Amaral V McCann trial

This article refers to Gonçalo Amaral as the "discredited former police chief" who was in charge of the " botched investigation" . Pure McCann-speak and enough to make my blood boil. But then I realised that it also gives details of the claims made in the book and even gives the name of the book, which to my mind is a way of spreading Amaral's message even wider and a big hint to people about how to find it on the internet. It also refers to Madeleine's 'disappearance', rather than her 'abduction'. Clever stuff. The article seems to pander to Team McCann, but even TM cannot insist that the book's name and its content (and the fact that there is also a documentary) should be left out.

this snippet is intriguing:

In this case, where in addition to the former member of the PJ are aimed at the publishing house "War & Peace," the producer Valentim de Carvalho and TVI, for dissemination of the thesis of Gonçalo Amaral, is attached to the main action, where the McCann family demands protection of rights, freedoms and guarantees.

Several members her and in other place maintain stoutly that the injunction no longer applies to the publisher or TV1 because no action was filed against them, that the injuntion has expired and there is no reason why the book should not be published.

So has the newspaper got it wrong? Or, heaven forbid, has some misinformation been put about?

Mods, if this appears elsewhere, please remove.
Lisboa, 05 Dec (Lusa) ? On the 11th of December, the Civil Court of Lisbon starts the trial over the injunction that forbids the sale of the book "Maddie ? The Truth About the Lie", about the disappearance of the child in 2007, written by Gonçalo Amaral.

During the sessions scheduled for the 11th, the 14th and the 16th of December, at the 7th Section of the Civil Court of Lisbon, the former Polícia Judiciária inspector's defence will present its opposition to the argumentation of the McCann family, that was the basis for the temporary injunction that was granted on the 9th of September.

Kate and Gerry McCann, represented by lawyer Isabel Duarte, allege that the book and the video that was based on it, divulge Gonçalo Amaral's thesis, which they consider unsustainable, of Maddie's parents' involvement in her disappearance

Who better than the Detective leading the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine can make an
informed opinion as to why he did not believe she was abducted.??????

Interesting that Smethurst is the U.K. Lawyer and not Carter Ruck. Since he is a Director of the Fund, his Fee and expenses, plus travel will come out of the Fund, making sure it is bled dry before they wind it up. I truly
hope the McCanns do not receive special treatment from the PJ and that this will be a fair trial.

Beattie wrote:Who better than the Detective leading the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine can make an
informed opinion as to why he did not believe she was abducted.??????

Interesting that Smethurst is the U.K. Lawyer and not Carter Ruck. Since he is a Director of the Fund, his Fee and expenses, plus travel will come out of the Fund, making sure it is bled dry before they wind it up. I truly
hope the McCanns do not receive special treatment from the PJ and that this will be a fair trial.

Or maybe CR simply did not want involved in a case they may have no chance of winning. They have already had a couple of bloody noses recently and another big blow to their egos would just damage their business even further.

sans_souci wrote:this snippet is intriguing:

In this case, where in addition to the former member of the PJ are aimed at the publishing house "War & Peace," the producer Valentim de Carvalho and TVI, for dissemination of the thesis of Gonçalo Amaral, is attached to the main action, where the McCann family demands protection of rights, freedoms and guarantees.

Several members her and in other place maintain stoutly that the injunction no longer applies to the publisher or TV1 because no action was filed against them, that the injuntion has expired and there is no reason why the book should not be published.

So has the newspaper got it wrong? Or, heaven forbid, has some misinformation been put about?

From information I have received, no case was filed against the publisher and the DVD producer within the 30 day period stipulated by law. Nothing has been published to that respect because the two respondents must specifically ask for the legal documents attesting to the expiration of the injunction. Whether they have done this or not I don't know.

As for accuracy in the Journal do Algarve article, it is stated that the three arguidos were "ilibados" or declared innocent, which is clearly not the case, as this can only be done in a court of law. AFAIK, if the case is re-opened, the arguido status on all three is reinstated.

Famous Grouse

Yes I thought of that, but the charge against Amaral was made a while ago. Maybe the Mccanns knew that couldn"t afford them, Smethurst, as the inhouse Kennedy Lawyer would I assume be more experienced in
Corporate Law than Libel, that"s why they have retained Duarte. So we have three Lawyers involved including
Abreu, their Portugese Lawyer.........they sure know how to spend public money on Lawyers, had they spent more money on Bona Fide Agencies in the beginning we might know more about what happened to Madeleine.

Beattie wrote:Famous Grouse

Yes I thought of that, but the charge against Amaral was made a while ago. Maybe the Mccanns knew that couldn"t afford them, Smethurst, as the inhouse Kennedy Lawyer would I assume be more experienced in
Corporate Law than Libel, that"s why they have retained Duarte. So we have three Lawyers involved including
Abreu, their Portugese Lawyer.........they sure know how to spend public money on Lawyers, had they spent more money on Bona Fide Agencies in the beginning we might know more about what happened to Madeleine.

