New episodes of the Judicial war with Maddie's parents: Gonçalo Amaral goes on the attack

http://bit.ly/wSvh7p



Gonçalo Amaral goes on the attack

New episodes of the Judicial war with Maddie's parents

The complaint of the alleged destruction of 7500 books
The review of the evidence
The work of the private detectives


O Crime, March 1, 2012 | Nº1544, pages 12/13:

The new source of conflict between the former Judiciary Police inspector and the McCann couple revolves around the devolution of the book written by Amaral. The courts annulled the injunction pending over the work, and now, the former inspector claims back his 7500 copies of "Maddie – The Truth of the Lie" whose trustee is the legal representative of the McCanns in Portugal.

Interview by Carlos Saraiva [Director of "O Crime"]
Thursday, March 1, 2012
With thanks to Joana Morais for translation

"O Crime" – The Court of Appeals has decreed the book copies (Maddie –The Truth of the Lie) that were apprehended should be returned to you. Do you already have them in your possession?

Gonçalo Amaral - The Lisbon Court of Appeals has decreed that my book and my opinions did not violate the privacy rights of the McCann couple, the parents of the missing child, wherefore the injunction was peremptorily refused.

Did the judicial ruling transited in rem judicatam [become a matter of record/final]?

The decision of the Court of Appeals did not allow a recourse. Even so, the distinguished lawyer [Isabel Duarte] of the couple managed to delay the transit of the judicial ruling, which occurred in November 2011, following a decision contrary to the McCanns issued by the Supreme Court of Lisbon. They have been selling a "pig in a poke" and I am beginning to doubt the McCanns are aware of the decisions of the Portuguese courts. Perhaps they continue to pay without knowing the outcome.

Why weren't they returned yet?

I doubt the books still exist. In fact, it should be recalled the McCanns' lawyer has always affirmed that those books would never be put on sale again. Exactly from where does that sureness come... I have no idea. I only know that lawyer and her clients do not abide by the decisions of the Portuguese courts, which can be a clear indication of their character, or, at least, of their behaviour within the Portuguese legal system. Allow me to remind you that, due to my suspicions that those books were destroyed, I have denounced the situation to the Public Ministry [Attorney General's Office]; currently taking place at the DIAP [Department of Investigation and Penal Action] of Lisbon is a criminal process for improper clearance or destruction of objects placed under the public domain (Article 3551 of the Penal Code), abstractly punishable by at least a sentence of up to five years in prison, where the suspects are the McCann couple and their illustrious lawyer.

Of how many copies are we talking about?

In question, approximately 7,500 book copies.

When they are returned, will you re-market them again?

Those books or a new re-print should be already on sale. The book publishers "Guerra e Paz" will know more about that issue.

At what stage is the civil proceeding the McCanns have against you?

We are at a pre-trial hearing stage. Presently, my new lawyer has been "tweaking" a process that was halted and that has stirred some panic in the opposing side.

One of the strongest arguments of the accusation alleges that Gonçalo Amaral became enriched with the book's author rights. What is your reaction to this claim?

If someone wants to talk about "enrichment", they should think firstly in the parents of the missing child, in their family, in their support "staff" and in their illustrious lawyer. In the latter case, it would be important for the aforementioned lawyer to state how much has she earned and what are her prospects regarding future gains, not to mention the other lawyers, the private detective agencies and PR companies.

Do you have any expectations as to the result of this lawsuit?

The only expectation that I have is that we are going to win the action, since there are no facts or material facts to support the claim. The action of the McCanns is inept. It is this that causes a great despondency in the illustrious lawyer, who felt the need to proceed with a campaign of disinformation and slander against me. She should not forget what she has been saying, because she will answer for that in court.

As you well know, the Prime Minister David Cameron, has ordered a re-evaluation of the investigation in England regarding Maddie's disappearance. How do you assess that decision, admitting that the English will hardly have access to the investigation in Portugal?

