Portuguese detective who led the search for Madeleine McCann vows to 'clean out' her parents as he sues them for damaging his reputation

The Portuguese detective who led the search for Madeleine McCann has promised to 'clean out' her grief-stricken parents by suing them for damaging his reputation.
Goncalo Amaral, 57, claimed in a book that Madeleine died at the McCann's holiday house in Praia da Luz and Kate and Gerry covered it up.
The McCanns won a libel case against Amaral in 2015, but this was overturned on appeal and that decision upheld in another court.
This means Amaral is now able to sue the McCanns for damages potentially totalling tens of thousands of pounds.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4415928/Detective-led-Madeleine-McCann-search-sue-parents.html

Good!!!

What's wrong with this guy? Has his life been ruined by them suing him for libel?

If he "knows" that they covered up the death of their daughter, he needs to prove it so they can be prosecuted. If he can't prove it, he needs to shut up.

Raggamuffin wrote:What's wrong with this guy? Has his life been ruined by them suing him for libel?

If has "knows" that they covered up the death of their daughter, he needs to prove it so they can be prosecuted. If he can't prove it, he needs to shut up.

Didn't the McCanns try to shut him up but the court case got overturned? Why exactly?

He wrote a book that told the story of the circumstances around the disappearance, the investigation and gave in depth details of all the evidence found in that investigation...


Unfortunately for the mccanns,  all the evidence pointed towards the theory that the girl died in the apartment and the mccanns covered it up.


That is not the detectives fault... and he has had his reputation trashed by the mccanns and the press.

HoratioTarr wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:What's wrong with this guy? Has his life been ruined by them suing him for libel?

If has "knows" that they covered up the death of their daughter, he needs to prove it so they can be prosecuted. If he can't prove it, he needs to shut up.

Didn't the McCanns try to shut him up but the court case got overturned?    Why exactly?  

Something to do with freedom of speech apparently.

On what grounds is he going to sue them anyway? They denied the things he said in his book - can he prove they were wrong to do so?

Oh, and why did he write a book? How much money did he make from it? If he has proof that they had something to do with the disappearance, he should go to the right people rather than try to make money out of writing a book.

His book gave a factual account of the investigation and details all the evidence found.

Raggamuffin wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Didn't the McCanns try to shut him up but the court case got overturned?    Why exactly?  

Something to do with freedom of speech apparently.

On what grounds is he going to sue them anyway? They denied the things he said in his book - can he prove they were wrong to do so?

They didn't just deny the things written in the book... they tried to silence him and ruin him financially... there was a viscous campaign of persecution and character assassination against him both during the investigation as well as after...!!!

When this man was assigned to investigate the case, he was a well renowned and well respected senior top detective...!

The investigation was the investigation... it threw up the evidence that it threw up... and the evidence pointed towards the way it pointed...!

He was just one of a large team of other detectives involved in investigating the case... all of whom were also regarded as being highly skilled/experienced professional police investigators...!

Even the British police who were sent over to help investigate, and having studied the evidence, came to the same conclusion that the primary line of enquiry was that the girl died in the apartment some time before she was reported missing, and that the mccanns had been involved in covering it up...!!!

There has never been any shred of evidence found that supports the 'abduction claim/story'...

In fact... there are numerous aspects of this caimed 'abduction' story that are so impossible/implausible/unlikely, as well as being contradictory to most of that which is known, and that not only has there been absolutely no evidence to support any of it... there has been evidence found that dismisses it!!!

The only people who are claiming that 'abduction' is what happened... are the very people who are suspected of being directly involved in/responsible for her disappearance...!?

So Goncalo Amaral is not interested in the truth and that his book was never about even attempting to explain the truth regarding the disappearance of Maddie. It was only ever about exploiting her disappearance. In order to gain money. This is easily to prove by the fact, he intend to financially clean the McCans. Over a claim his reputation was damaged. I mean if the objective was to speak the truth and that they truth be heard. Money would be immaterial.