I believe that they brought these charges against Dr Amaral in the belief that he would back down. They put up a bluff and, unfortunately for them, he called it. He has nothing to lose (on paper, at least) whereas, they have. It's an extremely silly course of action IMHO, and maybe Carter Ruck see it the same way.

Famous Grouse

Yes I agree, CR may well have decided not to take the case,especially on a no win no fee basis.

There is a certain logic in engaging a portuguese lawyer specialising in defamation cases if one is bringing a case for defamation in a Portuguese court.

sans_souci wrote:There is a certain logic in engaging a portuguese lawyer specialising in defamation cases if one is bringing a case for defamation in a Portuguese court.

Agreed, I expect it was the McCanns Portugese Lawyer Abreu who recommended her, don"t know how much experience she has, I read somewhere that she had only dealt with 4 cases, but then, maybe the Portugese
are not as libel happy as the British, even the Americans are bringing cases to be tried in the British Courts
because the awards are so high.!!!!!!

This is a post I copied from another site and found interesting. The Poster obviously knows a bit about the Law
and maybe we are in for a big surprise, or the McCanns are!!!!!
-------------------------
At the moment the McCanns have an ex parte injunction which means they went to the court and asked for it without Amaral being able to defend the application. Its a common tactic used by law firms like Carter Ruck (Trafigura was another example). In addition, by temporarily siezing his assetts they made it very difficult for Amaral to lodge any form of defence, in effect a financial silencing, after all, you need money to pay solicitors.

What could be interesting is that the case may well lead to the disclosure of information currently not in the public domain and it could also be an opportunity for the Portugese to re look at the option of child neglect charges.

In terms of the legal arguments, that could be even more interesting as aside from Amaral's theory the book is based on the evidence collected, what will need to be shown is that the theory damages the McCanns and that they had a reputation to damage in the first place. I can see the defence argument focussing on the child care approach and the way aspects of the search by the fund have been handled plus the argument that the theories that abound on the internet are far wider and more damaging that this book.

The issue at hand will be whether Amarals theory is any more or less credible than the abduction story and whether it "damages" the search for Madeleine. Given the recent debacle over the Halligan character and the fund I wonder how they are going to argue that this book damages the search when the fund is engaging people like that?

An interesting argument could be that by leaving the children unsupervised and allowing Madeleine to be abducted the parents reputation has already been tarnished to an extent that the Amaral theories do not add any injury.

Would also be interesting to see if his defence have sought disclosure of the social services investigation and subsequent reports as I dont recall the content or outcome of those being released or being shown as an example of perfect parenting etc.

Interesting post Beattie. It would seem fairly obvious that the application and injucntion were ex parte, especially in the light of subsequent comments about communication of the decision. This may have been to prevent Amaral or his publisher from transferring the rights outside of the geographical jurisdiction of the Portuguese courts. It should not have come as a great surprise, because the possibility of action had been flagged up by the McCanns spokesman for some months. I would guess that Amaral and co did not believe they actually could or would.

Before posters here start breaking out the port or setting off the fireworks in celebration, it is worth bearing in mind:

The court will examine the basis upon which the application has been made, and will only grant an injunction if they feel that there is a good chance of the main action being successful.

In this case, that is further underlined by the subsequent 'arrest' of assets roughly equalling the amount of the claim.

Those who have some experince of court procedure will know that they not nearly as exciting as those on the telly. The courts are sticklers for proedure, and not very accepting of grandstanding. It is more than likely that the court proceedings will concentrate of the claims made in the book, video and various interviews, and compare them to official documents, such as the final report of the PJ and the announcement by the Portuguese PP and AG. Any statements held to be libellous would move the decision in favour of the McCanns. The court is unlikely to be impressed by hearsay evidence, newspaper articles or the suchlike.

I am sure there will be enough speculation, swings and roundabouts to keep us all entertained until the final verdict of the court is eventually known. Interesting times, certainly.

In terms of the legal arguments, that could be even more interesting as aside from Amaral's theory the book is based on the evidence collected, what will need to be shown is that the theory damages the McCanns and that they had a reputation to damage in the first place. I can see the defence argument focussing on the child care approach and the way aspects of the search by the fund have been handled plus the argument that the theories that abound on the internet are far wider and more damaging that this book.
------------------------------------

sans souci

The above paragraph is the one I found most interesting. With Mrs. Fenn"s statement that Madeleine was crying
for over an hour yet even when Madeleine mentioned that she and Sean had been crying , the parents still went
out that night!!!!! Certainly not the most responsible parenting. The fact that the Tapas 9 refused to attend a
recon will not go down well either, plus of course the inept decisions taken on the Agencies employed to
search for Madeleine. Plus Kate"s refusal to answer questions. Interesting times ahead. By the way, I did not
think the 1.2 million Euros had been taken, surely Amaral never had that kind of money?

