BREAKING NEWS - Goncalo loses libel/damages trial and must pay damages

AndyB wrote:

Markus 2 wrote:

AndyB wrote:

Chop Suey on Toast wrote:and of course the accuracy of the book is relevant!

In what way? I didn't think the trial wasn't about the accuracy or otherwise of the book and DVD. It was about whether they'd harmed the search

The McCanns launched a libel action in 2009 claiming their family had suffered emotional and psychological harm as a result of the claims made in the book. “We want to emphasise that the action was never about money. It was entirely focused on the libels on our other children and the damage that was done in the search for Madeleine.”

All of it it seems

That's certainly what they claimed in the press, yet what they said in court was quite different. I've added a link to the findings of fact to the post that you quoted. Don't forget that the Supreme Court have already said that the book wasn't inaccurate and that GA was entitled to reach the conclusions he did, albeit that they were different from the official investigation.

Yes that is odd.
I think we have to wait for GA and his team to reply but it does seem there is some hold up over there in their system,yet TM were able to get this out. Hmm

chirpyinsect wrote:AndyB said

"That's certainly what they claimed in the press, yet what they said in court was quite different. I've added a link to the findings of fact to the post that you quoted. Don't forget that the Supreme Court have already said that the book wasn't inaccurate and that GA was entitled to reach the conclusions he did, albeit that they were different from the official investigation."
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jane Tanner claimed in her rog that she had never identified Murat as the man she saw yet GA claimed in the documentary and in the book that she had informally done so. There is no record in the released files but may be in the held back version. I did read that Jane was taken back after the id parade straight to OC and she didn`t sign any statement formally so it is her word against the police here. This is the relevant section from the Judgement.

The judge does note that some of the facts in the book are not complete, and some facts that are in the book are not in the case files, including Jane Tanner's "informal" recognition of Robert Murat.

I agree, but I'm not advancing the argument that the book is 100% accurate, just the idea that the accuracy of the book is irrelevant because it wasn't at issue in the trial, the appeal court having already ruled on it withthe supreme court ratifying that decision

Don't know what to make of this?

Mari Welzel@umweltbuerger  -12m

Textusa comments Anonymous 08:50:00
"TVI is using a fake document. Repeat "TVI used faked document" I have pics to prove it.

AndyB wrote:

chirpyinsect wrote:AndyB said

"That's certainly what they claimed in the press, yet what they said in court was quite different. I've added a link to the findings of fact to the post that you quoted. Don't forget that the Supreme Court have already said that the book wasn't inaccurate and that GA was entitled to reach the conclusions he did, albeit that they were different from the official investigation."
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jane Tanner claimed in her rog that she had never identified Murat as the man she saw yet GA claimed in the documentary and in the book that she had informally done so. There is no record in the released files but may be in the held back version. I did read that Jane was taken back after the id parade straight to OC and she didn`t sign any statement formally so it is her word against the police here. This is the relevant section from the Judgement.

The judge does note that some of the facts in the book are not complete, and some facts that are in the book are not in the case files, including Jane Tanner's "informal" recognition of Robert Murat.

I agree, but  I'm not advancing the argument that the book is 100% accurate, just the idea that the accuracy of the book is irrelevant because it wasn't at issue in the trial, the appeal court having already ruled on it withthe supreme court ratifying that decision

I think there are one or two inaccuracies ie dates that don`t tally. The book is based on the files and the opinions of the PJ at that time but the Macs were suing him for the hurt caused by the book being published and for the harm it did to the search.
In the findings of January most of these things were not proved except that the parents were hurt but no more than could be expected by losing their daughter.
Whether we agree with those findings or not, the fact remains that the judge made this decision based on the case the Macs put to the court. To us it looked a shoe in for an Amaral win or at least minimal damages.
Afaik the accuracy or otherwise of his theory was not the issue.
It would take a proper criminal trial for the parents to try to disprove GA`s (and the PJ`s ) theory and they were never going to do that were they?

costello wrote:Don't know what to make of this?

Mari Welzel@umweltbuerger  -12m

Textusa comments Anonymous 08:50:00
"TVI is using a fake document. Repeat "TVI used faked document" I have pics to prove it.

i

See up thread at 10.04

Thetruth wrote:

costello wrote:Don't know what to make of this?

Mari Welzel@umweltbuerger  -12m

Textusa comments Anonymous 08:50:00
"TVI is using a fake document. Repeat "TVI used faked document" I have pics to prove it.

i

See up thread at 10.04

Thanks.

Thanks for posting the piece from the laidbare BlogSpot. Was just about to do same.

Have tweeted Brunt and Lawton , politely asking why media seemed to have been in possession of court docs hours before GA and /or his lawyer. No replies yet.

Also asked Brunt re his written piece 4 Sky where he said this award would go to the fund, why he thought there was a need for such when 2 police forces have spent and are continuing to spend millions on the case.

I posted this over 90mins ago....