He won the case not based off any facts, because there is no facts to the case. There is only speculation made off forensic evidence, witness testimonies, conflicting and unreliable data from one of the sniffer dogs etc. So he won his case based on Freedom of Expression. What he claims in the book will be nothing more than a hypothesis to the case. This is made clear by the appeal decision. The books content made zero difference to when being able to aplly the law regarding Freedom of Expression

So if his book was even slightly true, then there would be sufficient evidence to arrest and charge the Mccans. The reality is that there is insufficient evidence and that most of the book was born out of the fantasies and conspiracies by Amaral.

Even his own publishers stated as much

Fatima de Oliveira Esteves, representing publisher Guerra e Paz, admitted that Mr Amaral 'appeared to have invented' much of the book.

I agree with Thors post. /\

There have been so many opinions foisted onto people as facts, and so much speculation over the years since Maddie disappeared, plus the bad press her parents have had, most of it because they were neglectful, but also because they didn't weep and wail in front of the cameras.
But however the public perceive them, there has been no proof that they harmed their daughter that night.

I think they are two people racked by guilt for leaving her alone, and they have paid a very high price for that....and itcontinues, helped by this ex detective who it seems is still hungry for money and fame made on the back of this tragedy.

The book that the detective wrote, is a factual account of the known circumstances around the girls disappearance, and gives an in depth/factual account of the investigation, and an in depth/factual account of all the evidence...

And in a further blow, the Supreme Court ruling determined they were not “formally in the clear”.

“It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case,” the 78-page ruling said.

It went on to say that police ceasing their case against the pair “was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn’t managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the crimes by the appellants.”


http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/madeleine-mccanns-parents-will-fight-claims-she-died-they-staged-her-abduction-to-cover-it-up/news-story/7b0a8aa3dcb35e3d411cdb49073595ae

Tommy Monk wrote:

The book that the detective wrote, is a factual account of the known circumstances around the girls disappearance, and gives an in depth/factual account of the investigation, and an in depth/factual account of all the evidence...

Jackanory.

If its a factual account of the known circumstances, as you claim and being that he claims the parents are guilty.

How is it they have not been arrested?

There a massive reason as to why.

That its clearly not a factual account, but one of born from beliefs.

The mccanns were arrested and were 'arguidos'...


The book just tells the story of the known circumstances/facts...

Tommy Monk wrote:The mccanns were arrested and were 'arguidos'...


The book just tells the story of the known circumstances/facts...

Past tense, they were suspects and were released without any charges laid against them.

That means they are innocent until proven otherwise.

The book is a story and just that, a story, based off the beliefs of someone.

It all stinks to me. The whole shebang. I guess until they ever find that child's body then it remains in limbo.

HoratioTarr wrote:

The Portuguese detective who led the search for Madeleine McCann has promised to 'clean out' her grief-stricken parents by suing them for damaging his reputation.
Goncalo Amaral, 57, claimed in a book that Madeleine died at the McCann's holiday house in Praia da Luz and Kate and Gerry covered it up.
The McCanns won a libel case against Amaral in 2015, but this was overturned on appeal and that decision upheld in another court.
This means Amaral is now able to sue the McCanns for damages potentially totalling tens of thousands of pounds.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4415928/Detective-led-Madeleine-McCann-search-sue-parents.html

I guess that would be karma.

Thorin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:The mccanns were arrested and were 'arguidos'...


The book just tells the story of the known circumstances/facts...

Past tense, they were suspects and were released without any charges laid against them.

That means they are innocent until proven otherwise.

The book is a story and just that, a story, based off the beliefs of someone.

They didn't have charges dropped. As far as I remember they did a bunk and came home to England, having refused to answer many questions.

Whether they were guilty of her death or she was taken, which only they said, they are guilty of gross negligence. Had they been a poor working class couple, they would've been arrested. They knew/know people in high places, Gordon Brown to name one, and they got away with no charges.