The decision of that Prime Minister has been twisted. The McCann couple has spoken of a re-examination of the child's "sightings". When, in fact, what is known is that Scotland Yard, who were appointed to re-evaluate the whole investigation, has set aside the pseudo-sightings, focusing instead on the investigation process that remains archived. Elements from the Scotland Yard have been working with an investigative [Judiciary Police] team from Oporto (Oporto because Algarve and Lisbon has already been involved), and what is known is that the "affair" is not going well for the McCanns.

The Maddie case, one can say (it's not a secret) that, it disrupted your career in the Judiciary Police. What sorrows do you have concerning that?

I do not agree with that! The "Maddie" case happened at a stage of my life when I was already tired of saying "yes". Just and only that.

Where you naïve?

Not at all. I left the Judiciary Police by my own initiative and with my head held high, I worked in there for almost thirty years and I had a successful career with an immaculate track record. Let the detractors attempt to denigrate my career, because, we will soon talk.

So far, the clues gathered by the private detectives that are searching for the child, even the ones that received media coverage, were revealed as useless, and have probably caused more confusion in the case. What is your opinion?

The private detectives, in general, were more concerned in creating false stories about the Portuguese investigators [Judiciary Police officers] in charge of the case, or in creating bogus sightings. The McCann couple should have the courage to disclose all the reports spawned by those private detectives and then we would understand what has been the purpose of the fund that was created to find the child. That would be very interesting. In fact, let me remind you of the performance of the [Spanish] detective agency "Método 3". Those men have fabricated several sightings. At a certain point in time, Christmas of 2007, they actually said that the child would be home by that same Christmas. At that time, they were trying to link their investigation to the disappearance of Madeleine. They actually went on to "contact" a lawyer/psychic to make that connection. That character [Marcos Aragão Correia] was the first person who, publicly, affirmed that Madeleine was dead, and who then proceeded with searches at dams in the Algarve. It is bewildering, or perhaps not, that it is the illustrious lawyer for the McCanns who is defending him in the action that I have made against him for qualified defamation [180º to 184º of the Penal Code], a crime for which he is on trial at the Court of Faro, is the very same lawyer of the McCanns. Let us stop here and reflect a little. Let us recall what the McCanns have stated when I expressed my opinion which implied the child was dead - that I was, according to them, undermining the searches to find her. Now, I will ask you or any other citizen for that matter, this: What could be the reason for the McCanns' lawyer to defend a person that manifests the idea - an idea which he has expressed publicly - that Madeleine is dead? Furthermore, what was the motive for "Método 3" to contact the lawyer/psychic? Surely, that was not done with the intent to find the child alive.

Do you still believe that one day we will know what happened, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that is?

One day, someone will find a solution that is both, politically and diplomatically correct.


Notes
1 Penal Code | Book II - Special Part | Title V - Of the Crimes against the State | Chapter II - Of the Crimes against Public Authorities | Section III - Of the Violation of Public Injunctions

Article 335: Improper clearance or destruction of objects placed under the public domain

Those who destroy, damage or impair, totally or partially, or, in any way subtract from the public domain to which is subject to, a document or any other movable object, as well as something that has been seized, withdrawn or subject to an injunction, is punishable with imprisonment up to five years, if a more severe penalty is not applicable by virtue of another statutory provision.

Thanks Annabel

This is the best bit : We are at a pre-trial hearing stage. Presently, my new lawyer has been “touching” in a process that was halted and that has stirred some panic in the opposing side"

Like I say tick tock!


2012 is Maddies year

"...... a sentence of up to five years ..........."

That's more than the tariff for child abandonment.



Amaral certainly seems in ebullient mood - we're right behind you, all the way.

"... up to five years ..."

Well, it's a start ...

Five years would be good.
No opportunities for speed-dialling their army of lawyers and hired hands every few minutes.
They'd no longer be in control of 'the situation they found themselves in'.

It might just encourage the T7 or some other whistleblowers to crawl out of the woodwork and say to the Met:
"I think we can have that conversation now ..."

Sometimes, that's what you have to do with gangsters.
Beating them on a different rap might give their potentially wavering puppets loose lips.

