Friday, 22 April 2016

The days after

1. Introduction

After a long wait, the decision from the Appeal Court of Lisbon on the appeal filed by all defendants in what we have called the McCann v Amaral Damages trial has come out.

Unsurprisingly, the decision was in favour of the defendants. Unanimously in favour of them. Overwhelming in favour of them. Totally in favour of them.

The last sentence of the sentence sums it all. Concise and precise: “Costs, in both instances, by the AA., appealed”, The AA. are the Authors/Plaintiffs, the McCanns.

If when in our post “Surreal” (in which we analysed the sentence from the 1st Instance Court) we considered the fact that Mr Amaral had been sentenced to pay a ridiculous amount to the McCanns as a defeat – note, we emphasized then it was a defeat and not the defeat – then now we will have to consider this for what it is, a landslide victory.

At this moment we think a word of gratitude should be said to Leanne Baulch for setting up the GoFund through which we helped support Mr Amaral’s legal fees in this victorious battle.

We remind readers that this GoFund helped us show in our post “Fraud” how really fraudulent the McCann’s Fraudulent fund, also known as the Find Madeleine fund, is.

2. The finish line

We have been asked privately more than once if this decision means that the nightmare for Mr Amaral is over.

No, it isn’t but we would say that if one was to compare his ordeal to a marathon, then he’s now entered the stadium and is running around the track waving to the crowd standing in ovation.

But he hasn’t crossed the finish line yet. He’s still running. Yes, his 2 nearest opponents, by the name of Kate and Gerry are about 15 miles behind and crying with cramp in both legs but the fact is that Mr Amaral hasn’t crossed that line yet.

The finish line are the words “transitado em julgado” (transited in judgement). Between him and them is the appeal to the Supreme Justice Court by the McCann team which we think will be submitted.

3. The McCann appeal

We think the McCann legal team cannot accept defeat, it must be imposed and if there’s still a step to be taken, however innocuous and useless, then it will be taken even if only as we’ve just said, to keep face.

However, having read the Appeal Court’s sentence, we foresee that the Supreme Justice Court will not see any grounds to accept it.

We say this based on the following 2 things:

First, because there are now 2 legal decisions on this particular matter of fact and law, at Appeal Court level, in which both determined that the McCann’s right to a good name and reputation under the presumption of innocence comes second to Mr Amaral’s right to freedom of speech. To appeal based on the conflict of these rights is really calling the Appeal court stupid and stubborn.

Second, because the only pending issue, which was brought up by the 1st Instance Court judge in her sentence, on whether Mr Amaral could not have written the book due to alleged professional limitations of secrecy and reserve, was completely clarified in this sentence:

Nonetheless, in the appealed decision it was understood that, having the now 1st appellant, Gonçalo Amaral, up until 2/10/2007, been the coordinator of the criminal investigation, related with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, he would be, even after his retirement, in 1/7/2008, subject to the duties of secrecy and reserve, imposed by the regulations of the employees working in the PJ.

And, on such terms, despite the personal reasons invoked in the introductory note of the book, in a situation of conflict with the rights of a good name and reputation of the appealed, he wouldn’t be enjoying, taking into account the results of the investigation, of ample and total freedom of expression – being, as such, his conduct illicit, for the effects of the Artº 484º of the C. Civil (Civil Code).

Of the above, in respect to it, was said, it clearly is inferred that the argumentation cannot be accepted.

In effect, and independently of the reasons invoked by the appellant for the publication, it would be hardly understood that an employee, furthermore retired, would maintain the alluded duties of secrecy and reserve, being limited in his right to have an opinion, relative to facts already made public by the judiciary authority and amply debated (and, in a great measure, by the initiative of the participants themselves) in the media, national and foreign.” 

We beg forgiveness for the convoluted language used above but Portuguese legalese is quite a task to translate but we tried to keep it as close to the original as possible.

for forgiveness First, it was an issue brought up by the judge and not by the McCann legal team, so for them to use it would be unbecoming and then this court by saying that it is “hardly understood” to even consider the idea that Mr Amaral could not write the book, leaves very little space – we would even say none – for any sort of contest against what it has ruled.

So it has now been very clearly legally determined that in the cases of the book and documentary Mr Amaral’s right to speak absolutely supersedes the McCann’s right to a good name and reputation from the presumption of innocence and that there’s no professional limitation for Mr Amaral to use all his abilities to speak.

As we’re not seeing any other valid argument to be used in the appeal, we’re not seeing the Supreme Justice Court even accept it for analysis. That doesn’t mean there wont be one. We think there will be, just to save face, even knowing beforehand it will be refused.

4. Replacement of judge

The only other possible argument – note we are excluding it immediately from the valid ones – would be to challenge the nomination of a judge because she had already taken part in the collective of judges who took the decision to overturn the Cautionary Action that had banned Mr Amaral’s book.

We must say upfront that if they filed the appeal based on this argument it would mean that the McCann legal team would be treading very, very dangerous ground. A path they should really think better before walking it.

It would be saying that an Appeal Court judge was unable to judge for herself her own incapacity to judge in this instance or, even worse, that she kept silent when knowing there was a conflict of interest.