What happened to the millions they got. Why are police still searching for Maddie when children go missing all the time, and nothing even said. They met the Pope, how many parents around the world with missing children get that honour.

Why did the vicar in that little church in Portugal have a breakdown.

So many questions, not enough answers. The whole thing stinks.

Whether she's found alive or not, the parents are to blame for negligence.

+1

magica wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Past tense, they were suspects and were released without any charges laid against them.

That means they are innocent until proven otherwise.

The book is a story and just that, a story, based off the beliefs of someone.

They didn't have charges dropped.  As far as I remember they did a bunk and came home to England, having refused to answer many questions.

Whether they were guilty of her death or she was taken, which only they said, they are guilty of gross negligence. Had they been a poor working class couple, they would've been arrested. They knew/know people in high places, Gordon Brown to name one, and they got away with no charges.

What happened to the millions they got. Why are police still searching for Maddie when children go missing all the time, and nothing even said.  They met the Pope, how many parents around the world with missing children get that honour.

Why did the vicar in that little church in Portugal have a breakdown.

So many questions, not enough answers. The whole thing stinks.

Whether she's found alive or not, the parents are to blame for negligence.

Spot on
Would have given you a greenie but keep getting flood control message?

magica wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Past tense, they were suspects and were released without any charges laid against them.

That means they are innocent until proven otherwise.

The book is a story and just that, a story, based off the beliefs of someone.

They didn't have charges dropped.  As far as I remember they did a bunk and came home to England, having refused to answer many questions.

Whether they were guilty of her death or she was taken, which only they said, they are guilty of gross negligence. Had they been a poor working class couple, they would've been arrested. They knew/know people in high places, Gordon Brown to name one, and they got away with no charges.

What happened to the millions they got. Why are police still searching for Maddie when children go missing all the time, and nothing even said.  They met the Pope, how many parents around the world with missing children get that honour.

Why did the vicar in that little church in Portugal have a breakdown.

So many questions, not enough answers. The whole thing stinks.

Whether she's found alive or not, the parents are to blame for negligence.

1) Yes they have been dropped. As why are not the Portuguese Police requesting their extradition to face trial?
You see when people are emotionally charged about a case, they invoke porkies as you are doing. As they are so convinced of guilt of the parents. That is your first failing here.

2) Of which they are paying the price for daily by the fact their daughter is now missing. That in itself is a sentence I would not place on any parent for an act of negligence. So what you are annoyed with is they sat within a complex to eat, and were not close enough to them. Fine you want to judge them on that and based on what law exactly? There is laws not age related that base leaving a child at home, when they are at risk.
So based off this crime, of which parents commit all the time, by leaving their children alone. You want to single them out and not only for this crime, but to continue to punish them. The law is grey in this area and they have suffered the ultimate consequences for believing their children were safe. Whilst they went out to eat within the complex.

You want to condemn them for this act alone of being misguided to believe their children were safe and that they parents were selfish?

No problem, but the fact this also gives rise to people to then claim they have murdered their own child and to see two parents who have suffered years for their act of negligence that night. Shows the false equivalence people want to mettle out to these parents over this.

So you are pissed that they have been able to keep the search going and others have been closed by the Police, as if that has any relevance? All cases should remain open and the reason this one has, is because of the constant media attention it has received. Blame the media for how and why they chose some cases  and not others. Don't use the McCans as a beating stick for why other cases of missing children do not receive the same coverage.

So you believe they should be convicted of neglect, for whilst on holiday, eating within the same complex.
So what fitting punishment would happen if they were arrested for neglect?

No more than a suspended sentence.

That shows the false equivalence at the outrage from people, as they clearly are baying for their blood, because people have decided through no court or law or any evidence. That they are guilty here or more than negligence.

So you may want to ask yourself why you and others want to continually make this family continue to suffer more than any sentence they would receive from A European or British court of justice.

Sadly it was always a British thing to leave kids alone at night whilst on holiday...maybe not so much since the McCanns daughter went missing, people have realised it IS neglectful and bad things CAN happen.

