MCCANNS PLAN TO FIGHT PORTUGUSE COURT RULING

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4237066/Madeleine-McCann-s-parents-fight-court-ruling.html

Madeleine McCann's parents 'plan to fight Portuguese court ruling that they haven't been cleared of involvement in their daughter's disappearance'
Couple lost libel battle against police chief who claimed they faked abduction
Portugal's Supreme Court last month rejected last-ditch appeal over the case
McCanns are trying to get decision invalidated by launching formal complaint

By Gerard Couzens For The Mailonline

Published: 09:40, 18 February 2017 | Updated: 10:34, 18 February 2017


Missing Madeleine McCann's parents are reportedly fighting a Portuguese court decision to side with former police chief Goncalo Amaral over his hurtful claims about her disappearance.

The country's Supreme Court last month rejected their last-ditch appeal over his 2008 book The Truth of the Lie in which he alleged Maddie died in their holiday flat and they faked her abduction to cover up the tragedy.

Judges backed a lower court's April 2016 decision to reverse their 2015 libel win against the ex-detective, leaving them facing a huge legal bill and the nightmare prospect of being sued by Amaral.

And they also challenged Gerry and Kate's insistence they had nothing to with their daughter's disappearance in a devastating put-down which is said to have sparked their fresh legal challenge


Best-selling Portuguese daily Correio da Manha said the couple were seeking to get the Supreme Court decision invalidated after launching a formal complaint against the judges' findings.

It was known they had 10 days to file an objection with court officials.

It is thought the McCanns' reported attempt to nullify the decision is based on comments made by the judges in their 76-page ruling that the 2008 shelving of the Portuguese probe into their daughter's disappearance 'was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the crimes by the appellants.'

The McCanns had their status as 'arguidos' or official suspects lifted on the same day - July 21 2008 - just three days before Amaral published his controversial book.


Correio da Manha reported today: 'The McCanns have requested the annulment of the Supreme Court decision, terming it frivolous for saying it 'had not been possible for public prosecutors to obtain sufficient evidence of crimes by the appellants.'

The newspaper said the McCanns had described the ruling as 'leviano' in the complaint lodged through their Portuguese lawyer - which in English translates as 'frivolous' but can also mean 'sloppy' or 'rash'.

No-one from the Supreme Court was available for comment this morning.

The McCanns' lawyer Isabel Duarte is refusing to say anything after receiving instructions from the couple not to make any public comment on the case.

She said yesterday when asked whether the couple had filed a formal complaint to the Supreme Court about the ruling: 'We received instructions from the clients not to make any declaration or give public information about the file against Mr Amaral or the case itself.'


It was unclear today if another set of Supreme Court judges dealt with complaints about rulings - or they were handed to another judicial body to deal with.

Amaral was ordered to pay the McCanns EUROS 500,000 euros (POUNDS 430,000) by a Lisbon court in April 2015 after they won round one of their lengthy judicial battle over his book and a subsequent TV documentary.

The former police chief got that ruling - and a ban on selling his book - overturned on appeal in April last year.

The decision by Lisbon's Court of Appeal sparked the Supreme Court fight which was resolved on January 31.

The full 76-page ruling said to have sparked a new legal challenge by the McCanns was released last week


Judges made it clear in their decision their job was not to decide whether the McCanns bore any criminal responsibility over their daughter's disappearance and it would be wrong for anyone to draw any inferences about the couple's guilt or innocence from their ruling.

But they added: 'It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case.

'In truth, that ruling was not made in virtue of Portugal's Public Prosecution Service having acquired the conviction that the appellants hadn't committed a crime.

'The archiving of the case was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the appellants.

'There is therefore a significant, and not merely a semantic difference, between the legally admissible foundations of the archive ruling.

'It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence.'


They added, highlighting the McCanns' Tapas Nine friend Jane Tanner's much-questioned sighting of the suspected 'abductor': 'It's true that the aforementioned criminal inquiry ended up being archived, namely because none of the apparent evidence that led to the appellants being made 'arguidos' was subsequently confirmed or consolidated.