Beattie wrote:In terms of the legal arguments, that could be even more interesting as aside from Amaral's theory the book is based on the evidence collected, what will need to be shown is that the theory damages the McCanns and that they had a reputation to damage in the first place. I can see the defence argument focussing on the child care approach and the way aspects of the search by the fund have been handled plus the argument that the theories that abound on the internet are far wider and more damaging that this book.
------------------------------------

sans souci

The above paragraph is the one I found most interesting. With Mrs. Fenn"s statement that Madeleine was crying
for over an hour yet even when Madeleine mentioned that she and Sean had been crying , the parents still went
out that night!!!!! Certainly not the most responsible parenting. The fact that the Tapas 9 refused to attend a
recon will not go down well either, plus of course the inept decisions taken on the Agencies employed to
search for Madeleine. Plus Kate"s refusal to answer questions. Interesting times ahead. By the way, I did not
think the 1.2 million Euros had been taken, surely Amaral never had that kind of money?

The book does not contain any theory of Gonçalo Amaral's, it is entirely based on the police files. Nowhere in the book does he give a personal opinion about what happened in the Maddie case. The conclusions are the same conclusions from the report by Tavares de Almeida and are the result of the work done by both the British and Portuguese police.

You mean his book and his conclusions were based entirely on an interim report produced several months before the PJ produced their final report, and the AG and PP made their decison?

So it was in effect a working theory of the police? And presented as 'the truth'.

Carolina

I think the McCanns might well live to regret bringing this case, as you say, Amaral has merely proved in the
Video that abduction was virtually impossible and that in his opinion Madeleine died in the Apartment. Also, if his Lawyer shows the Cutting Edge recon to prove none of the McCann family appear to be traumatised and seem happy and relaxed, end of story..........

sans_souci wrote:You mean his book and his conclusions were based entirely on an interim report produced several months before the PJ produced their final report, and the AG and PP made their decison?

So it was in effect a working theory of the police? And presented as 'the truth'.

Surely the report was produced BEFORE Amaral"s book was published? Apart from being pilloried by the U.K.
Press, Amaral had to contend with people like Ribiero turning a blind eye to a secondary investigation which
was supposed to be forbidden, the Press circus which the McCanns used to promote the Fund and keep
Madeleine"s picture in the Papers. Portugal has never experienced anything like this before and probably rue
the day the Tapas 9 chose to holiday in PDL.

sans_souci. You had better believe that it is THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.

THERE IS A LOT MORE TRUTH TO READ AS WELL. When he gets into his stride and sees this pair in court.

So be prepared to feel very shocked and disillusioned, not to mention feeling very betrayed by these people you seek to support.

I don't believe that the McCanns are walking into this court without knowing what will be happening. I don't know enough about the PT legal system but do wonder how much leeway there will be for anyone to challenge the McCanns - not much I suspect, but I am hopeful that I might be proven wrong.

Jem wrote:sans_souci. You had better believe that it is THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.

THERE IS A LOT MORE TRUTH TO READ AS WELL. When he gets into his stride and sees this pair in court.

So be prepared to feel very shocked and disillusioned, not to mention feeling very betrayed by these people you seek to support.

Where is the "sleeping with the Lawyers " Vid ?? It was you who made that claim, IIRC.

Carolina in his book Amaral gave his own opinion I assume.
Don´t know the exact wording but I think it was:
"My common sense tells me that Madeleine has died..."
But it is HIS opinion and since when is a person not allowed to talk about her/his opinion???
So his opinion shouldn´t be a problem, really!

I sincerely hope that Amaral"s Lawyer puts up a good defence, the post I copied and pasted here earlier
is worth a read, particularly the bit about the McCanns parenting which really is the crux of the matter. If the
children hadn"t been left alone night after night Madeleine wouldn"t have disappeared.

Do we know whether there will be a Jury? The way the Portugese feel about the McCanns it will be hard to
find 12 unbiased people.

Beattie wrote:I sincerely hope that Amaral"s Lawyer puts up a good defence, the post I copied and pasted here earlier
is worth a read, particularly the bit about the McCanns parenting which really is the crux of the matter. If the
children hadn"t been left alone night after night Madeleine wouldn"t have disappeared.

Do we know whether there will be a Jury? The way the Portugese feel about the McCanns it will be hard to
find 12 unbiased people.

But is it not within the law to get a Jury not from Portugal?
I mean humans are humans, here or there.
A Jury would be a fine thing.
But they, the members of the Jury, should be aware of the facts and results of the investigation.
In this case only one judge would be not enough!
I don´t know if it is possible to demand a Jury.
I would demand it.

I've not read the book, but sadly I think Madeleine is not with us anymore based on the parents in video interveiws (not press reports) and the files. Surely more people have read the files than the book.