Last night on the 20H00 news, TVI showed an image of the document and made some quotes from it.
I found this to be very strange because GA«s team said they had not been notified yet.
This morning TVI put on the report again so I freezed the image.
TVI is using a fake document. Repeat, TVI used fake document. I have the pics to prove it!
The doc shown is from 27/03/2015. It's from March!
And where the McCann names should appear it's altered!
What is going on????
Textusa I'll send my mail in a do not publish comment next if you want me to send you the pictures.
Anyone in Portugal who has MEO or TVCabo can go to programções automaticas and confirm this.

Sonia Poulton @SoniaPoulton  ·  12 mins 12 minutes ago
I have been informed that as of an hour ago, #Amaral's lawyer still did not have notification. #McCann

There are/were links between ITV and some news outlets in Portugal iirc.

Thanks Bampots. Lets not forget that  Sky and TM have kept up the tradition of getting the news to SKY first.
On 3/5/07 before the police was called and in this case before the defendants were notified.

mcFadden has just tweeted some  documents.

Certainly the WoC issue did not go the way of the McCs.

Courtesy of Inspirespirit on CMoMM by not sure what authority Deborah Jayne Law copied it from :-

"Just saw this on facebook.


Deborah Jayne Law
40 mins · Edited
The ruling just published online you will see how unprecedented this is
DECISION
**
Given the above, on balance of fact and law, decide:

I. Judging remedied the representation of irregularity MADELEINE McCann BETH author in accordance with article 29, paragraph 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and, therefore, dismiss the objection raised by the defendant GONÇALO AMARAL.

II. Declared partly the claims made in the main action by the authors KATE MARIE PATRICK HEALY McCann and Gerald McCann against the defendant GONÇALO AMARAL, and to that extent, the second sentence to pay each of the first indemnity the amount of Euro 250,000.00 (two hundred and fifty thousand euros) plus default interest at the statutory rate of interest civilians, since January 5, 2010 until full payment.
III. Dismiss the other requests made in the same action, the authors KATE MARIE PATRICK HEALY McCann and Gerald McCann against the defendant GONÇALO AMARAL and the same acquit the defendant.

IV. Fully judge rejected the requests made, in the same action, the authors MADELEINE BETH McCann, Sean Michael McCann and McCann AMELIE EVE against the defendant GONÇALO AMARAL and the same acquit the defendant.

V. Declared partly the claims valid in attached action, the authors KATE MARIE PATRICK HEALY McCann and Gerald McCann against the defendants GONÇALO AMARAL, WAR & PEACE, EDITORS, SA and VC - OAK-FILM VALENTINE, AUDIOVISUAL, SA, and in the same measure:

a) prohibit the defendants Gonçalo Amaral and War and Peace, Editor, SA selling book "Maddie - The Truth of the Lie" and condemn them in the collection, for delivery to the authors, within sixty (60) days after res judicata, of copies of this book that still remain in bookstores, other retail outlets, warehouses and warehouses.
District of Lisbon
Lisbon - Inst. Central - 1st Civil Chamber - J15
Palace of Justice, Border Marquis Street - 1098-001 Lisboa
Tel: 213 846 400 Fax: 213 874 221 Mail: lisboa.centralcivel@tribunais.org.pt
Proc.Nº 1454 / 09.5TVLSB

b) prohibit the defendants Gonçalo . Amaral and War and Peace, Editor, SA execution of new editions of the same book

c) prohibit the defendant VC - Oak-Movies Valentine, Audiovisual, SA execution of new editions of the DVD "Maddie, The Truth of the Lie".

d) prohibit the defendants Gonçalo Amaral, War and Peace, Editor, SA and VC - Oak-Movies Valentine, Audiovisual, SA, respectively, of the transfer, onerous or free, any form of copyright and book publishing and DVD. and) order, each of these defendants, the penalty payment of EUR 50,000.00 (fifty thousand euros) for each offense of the above prohibitions.

VI. Judge over the rest of unfounded the claims made in the action attached by the authors KATE MARIE PATRICK HEALY McCann and Gerald McCann against the defendants GONÇALO AMARAL, WAR & PEACE, EDITORS, SA and VC - OAK-FILM VALENTINE, AUDIOVISUAL, SA and same acquit the defendants.

VII. Judging fully rejected the claims made in the attached action against TVI defendant - INDEPENDENT TELEVISION, SA, the same acquitting the defendant.

VIII. Judging fully rejected the claims made in the action attached by the authors MADELEINE BETH McCann, Sean Michael McCann and McCann AMELIE EVE.

IX. Judging unchecked (subject to incidental sentence imposed in the order of 20 May 2014) the litigation in bad faith of either party.

X. Condemn the perpetrators KATE HEALY MARIE McCann, GERALD PATRICK McCann, MADEILENE BETH McCann, Sean Michael McCann and McCann AMELIE EVE and the defendant GONÇALO AMARAL the expense of the main action in the proportion of 58.30% for the former and 41.70% for second, in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 527 of the Civil Procedure Code.