This is a very serious accusation to make. Defaming a judge gets one into prison in Portugal, and very swiftly so.

A conflict of interests only exists when there’s a personal relationship between the judge and anyone representing any of the parties under judgement.

A judge is the first one to know if there is a conflict of interest. Implying that the judge didn’t realise there was one is defaming her by calling her incompetent to hold the position she holds, and implying that she tried to get it past her colleagues without them noticing is calling her dishonest, a worse defamation.

It would also seriously put in check the capability of the Appeal Court itself in being able to  nominate judges.

Besides, the whole idea is preposterous. If that was possible, a whole team of judges would have to be necessary to judge a reoffending criminal. As if a burglar could not be sent to prison twice by the same judge.

As there are unfortunately many reoffending criminals around in every country, no nation could keep up with the number of judges needed to fulfil such a requirement. Ridiculous.

Also, one appeals to a court, not to a judge. There’s a judge who decides whether the appeal has grounds to be accepted or not and if it is then all happens inside the court. Court, not courtroom. The appeal is sent to a collective of judges for decision. The judges are drawn up by a raffle system to obey the Principle of the Natural Judge. Basically, the parties only get to know who the judges are when they get to read their names in the sentence.

Honestly, we find it very strange for Isabel Duarte ever saying that and we believe what happened was she was probably noting that in both decisions there was the same judge and the whole issue got blown out of proportion to the point of having the McCanns absurdly requesting the replacement of one of the Appeal Court judges.

If she said it, then we must say that she does disappoint us. We do not empathise with the woman but we do not underestimate her professional capabilities.

It took as long as it took because the system is slow by nature and this court is undermanned. In September, as we have said before, we were told then that the decision would only come out in April and it turned out that our source was absolutely correct. The reason given then? Court is undermanned.

To sum up, if the Supreme Justice Court refuses to accept, as we expect it will, then nothing else will stand between Mr Amaral and the sentence transiting in judgement.

Then his marathon will be finished.

Whether he decides to start another is totally up to him. It seems he’s made up his mind about that. But then it will be his decision which we encourage and support.

5. Libel v Damages

In our post “No longer libel, so stop calling it libel” we explained why the trial had nothing to with libel as nowhere did the McCanns say Mr Amaral lied.

They drew the line by saying he couldn’t say what he said, not because it was false but because he should take into account the presumption of innocence.

And because he allegedly did not take that into account, they said they felt their name and reputation had been damaged.

Libel in Portugal is a crime, judged in a criminal court. The McCann v Amaral trial took place in a civil one.

A few days after our post, Mr Amaral gave us full reason, it wasn’t about libel but about damages.

If up to now it was frustrating to see the use of the word libel, as of the 19th it became amusing because now the word is linked to the fact that it is no longer considered libel to say that Maddie is dead, to say that her parents faked her abduction and to say that they helped dispose of her body.

By linking the word libel to the McCann defeat, as the MSM is doing, it achieves just that.

Maybe it’s on purpose. Just saying.

6. A very important witness

The sentence is divided in 4 parts:

- #1, The appeals, one by Mr Amaral (it has 29 bullet points) and the other by Guera & Paz together with Valentim de Carvalho (it has 40 bullet points). The McCanns are only mentioned in a sentence saying they stated they wanted the sentence to be upheld;

- #2. Proven facts in 1st Instance court (83 proven facts);

- #3. Analysis;

- #4. Decision.

We would say that this sentence both in form and content was what we were expecting from the 1st Instance Court a year ago and didn’t get.

An introduction with what each side claimed, what were the proven facts, a short analysis and a decision.

Of this decision, all we can say is that we couldn’t agree more.

Of the analysis, we have already shown in the current post that we are again in full agreement.

Of the proven facts, we did an analysis on them in our post “To haste or not to haste”.

Of the appeals, the only surprise came in finding out the importance that Mr Amaral’s legal team gave to 3 witnesses, and to one in particular, Michael Wright, to prove that Mr Amaral did not cause any special kind of damage to the McCanns with his book and documentary:

“To be noted that, under the terms of the same norm [art. 483º of the Civil Code], besides the illicitness, which is not verified, to sustain the civil indemnity request, it would also be necessary proof of effect [nexo de causalidade] between the defendant’s behaviour and the damages, worthy of notice, suffered by the authors, which, if we pay attention to the responses given to articles 11 and 16 of the instructory base, as well as the respective motivation, is completely set aside.

It should, furthermore, be taken into account that the statements contained in these articles appear to be more like conclusions and not as facts to be taken into an instructory base.

Conclusions which, in any way, are grounded in any factuality, both the contained in that base as in that basis as in what was poured in the pleadings of the authors.

In case, however, by absurdity, they are considered as such (damages of alleged fact, worthy of protection and in some way caused by the book and by the DVD) what is contained in the articles 13º to 15º of the instructory base – nothing else was given as proven as damages – it should be said that they aren’t true.

To assess this falsehood, and in the measure the now appellant understands how infirmed such “facts” are, it will be enough the re-appreciation of the recorded proof, being, the statement of the witness Michael Terrence Wright, the statement of the witness Alan Robert Pike and the statement of the witness Angus Keith McBride.