'However even the archive ruling raises serious concerns relating to the truth of the allegation that Madeleine was kidnapped.'

The Supreme Court judges said the McCanns claimed Amaral's book and the TV documentary based on the book formed no part of case files made public in 2008 and would have damaged the honour and good name of any 'innocent person who had been cleared through the shelving of the criminal investigation.'

But they stated: 'We consider the invocation of the violation of the principle of innocence should not be taken into account here, since this issue is not relevant to the resolution of the question that needs to be decided here.'

They said the 'crucial question' for them was how to resolve the rights of Kate and Gerry McCann to their 'good name and reputation' and the rights of Goncalo Amaral and the other respondents including the book editors to the constitutionally-inshrined right of 'freedom of expression.'

Concluding Amaral had not acted 'illicitly,' they ruled his book was not a personal and unjustified attack on the McCanns with a 'defamatory intention' behind it which would not be protected by freedom of speech rights.


Describing the book and the TV documentary based on it as an 'opinion' based on the logic of facts and evidence contained in the criminal case files, they added: 'Our opinion is that rather than an injurious animus, the intention was informative and defensive.'

The Supreme Court ruling meant Amaral was spared having to pay the McCanns the compensation he was ordered to hand them after the first court ruling in 2015.

The payment was frozen when he launched his successful appeal.

Earlier this month it emerged the ex detective, removed as head of the investigation into Madeleine's May 3 2007 disappearance after criticising British detectives, was writing a new book about the unsolved mystery.

It is understood he will be critical in the new book of some of the things Scotland Yard did in their review and later ongoing investigation of the case.

The former cop insisted from day one of his court fight with the McCanns that everything he wrote in his book was based on the publicly-available case files.

Kate and Gerry, both 48, of Rothley, Leicestershire, have said they will sue if 'The Truth of the Lie' is sold in Britain.

They said in a statement after learning of the Supreme Court ruling against them: 'What we have been told by our lawyers is obviously extremely disappointing.

'It is eight years since we brought the action, and in that time the landscape has changed dramatically, namely there is now a joint Metropolitan Police and Policia Judiciaria investigation which is what we have always wanted.

'The police in both countries continue to work on the basis that there is no evidence Madeleine has come to physical harm.

'We will of course be discussing the implications of the Supreme Court ruling with our lawyers in due course.'


It is believed the McCanns are discussing the possibility of taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

The 20,000 page 'Madeleine files made public in 2008 contained a report by public prosecutors which said:' No element of proof whatsoever was found which allows us to form any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstance of Madeleine's disappearance from the apartment…including, and most dramatically, establishing whether she is alive or dead, which seems more probable.'

Referring to the McCanns' much-criticised decision to leave their daughter, then three, alone with younger siblings Sean and Amelie while they ate tapas nearby, it added: 'We must also recognise that the parents are paying a heavy penalty over the disappearance of Madeleine for their carelessness in monitoring and protecting their children.'

Portuguese police chiefs said late last year they were 'completely in tune' with British detectives still investigating Madeleine's disappearance, appearing to end years of tension between the two forces whose theories on the youngster's fate have differed wildly.

Portuguese prosecutors reopened their probe into Madeleine McCann's disappearance in May 2014, and are now working in close coordination with Scotland Yard's scaled-down Operation Grange probe into Madeleine's fate.

All they have to do is to ask the PJ to reopen the case. But they won't because they know they are not innocent. At the very least all the Tapas 9 are guilty of neglecting their children night after night

http://portugalresident.com/hysteria-mounts-as-mccann-parents-revealed-to-be-%E2%80%9Cfighting%E2%80%9D-defeat-in-portugal%E2%80%99s-supreme-court

Posted by portugalpress on February 18, 2017


Hysteria mounts as McCann parents revealed to be “fighting” defeat in Portugal’s Supreme Court

COPY OF LIZZY VIDEO - ISABEL DUARTE FRIENDS WONT TALK TO ME - EVERYONE BELIEVES GONCALO AMARAL POSTED IN ARTICLE :)

Rising hysteria following the crushing defeat suffered by the parents of Madeleine McCann in the Supreme Court last month has been ratcheted up this weekend with news that the couple are now on the attack.

