Re: GONCALO AMARAL WINS APPEAL! - HE MAY SUE THE McCANNS

Andrew Wed 25 May 2016, 8:44 am

25 May 2016
Appeal to the Supreme Court

An appeal to the Supreme Court has been filed by the lawyer on behalf of the McCanns.

PJGA will assume the legal costs for Gonçalo Amaral, thanks to your contributions.

We remain confident, as always, that Justice will be served and Freedom of Speech, of Opinion and of Information will prevail.

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/appeal-to-supreme-court.html?m=1

**candyfloss** Wed 25 May 2016, 9:17 am

Andrew wrote:25 May 2016
Appeal to the Supreme Court

An appeal to the Supreme Court has been filed by the lawyer on behalf of the McCanns.

PJGA will assume the legal costs for Gonçalo Amaral, thanks to your contributions.

We remain confident, as always, that Justice will be served and Freedom of Speech, of Opinion and of Information will prevail.

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/appeal-to-supreme-court.html?m=1

GONCALO AMARAL WINS APPEAL! - HE MAY SUE THE McCANNS - Page 21 CjSU__FXEAAQguh

Andrew Wed 25 May 2016, 10:46 am

http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/mccanns-appealing-to-supreme-court.html?spref=tw

bluebell Wed 25 May 2016, 11:01 am

Andrew wrote:http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/mccanns-appealing-to-supreme-court.html?spref=tw

McCanns appealing to Supreme Court

- Privacy versus freedom of expression -

The lawyer for Kate and Gerry McCann has filed an appeal in Portugal’s Supreme Court following last month’s Appellate Court decision in favour of Gonçalo Amaral.
This is the latest move in the long-running civil action over the former lead detective’s controversial book about Madeleine McCann’s disappearance in 2007.
The court last month overturned an earlier decision to award half a million euros in damages to the McCanns. The Supreme Court review is expected to focus mainly on legal aspects of the case rather than material issues.
The lifting of both the damages ruling and the ban on further publication of the book was seen as a highly significant decision within traditional areas of conflict: the right to honour and privacy on the one hand, and to freedom of expression and opinion on the other
Freedom of expression is a fundamental right enshrined in the Portuguese constitution that applies to every citizen, but it comes with certain constraints.
While everyone has a right to express and to publicise their thoughts in words, image or by any other means, the constitution also states that everyone has a right to a good name and reputation and to the protection of the intimacy of private and family life.
The media have the right - indeed it is their social function - to spread news and give critical or non-critical opinions. It is important that they do so with respect for the truth and for the intangible rights of others, said the three appeal judges in this case last month.
Amaral in his book, The Truth of the Lie, not only included facts that were evidence in the inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, but aired his opinion that Madeleine was not abducted. He suggested that she died accidentally and that her parents covered this up by concealing her body and making up a false story.
The facts of the case in the form of evidence in police files had already been widely published in newspapers and on the Internet as a result of an initiative by the office of Portugal’s prosecutor general. Amaral had the legitimate right to describe and interpret these facts.
The allegation expressed in his book that the McCanns were involved in a cover-up was not new either. It was already in the public domain as it was contained in the police files and was the basis upon which the couple had been declared official suspects, arguidos, in the original investigation.
The judges indicated that the McCanns had voluntarily limited their rights to privacy by making themselves available to the national and international media to which they had easy access. In effect they opened the way for anyone to debate and express opinions about the case, including opinions that contradicted their own.
In essence, the appeal judges ruled that the McCanns rights had not been infringed and that Amaral’s book was a lawful example of freedom of expression.
Many observers would argue that the lawsuit instigated by the McCanns seven years ago is turning out to be more harmful and costly to them than the defendants. It has inadvertently generated publicity of a kind they least wanted and boosted book sales, but they have instructed their Lisbon lawyer, Isabel Duarte, to continue to the highest level.
Even that may not be the end of this dispute. Amaral is considering turning tables and suing the McCanns for damages.

Andrew Wed 25 May 2016, 11:03 am

http://portugalresident.com/mccanns-appealing-to-supreme-court-privacy-versus-freedom-of-expression

ETA - same article as above.

bluebell Wed 25 May 2016, 11:07 am

Thanks for that link Andrew. Good, clear and concise article by Len Port so hope OK to have c/p'd it in full Smile

Andrew Wed 25 May 2016, 11:19 am

bluebell wrote:Thanks for that link Andrew. Good, clear and concise article by Len Port so hope OK to have c/p'd it in full

Yes a very good article. Of course it's ok. Was just being lazy as trying to get some work done at the same time Very Happy

Poe Wed 25 May 2016, 1:11 pm

Many observers would argue that the lawsuit instigated by the McCanns seven years ago is turning out to be more harmful and costly to them than the defendants. It has inadvertently generated publicity of a kind they least wanted and boosted book sales, but they have instructed their Lisbon lawyer, Isabel Duarte, to continue to the highest level.