The decision of that Prime Minister has been twisted. The McCann couple has spoken of a re-examination of the child’s “sightings”. When, in fact, what is known is that Scotland Yard, who were appointed to re-evaluate the whole investigation, has set aside the pseudo-sightings, focusing instead on the investigation process that remains archived. Elements from the Scotland Yard have been working with an investigative [Judiciary Police] team from Oporto (Oporto because Algarve and Lisbon have already been involved), and what is known is that the “affair” is not going well for the McCanns."

So, SY are checking out the SHELVED FILES .......very promising I would say because these must surely contain info detrimental to the McCanns,!!!

Panda wrote:

The decision of that Prime Minister has been twisted. The McCann couple has spoken of a re-examination of the child’s “sightings”. When, in fact, what is known is that Scotland Yard, who were appointed to re-evaluate the whole investigation, has set aside the pseudo-sightings, focusing instead on the investigation process that remains archived. Elements from the Scotland Yard have been working with an investigative [Judiciary Police] team from Oporto (Oporto because Algarve and Lisbon have already been involved), and what is known is that the “affair” is not going well for the McCanns."

So, SY are checking out the SHELVED FILES .......very promising I would say because these must surely contain info detrimental to the McCanns,!!!

'Course they are, it's a squad of MURDER specialists. And the McCanns are STILL trying to persuade us that they are looking at "sightings". I'd be rolling about on the floor in fits if it wasn't so bloody pathetic.

Iris wrote:

Panda wrote:

The decision of that Prime Minister has been twisted. The McCann couple has spoken of a re-examination of the child’s “sightings”. When, in fact, what is known is that Scotland Yard, who were appointed to re-evaluate the whole investigation, has set aside the pseudo-sightings, focusing instead on the investigation process that remains archived. Elements from the Scotland Yard have been working with an investigative [Judiciary Police] team from Oporto (Oporto because Algarve and Lisbon have already been involved), and what is known is that the “affair” is not going well for the McCanns."

So, SY are checking out the SHELVED FILES .......very promising I would say because these must surely contain info detrimental to the McCanns,!!!

'Course they are, it's a squad of MURDER specialists. And the McCanns are STILL trying to persuade us that they are looking at "sightings". I'd be rolling about on the floor in fits if it wasn't so bloody pathetic.

The SY image is badly tarnished and even if they file a true report , will we, the taxpayer for this review , get to see the Report.? I hope the Mccanns
rue the day they demanded a review, they were home and dry, reputation intact, loadsa money in the Bank.

It was stated that this review would not be made public, so in my personal opinion whatever is found detremental to the Mccanns and friends will, I doubt, ever be known by the public at large. I'm not ashamed to say I have no faith in any justice re this case, too many high profile faces and egos would have to suffer humiliation. I would be happy to be proved wrong, but I still think it's a whitewash.

mara thon wrote:It was stated that this review would not be made public, so in my personal opinion whatever is found detremental to the Mccanns and friends will, I doubt, ever be known by the public at large. I'm not ashamed to say I have no faith in any justice re this case, too many high profile faces and egos would have to suffer humiliation. I would be happy to be proved wrong, but I still think it's a whitewash.

I am inclined to agree with you mara_thon , but I also think if any new evidence is found , since the taxpayer is footing the bill we HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW.If this right is refused I would have no hesitaion in setting up a Petition which I am convinced would be signed by many hundreds of Forum and
Blog Members, also Members of the public who donated to the Fund.

Panda wrote:

Iris wrote:

Panda wrote:

The decision of that Prime Minister has been twisted. The McCann couple has spoken of a re-examination of the child’s “sightings”. When, in fact, what is known is that Scotland Yard, who were appointed to re-evaluate the whole investigation, has set aside the pseudo-sightings, focusing instead on the investigation process that remains archived. Elements from the Scotland Yard have been working with an investigative [Judiciary Police] team from Oporto (Oporto because Algarve and Lisbon have already been involved), and what is known is that the “affair” is not going well for the McCanns."

So, SY are checking out the SHELVED FILES .......very promising I would say because these must surely contain info detrimental to the McCanns,!!!

