amaral assesses the full damage the disgraced parents have inflicted upon him, he sues the lying pants off of them!

Marky wrote:

Panda wrote:Interesting that he is thinking of translating the Book into English.

getting a publisher in the uk and circumnavigating our libel laws will be a challenge.

Can"t remember his name now but there was an ex MI5 guy who was going to publish his autobiography.
Maggie Thatcher stopped him on the grounds of secrecy etc but he had the Book published in Australia and it
found it"s way to the bookshelves in Britain eventually.

Not sure about this, but until such time as the Trial takes place Libel hasn"t been proved so I can"t see how the
McCanns or the Government can stop it.

Panda wrote:I think before we get too carried away with this, the lifting of the injunction merely gives Amaral the right
to freedom of Speech. The Trial will determine whether his remarks are libellous and damage the McCanns
reputation. No one can say whether Madeleine is alive or dead and this will be the crux of the Trial. The verdict
could go either way.

The crux of the trial is not whether Madeleine is alive or dead and it is not up to anyone to prove either hypothesis. I do not believe that the McCanns have a strong case for libel or defamation now in light of the decision taken by the court in Lisbon and the scathing criticism by the judges of the decision to ban the book in the first place. Even their lawyer Isabel Duarte said that it would be very difficult to appeal the decision. I am happy just to think that the McCanns were probably never expecting this decision and they thought that everything was always going to go their way.

The arguments the McCanns used for the injunction are the same they are using in the libel case, therefore, Gonçalo Amaral has reason to be optimistic as to the outcome. The judges pointed out that everything in the book is true and faithful to the police files, which were made public. It was also pointed that because of his experience of 26 years with the PJ, he had the right to come to another conclusion than that of the final report, based on the facts and evidence of the investigation as he knew it. GA had the righ to express his own opinion. The judges also stated that the information in the book was already in the public domain long before it was published. It was also pointed out that everything, including the book in Portuguese and English, was available on the internet and anyone could read it. They did bring up, however, that because of these translations, etc., GA's copyrights were violated. Another matter. The "acordão" also defended his right to freedom of speech, expression and opinion and that the injunction went against basic human rights. Don't forget either that the judges stated that the book and video did not in any offend the rights of the McCanns and that they should accept that others may not be in agreement with what they say and that these people have the right to express their opinions, whether the McCanns like it or not. In my opinion it was a very strong and harsh decision against the injunction and strongly in favour of freedom of speech and expression, which is difficult to contest.

Panda wrote:

Marky wrote:

Panda wrote:Interesting that he is thinking of translating the Book into English.

getting a publisher in the uk and circumnavigating our libel laws will be a challenge.

Can"t remember his name now but there was an ex MI5 guy who was going to publish his autobiography.
Maggie Thatcher stopped him on the grounds of secrecy etc but he had the Book published in Australia and it
found it"s way to the bookshelves in Britain eventually.

Not sure about this, but until such time as the Trial takes place Libel hasn"t been proved so I can"t see how the
McCanns or the Government can stop it.

Hi Panda, do you mean Ex MI5 guy Peter Wright, author of 'Spycatcher' ?

I remember that book. I worked for an oil company at the time, so there were always people going offshore who could obtain it and bring it back. And this was in the days even before the Internet, and Amazon, and places like Play.com who are based in Jersey, where UK copyrights don't apply. If it's published in English, in the States or Canada or Oz or India or even Hong Kong, it'll get here. Trust me on this. BTW Spycatcher was the most boring pile of bollox I ever tried to read, I couldn't even get to the end of it, it was so boring; but everybody wanted to read it because it had been banned!

Pennylane,

Yes, that"s the guy.......still shopping til you drop or have the proposed cuts reined you in?

Panda wrote: Pennylane,

Yes, that"s the guy.......still shopping til you drop or have the proposed cuts reined you in?

I'm feeling the pinch Panda, and I'm deeply traumatised!

keepingmum wrote: I think Panda is right. We've had a great two days with a much-needed boost after so many months. But the McCanns are devious, their little gang show no signs - yet - of breaking ranks and the Press seem to have gone to sleep over the latest developments. I just hope that they have twigged that astute members of public are now very suspicious of the "more agony for Kate" headlines and the Press are keeping their powder dry until more events develop. This story is on the back-burner for the time being - but revenge is always better when served nice and cold.

I think we have always overestimated the intelligence of the McCanns. They are both too arrogant to be able to properly assess a situation in an objective manner and to make the right choices as to which actions are to be taken. They imagine themselves as all powerful and forge on ahead thinking that everyone who is in their way will be knocked down. That explains Kate's reaction to the judges' latest decision : "I don't believe it!". What? She couldn't believe it? Anyone could have foreseen such an outcome. It was a very good possibility, but the McCanns never imagined such a decision, because, like selfish, self-centered, infantile adults, everything was supposed to continue going their way. I sincerely don't believe they have any more ammunition in the way of arguments, because they put all their cards on the table from the beginning.(Excuse the mixed metaphores!) Frankly, I can't think of what other arguments they can advance in their case. It reminds me of that expression : They've painted themselves into a corner.