I worked in a couple of camps yonks ago, so many parents left kids tucked up for the night in chalets, then went off themselves to the club drinking and dancing (these were mainly working class parents btw) and the only supervision their children got was when a designated holiday camp employer was given a list of chalets with children left alone, where we would do the rounds and listen in through the walls....if all was quiet they were deemed to be safe. If they were crying their parents would be notified over the tanoy.

The McCanns DID neglect their kids by leaving them alone....just as thousands of British parents on holiday did before them.

They were the unlucky ones.....well Madeline was.

And of course the first thing you do when you notice your child is missing is shout:

"They've taken her"

Always found that odd.

eddie wrote:And of course the first thing you do when you notice your child is missing is shout:

"They've taken her"

Always found that odd.

Based on how many accounts of parents finding their children missing?

You see again someone basing a hypothetical claim to what every parent does when their child is missing. Not based on facts and even failing to accommodate how shock can effect people.

So the only thing that is odd, is for you to claim, this would be the first thing (in every case) to do when a child is missing.

Easy to claim in hindsight and even more so again when you already hold a confirmation bias.

Damn I've written a very long reply to you Thorin and lost it all.

magica wrote:Damn I've written a very long reply to you Thorin and lost it all.

I kept doing that yesterday...its so frustrating.

To refresh anyone's memory, an account of the known  facts that led up to and after Maddies disappearance.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/03/16/madeleine-mccann-latest-are-police-any-closer-to-knowing-the-tru/

No evidence what so ever of an abduction.

It's all been said a hundred times before ... But... The McCanns lied and did not cooperate with the police inquiry.

magica wrote:Damn I've written a very long reply to you Thorin and lost it all.

Sorry to hear that.

The point though that people fail to grasp, is that these two parents are having to live daily with the consequences of their decision on that night. Where based on that and because it has received mass media attention. They have also had to face countless hate from some of the general public. All because people have convinced themselves they are guilty are far worse than neglect. They also do this not off looking at the evidence with an open mind but with confirmation bias. Countless people make poor neglectful decisions as parents, but in this case, the parents have been given a life sentence of torment and abuse. Like I said, you want to condemn them for their neglect that night, then do so, but please spare me all the views about the case, as if you or others actually know what happened that night. Everyone has looked to find only the evidence and interpret this to fit their view they are guilty of far worse. I hope one day the girl is found alive more than anything or that if dead, her body is found, so then answers can truly be found around her disappearance. Until that happens, then people are in no position to judge here.

Miffs2 wrote:No evidence what so ever of an abduction.

It's all been said a hundred times before ... But... The McCanns lied and did not cooperate with the police inquiry.

Gibberish, again based on confirmation bias and not the many possibilities that she could have been abuducted.

Again a glowing example of a self made now Criminal expert failing foul of confirmation bias

There wasn't much evidence of anything really. False reports, untruths, bad policing immediately after the child was reported missing, it was all a shambles.

Profilers of missing children say the first hours are the most important in finding a missing child....once that has lapsed the trail can get cold very quickly.
If a child has been taken by a paedophile the likelihood is the child is already dead.

The outstanding fact is no one knows for sure what happened to Maddie except the person or people who took her or killed her...and I suspect unless someone admits it was they, or if a miracle happens and Maddie is found, no one will ever know for sure.

Thorin wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:The mccanns were arrested and were 'arguidos'...


The book just tells the story of the known circumstances/facts...

Past tense, they were suspects and were released without any charges laid against them.

That means they are innocent until proven otherwise.

The book is a story and just that, a story, based off the beliefs of someone.

And in a further blow, the Supreme Court ruling determined they were not “formally in the clear”.

“It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case,” the 78-page ruling said.

It went on to say that police ceasing their case against the pair “was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn’t managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the crimes by the appellants.”


http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/madeleine-mccanns-parents-will-fight-claims-she-died-they-staged-her-abduction-to-cover-it-up/news-story/7b0a8aa3dcb35e3d411cdb49073595ae

Tommy Monk wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Past tense, they were suspects and were released without any charges laid against them.

