18 September 2009

The prohibition to sell “The Truth of the Lie”, Freedom of Expression and Opinion: Lawyer's Impressions



by Drª. Marta Madalena Botelho

The book “The Truth about the Lie”, by Gonçalo Amaral, which focuses on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, that happened in May of 2007 in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, is going to be removed from the market, following a decision from the Civil Court of Lisbon, which forbids its sale.

In “The Truth about the Lie”, Gonçalo Amaral subscribes the thesis that the parents were involved in the little English girl’s disappearance, a conclusion that is essentially anchored on the fact that the PJ’s dogs detected blood and cadaver odour inside the apartment where the child disappeared from, and inside the automobile that the McCanns hired after the disappearance.

Unsatisfied about the publication of the book in Portugal – and very likely, trying at any cost to prevent the book from being translated and published abroad, mainly in the United Kingdom – the McCanns, on their behalf and on behalf of their children (including Madeleine), have requested an injunction against Gonçalo Amaral and the editors Guerra e Paz, Editores, SA (for the book) and VC-Valentim de Carvalho Filmes, Audiovisuais (for the video that was meanwhile produced from the book), almost two years after the publication and the sale of 175 thousand copies (in Portugal alone).

In its decision, the Court decided in favour of the petitioners. Therefore, and according to the judicial decision that was made public today [09.09.2009], any expressions of the theory of the child’s death and a concealment of the cadaver with the parents’ involvement, are forbidden in any shape or form. The author of the book and the editors are forbidden from “citing, analysing or commenting upon, verbally or in writing, the parts of the book or the video that defend the theory of death or concealment of the body”, as well as from “reproducing or commenting, giving an opinion or an interview, where said thesis is defended or where it can be inferred”. In order to prevent that either the book or the video can be published abroad, the author and the editors are also prohibited from selling the book’s and the video’s copyrights.

The decision goes even further and does not merely prohibit the sale of the remaining copies or of new editions of the book, but also prohibits the edition of “other books and/or videos that defend the same theory and that are destined to be sold or published by any means in Portugal”. In order to prevent both the book and the video from being publicised abroad, the author and the editors are also forbidden from selling the rights that they hold over the works (source).

Well, in “The Truth about the Lie”, Gonçalo Amaral described the investigation, listed the collected evidence, and based on that, he built a thesis and presented his own conclusions. Therefore, this book is a free exercise of opinion, divulged under the freedom of expression that is constitutionally acknowledged and guaranteed in our country.

Deep down, it seems that Gonçalo Amaral does nothing more than to emit his perception of what he believes is the most likely scenario for the disappearance of Madeleine. According to the impressions that he has collected, he believes that the evidence point into the direction that the child died inside the apartment, and he considers the possibility that the parents had some kind of direct or indirect intervention in the concealment of the cadaver.

It does not seem possible to infer, from this, that the former inspector states that the parents are responsible over the disappearance. This is merely a mental construction that is based on the investigation that was carried out, which is to say, an exercise in (free) opinion about certain facts.

By preventing the divulgation of any opinion that establishes the connection between the McCanns and the disappearance of Madeleine, the Court is limiting the freedom of expression not only for Gonçalo Amaral, but for all the people who reach the same conclusion. By forbidding the publication and divulgation in Portugal of any books and/or videos that defend the same thesis, the Court is limiting the right to emit an opinion about certain facts. What seems to be at stake is an act of censorship on what is thought and expressed about the “Madeleine McCann” case in Portugal.

According to the Court, this is a situation where fundamental rights are at conflict: on one side, Gonçalo Amaral’s right to freedom of expression, and on the other, the McCanns’ personality rights. In that conflict, the Court decided that the personality rights should prevail.

But it is important to clarify whether or not this is indeed a matter of conflicting fundamental rights, which is to say, it is absolutely essential to analyse whether or not the McCanns’ personality rights are being damaged, as there re no doubts that the book was published under the freedom of expression of its author.