XI. Condemn the perpetrators KATE HEALY MARIE McCann, GERALD PATRICK McCann, MADEILENE BETH McCann, Sean Michael McCann and McCann AMELIE EVE and defendants GONÇALO AMARAL, WAR & PEACE, EDITORS, SA and VC - OAK-FILM VALENTINE,


District of Lisbon
Lisbon - Inst. Central - 1st Civil Chamber - J15
Palace of Justice, Border Marquis Street - 1098-001 Lisboa
Tel: 213 846 400 Fax: 213 874 221 Mail: lisboa.centralcivel@tribunais.org.pt
Proc.Nº 1454 / 09.5TVLSB
AUDIOVISUAL, SA at the expense of attached action in the proportion of 50%, in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 527 of the Civil Procedure Code.
Notify.
Sign.
**
*
Almada, April 27, 2015
(processed by computer and reviewed by signatory)
(from 29 March April 9 - Easter legal holidays)  "

re these sections  
X. Condemn the perpetrators KATE HEALY MARIE McCann, GERALD PATRICK McCann, MADEILENE BETH McCann, Sean Michael McCann and McCann AMELIE EVE and the defendant GONÇALO AMARAL the expense of the main action in the proportion of 58.30% for the former and 41.70% for second, in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 527 of the Civil Procedure Code.

XI. Condemn the perpetrators KATE HEALY MARIE McCann, GERALD PATRICK McCann, MADEILENE BETH McCann, Sean Michael McCann and McCann AMELIE EVE and defendants GONÇALO AMARAL, WAR & PEACE, EDITORS, SA and VC - OAK-FILM VALENTINE,


X appears to suggest a division of court costs, and that Mcs must pay a higher proportion? Those might wipe out their awarded damages - it will be interesting to find out the total court costs if this is the case.

is part of X1 missing ?

Mimi wrote:Courtesy of Inspirespirit on CMoMM by not sure what authority Deborah Jayne Law copied it from

It looks like a translation of the last part of this: http://www.eliphashardi.eu/

There's a link to it in the article that Anny linked to on page 14 of this thread

Russian Doll wrote:re these sections  
X. Condemn the perpetrators KATE HEALY MARIE McCann, GERALD PATRICK McCann, MADEILENE BETH McCann, Sean Michael McCann and McCann AMELIE EVE and the defendant GONÇALO AMARAL the expense of the main action in the proportion of 58.30% for the former and 41.70% for second, in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 527 of the Civil Procedure Code.

XI. Condemn the perpetrators KATE HEALY MARIE McCann, GERALD PATRICK McCann, MADEILENE BETH McCann, Sean Michael McCann and McCann AMELIE EVE and defendants GONÇALO AMARAL, WAR & PEACE, EDITORS, SA and VC - OAK-FILM VALENTINE,


X appears to suggest a division of court costs, and that Mcs must pay a higher proportion? Those might wipe out their awarded damages - it will be interesting to find out the total court costs if this is the case.

is part of X1 missing ?

I think the whole of XI is this
XI. Condemn the authors KATE MARIE HEALY MACCANN, GERALD PATRICK MACCANN, MADEILENE BETH MACCANN, SEAN MICHAEL MACCANN and AMELIE EVE MACCANN and defendants GONÇALO AMARAL, WAR & PEACE, editors, S.A. and V.C.-VALENTIM DE CARVALHO-movies,
AUDIOVISUALS, S.A. in the expense of action attached in the proportion of 50%, in accordance with paragraph 1 of article 527º of the code of Civil procedure.

Thanks Andy B, so these are additional costs of half paid by each?

Maybe wishful thinking but didn`t K and G ask for 250k each and this sentence states that PART of that will be awarded.

Declared partly the claims made in the main action by the authors KATE MARIE PATRICK HEALY McCann and Gerald McCann against the defendant GONÇALO AMARAL, and to that extent, the second sentence to pay each of the first indemnity the amount of Euro 250,000.00 (two hundred and fifty thousand euros) plus default interest at the statutory rate of interest civilians, since January 5, 2010 until full payment.

As the judge only really stated that the book had caused some harm that was not greater than the orginal harm they felt when M went missing, surely she can`t be awarding the full amount asked for. Or am I reading this wrong?

Russian Doll wrote:  Thanks Andy B, so these are additional costs of half paid by each?

You're welcome. I'm guessing that's what it means but I can't see why the costs have been split in two (at parts X & XI) before being divided amongst the participants

Jim Gamble‏@JimGamble_INEQE 33m33 minutes ago
@magsmags @BBCWorld lol. The shame is all his. Unprofessional & IMO inexcusable behaviour that damaged the search for a missing child.

AAARGH!!!!!

You took the words right out of my mouth, Freedom.

There were plenty more that I wanted to say but I would have had to censor myself!

candyfloss wrote:Jim Gamble‏@JimGamble_INEQE 33m33 minutes ago
@magsmags @BBCWorld lol. The shame is all his. Unprofessional & IMO inexcusable behaviour that damaged the search for a missing child.

Nasty little man.

I. Judging remedied the representation of irregularity MADELEINE McCann BETH author in accordance with article 29, paragraph 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and, therefore, dismiss the objection raised by the defendant GONÇALO AMARAL.


Seems the judge did not allow GA`s objection to the Ward of Court - they must have managed to get the dates sorted and the Ward to confirm somehow.