Statements that show that, even before the publication of the book and the documentary in question, publicly circulated, with the knowledge of the authors, namely in the internet, theories and theses identical to the defendant’s one.

As such, being truthful the sentiments given as proven in the matter of fact now in question, be they of rage, despair, anguish, ill-being or worry, namely as to what the children may come to think, the truth is that the reasons for them already existed before any intervention from the defendant, now appellant.

The same can be said about in respect to the insomnia and lack of appetite.

The court should take into account that the deponents are all close witnesses to the authors (family member, psychologist and lawyer) and that, notably, in their statements, end up always trying to devaluate the theses prior the book and documentary and, naturally, overvalue the impact of these in the spirit of the authors.

Especially in relation to the witness Michael Terence Wright, who was in charge of accompanying the authors, after the disappearance of the minor Madeleine Beth McCann, in the dissemination of campaigns and monitoring some sites and information spread via Internet.

Witness that, when in the summary and critical analysis of the main statements from witnesses, was discredited by the court (and correctly so) by accompanying himself with handwritten notes where appeared in order, in an almost perfect chronological sequence, the topics of the answers to the questions that were made to him in the final hearing.

But whose statement, in this court, when he accepts, evidently against his will, that already before the book and the documentary there circulated adverse theses to the McCann couple – against the defendant/appellant – should, on the contrary, be especially be taken into account.”

Again we apologise for the convoluted legalese.

Of the 29 bullet points, as can be seen, 12 are dedicated to Michael Wright. How grateful must Mr Amaral be that the McCann team decided to call this gentleman to the stand!

What Michael Wright said in court can be read in our McCann v Amaral Lisbon Trial blog.

7. The Emperor and his tailors

We know many have come here today with their heart filled with hope that things are coming to an end soon.

The bad news is that we can’t tell anyone that. We don’t have a crystal ball and we’re not inside the head of those deciding.

But the good news is that for the exact same reasons we can’t state the contrary.

As we have said in our post “The importance of King Richard” it all depends on him and only him, whoever he is.

We are certain that if he could, he would sweep the issue under the carpet but the elephant is too big for that as we have seen.

The Establishment has pretended up to now that the big thing beneath the rug with tusks and a trunk sticking out is just a minor lump on the floor beneath it. It fools no one but until it’s officially said that the Emperor is naked, his non-existing clothes will be the most fashionable ones in the Kingdom.

And that particular story has much use in this case, as it wasn’t the child saying the Emperor had no clothes that made people see that he was walking around without them.

The Emperor knew then as everyone did that he had no clothes on.

Words heard cannot be unheard, we know that, but this story boils down to that single minute in which the Emperor, the King Richard of this story, had to make up his mind: ignore the child and continue the farce or own up to it.

He knew that if he pretended not to have heard the child and have her silenced the consequence would be the awkwardness seen in every face he would look at afterwards and this would go on for the rest of his life as he would have to continue the pretence of being clothed when he and all looking at him saw and knew him naked. And that would be the way he would be remembered in history books.

The other option would be to face the embarrassment and vent his fury on those he would say had fooled him.

We all know he opted for the latter but we do tend to overlook the existence of the first.

If for some reason the tailors had some sort of real crunching power over the Emperor, would he have any other option but the first one?

In the Maddie affair, it’s evident that the tailors have that sort of very significant power over the Emperor.

He has told the tailors they are forcing him to face the crowd naked and they have made him go out that way anyway.

As we have seen over the years many a child has spoken out but their voices were either ignored or smothered.

We think that in the Maddie case the only way the Emperor can decide against his tailors is for him to find leverage that will enable him to do that.

Only one child’s voice, however candid, will not be sufficient. Not even the voices of all children. They are minors and can be ignored.

It requires collective laughter from the entire crowd, from both child and adult alike.

We are the children of that crowd, the MSM the adults. That’s the reality, whether one likes it or not.

The good news is that in the Maddie affair, the adults are now starting to laugh with us.

8. The making of a crowd

Humanity is made up of cowards imagining themselves to be heroes. Before the reader thinks we’re criticising anyone, we’re not, we’re acknowledging the instinct of self-preservation. We all do what we can to protect ourselves and those we are responsible for, and that includes excluding unnecessary risks.

Now that the dawn of truth in the Maddie case is rising, we will see many a plant that was hidden in the soil in self-protection, to start to bloom. “Adult” and “children” alike. Do not criticise them, welcome them instead.

They are the ones, together with us, who will make up the chorus that will give the Emperor the necessary leverage to face the tailors and end this farce.

And the good thing is that we have been watching that many such flowers are starting to bloom.

We have already mentioned how the MSM has been using the word libel. How it’s showing that to call the McCann bluff is no longer considered libellous – it was never libellous, only the Establishment having made sure we all felt the fear associated with it.

No pejorative adjectives used against Mr Amaral. If it wasn’t the use by some tabloids of the word cop instead of detective, we would say the MSM is indeed joining the chorus. If one considers that cop is the appropriate word in the tabloid vocabulary used to say detective, then one could even say the entire MSM has joined.