It is at this point that I disagree with the Court’s decision. In effect, while Gonçalo Amaral merely expresses personal convictions, which is to say, an opinion about certain facts that took place, and only taking personal conclusions thereof, not making any accusations, it seems that although one may admit that the situation is uncomfortable for the McCanns, it does not damage their personality rights. It would be damaging if the conclusions were unreasonable or baseless, but given the fact that the author of the book elaborates a logical reasoning and bases his conclusions on facts, what may be said is that the conclusions may be wrong, but not that they are gratuitous, and therefore, that their purpose is to target the McCanns’ fundamental personality rights.

On my behalf, I would say that in this case, the McCanns’ fundamental personality rights were not violated, and that, on the contrary, the Court’s decision attacks Gonçalo Amaral’s freedom of expression.

Hypothetically, and taking this matter to an extreme, I dare to say that to forbid the emission of a free exercise in opinion, in logics and in argumentation like the one that was made by Gonçalo Amaral, is to open the door to the possibility of considering that personality rights are being damaged by, for example, any accusation from the Public Ministry that comes to be considered as not sustained due to a lack of proof. Excessive, maybe, but possible, using a reasoning that resembles that of this judicial decision.

Given the fact that everything indicates that Gonçalo Amaral and/or the editors will appeal this decision, we shall see whether or not the superior instances agree with this point of view. Anyway, what remains to be seen is if the Court maintains the now expressed opinion, if there is, at least, opposition and if the process moves into trial.

in: Drª. Marta Madalena Botelho’s webpage 09.09.2009 * further notes added by Drª. Marta Madalena Botelho on 17.09.2009

44 comments:

  1. Very interesting quote, but let's remember the dogs were brought in by the British Police, on behalf of the PJ. The McCanns are getting very afraid, but i would imagine not as afraid as Madeleine was!!!!
    Jan

    ReplyDelete
  2. In other words if you do not aid and abet the Mccanns you are censored.

    Only in a state of war does any goverment censor the press and now the Mccanns of course.

    One day the truth will prevail.
    IT ALWAYS DOES.

    ReplyDelete
  3. A trial would be the best outcome, lets see the McCann's cross-examined by a very clever lawyer. I would like to hear them, at long last, without a script or spokesman in front of them, challeneged on their ever changing stories about the shutters etc. Further, changing the subject slightly, what of the fact that they have named 'persons of interest' without having proof? Is this not the same scenario? The UK press have quickly printed stories, often without proven factual basis, about certain individuals, with the hand of the McCann's firmly pulling their strings.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Get The Maccanns to Portugal and in a court of Law. and wipe the grins of their faces.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Brilliant piece. I agree entirely. (More!!) Thanks again Joana and team for bringing this to our attention. Portugal, to arms, the security of your entire judicial system and basic civil liberties are potentially under threat from this one unsafe and unfair decision.

    E

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Maccann's will do all in their power to avoid going to court. but they must be now frightened of the outcome, they really thought things were well and truly over last year. Oh Dear what a surprise, If a fund sets up for the defence of Mr Amaral and the Madeleine foundation I will donate.

    ReplyDelete
  7. On September 18, LJC said...
    "A trial would be the best outcome, lets see the McCann's cross-examined by a very clever lawyer. I would like to hear them, at long last, without a script or spokesman in front of them, challeneged on their ever changing stories about the shutters etc."

    So would I. But I am afraid that British justice has now reached such a low that we have to ask ourselves would such a free trial be allowed, or would a judge - someone like Mrs. Justice Hogg - rule such a question as inadmissible. I believe they would. They would probably give some BS to the effect that the McCanns were found "innocent" by the Portugese legal system and it was inadmissible to query the results of that process in a civil case.

    Of course, TB or others might be able at least to get their version into the public eye. But on the other hand we might see what we have seen before from the media - the Pact of Silence. They have been v. quiet about Amaral's book all along the line. They gave virtually no publicity to its banning. They are now giving no publicity to the legal persecution of the Madeleine Foundation.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The McCanns invited us all into their lives and now they are trying to cancel the party.

    ReplyDelete
  9. If the ban on the book and the DVD are upheld by the court after the appeal against its banning, whats to stop Sr. Amaral discussing the released official police files on TV with other people i.e. guests and audience but leaving out his own thesis?

    There is nothing that the McCann’s can do about the official police files being discussed in public, is there?

    What is in the official police files are from the whole investigation by many officers and not just Sr. Amaral's work.