Carolina wrote:

Panda wrote:I think before we get too carried away with this, the lifting of the injunction merely gives Amaral the right
to freedom of Speech. The Trial will determine whether his remarks are libellous and damage the McCanns
reputation. No one can say whether Madeleine is alive or dead and this will be the crux of the Trial. The verdict
could go either way.

The crux of the trial is not whether Madeleine is alive or dead and it is not up to anyone to prove either hypothesis. I do not believe that the McCanns have a strong case for libel or defamation now in light of the decision taken by the court in Lisbon and the scathing criticism by the judges of the decision to ban the book in the first place. Even their lawyer Isabel Duarte said that it would be very difficult to appeal the decision. I am happy just to think that the McCanns were probably never expecting this decision and they thought that everything was always going to go their way.

The arguments the McCanns used for the injunction are the same they are using in the libel case, therefore, Gonçalo Amaral has reason to be optimistic as to the outcome. The judges pointed out that everything in the book is true and faithful to the police files, which were made public. It was also pointed that because of his experience of 26 years with the PJ, he had the right to come to another conclusion than that of the final report, based on the facts and evidence of the investigation as he knew it. GA had the righ to express his own opinion. The judges also stated that the information in the book was already in the public domain long before it was published. It was also pointed out that everything, including the book in Portuguese and English, was available on the internet and anyone could read it. They did bring up, however, that because of these translations, etc., GA's copyrights were violated. Another matter. The "acordão" also defended his right to freedom of speech, expression and opinion and that the injunction went against basic human rights. Don't forget either that the judges stated that the book and video did not in any offend the rights of the McCanns and that they should accept that others may not be in agreement with what they say and that these people have the right to express their opinions, whether the McCanns like it or not. In my opinion it was a very strong and harsh decision against the injunction and strongly in favour of freedom of speech and expression, which is difficult to contest.

Carolina, I agree that banning the book before the Trial suggested Amaral was guilty of Libel before the
Trial.!!!! Not sure I agree with you about whether Madeleine is alive or dead not being the issue. IMO it is and an assumption will have to be made. The McCanns are claiming that by Amaral saying he believes Madeleine died in 5a it hinders the search for her and suggests their reputation is being maligned. Since Amaral cannot
prove Madeleine is dead the Judges will have to make a decision on probability.

Panda wrote:

Carolina wrote:

Panda wrote:I think before we get too carried away with this, the lifting of the injunction merely gives Amaral the right
to freedom of Speech. The Trial will determine whether his remarks are libellous and damage the McCanns
reputation. No one can say whether Madeleine is alive or dead and this will be the crux of the Trial. The verdict
could go either way.

The crux of the trial is not whether Madeleine is alive or dead and it is not up to anyone to prove either hypothesis. I do not believe that the McCanns have a strong case for libel or defamation now in light of the decision taken by the court in Lisbon and the scathing criticism by the judges of the decision to ban the book in the first place. Even their lawyer Isabel Duarte said that it would be very difficult to appeal the decision. I am happy just to think that the McCanns were probably never expecting this decision and they thought that everything was always going to go their way.

The arguments the McCanns used for the injunction are the same they are using in the libel case, therefore, Gonçalo Amaral has reason to be optimistic as to the outcome. The judges pointed out that everything in the book is true and faithful to the police files, which were made public. It was also pointed that because of his experience of 26 years with the PJ, he had the right to come to another conclusion than that of the final report, based on the facts and evidence of the investigation as he knew it. GA had the righ to express his own opinion. The judges also stated that the information in the book was already in the public domain long before it was published. It was also pointed out that everything, including the book in Portuguese and English, was available on the internet and anyone could read it. They did bring up, however, that because of these translations, etc., GA's copyrights were violated. Another matter. The "acordão" also defended his right to freedom of speech, expression and opinion and that the injunction went against basic human rights. Don't forget either that the judges stated that the book and video did not in any offend the rights of the McCanns and that they should accept that others may not be in agreement with what they say and that these people have the right to express their opinions, whether the McCanns like it or not. In my opinion it was a very strong and harsh decision against the injunction and strongly in favour of freedom of speech and expression, which is difficult to contest.

Carolina, I agree that banning the book before the Trial suggested Amaral was guilty of Libel before the
Trial.!!!! Not sure I agree with you about whether Madeleine is alive or dead not being the issue. IMO it is and an assumption will have to be made. The McCanns are claiming that by Amaral saying he believes Madeleine died in 5a it hinders the search for her and suggests their reputation is being maligned. Since Amaral cannot
prove Madeleine is dead the Judges will have to make a decision on probability.

If we follow your argumentation, then the McCanns have to prove that an abduction took place and that their daughter is still alive. Difficult, considering there exists absolutely no physical evidence that an abduction did happen.We only have their word for it. As for Maddie still being alive, all we have are a series of irrelevant sightings which have ceased "il y a belle lurette". Whereas, there is plenty of physical evidence that someone died in 5A.