'Course they are, it's a squad of MURDER specialists. And the McCanns are STILL trying to persuade us that they are looking at "sightings". I'd be rolling about on the floor in fits if it wasn't so bloody pathetic.

The SY image is badly tarnished and even if they file a true report , will we, the taxpayer for this review , get to see the Report.? I hope the Mccanns
rue the day they demanded a review, they were home and dry, reputation intact, loadsa money in the Bank.

GOD did I get fed up of folk saying this to me, they all seemed to say the same (luckly not anymore the Mcs have shot themselves in the foot) "why would they ask for a review and demand the case be re-opened if they were guilty".......
But us nutters know just what the is the wider agenda don't we, if we shout enough people will think we are innocent, yes but what they didn't expect was for May and Cameron to take the bait!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not really bothered if the Tax Payer dosen't get to know what evidence Scot Yard find, as long as the McCanns and their friends are brought to account.

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

Panda wrote:

Iris wrote:

Panda wrote:

The decision of that Prime Minister has been twisted. The McCann couple has spoken of a re-examination of the child’s “sightings”. When, in fact, what is known is that Scotland Yard, who were appointed to re-evaluate the whole investigation, has set aside the pseudo-sightings, focusing instead on the investigation process that remains archived. Elements from the Scotland Yard have been working with an investigative [Judiciary Police] team from Oporto (Oporto because Algarve and Lisbon have already been involved), and what is known is that the “affair” is not going well for the McCanns."

So, SY are checking out the SHELVED FILES .......very promising I would say because these must surely contain info detrimental to the McCanns,!!!

'Course they are, it's a squad of MURDER specialists. And the McCanns are STILL trying to persuade us that they are looking at "sightings". I'd be rolling about on the floor in fits if it wasn't so bloody pathetic.

The SY image is badly tarnished and even if they file a true report , will we, the taxpayer for this review , get to see the Report.? I hope the Mccanns
rue the day they demanded a review, they were home and dry, reputation intact, loadsa money in the Bank.

GOD did I get fed up of folk saying this to me, they all seemed to say the same (luckly not anymore the Mcs have shot themselves in the foot) "why would they ask for a review and demand the case be re-opened if they were guilty".......
But us nutters know just what the is the wider agenda don't we, if we shout enough people will think we are innocent, yes but what they didn't expect was for May and Cameron to take the bait!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm not really bothered if the Tax Payer dosen't get to know what evidence Scot Yard find, as long as the McCanns and their friends are brought to account.

Hi Lillyofthevalley, I do think if SY really are checking the shelved files , there must be some evidence against the McCanns and is the reason the case was shelved, not closed . As I say, if we do not receive a report on the SY findings I will deem it another cover up and start an appeal.

It is important to remember that Scotland Yard do not report to David Cameron or Theresa May or to anyone else in a political position. Contrary to what the McCanns would have us believe, Scotland Yard do not report to the McCanns, the McCanns' lawyers, the McCanns' PR spokesman or the McCanns' friends or family either. Scotland Yard do not issue reports to the UK media or to the general public. Scotland Yard, as do all other police forces in the UK report only to the CPS. If Scotland Yard find sufficient evidence to charge someone with a crime, the final decision on whether that person is brought before a court to answer those charges is made by the CPS. If Scotland Yard ascertain that in the case of Madeleine McCann a crime has been committed and if reasonable grounds exist to suspect that the crime has resulted in the death of the child, that case remains open until it has been solved and the perpetrators have been brought to justice. It is quite possible that Scotland Yard reach such a conclusion but cannot solve the crime at the present time. If this is indeed the case, do not expect them to issue a report to that effect. IMO, only if Scotland Yard break with established practice and issue a report on this case exonerating the parents from all blame, then we can talk about a whitewash.

T4Two an excellent post, astute observations. summed it all up nicely for me.