    Maybe Sr. Amaral could contact someone like Martin Brunt to be a go-between and ask the McCann’s if they would like to join him in a discussion on TV about the offical files?

    Not that they would do it but the invitation would have been made and they would look like the spineless cowards that they are by refusing to do it.

    Eve.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Going purely on past experience in this case I am surprised that anyone still thinks that the establishments in either of our countries are suddenly going to allow the McCanns to appear in a court whether it be a civil action or criminal proceedings. IMO the government of the UK continues to use the combination of its media monitoring organization and top legal teams to frustrate justice ever being achieved for Madeleine McCann.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "According to the Court, this is a situation where fundamental rights are at conflict: on one side, Gonçalo Amaral’s right to freedom of expression, and on the other, the McCanns’ personality rights. In that conflict, the Court decided that the personality rights should prevail."

    -Dr. Amaral is Portugese
    -mccanns are English

    I am confused.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dear Confused,
    Welcome to the Club.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Marta Madalena Botelho's [legal] opinion brings it home for all persons living in and operating in Portugal: if this court decision goes unchallenged, or is UNSUCCESSFULLY challenged, then it goes down to be cited as precedent in all similar cases that may be concocted to limit freedom of expression.

    You see, Goncalo Amaral could have stood on his soap box in the middle of the public square and made various statements about this case seemingly without basis. His hand is however strengthened, in my humble opinion, that the publication of his interpretation of the facts coincides in time with the publication of the case files by the Public Ministry. So what he states is not fabricated then.

    The problem his WORTHLESS (sorry, I just spat...)opponents have with his very existence is that he won't let it rest. What they seek, while the poor little kid lies in her lair (read this to mean her palace, being treated like a princess??) at the mercy of an evil abductor whose mind is so twisted that he's convinced her parents would much rather have her blanket back than have her, is for all discussion of this case to cease. Ah ha, because it is a bad story and reflects poorly on them. But this is not about these worthless people whose sense of priority stinks to high heaven: this is still about a missing child.

    And someone has to keep the fire alive to keep on looking for her, be she dead or alive. I dare say, there is no indication that Goncalo Amaral's decision to keep up the investigation says that he too is prepared to get to the very bottom of this and eventually locate the child: be she dead or alive.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Muito interessante esta possibilidade e perigosa também. Se entendi bem, caso o tribunal condene G.A. por sugerir que a criança morreu e que os pais estão de alguma maneira envolvidos no seu desaparecimento, então os McCann poderão, após ter sido aceite esta linha de defesa, processar o M.P. porque também este considerou essa possibilidade mas não a levou adiante por não existirem à data (e atenção aqui, porque podem haver agora) elementos que sustentem esta possibilidade.
    Não foi por acaso que o casal maravilha apostou em nestes ilustres advogados, pois não?
    Alexandra