Even the Star, the only – yes, the only – paper to side with the McCanns in the summer of 2011, has put a very compromising headline for the McCanns: “Maddie: cop wins right to accuse parents”. The main headline of its front page.

Women have won the right to be treated equally. Gays have won the right not to be discriminated. Black people of the US and of South Africa won the right to be an integral part of their societies.

People who win rights are the one who hold reason. Especially when they are resilient in fighting for them.

And isn’t the verb to accuse really a strong one to use? And even more so when preceded by righteousness.

All media, both serious and otherwise, reported the story. Even outside Portugal and the UK. The message is the same: McCanns sued Mr Amaral and came back empty handed.

A public and notorious humiliation.

The perception the general public now has is that it was confirmed Mr Amaral was telling the truth and the McCanns are lying. The public feels Mr Amaral was vindicated. If popularity were shares in a stock market, the McCann ones would be very difficult to get rid of. Even for free. Even if one paid for someone to take them.

The pressure on the UK is simply enormous. The Emperor without clothes in the childrens story faced less pressure when he stood as he came to this world before the crowd.

9. Banning in 21st Century UK

But the most significant thing that happened as a reaction to the sentence was the Mirror’s article in which the McCanns threaten to sue anyone caught selling Mr Amaral’s book in the UK.

Suddenly the UK has become Nazi Germany when books were burned. And it has become a state like North Korea in which what is true outside its borders is only true if first is true inside them.

And if the truth is not true inside them then it must be persecuted and those helping it spread be severely and exemplarily punished.

But at least in Nazi Germany and in North Korea these rules were set by the state.

In 21st Century UK they are set by a couple of doctors from Rothley.

And the entire UK – as far as we know it is still so – kneels before them.

In 21st Century UK, little Bogeyman Jr is cautioned when he goes to bed by his parents, Mr and Mrs Bogeyman, that they will call the McCanns if he doesn’t behave well.

One wonders if they are going to sue Katie Hopkins because of her tweet: “The words you can't seem to say @BBCNews are 'The Truth of the Lie.' Back on shelves soon”?

They have to if they meant their threat.

Katie Hopkins is giving explicitly more publicity to the book then any bookstore by putting it on its shelves. She now has 636,000 followers. That’s 636,000 people who have asked to read it.

One must add many more who don’t follow her but read her.

Many of whom, both followers and non-followers, who don’t follow the Maddie case were just informed what the title of the book was. And a picture of its cover.

McCanns must sue Hopkins otherwise their threat is only filled with hot air.

We would really be curious to see if the UK Justice System would pretend to ignore the decision taken by its Portuguese counterpart and how it would react when it would be brought in as evidence.

10. The forbidden fruit

People seem to be misreading this threat. Yes, they really have to be very desperate to pull such a similar stunt. As always we ask our readers to please look a little further than what is placed in front of them.

What are the 2 main characteristics of this piece of news? It’s obnoxious and ridiculous.

Unusually obnoxious and unusually ridiculous. Way too much of both to be just them.

The reason, in our opinion, is to make people go search for the book. The forbidden fruit effect. Is it forbidden? Then one just needs to have it, doesn’t one?

Take for example one of the many Katie Hopkins’ followers who are not familiar with the case. She says the title and the obnoxious couple threatens to sue anyone selling it. What is the natural reaction but to go search it online.

In fact, one of the best ways to boost sales of a book in this world connected online is to be able to get it banned.

Twitter is now filled with people now saying that they want to get their hands on Mr Amaral’s book.

Will the McCanns also sue Luisa Zissman for wanting to read Mr Amaral’s book: “I really want to read the book "Truth of the lie" by Gonzalo Amaral re the Madeline McCann case. Where can I get English copy”?

They should as Luisa Zissman has 575,000 followers.

Please note the same spelling mistake in Mr Amaral’s name as the one made by the Mirror. Was it from Katie Hopkins that Luisa got the name of the book right and from the Mirror the want to read it?

11. The rising of the voices

So the crowd, in our opinion, is leaving little space for King Richard to decide against it. The leverage he has against the tailors is gaining an unstoppable momentum.

Then voices like those of Craig Murray start to appear.

As he says: “I have a confession to make. Back in 2014 I posted that I was going to write something further on the subject of the McCanns. In the end I did not, because I was surprised by the strong emotional reaction I received, from a number of decent people, who were enraged that I might be prepared to write something not to the McCanns’ advantage. But I regret being so pusillanimous, particularly as so much discussion has been suppressed by the extremely aggressive stance taken on threats of libel action on this story. So in the full knowledge that some decent people will be outraged, here it is.”

Other passages from the same post “The Strange Case of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the McCanns” in Mr Murray’s blog:

“Which leads me on to the question of why they received such exceptional treatment from British authorities, directed straight from No. 10, to the extent that Blair and Brown eventually gave them a PR representative? I used at one stage to be Resident Clerk in the FCO, a now abolished post effectively of night duty officer. I can tell you from horrible personal experience that the FCO deals with gut-wrenching cases of lost or dead children abroad frequently. I spent one of the most terrible three hours of my life, through to a cold dawn, on the phone with a hysterical bereaved mother desperate to explore any avenue that might give a possibility that the boy who had just drowned in Brazil was misidentified as her son. On average, I am afraid such tragedies get substantially less than 1% of the public resources that were devoted to the McCanns.