According to a report in today’s Correio da Manhã, the couple consider the court has been “frivolous” in upholding last year’s decision, on appeal, to free former PJ coordinator Gonçalo Amaral from paying any damages for his thesis on their daughter’s disappearance: the best-selling book “Maddie: The Truth of the Lie”.

The basis of the so-called frivolity, says CM, is the reference the panel of judges made to the couple not having been considered “innocent” in the affair (click here).

The particular clause under attack is the one referring to the Public Ministry’s decision to drop the McCann’s ‘arguido’ (official suspect) status on the basis it had not been able to “obtain sufficient proof of the practice of crimes”, claims the paper.

But huge question marks remain over which body the McCanns are actually complaining to, and how an annulment of a decision from the highest court in the land could be obtained.

For the time being, CM’s story is just a small paragraph in the “latest news” stories on its Saturday back page.

In the UK, the Daily Mail has picked it up, without adding anything new.

Stretching the story out to nine paragraphs, the top-selling tabloid addresses a lot of its ‘gaps’: the “huge legal bill” that the couple will be facing now that Amaral does not have to pay them the €500,000 set by an earlier court, the “nightmare prospect of being sued by Amaral” for damages he has suffered over the eight years of litigation, and of course, the “devastating put down” said to have sparked this “fresh challenge”: that they had a hand in the affair - something they have always denied.

If this was the only story to have followed the Supreme Court’s decision, it could be argued that this was ‘the next logical step’. But stories have been hitting the UK media almost daily since January 31 (when the judges’ decision was first published) - and Correio da Manhã has had its moments, too, where it claimed the McCanns have been making ‘thousands of euros’ by “selling their pain” in the form of media interviews.

Added to the latest media circus comes a new policy by UK tabloids to seemingly allow all readers’ comments, without screening.

Bystanders have been astounded by the venom unleashed online, with the Sun particularly allowing the kind of commentary that in the past it condemned as coming from ‘vile trolls’.

“Suddenly, anything goes”, a UK media source told us.

Even more bizarre have been stories alluding to the McCann’s having ‘banned’ their Portuguese lawyer Isabel Duarte from talking to the press (another account from the Daily Mail/ Tracey Kandohla, a reporter who writes about the Madeleine mystery for the Sun and the Mirror and is believed to be a friend of Kate McCann).

Kandohla explains that Duarte had been “carefully considering reaction” on behalf of the couple, since the Supreme Court put down, but has now been warned: “Don’t say anything!”

This has thrown up the contents of a BBC Panorama programme, screened years ago, when Duarte told reporter Richard Bilton that she felt “alone” and that many of her friends refused to talk to her about the case, as “everyone believes that I am defending a father and mother that have killed their daughter and got rid of the corpse” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=979aGU6Ezkk).

Considering this is a story previously protected by top-flight lawyers - who have used the threat of legal action to silence dissenting voices - and further shielded by a high-profile press spokesman, publicity since the Supreme Court ruling appears to have gone haywire.

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

It looks like the McCanns are threatening to go back to court. Could this be a stalling mechanism to delay their paying up what they owe Mr. Amaral?

I like that Isabel Duarte's quote is being repeated: "everyone believes that I am defending a father and mother that have killed their daughter and got rid of the corpse".

The one thing the McCanns can be sure of is that dissenting voices will not be silenced - just read the comments the Sun has been publishing!!!

interested wrote:It looks like the McCanns are threatening to go back to court.  Could this be a stalling mechanism to delay their paying up what they owe Mr. Amaral?

I like that Isabel Duarte's quote is being repeated:  "everyone believes that I am defending a father and mother that have killed their daughter and got rid of the corpse".

The one thing the McCanns can be sure of is that dissenting voices will not be silenced - just read the comments the Sun has been publishing!!!