    ReplyDelete
  15. I have to wonder, did this judge make this ruling in the knowledge that it would be overturned in a higher court. Thus giving Goncalo Amaral the opportunity to air his beliefs in a courtroom, watched by the world and unhindered by the threat of prosecution for slander.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I've heard enough, this case has tentacles further than we can imagine, its time to put up or shut up, where can we donate to uphold SR Amaral's name?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Atendendo a que a providencia cautelar foi pedida tambem em nome de Madeleine, tera Goncalo Amaral violado os "direitos de personalidade de Madeleine"no seu livro, ao defender que factos( vestigios biologicos) apontam para a sua morte e que essa hipotese tem de ser meticulosamente investigada para que possa perceber-se o que lhe aconteceu, e possa haver justica? NAO ME PARECE!! E nao me parece QUE A DECISAO DA JUIZA TENHA TIDO EM CONTA OS DIREITOS E INTERESSES DE MADELEINE. Ha portanto, na decisao deste tribunal uma postura nitidamente parcial da juiza. Ela ignorou os direitos da vitima e satisfez os desejos dos Mccann, quando deveria ter sido isenta. Foi mais longe a juiza - Numa investigacao onde proliferam pontas soltas e muitas duvidas, a juiza nao teve pejo em tomar partido por um dos lados, ignorando que ha uma crianca desaparecida que pode ter sido vitima daqueles que ela oficial e deliberadamente protege.
    Perante esta providencia cautelar, a decisao acertada, seria EXIGIR A RE-ABERTURA DO PROCESSO para que se podessem resolver as pontas soltas da investigacao e da forma mais independente e meticulosa, obter uma conclusao. Depois, e perante o apurar da verdade se decidiria se o livro deve ser comercializado ou nao. MADELEINE FOI VITIMA DE UM CRIME E O SEU DIREITO A JUSTICA DEVE PREVALECER SOBRE TODOS OS OUTROS. Os Gemeos tambem tem o direito de saber o que aconteceu a irma, com verdade, sem manipulacoes. Tambem a eles foi negado esse direito por um tribunal que parece nao ter qualquer sensibilidade para os direitos das criancas. AS CONCLUSOES DE G. AMARAL NAO SAO ACUSACOES E NAO SAO GRATUITAS. SAO A OPINIAO DE ALGUEM QUE FEZ PARTE DA INVESTIGACAO E TEVE ACESSO A DADOS CONCRETOS QUE A INVESTIGACAO REVELOU.
    Alem disto, devemos todos lembrar-nos que a investigacao foi feita por uma vasta equipa de investigadores dos dois paises e que o livro ja foi editado ha mais de um ano. Durante este ano, em que pelo menos 175 mil pessoas leram o livro e outras tantas o comentaram, nenhum investigador desmentiu G. Amaral, oficialmente ou nao. Se o livro contivesse falsidades e fosse uma fraude, a medida mais acertada seria, oficialmente a PJ Ou a policia inglesa, desmentir a tese do livro. Tal nao aconteceu.... ENTAO PROIBIR ESTE LIVRO E PRIVAR O PUBLICO DE TER ACESSO Aquilo que as files da PJ revelam e que deixou de estar em segredo de justica.

    OS MCCANN, O SEU PORTA-VOZ E OS DETECTIVES NAO ESTAO PROIBIDOS DE DAR ENTREVISTAS A DEFENDER O RAPTO, SEM APRESENTAREM QUALQUER EVIDENCIA PARA O QUE DEFENDEM. PORQUE? PORQUE ESTA DUALIDADE DE CRITERIOS?

    COM BASE NO QUE A INVESTIGACAO APUROU, DEVIA SER EXIGIDO AOS MCCANN QUE APRESENTASSEM PUBLICAMENTE AS EVIDENCIAS QUE INDICAM QUE MADELEINE FOI RAPTADA, E SO DEPOIS SEREM AUTORIZADOS A DAR ENTREVISTAS.

    ESPERO QUE DEPOIS DAS ELEICOES, o pais tenha a coragem de re-abrir este caso e fazer justica a Madeleine- POR ELA, pelos gemeos e por todas as criancas.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Why would a judge intentionally make an illegal judgement to somehow actually help the person being discriminated against via the backdoor when all that was required was to behave in an ethical, moral and legally correct manner?

    T4two


    T4two

    ReplyDelete
  19. Since May 4, 2007, every step done by the Mccann's in the Media, it was a PUBLIC CONFESSION about what they have done to Madeleine. After all, they violated their daughter "Personality rights"- leaving her unprotected for several nights, using her tragedy to get money from public donations, perverting the investigation which prevent Madeleine from having justice.

    ReplyDelete
  20. If ever this case goes to the courtroom, I don't think the debate will be about little Madeleine's disappearance at all. It will be about what rights Mr Amaral has of publishing his book, and nobody will try to make a reconstruction, judge the parents or officially say what happened to the child. The debate will certainly be interesting as regards the rights of Portuguese citizens to publish books about other people or cases, but it will not be about the case itself.