I must admit that it really does appeal to my inner gothic horror fangirl that the McCanns may be the authors of their own downfall caused by their hatred and determination to destroy Mr Amaral at all costs.

Andrew Wed 25 May 2016, 2:56 pm

As I said on another thread, they will literally do anything and spend everything to try and stop that book getting released in English and in the shops.

Now it's going to be interesting if the UK press report this latest appeal....

Nothing as yet.

costello Wed 25 May 2016, 3:04 pm

Andrew wrote:As I said on another thread, they will literally do anything and spend everything to try and stop that book getting released in English and in the shops.

Now it's going to be interesting if the UK press report this latest appeal....

Nothing as yet.

I don't think the UK press will report anything Andrew, maybe later when we know if the appeal has been accepted or not.

Andrew Wed 25 May 2016, 3:18 pm

Yes, I'm sure your right, costello...

But if there is a contrived effort on behalf of the MSM to get people talking about the Mc's then it will be in tomorrow's news...

costello Wed 25 May 2016, 3:53 pm

Don't want to tempt fate here Andrew, but wouldn't people talk more about the McCanns
if a negative response to their appeal is on the horizon.

Andrew Wed 25 May 2016, 4:06 pm

A negative response to their appeal is on the horizon. Surely.

I think it will be reported tomorrow... Not front page stuff though.

"McCanns lodge appeal to the supreme court in desperate and pathetic attempt to stop the Truth.... The truth of the lie book, written by the wonderful Portuguese Ex-Detective, Goncalo Amaral"

costello Wed 25 May 2016, 4:38 pm

Yes totally agree Andrew. I am thinking more on the lines of FG's comment,'the media
will report from Lisbon and the truth will emerge'. I believe GA has a lot more to say on this case, and hopefully soon. Again just my thoughts.

Andrew Wed 25 May 2016, 5:56 pm

I don't think GA will say anything 'more' until this court business is finalised and put to bed.

I also don't think he will say anything 'more' until a decision has been made with OG and the PJ.

He's clearly a very smart guy and will reveal his cards when he knows the time is right.

Imo.

bluebell Wed 25 May 2016, 6:10 pm

Does anyone know when we may hear that this appeal against the appeal has been accepted? I assume the Supreme Court can decide to reject ?

costello Wed 25 May 2016, 6:18 pm

Andrew wrote:I don't think GA will say anything 'more' until this court business is finalised and put to bed.

I also don't think he will say anything 'more' until a decision has been made with OG and the PJ.

He's clearly a very smart guy and will reveal his cards when he knows the time is right.

Imo.

I too believe GA will reveal everything when the time is right Andrew. My money is still on the PJ resolving this case. Just my thoughts as ever.

Andrew Wed 25 May 2016, 6:19 pm

Some dates mentioned on the 'textusa' thread.

I reckon it's already been rejected and chucked in the bin as we speak.

But be a while before an official statement comes out.

costello Wed 25 May 2016, 6:38 pm

bluebell wrote:Does anyone know when we may hear that this appeal against the appeal has been accepted? I assume the Supreme Court can decide to reject ?

Yes bluebell I'm certain the SC can decide to reject. I'm hoping we are just going through the motions here, and that Andrew may be right in
that a decision has already been made. If there are no legal issues to be challenged then I am sure the appeal 'should' be rejected, from what I
have read.

bluebell Wed 25 May 2016, 6:49 pm

Any 'legal eagles' here to explain this? Being an appeal against an appeal Rolling Eyes

this might not be relevant, though it does mention the Supreme Court.

8. Appeal

8.1 Grounds for appeal

The general rule is that a party may appeal to the court of second instance (“Tribunal da Relação”) when the value of the lawsuit is higher than EUR5,000 and the decision is unfavourable to the appealing party in an amount higher than EUR2,500.01 (Cf. Article 629 of the CPC). The court of second instance decides both on legal and factual issues.

A party may appeal to the Supreme Court when the value of the lawsuit is higher than EUR30,000 and the decision is unfavourable to the appealing party in an amount higher than EUR15,000.01.