Or they have been advised it is extremely unlikely they would be successful before the ECHR. The SC judgement appears to have been very mindful of ECHR decisions.

In her blog, Joana Morais said: ".....it is possible the judges will consider the frivolity allegation as defamatory and take legal action against the couple."

interested wrote:In her blog, Joana Morais said:  ".....it is possible the judges will consider the frivolity allegation as defamatory and take legal action against the couple."

WE LIVE IN INTERESTING TIMES,THINGS CAN ONLY GET BETTER.

interested wrote:In her blog, Joana Morais said:  ".....it is possible the judges will consider the frivolity allegation as defamatory and take legal action against the couple."

https://joana-morais.blogspot.ca/2017/02/maddie-parents-accuse-supreme-court.html




Home Justice McCann News Maddie parents accuse Supreme Court (Updated)
Maddie parents accuse Supreme Court (Updated)
by Joana Morais 10 hrs ago
Kate and Gerry ask for the ruling to be annulled


The McCann couple, the parents of Maddie, the English girl that went missing in the Algarve in 2007, called for the nullity of the judgement of the Supreme Court of Justice, calling it frivolous (rash, imprudent) "because it was not possible for the Public Prosecutor to obtain sufficient evidence of crimes by the appellants".

The Supreme Court confirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals to revoke the payment of a compensation of 500 thousand euros by the former PJ inspector Gonçalo Amaral.

in Correio da Manhã, February 18, 2017


Even though we don't know if this is a request to annul the Supreme Court ruling or if it is, as was published in the UK media, a formal complaint against the ruling or judges, a few thoughts:

An annulment can be requested of a ruling, even of a Supreme Court ruling. This must be done on a point of law. Since the ruling is extremely well structured, there are no technical points they can pick, the likely outcome is that this will be denied .

Fact of the matter is that the judges wrote several pages to come to the conclusion of the not cleared explanation and were explicit that it was not up to the Supreme Court to deliberate on their innocence or guilt.

There is a massive difference between being innocent and being cleared by an archival. The McCanns can always claim they are innocent but they cannot claim they have been declared innocent by the archival.

This issue was only addressed as a reply to the points in the appeal, points that were made by the McCanns themselves.

An annulment can only be considered on points of law, which would never include frivolity as an allegation.

In no way do we believe that frivolity may be invoked regarding the explanation of what a shelving of an investigation process means, about three Supreme Court judges when writing a structured and impartial decision which is available to read in its entirety and due context.

Finally, it is possible the judges will consider the frivolity allegation as defamatory and take legal action against the couple."

Badboy wrote:

interested wrote:In her blog, Joana Morais said:  ".....it is possible the judges will consider the frivolity allegation as defamatory and take legal action against the couple."

WE LIVE IN INTERESTING TIMES,THINGS CAN ONLY GET BETTER.

THAT'S true enough!! Wouldn't that be something to hear. The JUDGES take legal action against the McCanns!! That would keep keep going until they face the legal action and conviction they have coming to them.

I would love the judges to take action against them

The Files are down and Pamalam's at moment - exceeded bandwith, think something to do with so many visits in month

can use these in meantime - thanks to Ben for links

https://web.archive.org/web/20160330232112/http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TRANSLATIONS.htm

https://web.archive.org/web/20161002082504/http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/

Dear Lord, what next?!

Front page of Sunday People - "Parents desperate court bid - McCanns in new battle over cop slurs" - this headline shares the front page with a picture of Rose West and story about her.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mccanns-launch-new-court-battle-9847926

McCanns launch new court battle against cop's claims they faked Maddie abduction - amid fears his case could leave search fund broke

Lawyer confirmed couple are fighting a court judgment which could cost them hundreds of thousands and wipe out the “Find Madeleine” fund

The parents of missing Madeleine McCann have launched a desperate bid to overturn a Portuguese court ruling which fails to put them in the clear over her disappearance.

Yesterday their lawyer confirmed they are fighting a court judgment which could cost them hundreds of thousands and wipe out the “Find Madeleine” fund.