I am going to come straight out with this. British diplomatic staff were under direct instruction to support the McCanns far beyond the usual and to put pressure on the Portuguese authorities over the case. I have direct information that more than one of those diplomatic staff found the McCanns less than convincing and their stories inconsistent. Embassy staff were perturbed to be ordered that British authorities were to be present at every contact between the McCanns and Portuguese police.

This again is absolutely not the norm. On a daily basis more British citizens have contact with foreign authorities than the total staff of the FCO. It would be simply impossible to give that level of support to everybody. Plus, against jingoistic presumption, a great many Brits who have contact with foreign police are actually criminals.

The British Ambassador in Portugal, John Buck, had been my direct boss in the FCO. he was Deputy Head of Southern European Department when I was Head of Cyprus Section. He and his staff were concerned by contradictions in the McCann’s story. The Embassy warned, in writing, that being perceived as too close to the McCanns might not prove wise. They demanded the instruction from London be reconfirmed. It was.

I know of people’s misgivings because I was told directly. But material was also leaked to a Belgian newspaper confirming what I have said. It was published by the Express, but like so much other material which is not supportive of the McCanns, it got taken down. Fortunately that last link preserved it. It also shows that the FCO continues to refuse Freedom of Information requests for the material on the interesting grounds that it might damage relations with Portugal.”

Mr Murray has a reputation for integrity. He left an ambassadorial post on a point of principle.

Like most who only know of the case from what they have read – not necessarily believed – in the press Craig Murray believes in neglect. We doubt he's read all the files in detail or studied blogs.

He's commenting from his knowledge of diplomatic procedures and is earnestly noting the extraordinary behaviour in this case. And the comments on this post in his blog are interesting. Not all believe neglect.

12. Conclusion

Can there be more evident signs that all points to the clarification of this case.

Archiving Operation Grange, which we would now call it the Tailors’ Option under the context of this post, is a possibility we have always recognised, but it would be a recognition by the Emperor that he’s unable to face them even before a laughing crowd ridiculing him.

Now, and not wanting to get into politics here, it would seem to us that between some Panama papers and a Brexit referendum, “solving” the Maddie case would just be the popularity massage – without exercise swings – that the doctor ordered. Just saying.

What the days after will be will depend only on King Richard, or Emperor Richard to mix up stories. We, on our part, think he has now more than enough leverage.


  1. You have covered the latest developments extraordinarily well. I think your interpretation is excellent and worthy of a read from all, from members of the 'Establishment' to the 'mere' crowd who actually are so very important in shaping this case. With thanks

  2. There are a few journalists (!) who still like to take a swipe at Mr. Amaral. Calling him a 'bungling' 'incompetent cop' etc. Perhaps it's to hide the bitter pill behind the headline?

  3. Hi Textusa,thank you for another well written article and warm congratulations to Goncalo Amaral and his legal team for overturning a previous decision against him!
    I doubt whether the UK Government has the gumption to unlock the secret tryst that it has given to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann,with the highest level of support from the outset by former and present Prime ministers of the UK?
    Was Gerry pushing against his weight, when questioning David Cameron over previous promises on implementation of Leveson 2?
    The parents of Madeleine(Kate,Gerry) had previously given sworn testimonies at Leveson,which turned out to not be the full Truth and it transpired that they had paid a PR(Bell Pottinger,Mark Warner reps) firm 1/2 million pounds to keep them in the headlines for twelve months or more?
    There possibly must be some connection between Mark Warner and the UK Government,via Madeleine's disappearance but perhaps we will never know?
    Congratulations for your continued support for the Truth.

  4. Superb stuff, Bronte - Again!

    I wholeheartedly buy into your analysis, and can feel that conviction forming that a proper end to this very sorry tale is approaching, at last.


    Excellent article with very interesting points. I didn't realise GA and G&P considered the online version illegal. I would have paid to read it but I will buy an English version as soon as it's available and I'm sure the majority of people who also have will buy it too. It will be a world best seller with all this publicity.....mcs have done it again! This is a turning point and no going back now

    1. Anonymous22 Apr 2016, 14:10:00,

      The issue of Mr Amaral's opinion about the legality of the online version has been clarified by the article's author:

      We think Mr Amaral had to say it is illegal in order to clarify it wasn't with his blessing, which could have been seen as defiance of a court order, but we're sure he appreciates it was done to help him, which it has.

      A lot of people who downloaded it have like you said they will buy the book when available.

  6. A link to a joke of an article in a Leicestershire newspaper. Duarte's comments very interesting:

    1. Anonymous22 Apr 2016, 14:28:00,

      As we thought, saying "I and the McCanns are obviously disappointed but I am not surprised because one of the judges ruled in favour of a previous appeal overturning a ban on the book" is not saying she asked for the replacement of said judge.