    ReplyDelete
  21. The reason we are all on sites like this, talking about this, is because the McCann’s themselves, by their very actions, have brought this situation about. Right from the outset they refused to take any blame, right from the outset they have had scripted answers to read from, right from the outset they have had a spokesperson, right from the outset they tried to manipulate the press, right from the outset they refused a Police Liaison Officer (British I think) and right from the outset if they were unhappy with questions they walked away from the interview. I know that others in similar situations have taken great comfort from a Police Liaison Officer’s presence, keeping them up to date with everything the Police are doing and I would have especially thought in Madeleine’s case, this would have been a good idea, but I think the McCann’s knew from the off that the Police were viewing them suspiciously and did not co-operate. They can only blame themselves now if everyone sat up and took notice of this and their ever-changing stories. They cannot silence people on this because it is of their own doing. They have never co-operated with anything either the Portuguese Police or British Police have tried to do and now they have the audacity to try to silence anyone who questions their version. Its not a case of survival of the fittest, it’s a case of survival of the richest!

    ReplyDelete
  22. I find it hard to believe that this judge can impose restrictions on this book for other jurisdictions.

    For instance, what if Dr Amaral relocated to Spain, how does she think she can impose silence on him there.

    How do the McCanns think they can restrict the people of the UK from reading this book? The courts hate to impose such injunctions inhibiting freedom of speech.

    This book is not threatening national security or something like that.

    It is also in the public interest that the people of the UK realise that the McCanns supposed abduction theory is not held as credible by those in authority who have investigated the case in Portugal.

    The judge has a bloody nerve, because not only is she trying to impose a restriction on Dr Amaral, but on the face of it it looks like she is trying to impose it on the whole world.

    ReplyDelete
  23. 'They knowingly abandoned their children, deliberately creating circumstances (the unlocked door) for the purpose of their three year old daughter to be able to leave the apartment in the dead of night where any number of dangers could have befallen her, to search for her parents who were wining and dining in a restaurant.

    urthermore, the unlocked apartment endangered not only the life of 3 year old Madeleine but also of Sean and Amelie, the two younger children. Anyone, who had the ‘mind to’ being able to gain access and inflict harm on these children.

    Madeleine, Sean and Amelie, quite clearly could not defend themselves in the situation in which they were placed. I believe this to be a criminal act!

    Portuguese Judicial Code
    Article 138
    Exposure or abandonment

    1 - Whom endangers the life of another person:
    a) By exposing her in a place where the person is subject to a situation which she cannot defend herself from on her own; or
    b) By abandoning her in a defenseless state, for motive of age, physical defect or illness,when the agent had the duty to guard, watch or assist to the person;
    is punished with a prison term of 1 to 5years.

    2 - If the fact is practised by an ascendant ;or descendant, adoptant or adoptee of the victim, the agent is punished with a prison term of 2 to 5 years.

    3 - If the fact results in:
    a) Serious offense to the physical integrity, the agent is punished with a prison term of 2 to 8 years;
    b) Death, the agent is punished with a prison term of 3 to 10 years.

    'The doctors McCann did not come close to providing a basic level of care for these children.


    Read more: http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/#ixzz0RToF2SXO
    Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives

    ReplyDelete
  24. 'The life of Madeleine Beth McCann changed forever on 3rd May 2007. As a 3 year old child she did not have a say in how she should be cared for. She had no choice in what was to become of her. Those she trusted to provide the care and protection which was her human right failed her in every possible way. She is still being failed.'

    ReplyDelete
  25. -what makes the Party's 7 so powerful? = Castle Craig, believe it or not. waht lies behind.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Before expessing my opiniom om the article, I have to express my deepest regrets that "The 3 Arguidos" has let us down - I don't know the reason, and I don't question the why - I am sure there are good explanations that cannot be told to us.

    As for the article, once again we are sold what the McCanns wish uus to believe.

    So far, so good - they keep on defrauding everyone with the suport of the official intervenients

    Keep on, Joana, Astro and Kazlux


    kisses

    Luz

    ReplyDelete
  27. Many thanks to Astro, Joana and Kazlux for keeping us up=to-date. I would appreciate hearing on the status of 3A's - is it "now defunct" as stated in an article posted here yesterday????

    ReplyDelete
  28. I agree with LJC. The McCanns have drawn suspicion on themselves by protesting too much and acting in such a superior way as if they are above the law and above suspicion.

    The more extreme lengths they go to to try and shut everyone up, just makes them look more suspicious.

    If they are guilty of knowing more than they`re letting on, they could have got away with it if they hadn`t tried to bully everyone to their way of thinking. It was certainly their arrogance that aroused my suspicions.