This week the Sunday People tracked down the ex-detective at the centre of the misery facing Kate and Gerry, both 48.

Goncalo Amaral led the initial ­investigation when Madeleine vanished in May 2007 when she was three.

Now the McCanns are fighting the latest decision by Portugal’s Supreme Court.

The couple were ruled out as formal suspects, or “arguidos”, back in 2008 but in newly-released court papers, judges have specified that this does not equate to a ruling of innocence.
In the 76-page ruling, the Supreme Court also said the archiving in 2008 of the criminal case into Madeleine’s ­disappearance does not prove the McCanns are innocent. The court concluded Amaral’s book was not a personal and unjustified attack on the McCanns. It was an “opinion” based on the case files.

There was no defamatory intention behind it and so it is protected by
“freedom of speech rights”. That ruling left Madeleine’s parents facing legal costs and the nightmare prospect of being sued by the former detective.

Local reports yesterday said the couple were seeking to get the decision thrown out after launching a formal complaint against the judges’ findings.
The couple, doctors from Rothley, Leics, could eventually take the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

The McCanns’ lawyer Isabel Duarte confirmed a formal complaint had been made. The latest ruling means Amaral was spared having to pay the McCanns compensation he was ordered to hand over two years ago over his book The Truth of the Lie.

According to the latest accounts filed last month the couple’s Find Madeleine fund has just £200,000 left after half a million was placed in investments.

Experts say legal fees and a possible pay-out to Amaral would easily dwarf this sum, leaving no cash left to continue the couple’s efforts to find their daughter.
Amaral was relaxing this week in the Olivais region in the north of the capital Lisbon. A local who spotted Amaral dining told the Sunday People: “He rarely mentions it. We know who he is – everybody does.”

A shopkeeper added: “He comes to the newsagents and then goes to one of the restaurants here for lunch.”
Roadsweeper Enrique Gonzalez said: “It is popular with all of the police officers who live and work around here.

“He comes and talks about the old times.”

The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “If Mr Amaral’s current book about Madeleine or any new one he may be planning to write is published here in the UK Kate and Gerry’s lawyers will take immediate action. He needs to know lawyers are watching.”

"The McCanns' lawyer Isabel Duarte confirmed a formal complaint had been made." I thought she was told, "Don't say anything". Isabel had better watch it; the next thing she knows she will be sued by her clients for not following instructions.

AnnaEsse wrote:Dear Lord, what next?!

THE MIND BOGGLES

Wonder what the half a million of 'investments' are

contrary wrote:Wonder what the half a million of 'investments' are

Wherever that money is it belongs to the fund unless it has been moved under the fund's objective that states it is to support Madeleine's family financially.

The latest Mirror article states that fighting their battle with Mr. Amaral (which Isabel Duarte says "is sort of like an appeal") will "empower them to bring their daughter home".

There is also an interesting comment from someone who donated to the Fund who is not happy about money used for lawsuits. I guess that person was not aware that the Fund was originally set up to cover legal expenses. When the Fund was set up, I was suspicious of why the parents of a missing child would even think they would need money for legal expenses. Of course the McCanns knew better than I why they anticipated that expense.

interested wrote:The latest Mirror article states that fighting their battle with Mr. Amaral (which Isabel Duarte says "is sort of like an appeal") will "empower them to bring their daughter home".  

There is also an interesting comment from someone who donated to the Fund who is not happy about money used for lawsuits.  I guess that person was not aware that the Fund was originally set up to cover legal expenses.  When the Fund was set up, I was suspicious of why the parents of a missing child would even think they would need money for legal expenses.  Of course the McCanns knew better than I why they anticipated that expense.

Parents say they will keep fighting libel battle with ex-cop and bring their daughter home

.http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-say-keep-9851773

Madeleine McCann's parents say they will keep fighting libel battle with ex-cop and bring their daughter home
Kate and Gerry McCann are making a formal complaint to Portugal's top court in a bid to stop the detective telling "awful lies" about her disappearance

BY TRACEY KANDOHLA
21:25, 19 FEB 2017UPDATED 22:18, 19 FEB 2017

Madeleine McCann ’s parents will keep fighting their libel battle with a former police chief because it will “empower them to help bring their daughter home”, according to a pal.