      In this sentence she seems to explain on what grounds she's to file the appeal: "This decision was an appreciation of the law and not the facts. We can appeal to the Supreme Court which we will do as we have instructions from our clients."

      It doesn't make us change our opinion that the Supreme will not accept the appeal. The Supreme Justice Court is to judge issues of law and she's accepting that was done, even more than it should have been done in her opinion, at the lower level courts.

      Besides, proven facts are against the McCanns. Mr Amaral cannot be singled out as the only source of damage and, as the 1st Instance Court judge said, the damages claimed were to be expected after the couple decided to be part of a media circus.

      Their only defense was on the right to sanctity of a right against another right and that was duly analysed and contradicted.

  7. Portuguese media reporting:

  8. Thank you again Textusa,I,ve spent ages reading,then re reading ,especially Craig Murray,s piece,and although most of us have questioned the "special" treatment the McCanns were obviously getting,to hear those doubts confirmed is IMO fantastic!!! Lets hope others,who know ,they too have been part of this despicable cover up will also,now,follow Craig Murray! So thrilled with the result from Portugal this week,my family thought I,d won the lottery,which of course,I had!!!

  9. Since when has the Mirror actually reported the truth about anything? It's foolhardy to assume this story is accurate simply because it suits an agenda.

  10. This is a good analysis. I like your Emperor's New Clothes analogy - very apt. Certainly the "archive" option is more difficult now. The extra 95k was presumably to buy "them" a few months to get beyond the appeal which they hoped would go against Amaral. It would then be easy to archive.

    Now... not so much. The most recent story (despite its relative lack of coverage compared to the original 500k win) is of Amaral's success, the book back on sale and his accusations against the Parents.

    If the MET archive the case now, having spent 4 years unable to find an abductor or even a suspect, then the "well I guess it must have been the parents" will be the de-facto summary to their ill-fated investigation.

    The only way around it would be for them to publish a strongly-worded, well-publicised report exonerating the McCanns despite the failure to find an abductor. But even that is unlikely to convince any but their existing supporters.


    Now GA in the Sun is the former Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral and no longer the blundering cop. How times have changed indeed!

    1. Anonymous 23 Apr 2016, 12:29:00,

      Let's us play with the words in this article and put them into a mathematical equation:

      "former Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral"


      "who claimed they faked their daughter’s abduction"


      "won the major legal victory on Tuesday"


      "now intends to sue the McCanns for libel"


      "He was taken off the case for criticising British police"


      "His book, which he made £286,000 from, is due back on the shelves in Portugal next week"

      = need we say more?

      Noted, the fact that the McCanns have finally used the word "libel" against Mr Amaral, and even then using the twins to do it: "It has always been focused on the effects of the libels on our other children and the damage that has been done to the search for Madeleine".

  12. So it appears The Sun are going after Amaral tomorrow.

    1. That rag is SO going the way of the News Of The World - into oblivion.

  13. Recommend reading this regarding British Ambassador in Portugal then, John Buck:

  14. Mr Amaral on CMTV just now: the decision to archive was taken in October 2007. Who came after me, was to put things in order for the process to be archived.

  15. About an English version of the book, Mr Amaral on CMTV, 23Apr16:
    - Are you going to publish this book in English?
    - I have a full idea for that, I do… I know the couple has said they will sue if someone buys the book in England… but it’s like this, the couple are not owners of the English language and the book can be published in any language, namely in the English language, in any country where English is spoken or even on the Internet.
    Now what’s going to happen, only speaking with my publishers, as I still have rights over the book, but I do have that intention, yes, of letting the book to be known, even more so as there are badly translated copies on the Internet, so people have the right to know my opinion, and that of other people, and know them in an official work, so to speak.

    See comments - whoops Sun!
    Marion Greaves accuses Sun of lying about her
    Leanne Baulch has also responded:
    Didin't Tony Bennett first attack the GoFund and then had to retract himself and make a donation?



    1. Anonymous 24 Apr 2016, 10:40:00,

      Thank you for the link. Again good news.

      Recognising the possibility to appeal to this court, is admitting the appeal to the Supreme Justice Court will not be successful.

      There seems to me some misconceptions in the article abut this. This court does not have jurisdiction in any country. It only recommends. So, whatever appeal to it does not halt in any way the national procedures.

      If Supreme Justice Court rejects the appeal, the Appeal Court sentence transits in judgement and the MCanns have to pay the legal costs, and the case will be closed in court.

      If, for some strange reason, the Human Rights court gives reason to the McCanns, then the McCann will have won... reason. Nothing else. Likewise, if they confirm, as would be expected, that the reason lies with Mr Amaral, nothing changes except of him seeing his position morally reinforced.

      No one is forced to go to the Human Rights court. This to say that if the McCanns wish to spend money in this, it's their decision, but that doesn't mean Mr Amaral will have to spend a single cent.

      As said, out of this court comes out only a recommendation, so to it's up to him to engage or not in this process. If we were him, we would just sit and watch the McCanns spend money.

  18. The fact the Sun is allowing such scathing comments, including a quote from Gaspar statements, shows it's not really intended to be an article favourable to the McCanns.