    Lulu

    ReplyDelete
  29. Is Amaral not entitled to an opinion?

    Surely we are all entitled to express our opinion? It seem the opinion of the UK press that the McCanns are 'innocent' despite the fact that we know for sure that they MUST have abandoned their children or an abduction would not have been possible. If they didnt abandon the childen, then an abduction would not have been possible, so what happened to their daughter?

    Better for them if thay admit they neglected her and stop telling us they checked regularly! McCanns, you are liars. Not libel, but fact!

    ReplyDelete
  30. One wonders why GA doesn't turn his book's English translation downloadable from sites that would accept it. The sentence doesn't apply to the web products! Of course GA wouldn't get copyrights. But he would for sure gain much more credibility and silence those who pretend he used Madeleine to make money.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Will. at last, this case be brought to a real trial where the McCanns can be examined and corss examined - where the fact that they have refused to answer certain questions can be put to the test?

    Thye have refused to answer questions, they did neglect their child.

    Come on McCanns, stop trying to silence people - answer questions and prove your innocence through a proper debate!

    ReplyDelete
  32. Courts don't work quite that way - Tony and Debbie are in the hot seat - they will have to answer questions. They will not be questioning the McCanns.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Then Tony and Debbie should countersue them for trying to restrict their freedom of speech.

    They have not been making things up about the McCanns, and they could argue that what they are doing is in the interests of the public, being as how the McCanns have their mega bucks Fund up and running and people are being told that Madeleine was abducted, when investigators who know about this case have come to a different conclusion.

    The public need to know this so they can make an informed decision as to whether or not to donate.

    ReplyDelete
  34. If we talk about Gerry Mccann it's allways money and madness.

    I never saw something like that
    in my whole 65 years of life.

    The "inexplicable" death of an innocent child of negligent middle-class parents that enjoy such a political and financial to cover the crime power is a scandal.
    Sometimes I have the feeling I'am in the cinema and see a bad, senseless high budget horror film and midstream Gonçalo Amaral wakes me up and tell me the truth about the lie.So I can understand the message of the film.

    Goddness me! where is going Europe with a new dictator named Gerald Mccann and his army in UK & Portugal?
    I am glad this virus is not arrived in Italy yet.

    Gerry, please stay way from my Berlusconi.

    Greetings from Venice,

    Nicoletta

    ReplyDelete
  35. Anon. who mentioned Castle Craig:
    Really? Are "our" McCanns in any way related with the McCanns who are Castle Craig's owners/founders?
    I see the hospital has a branch in the Netherlands, a country where "our" McCanns worked and lived in...
    Castle Craig is a privately held hospital specialized in the treatment of alcohol and drug addictions, but I really can't say I see how this can have any relevance with the immense protection given to the infamous couple...do you care to elaborate further?...
    I thought that Gerry McCann was the only doctor in the family, if indeed they are connected in any way, why has it never emerged? How commom is the name McCann in Scotland? Is it like our Silva or your Smith? There are scores of Silvas in Portugal and of course they are not all of the same family! Is this just another strange coincidence, like the one of the owner of apartm. 5A also being a McCann?...

    ReplyDelete
  36. I have to admit it, even though I know they will read this blog and it will give them "strength"....

    I am afraid of the McCanns. That is why I post anonymously. Imagine being one of their patients!!!!!

    notice no patient has ever come forward to sing their praise.

    Mind you, the worst thing possible would be, to be one of their children (those poor poor mites)

    If this was a novel, everyone would say --- don't be so ridiculous, nothing like that could ever happen.

    Where will it all end. There won't be proper justice that is for sure. Not in this life anyway.

    If anyone is brave enough & willing to challenge this pair of "doctors" I will surely donate to fund it. Nothing talks louder than money. Come to think of it, fund raising events would be super fun, but then again, that's not anonymous is it.......

    I guess it will have to be cash or postal orders in the post, posted from a, far away from my home, postbox.

    I would say that at least it's getting fun again (nothing will help MM now, and I'm not meaning fun at her expense) But it is at the expense of the brave Tony, Debbie & Dr Amaral & his family.