T4two wrote:It is important to remember that Scotland Yard do not report to David Cameron or Theresa May or to anyone else in a political position. Contrary to what the McCanns would have us believe, Scotland Yard do not report to the McCanns, the McCanns' lawyers, the McCanns' PR spokesman or the McCanns' friends or family either. Scotland Yard do not issue reports to the UK media or to the general public. Scotland Yard, as do all other police forces in the UK report only to the CPS. If Scotland Yard find sufficient evidence to charge someone with a crime, the final decision on whether that person is brought before a court to answer those charges is made by the CPS. If Scotland Yard ascertain that in the case of Madeleine McCann a crime has been committed and if reasonable grounds exist to suspect that the crime has resulted in the death of the child, that case remains open until it has been solved and the perpetrators have been brought to justice. It is quite possible that Scotland Yard reach such a conclusion but cannot solve the crime at the present time. If this is indeed the case, do not expect them to issue a report to that effect. IMO, only if Scotland Yard break with established practice and issue a report on this case exonerating the parents from all blame, then we can talk about a whitewash.

Good post T4two.

Comment from GA at the end of the interview :

"One day, someone will find a solution that is both, politically and diplomatically correct."

I don`t like the sound of that.

Surely it`s politics and diplomacy that have been the very things that have prevented justice.

T4two wrote:It is important to remember that Scotland Yard do not report to David Cameron or Theresa May or to anyone else in a political position. Contrary to what the McCanns would have us believe, Scotland Yard do not report to the McCanns, the McCanns' lawyers, the McCanns' PR spokesman or the McCanns' friends or family either. Scotland Yard do not issue reports to the UK media or to the general public. Scotland Yard, as do all other police forces in the UK report only to the CPS. If Scotland Yard find sufficient evidence to charge someone with a crime, the final decision on whether that person is brought before a court to answer those charges is made by the CPS. If Scotland Yard ascertain that in the case of Madeleine McCann a crime has been committed and if reasonable grounds exist to suspect that the crime has resulted in the death of the child, that case remains open until it has been solved and the perpetrators have been brought to justice. It is quite possible that Scotland Yard reach such a conclusion but cannot solve the crime at the present time. If this is indeed the case, do not expect them to issue a report to that effect. IMO, only if Scotland Yard break with established practice and issue a report on this case exonerating the parents from all blame, then we can talk about a whitewash.

Well lets just hope the CPS are above corruption.

Well you would have to hope so. However, say the Review found there was evidence a crime had been committed. And let's face it unless Madeleine wandered of a crime has been committed by somebody. But maybe what Goncalo Amaral meant when he said if a crime has been discovered and a diplomatic solution, he meant where would the case be tried and who would gather the evidence. Not sure how this is in law. If the crime was committed in Portugal which it obviously was, then would the Portuguese authorities have to prepare the case and prosecute.

MaryB wrote:Well you would have to hope so. However, say the Review found there was evidence a crime had been committed. And let's face it unless Madeleine wandered of a crime has been committed by somebody. But maybe what Goncalo Amaral meant when he said if a crime has been discovered and a diplomatic solution, he meant where would the case be tried and who would gather the evidence. Not sure how this is in law. If the crime was committed in Portugal which it obviously was, then would the Portuguese authorities have to prepare the case and prosecute.

Mary B - hope you`re right. He has often referred to political interference blurring the truth, I thought it was him being cynical.

MaryB wrote:Well you would have to hope so. However, say the Review found there was evidence a crime had been committed. And let's face it unless Madeleine wandered of a crime has been committed by somebody. But maybe what Goncalo Amaral meant when he said if a crime has been discovered and a diplomatic solution, he meant where would the case be tried and who would gather the evidence. Not sure how this is in law. If the crime was committed in Portugal which it obviously was, then would the Portuguese authorities have to prepare the case and prosecute.

In cases of cross-border crime, the decision about where to prosecute is based on numerous considerations and is not automatically the country where the crime took place. Worth taking a look at the CPS guidelines on jurisdiction here.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/jurisdiction/#b02

Close Liaison might be necessary to avoid clashes between any Cases relating to the Fund Charity Company and any relating to the situation in which Madeleine finds herself (Well Healy & McCann hardly went to any trouble to find her ...................... )