That means they are innocent until proven otherwise.

The book is a story and just that, a story, based off the beliefs of someone.

And in a further blow, the Supreme Court ruling determined they were not “formally in the clear”.

“It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case,” the 78-page ruling said.

It went on to say that police ceasing their case against the pair “was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn’t managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the crimes by the appellants.”


http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/madeleine-mccanns-parents-will-fight-claims-she-died-they-staged-her-abduction-to-cover-it-up/news-story/7b0a8aa3dcb35e3d411cdb49073595ae

Which means they are innocent until proven guilty.

Anything else?

That sleazy ex-cop is a sly old dog, isn't he...

He doesn't actually need to "clean out" anybody..

He will clean up financially in any case, from the the increased sales of his "alternative facts" novel, based on the extra notoriety he's earned from this court case.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:
That sleazy ex-cop is a sly old dog, isn't he...

He doesn't actually need to "clean out" anybody..

He will clean up financially in any case, from the the increased sales of his "alternative facts" novel, based on the extra notoriety he's earned from this court case.

+1

Spot on

Read his book for yourself...

Here is the full text of the book...


http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/TOTL.htm

eddie wrote:And of course the first thing you do when you notice your child is missing is shout:

"They've taken her"

Always found that odd.

There's lots of things that don't add up. I appreciate that people have a false sense of security on holiday, everything is warm and laid back and feels safe..but we're talking about 2 toddlers and a four year old girl, left alone with a main road outside and a swimming pool opposite.

HoratioTarr wrote:

eddie wrote:And of course the first thing you do when you notice your child is missing is shout:

"They've taken her"

Always found that odd.

There's lots of things that don't add up.    I appreciate that people have a false sense of security on holiday, everything is warm and laid back and feels safe..but we're talking about 2 toddlers and a four year old girl, left alone  with a main road outside and a swimming pool opposite.  

I agree, neglect and while they're making merry drinking and laughing, their child was abducted.

Also they could've had babysitting service like their friends and said no, that's not the conduct of responsible parents.

Thorin wrote:

magica wrote:Damn I've written a very long reply to you Thorin and lost it all.

Sorry to hear that.

The point though that people fail to grasp, is that these two parents are having to live daily with the consequences of their decision on that night. Where based on that and because it has received mass media attention. They have also had to face countless hate from some of the general public. All because people have convinced themselves they are guilty are far worse than neglect. They also do this not off looking at the evidence with an open mind but with confirmation bias. Countless people make poor neglectful decisions as parents, but in this case, the parents have been given a life sentence of torment and abuse. Like I said, you want to condemn them for their neglect that night, then do so, but please spare me all the views about the case, as if you or others actually know what happened that night. Everyone has looked to find only the evidence and interpret this to fit their view they are guilty of far worse. I hope one day the girl is found alive more than anything or that if dead, her body is found, so then answers can truly be found around her disappearance. Until that happens, then people are in no position to judge here.

I wish I could remember the post I did Thor, I did it on my tablet and sent it but it went awry!

The thing is, they could've had babysitting monitors and people going round their apartment as their friends had. They chose not too.

I hope she's found, but if she's with paedos then I hope she's dead, I don't want to go their in my mind tbh.

Read the book here...


http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/TOTL.htm


She died in the apartment.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Read the book here...


http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/TOTL.htm


She died in the apartment.

I see no reason for this policeman to lie. Also, the evidence is the evidence, and nobody can argue with that. Why did the McCann's leave their daughter to cry for over an hour one night? You just wouldn't do that, would you?

magica wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

There's lots of things that don't add up.    I appreciate that people have a false sense of security on holiday, everything is warm and laid back and feels safe..but we're talking about 2 toddlers and a four year old girl, left alone  with a main road outside and a swimming pool opposite.  