    I'm not happy at being called a troll... but do I have any rights to challenge this inappropriate name calling

  20. We are watching this game play out. It's abominable and absurd.

    King Richard / The Emperor / David Cameron ... whoever has the power and means to bring this to an end should do so swiftly. Enough time, resource, money, distress and tragedy has been initiated by this 'affair'. Whoever has the means to bring this to a conclusion surely has a moral obligation to do so. It is shaming for the UK. Nothing can bring Madeleine back now and this is no longer about Madeleine. It is about ego and power.



    Posted by portugalpress on April 24, 2016
    Amaral’s libel win opens Pandora’s Box on national television

    A new ‘mood’ has emerged following the successful appeal by former PJ inspector Gonçalo Amaral against €500,000 libel damages awarded to the parents of missing Madeleine McCann.

    For the first time “serious figures” formerly connected to the government and PJ are questioning the political pressures that effectively shut-down the original Portuguese investigation - allowing nothing to move forwards other than the abduction theory.

    Without naming names or pointing fingers, it is clear that Amaral’s victorious return from the cold of litigation has paved the way for less-than-habitually-guarded discussion.

    While here CMTV screened a four-way interview late on Saturday night which threw up the issue of ‘plausible leads’ nipped in the bud in the early days - as they simply did not fit with the abduction profile - in Edinburgh former ambassador and human rights activist Craig Murray has weighed onto the scene, outlining the sort of pressure with which Portugal had to contend.

    “I am going to come straight out with this”, he wrote in a post following news of Amaral’s appeal court win. “British diplomatic staff were under direct instruction to support the McCanns far beyond the usual and to put pressure on the Portuguese authorities over the case.

    “I have direct information that more than one of those diplomatic staff found the McCanns less than convincing and their stories inconsistent. Embassy staff were perturbed to be ordered that British authorities were to be present at every contact between the McCanns and Portuguese police.

    “This again is absolutely not the norm. On a daily basis more British citizens have contact with foreign authorities than the total staff of the FCO (Foreign and Commonwealth Office). It would be simply impossible to give that level of support to everybody”.

    John Buck, Murray’s direct boss in the FCO when he was head of Cyprus Section, was the British ambassador in Portugal when three-year-old Madeleine went missing in May, 2007.

    “He and his staff were concerned by contradictions in the McCann’s story”, Murray continues. “The Embassy warned, in writing, that being perceived as too close to the McCanns might not prove wise. They demanded the instruction from London be reconfirmed. It was.”

    Murray’s post does not dwell on the reasons for this “far beyond usual” support, but he concedes “that it might have put some psychological pressure on the Portuguese investigators and prosecuting officers in their determinations”.

    Talking on CMTV in the early hours of Sunday morning, former PJ director Manuel Rodrigues left little doubt that it had.

    In a one-hour “special” which went out between 11.30 and 12.40, Rodrigues and former Minister for Internal Administration Rui Pereira both lamented British interference which, Rodrigues concedes, may ensure that “blame” in this apparently unsolvable nine-year-old mystery “dies a spinster”.

    Why a faithful reconstruction of the night of Madeleine’s disappearance was never achieved he still does not know, he explained.

    “Someone stopped it. Don’t ask me to name names. We have already talked about all the assistance the (McCann) couple received from people directly connected with the British government. We have talked about the British government and the British police. I can’t interpret it any other way”.

    Rodrigues referred to the “pure ingenuousness” of Portuguese authorities, allowing forensic tests on evidence recovered to be allowed to take place in a British laboratory so that there was no whiff of uncertainty.

    In the first report, 15 alleles out of 19 that made up Madeleine’s DNA appeared, he said.

    Then, in a second report, all the alleles had “disappeared completely”.


  23. cont.

    Amaral too had his moment to outline some the ‘plausible hypotheses’ that emerged in the early days as his team shifted its focus from the likelihood of an abduction.

    A late-night sighting of three figures entering Luz church with a large bag coincided with the existence of a coffin inside the church, he said, into which Madeleine’s body could have been placed.

    The coffin - holding the remains of an elderly British resident - was taken the following day for cremation in the Alentejo.

    Amaral stressed nonetheless that the book ‘Maddie: The Truth of the Lie’ that the McCanns have sought to ban is not ‘his truth’ - nor indeed factual truth - but the opinion of the PJ in September of 2007 when it became clear their efforts were about to be archived.

    Since that time - and even when Scotland Yard became involved in 2011 and vowed to ‘peel back the layers’ of the mystery as if peeling an onion - none of those original lines of investigation have ever been revisited, resulting in the situation in which millions of pounds have been spent getting nowhere, or as Amaral put it: “going down a one-way street”.

    That the four-way interview went out at such a late hour suggests CMTV is still being careful about how it presents this case, but Amaral’s ‘victory’ for freedom of expression would appear to have lifted the lid on a Pandora’s Box shut tight from mainstream media for almost nine years.

    In UK, the Sun leaked a lurid colour page promising an exposé on “Maddie Cop’s Sick Secret” on Sunday morning.

    It turned out to be nothing more than the rehash of an ‘Amaral-bashing’ story by the Express a year before in which British people donating to his legal expenses were tarnished as ‘online trolls’.