The Supreme Court only rules on legal issues and, in most cases, cannot revoke the second instance judgment concerning the proven facts.

In most cases the parties cannot move to the Supreme Court if the first and the second instance courts have issued identical decisions with similar grounds.

The general rule is that the appeal does not suspend the proceedings unless the appealing party pays a deposit or presents a bank guarantee.

^ Return to Top
8.2 Time limits and triggering events

The general rule is that the appealing party has 30 days to appeal to the higher court in the event that the appeal is to the court of second instance (Cf. Article 638 of the CPC). If the appeal includes the impeachment of the proven facts through a review of the recorded witnesses or party statements, then the appealing party has 40 days to appeal.

However, in some specific cases (e.g. freezing orders) the appealing party has only 15 days to appeal.

The defendant in the appeal always has the same term to present an answer.

The first instance court will then decide whether the appeal should be accepted. If it is accepted, the case is sent to the higher court.

On the basis of historic evidence, it is estimated that the second instance courts take on average between six months and one year to decide an appeal, and that the Supreme Court will take on average three to six months to issue a final decision.

eta - I think this is the site I copied from http://www.chambersandpartners.com/guide/practice-guides/location/241/6617/1422-200

poster Thu 26 May 2016, 2:37 pm

bluebell wrote:
Andrew wrote:http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.co.uk/2016/05/mccanns-appealing-to-supreme-court.html?spref=tw

McCanns appealing to Supreme Court

- Privacy versus freedom of expression -

The lawyer for Kate and Gerry McCann has filed an appeal in Portugal’s Supreme Court following last month’s Appellate Court decision in favour of Gonçalo Amaral.
This is the latest move in the long-running civil action over the former lead detective’s controversial book about Madeleine McCann’s disappearance in 2007.
The court last month overturned an earlier decision to award half a million euros in damages to the McCanns. The Supreme Court review is expected to focus mainly on legal aspects of the case rather than material issues.
The lifting of both the damages ruling and the ban on further publication of the book was seen as a highly significant decision within traditional areas of conflict: the right to honour and privacy on the one hand, and to freedom of expression and opinion on the other
Freedom of expression is a fundamental right enshrined in the Portuguese constitution that applies to every citizen, but it comes with certain constraints.
While everyone has a right to express and to publicise their thoughts in words, image or by any other means, the constitution also states that everyone has a right to a good name and reputation and to the protection of the intimacy of private and family life.
The media have the right - indeed it is their social function - to spread news and give critical or non-critical opinions. It is important that they do so with respect for the truth and for the intangible rights of others, said the three appeal judges in this case last month.
Amaral in his book, The Truth of the Lie, not only included facts that were evidence in the inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, but aired his opinion that Madeleine was not abducted. He suggested that she died accidentally and that her parents covered this up by concealing her body and making up a false story.
The facts of the case in the form of evidence in police files had already been widely published in newspapers and on the Internet as a result of an initiative by the office of Portugal’s prosecutor general. Amaral had the legitimate right to describe and interpret these facts.
The allegation expressed in his book that the McCanns were involved in a cover-up was not new either. It was already in the public domain as it was contained in the police files and was the basis upon which the couple had been declared official suspects, arguidos, in the original investigation.
The judges indicated that the McCanns had voluntarily limited their rights to privacy by making themselves available to the national and international media to which they had easy access. In effect they opened the way for anyone to debate and express opinions about the case, including opinions that contradicted their own.
In essence, the appeal judges ruled that the McCanns rights had not been infringed and that Amaral’s book was a lawful example of freedom of expression.
Many observers would argue that the lawsuit instigated by the McCanns seven years ago is turning out to be more harmful and costly to them than the defendants. It has inadvertently generated publicity of a kind they least wanted and boosted book sales, but they have instructed their Lisbon lawyer, Isabel Duarte, to continue to the highest level.
Even that may not be the end of this dispute. Amaral is considering turning tables and suing the McCanns for damages.

I don't really see how the McCanns have a leg to stand on. It is a FACT that there is zero evidence of abduction. It is a FACT that the Tapasnik's rogatories statements are all over the place in terms of inconsistencies, omissions, contradictions, extraordinary memory losses and more besides. The McCanns allegations about what happened to Madeleine are not supported by any facts or evidence at all. Therefore the McCanns claim about what happened is merely an opinion with nothing whatsoever to support it. It was reported as 'fact' in the press simply on the basis that the McCanns had said that was what happened and on no other basis.