I agree, neglect and while they're making merry drinking and laughing, their child was abducted.

Also they could've had babysitting service like their friends and said no, that's not the conduct of responsible parents.

Too many anomalies with the statements too. The front door was locked, the back patio doors open. If so, why did Gerry McCann use the further away front door when he could have entered the apartments through the nearer and open patio doors? Why would you leave those patio doors open when you can't even the see the apartment from the Tapas bar?

No. I've never heard of anyone saying "They've taken her" when they find their child not asleep in the bed.

Why would you say that unless you knew someone might take your child?
Makes no sense.

eddie wrote:No. I've never heard of anyone saying "They've taken her" when they find their child not asleep in the bed.

Why would you say that unless you knew someone might take your child?
Makes no sense.

Odd Kate McCann washed her daughter's beloved Cuddle Cat too. Why would you ever want to wash off whatever smell remained of your daughter on that toy?

No evidence of an abduction

Miffs2 wrote:No evidence of an abduction

Really?

There is a missing child.

Can you rule out a possible abduction?

No

Just as the European Court cannot rule out foul play by the parents

Both are possibilities

Hence why I remain objective and neutral to this case.

So is your perceived claim that their is no evidence of abduction, then rule out the child was abducted?

No

For starters, you have a missing child. That is evidence for the possibility of an abduction.

To say there is no evidence of an abduction, would be to prove beyond any doubt. It would have been impossible to abduct this child.

Can you prove that Nems?

Take your time on that and understand like the book, and your views. Is based on confirmation bias, and not facts.

HoratioTarr wrote:

eddie wrote:No. I've never heard of anyone saying "They've taken her" when they find their child not asleep in the bed.

Why would you say that unless you knew someone might take your child?
Makes no sense.

Odd Kate McCann washed her daughter's beloved Cuddle Cat too.   Why would you ever want to wash off whatever smell remained of your daughter on that toy?

She stated that it 'was covered in sunscreen' so she washed it - the day after?
Yeah, I'd be doing that after my daughter was "taken by them"

eddie wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Odd Kate McCann washed her daughter's beloved Cuddle Cat too.   Why would you ever want to wash off whatever smell remained of your daughter on that toy?

She stated that it 'was covered in sunscreen'  so she washed it - the day after?
Yeah, I'd be doing that after my daughter was "taken by them"

How or why even claim something you would do, when you never have had to face such a situation?

The answer.

You are not reasoning your point here, which is based on the opinion of Eddie and how you would do something in hindsight (contradiction), but instead based on hoping you can sway people based off likability.

I mean why else invoke a view as to what you would perceive to do in this situation, when you have never even gone through a situation like this? 

You see how the above does not look to for reason and logic how you argued that Eddie. Instead you look to the nurture of female parents and that you are kind. To them claim you would never do that. Is playing off emotions and not reason. Trying to win people over off what you would claim to do. Is always going to be a flawed argument.

As the standards of this are not based solely on you.

eddie wrote:

HoratioTarr wrote:

Odd Kate McCann washed her daughter's beloved Cuddle Cat too.   Why would you ever want to wash off whatever smell remained of your daughter on that toy?

She stated that it 'was covered in sunscreen'  so she washed it - the day after?
Yeah, I'd be doing that after my daughter was "taken by them"

No parent would. We know that because we're parents.

HoratioTarr wrote:

eddie wrote:

She stated that it 'was covered in sunscreen'  so she washed it - the day after?
Yeah, I'd be doing that after my daughter was "taken by them"

No parent would.    We know that because we're parents.

No parent would?

And you base this not off reason or evidence, but again what you perceive you would do.

And being a parent,  is then invoked as if this lends credence to you view.

Okay, prove to me, beyond doubt, that you can undo mathematics through probability. That it would be impossible for you to wash a toy, after the shock of your child going missing?

No person can lay claim to what they might possible do. As there is no possible conceived way. That we can say how we would act. Hence to argue off hindsight, is again flawed reasoning.