Kate and Gerry McCann are battling to overturn a judgment in favour of Goncalo Amaral, 58, by making a formal complaint to Portugal’s top court .

The couple, both 48, won damages from Mr Amaral over his claim in a 2008 book that they faked ­Madeleine’s kidnap to cover up her accidental death.

But he won an appeal on freedom of expression grounds and the Supreme Court has since rejected the McCanns’ counter-appeal.

It leaves doctors Kate and Gerry, of Rothley, Leics, facing a huge legal bill. Their lawyer Isabel Duarte confirmed: “They have now made a complaint over the ruling to that court, it is sort of like an appeal.”

A family friend added: “It’s been ­dragging on for nearly nine years and they’re not giving up for the sake of a few more months.

“They firmly believe one day they can stop Mr Amaral telling these awful lies about their daughter’s disappearance. They need to do everything in their power to bring Madeleine home”.

Mr Amaral led the botched hunt for ­Madeleine in 2007 after she vanished, aged three, at the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.

He is now planning a second book based on his own experiences, potentially piling on the misery for the McCanns.

Our sister paper the Sunday People tracked Mr Amaral down to a cafe north of Lisbon, where he was pictured drinking beer and smoking in the sunshine.

The family friend added: “It appears he has no idea of the hurt and anguish he continues to heap on Madeleine’s poor parents.”

The family friend added: “It appears he has no idea of the hurt and anguish he continues to heap on Madeleine’s poor parents.”

The family friend seems to have forgotten it was their friends who started the legal process. Senor Amaral has simply defended the action rather than roll over like they wanted him to.

People on Twitter are saying that unfortunately it was in the small print that the McCanns could use the fund money for whatever they liked, and kind donors obviously thought of the missing child more than examining the small print. On the other hand, their PAID spokesperson (not some random member of the public or even a source close to the McCanns) said ON CAMERA that anyone donating need not worry that their money would be used for legal expenditure or anything like that. Far more people would have seen that interview than the details in the fund documents. Can they have it both ways?

squeaker wrote:People on Twitter are saying that unfortunately it was in the small print that the McCanns could use the fund money for whatever they liked, and kind donors obviously thought of the missing child more than examining the small print. On the other hand, their PAID spokesperson (not some random member of the public or even a source close to the McCanns) said ON CAMERA that anyone donating need not worry that their money would be used for legal expenditure or anything like that. Far more people would have seen that interview than the details in the fund documents. Can they have it both ways?

The original objectives of the company included support (including financial assistance) for the family. That clause was removed in 2011 although the company has continued to fund the legal action in Portugal.

According to "The Global Legal Post" (online) "The door is also now open for the former police chief to sue the couple."

Chris wrote:

squeaker wrote:People on Twitter are saying that unfortunately it was in the small print that the McCanns could use the fund money for whatever they liked, and kind donors obviously thought of the missing child more than examining the small print. On the other hand, their PAID spokesperson (not some random member of the public or even a source close to the McCanns) said ON CAMERA that anyone donating need not worry that their money would be used for legal expenditure or anything like that. Far more people would have seen that interview than the details in the fund documents. Can they have it both ways?

The original objectives of the company included support (including financial assistance) for the family. That clause was removed in 2011 although the company has continued to fund the legal action in Portugal.

This is still on the Find Madeleine web site.

Fund Objectives

The full objects of the Fund are:

• To secure the safe return to her family of Madeleine McCann who was abducted in Praia da Luz, Portugal on Thursday 3rd May 2007;
  To procure that Madeleine's abduction is thoroughly investigated and that her abductors, as well as those who played or play any part in assisting them, are identified and brought to justice; and
  To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine's family
  

.


http://www.findmadeleine.com/about_us/madeleines-fund.html

It's plain why the Charities Commission wouldn't consent to allow them to register as a charity...