    ReplyDelete
  37. In the past I have stated how narcissists will stop at nothing to destroy any person that exposes to the public who they really are. Mr. Amaral has been and continues to be the victim of narcissistic aggression. It started with him being described as an incompetent drunk by the British media; then being removed from the case; unexpectedly having his candidacy for mayor rejected; being convicted of creating a false police report, in a case in which no proof existed and the credibility of his accusers was nil; and now his freedom of expression has been taken away. The final action by the McCanns is to try to make Mr. Amaral destitute. Mr. Amaral must realize by now that any appeal he makes in Portugal will be useless. I think his only chance is to appeal to a European Union court.
    Those of you who think that the McCanns will appear in court to refute what was written by Mr. Amaral are living in La-La land. It will never happen.

    ReplyDelete
  38. You must have heard of the saying 'the best form of defence is attack'.

    Don't be cowed by these people, they want to silence anybody who dares to say there is no evidence of an abduction, yet plenty pointing to a death in the apartment.

    Meanwhile, their Fund rolls on, and the public are being denied the opportunity to learn about the findings of the dogs and all.

    The McCanns don't want this brought out in a trial and reported in the media.

    It would also be revealed that they have not been found 'innocent of all charges' which they keep telling everybody.

    There has never been any charges brought yet as there has never been an indictment, yet.

    Kate McCann needs to be asked again when she is going to answer those 48 questions regarding the disappearance of her daughter which she has so far refused to answer.

    And, the media should be reminded of that.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Castle Craig may have something to do with this case or could it be this or both?

    Gerry used to work at C.O.M.A.R.E . This is a government research establishment. A.K.A “Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment”. Link to C.O.M.A.R.E. http://www.srp-uk.org/index.html

    He was one of the many doctors who worked there.

    His job was doing research to see if radiation would cause any increase of heart attacks in children.

    Could this be a reason Gerry has so many handy ‘contacts’ and could he know something that the government wants kept quiet.

    Does anyone remember Gail Cooper? She was the woman who said that some man who pretended to be a charity collector A.K.A ‘creepy man’ was hanging about in PDL in April.

    http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/article10662.ece

    Her son Michael Hall (from her first marriage) also worked at C.O.M.A.R.E as a researcher at the same time as Gerry did.

    Her second husband Jonathan Cooper is a Doctor with a surgery in Melton Mowbray, Nottingham near the place that Kate McCann worked as a part time doctor. Mrs Cooper is a community healthcare co-ordinator from Newark, Nottingham.

    Add Ruth McCann, owner of the flat the mccanns used.

    Plus Castle Craig, owned by more McCann’s.

    I find these coincidences very strange. Did everybody from that county go to Pria de Luz for their holidays that year?

    Eve

    ReplyDelete
  40. Yes, Eve,

    Too many people around with past connections to each other.

    Strange 'coincidences' indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I also think this is about revenge against Mr Amaral and Tony Bennett, it has not got anything whatsoever to do with Madelaine, I also think we will never see the Maccanns in court the have the Luck of the Devil. The Maccann's fear no one not even God.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I'm going to leave aside for a moment any mention of cadaver dogs, DNA, evidence of abduction


    Who is responsible for the fact that Madeleine McCann disappeared ? Her parents are. Whatever happened to her happened because they left her alone. Quite simple really. They were responsible for her, They didn't keep her safe.

    Never once have I heard them accept responsibility for that, and no-one has held them to account for it. And that is just plain wrong

    ReplyDelete
  43. We all know that what the McCanns and their team are doing is wrong - attempts to undermine freedom of thought and of speech are dangerous in this day and age... but that's not what's really worrying... What's really worrying is that they are doing it and not giving a damn what people think.
    When a thief loses the fear of being caught because he knows he can do it with impunity... that's the danger.

    ReplyDelete
  44. In 100 years time this will be like the Jack The Ripper Case, there will be new thoughts an analysis of the facts and the theory that this little girl died in the apartment and that somehow the parents were involved will be the only conclusion one can draw.

    This is an important case as it shows how big money and big PR can make you invincible, even to Social services and the Courts.

    Jane Tanners constantly changing description of the so called abductor is sheer comedy, Specsavers should use her in an advertising campaign

    ReplyDelete