This said, I agree with Carolina that whether Maddie is alive or dead is not the issue.

No, Panda, no!!!! The judges do not have to make a decision at all based on whether Maddie is alive or dead. It simply, from a judicial point of view, does not come into the equation. They make their decision on whether someone has the right to have the opinion that she is not longer with us based on facts from a police investigation and from 26 years experience in the PJ. Neither the McCanns nor Gonçalo Amaral have to prove that she is either alive or dead. The crux of the libel case is if the rights of the plaintiffs have been offended on one side and the right to freedom of expression, speech and of opinion of the defendent on the other.

Carolina,

What about the claim that Amaral"s theory has hindered their search for their Daughter, damaged their health
and the twins (they even included Madeleine before someone reminded them she is still a Ward of Court and they are no longer her Guardians!!) I know nothing of Portugese Law but these claims must be taken into account, even though WE don"t think they are valid, judgement must be made on these issues and did Amaral
exceed his right to freedom of speech by publishing his thoughts? there were I remember four possibilities the
PJ Final Report listed.

Panda wrote:Carolina,

What about the claim that Amaral"s theory has hindered their search for their Daughter, damaged their health
and the twins (they even included Madeleine before someone reminded them she is still a Ward of Court and they are no longer her Guardians!!) I know nothing of Portugese Law but these claims must be taken into account, even though WE don"t think they are valid, judgement must be made on these issues and did Amaral
exceed his right to freedom of speech by publishing his thoughts? there were I remember four possibilities the
PJ Final Report listed.

In the UK, and I should think, elsewhere in Europe, when someone claims that their health has been damaged, medical records must be presented. When a relative of mine made a claim against a Health authority, her medical records from after and before the incident had to be produced, to prove that damage had resulted from the incident and that her health problems did not predate the incident. I would expect the Portuguese court to request these medical records from the McCanns so that if they were claiming depression, say, and the medical records showed that their treatment for depression predated Maddie's disappearance or the publication of the book, they would have no claim for damage to health. If treatment for depression followed Maddie's disappearance and predated the publication of the book, that could be taken as a natural response to the event and not resulting from publication.

I don't think the McCanns would be able to claim damage to their health if no medical records were available.

I don't think the McCanns would be able to claim damage to their health if no medical records were available.

Quite - and like Insurance Policies, the Court will not pay out for a pre-existing condition. If Mrs Kate suffered from depression before, then the Court won't pay out for her "depression" now.

Panda wrote:Carolina,

What about the claim that Amaral"s theory has hindered their search for their Daughter, damaged their health
and the twins (they even included Madeleine before someone reminded them she is still a Ward of Court and they are no longer her Guardians!!) I know nothing of Portugese Law but these claims must be taken into account, even though WE don"t think they are valid, judgement must be made on these issues and did Amaral
exceed his right to freedom of speech by publishing his thoughts? there were I remember four possibilities the
PJ Final Report listed.

Whether Gonçalo Amaral or others for that matter express an opinion that Maddie died in the appartment does not in any way hinder the search for their daughter. Nothing is stopping them from continuing with their fake searches despite what others think. This is a specious argument used because they are afraid donations will stop. It's all about money.

Anyway, this is an argument easy to counter in a court of law. All a lawyer has to do is ask them why they did not physically search for their daughter the night she disappeared. And why have they not searched after David Edgar claimed Maddie was being held captive in a secret cellar in a 10 km radius around Praia da Luz.

What's Kate's argument? "I'm depressed, not because my daughter went missing. I only missed five nights of sleep over that and I wrote in my diary that I slept well the night of her 4th birthday. I'm only depressed because that nasty policeman wrote the truth about the investigation." That'll make her look good.

Hi Colonel Fabien,

The McCanns have English Lawyers and Portugese Lawyers so surely they would have been properly
advised on the props and cons of suing Amaral? We know Gerry is arrogant but he is not stupid, this is the guy who raised over £3 million in donations, plus T.V. interviews etc and succeeded with PR help in getting half
the World to search for Madeleine. Maybe he listened to Isobel Duarte who seemed to behave without decorum
judging by the minute by minute transcript we received.

I thought at the time he was putting his head in the Lions mouth having to go to Court in Portugal where he
and Kate have behaved disgracefully towards the people of Portugal who as taxpayers have Funded all the Police
work which must have run into Millions of Euros.

Just seen your post, maybe the Daily Express coughing up £600,000 without going to Court made Gerry think it
would be a walkover suing Amaral. To prove they suffered Health problems they would have to produce Certificates wouldn"t they?

Panda wrote:Hi Colonel Fabien,

The McCanns have English Lawyers and Portugese Lawyers so surely they would have been properly
advised on the props and cons of suing Amaral? We know Gerry is arrogant but he is not stupid...

I think Gerry is stupid, simply because he does not know when to stop. They are not victims of lawyers giving them bad advice, they are their own victims, victims of their infantile arrogance. Never underestimate your enemy's resources, but NEVER EVER overestimate them either. It can be just as fatal.