Therefore, both the McCanns and the media breached Detective Amaral's RIGHT to a good name and reputation and to the protection of his private and family life. As they did not verify whether the McCann's OPINION about what happened to Madeleine was supported by any evidence. And whether it was true or not. Without any supportive evidence, how could the media be sure the McCanns weren't lying?

As is explained above, the McCanns had already voluntarily limited their right to privacy by making themselves available to the media to report on their opinion about what happened to Madeleine. The media have in-house lawyers to consult on matter of defamation and libel before publishing stories. Why did they not check whether or not there was any truth in what Kate McCann said about Detective Amaral?

In Kate's book she claimed: "On 24th July, three days after the inquiry was closed, Goncalo Amaral launched his book about our daughter's disappearance. For this to ahve been possible, confidential information about the investigation would have to have been passed to his publishers.....it repeated his theories, dressed up with fabrication and speculation. What it failed to include was any evidence - something one would expect to be rather important to a police officer - or any detail that didn't suit his story."

Oh dear, Kate! Pot calling the kettle black! His theory has a lot more evidence than yours and always did...

As explained above, once the McCanns had courted the press with their opinion about what had happened, this effectively opened the way for anyone to publicly debate and express opinions about the case, even if the opinions contradicted their own.

Detective Amaral in his book included FACTS (unjemmied shutters/dog alerts/Madeleine's bed looking unslept in etc) that were used as EVIDENCE in the police enquiry into Madeleine's disappearance. He interpreted these FACTS which are already in the public domain and have been aired widely in the media to describe and interpreted these facts to form and express an opinion and to make an allegation. The allegation made in the book is not new either, it was contained in the police files and formed the basis on which the McCanns were declared official suspects in the original investigation.

As is written above:
Many observers would argue that the lawsuit instigated by the McCanns seven years ago is turning out to be more harmful and costly to them than the defendants. It has inadvertently generated publicity of a kind they least wanted and boosted book sales, but they have instructed their Lisbon lawyer, Isabel Duarte, to continue to the highest level.
Even that may not be the end of this dispute. Amaral is considering turning tables and suing the McCanns for damages.

IMO Kate and Gerry's fate was sealed when they refused to keep their heads down after the case was archived in the summer of 2008. The Portuguese police believed that Madeleine was dead.

As Kate writes in her book: "Why on earth would a former police officer want to convince the world that a missing child was dead - with no evidence whatsoever to support his claim? The only conclusion we could draw was that he was attempting to justify his actions while in charge of the investigation and at the same time promoting his forthcoming book to cash in on our misfortune. It just beggars belief."

Kate's hypocrisy is breathtaking. Notice how she writes "our" misfortune. What about Madeleine's misfortune? The misfortune of finding herself dead if Detective Amaral is right. And look how Kate and Gerry cashed in on Madeleine's misfortune with the fraudulent, imo, Fund. Because if Detective Amaral is right and Madeleine died that fateful week, the the Fund was a fraud from the outset.

Theories, as always.

poster Thu 26 May 2016, 2:40 pm

It is also a FACT that the McCanns themselves failed to protect the privacy of their two surviving children and even courted the media with them. I can't believe they were allowed to do this? Surely social services and/or another relevant agency should have stepped in to protect the twins right to privacy from press intrusion?

They really are a gruesome twosome, imo. Not nearly as intelligent as the Portuguese police.

And I do believe they are now reaping what they sowed. But I do feel sorry for the twins.

poster Thu 26 May 2016, 2:53 pm

The McCann parents looking remarkably happy as early on as the 20th May and courting the press.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6673601.stm

Andrew Thu 26 May 2016, 4:56 pm

You were of course right, costello. Diddly squat about the Mc's appealing in the news.

Saving their ink I suppose when it's confirmed it's been rejected.

Sharpening their knives in the background.

costello Thu 26 May 2016, 6:20 pm

Andrew wrote:You were of course right, costello. Diddly squat about the Mc's appealing in the news.

Saving their ink I suppose when it's confirmed it's been rejected.

Sharpening their knives in the background.

Well that will be a first for me Andrew! Seriously though I do think they have bitten off more than they can chew, but have had to go along with
this appeal to save face (just my thoughts). I'm just hoping their appeal is rejected, the law of averages states it should.

Sponsored content

GONCALO AMARAL WINS APPEAL! - HE MAY SUE THE McCANNS