    But it served to highlight that ‘pressure’ in Britain to stick to the abduction theory and demonise everything else could still be at work.


    Wow - we are now being called British supporters... not trolls! Haven't read the article fully yet..

  25. Textusa - I just sent you the link to the Mirror article. Having now read through it I am feeling quite amazed and encouraged at the tone of the report.

    "One supporter of Goncalo Amaral wrote on Facebook: "I donated too and I will keep donating - this man deserves to have his say"

    "The former cop appealed the decision however, and parents Kate, 47, and Gerry, 48, were left fuming last week as three Portuguese appeal judges ruled in his favour."

    "British supporters of a Portuguese cop who claims Madeleine McCann’s parents lied following their daughter's abduction have raised £50,000 for him on GoFundMe. "

    "Those supportive of Amaral have been labelled "trolls".

    Another wrote: "So proud [to be] one of them 'trolls' who donated money to a good man who was simply doing his job." "

    The tone of the article is clearly not derisory towards the supporters who have donated. Indeed it does not label us as trolls but indicates that we "have been labelled "trolls".

    Why has it suddenly taken an about turn in attitude I wonder? Nothing if not encouraging

  26. Seems that the time is right to shelve the case in the UK according to R4 news item just out. What is your take on this Textusa, and the one line of enquiry remaining?

    1. Anonymous 26 Apr 2016, 11:04:00,

      Apologies for the late reply. We think you are referring to this:

      Madeleine McCann case: One line of inquiry remains

      Police are following one remaining line of inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, Scotland Yard boss Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe has said.

      The UK-based investigation into her disappearance could finish in the next few months, he told LBC radio.

      Madeleine, of Rothley, Leicestershire, was three years old went she missing from her family's Portuguese holiday apartment on 3 May 2007.

      Despite a high-profile hunt, no trace of her has ever been found.

      The remaining line of inquiry is centred around a letter asking for assistance sent from UK investigators to the Portuguese Public Prosecution Service in July 2015.

      In October last year, the Metropolitan Police confirmed that the number of UK officers investigating the case had now dropped from 29 to four, as the majority of work on the case had been completed.

      Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, said then that they fully understood the decision.


      As always, we will let the dust settle before coming to any conclusion about this.

      And one cannot disassociate this, for the good or for the bad, from the Hillsborough scandal (something that has come back to haunt, as any hidden truth inevitably does) that is blowing up on SY's lap right now.

    2. Very good point Textusa, I'm always interested to hear your take on things considering the history of this case. I was at the Liverpool vs Forest match back in '89, I shed a lot of tears today for the Liverpool families who lost loved ones and the justice they have finally received.

    3. We stand corrected. Hillsborough doesn't involve the Met but it does show cover-ups come to light eventually.

      It involved South Yorkshire police and the failure of West Midlands police investigation into this case.

      This is all about what we're trying to do. Very moving and eloquent.


      The worst football disaster in the UK and he can't remember?! Very convenient.

    5. Very apt:

    6. David Cameron is apologising for what happened.
      Will his successor have to do this for the M case in the future?

    7. Anonymous 26 Apr 2016, 14:35:00,

      The big difference, with ALL due respect to the 96 victims, is that the Hillsborough tragedy was only within the UK, not not known outside it.

      Maddie is a worldwide scandal.

    8. The families of the justice campaign- 22 people- are speaking live on TV now. Each relative reading out their statement. The conduct of public authorities criiticised, senior officers deflecting blame by yet another.
      The "slavish media" were criticised by one speaker.
      Their controlled grief and anger palpable. Some very ordinary people stumbling over some difficult words, but all the more touching is their courage in speaking on national TV.
      A mother speaking now about the great shame of police hiding the truth.
      If they had told the truth and accepted responsibility, "we would not be here now".
      Sounding all familiar?

    9. A wife speaks tearfully about having to protect her children from slurs against her husband-" an evil act "by police and politicians alike.
      She is shaking with emotion and nerves.
      She thanks helpers- " We never walked alone" in words of the song
      Trevor Hicks- father of 2 girls- not a good day for the establishment who " peddled the same old rubbish"
      Mrs Hicks- it's taken 27 years to find a brave jury
      "where is the person behind the dirty tricks brigade- where is he today?"
      Another lawyer
      I hope no Sun reporters here or undercover police! Laughter

    10. 40 families had to pay £150k for a barrister and also pay for a private prosecution.
      Margaret Aspinall
      What do the media feel now, believing those lies? They should be ashamed of themselves.

    11. Chief Constable Crompton of South Yorkshire suspended for fighting the truth of Hillsborough.


    Have they decided to take swift action and nip this in the bud now? In order to archive?

  28. I don't know why HH chose today to speak about M, when there is one line of inquiry still to be followed. Could be a hint that there is still something significant?
    Today, there was no focus on what he said about Op Grange. Hillsborough has overtaken everything on the news.

    1. They always look for 'a good day to bury bad news.'


  30. Passei para te enviar um beijinho e para te ler, claro :) excelente sumário dos últimos eventos.

  31. Can't believe, here they try again this old story ...



Comments are moderated.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.