So why HAVE the McCanns put themselves on trial?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1243596/Shes-terrifyingly-hes-boiling-rage-So-HAVE-McCanns-trial.html

She's terrifyingly thin, he's boiling with rage: So why HAVE the McCanns put themselves on trial?



During the first few weeks after Madeleine McCann's disappearance, Goncalo Amaral came to symbolise all that was wrong with the abysmally mishandled Portuguese police investigation into the case.
A portly provincial CID chief who was plainly out of his depth and had a penchant for long, wine-fuelled lunches and leaking favourable stories about himself to the Press, he was removed as head of the investigation after six months.
And when he was later revealed to have perjured himself to cover up a brutal interrogation by members of his team, detractors scoffed that his name ought to have been spelt with an 'o', as in 'amoral'.
In an extraordinary transformation of fortunes, however, he is now a Portuguese national icon, 'courageously' fighting for the right to express his bombshell theory: that Madeleine was not abducted, but died accidentally, and her parents, Gerry and Kate, covered up her death.
As Amaral arrived at a Lisbon court this week for the cause celebre case that has turned him into an unlikely hero, he clearly revelled in his new-found popularity.
Mobbed by cheering, flag and banner-waving supporters (mainly women of a certain age), he smiled and signed autographs before a barrage of cameras.
Though he is 50 and a father of three daughters, Amaral sported a faux diamond ear-stud recently given to him by his (much younger) second wife, Sofia Leal: surely a ludicrous accessory for a balding, middle-aged man in a gumshoe's mac and trilby.
Yet for Gerry and Kate, who froze with contempt as the star witness sashayed past them to take his seat in court, this unedifying spectacle was just the start of a week that has once again tested their powers of resolve to the limit



For three long days, the couple were forced to listen as a procession of witnesses supported the distressing central assertions in the controversial memoir Amaral has written about the hunt for their daughter.
Melodramatically titled Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie, the book had become a best-seller in Portugal by September, when the McCanns won an injunction ordering it to be removed from the shelves.
Up to 330,000 copies of the £10 paperback are said to have been sold in Portugal and Europe before it was withdrawn, reportedly netting Amaral more than £1 million.
In the book, which has been turned into a TV documentary and DVD, the former police chief states with absolute conviction his belief that three-year-old Madeleine was not abducted from the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, as her parents have always claimed.
Instead, he claims she died by accident, after falling from the sofa and hitting her head on the floor while the McCanns dined with friends in a nearby tapas bar.


When they realised what had happened, according to his shocking theory, they panicked and concealed her body, thus precipitating the biggest and most perplexing missing person inquiry of modern times.
Regardless of whether they believe these unsubstantiated views, the majority of the Portuguese people insist that Amaral has every right to express them.
For in a country that threw off the shackles of dictatorship only 35 years ago and where state censorship is still remembered by the older generation, freedom of speech is sacrosanct.
Having been pilloried for leaving their three children alone on the night their elder daughter vanished, Kate and Gerry find themselves under vitriolic attack from the Portuguese media yet again.
This week's court case was brought by Amaral, who is seeking to have the injunction lifted so he can sell thousands more copies of his book, which his publishers hope to launch on the huge U.S. and British markets.
But the hearing would never have come about had the McCanns not sought the ban in the first place and instead allowed the public to make up their own minds about the unsubstantiated theories of a failed police chief with many axes to grind.

This week's skirmish is not the end of the McCanns' battle to silence Amaral.
Win or lose, they are intent on suing him for libel damages to recoup every penny he has earned from the book, promising to donate the money to the fund they set up to find Madeleine.



For his part, should the Lisbon courts find against him, Amaral has pledged to fight on, all the way to the European Court of Human Rights if necessary.
Though this case will be decided within two months, the McCanns seem certain to be trekking back and forth between their home in Leicestershire and Lisbon for many months - or even years - to come.
Watching the couple suffer more attacks on their reputations this week - Kate painfully thin and close to breaking point; Gerry pugnacious, as always - you have to ask why they have chosen to put themselves in the firing line yet again.
Why have they embarked on a course of action that has effectively placed them - rather than the man who bungled the police investigation - on trial?

And worse, in a court where they can be subjected to the most damaging and baseless slurs without recourse to rigorous cross-examination.
Many PR experts would have advised them to simply ignore Amaral and his unproven 'theory', so depriving his book of the global publicity the case has received this week.

Before answering the questions about the McCanns, it is worth recounting the former police chief's part in the flawed inquiry and how his book came to be written.
On May 3, 2007, when Madeleine vanished from Apartment 5A of the Ocean Club, Amaral was in charge of CID at the nearest big town, Portimao.
As he recalls in the memoir, he was informed about her disappearance just after midnight.


The McCanns were adamant that Madeleine - who had been left alone with her twin brother and sister, Sean and Amelie, then 18 months old - must have been snatched. But he quickly became sceptical.
When I spoke to him at length this week, he claimed to have approached the case with professional dispassion, but his opinion appears to have been influenced at least partly by deep cultural differences between him and the McCanns.
As a traditional Portuguese father with three daughters, he was appalled to discover these British parents had left their three small children alone while they enjoyed dinner with friends, even though the restaurant was only yards away.
As the hours and days passed, however, other factors coloured his views, not least the McCanns' apparent determination to whip up publicity via what one witness this week described disdainfully as a 'media circus'.
Though Amaral insists he has no time for conspiracy theories, it seems he began to see them everywhere.
For example, why had the couple's holiday friends trampled all over the apartment, tarnishing potentially vital evidence: was this ' contamination' deliberate?
Then there was the behaviour of the British authorities, including the police officers who arrived in Praia da Luz four days after Madeleine vanished. Why were they seemingly so unco-operative with the Portuguese police and protective of the McCanns?
He remains convinced that his team was systematically obstructed by the British in some arcane plot orchestrated from on high, and he has just published a second (not banned) book expounding this theory, titled The English Gag.


According to the court testimony of the McCanns' liaison officer, Ricardo Paiva, the suspicions of Amaral and his team were hardened by what was seen as a turning point in the police investigation.
It came when a weeping Kate phoned Paiva, in late July 2007, to report a disturbing dream in which she had seen Madeleine lying on rocks overlooking a beach at Praia da Luz. The detectives took this to be a clear signal that the McCanns knew full well that their daughter was dead.
Soon afterwards, sniffer dogs were called in to the search, but though they were said to have detected 'the scent of death' in the couple's holiday apartment and Renault Scenic hire car, no forensic evidence was found to support this.
There are serious questions about the reliability of these dogs, which also seemed to sniff out human remains at a Jersey children's home, which has since been discounted.
Furthermore, Gerry McCann insists Kate never had the supposedly incriminating dream, let alone reported it.
'I don't know if something has been lost in translation, but that didn't happen,' said the 41-year-old heart specialist, struggling to maintain his composure during a break in the proceedings. 'These are Goncalo Amaral's witnesses.
'I think it is particularly disappointing that certain police officers who considered us as possibly involved have not been able to change their views, despite the lack of evidence.'

Speaking to me during the court lunch-break on Thursday, however, Amaral remained defiantly on the offensive. With a female supporter acting as interpreter, he said he wrote his 200-page book in just two months, fuelled by endless cigarettes at his home on the Algarve.
He didn't work from police documents or diaries, but purely from memory, he told me, tapping his head for emphasis. And he used a personal computer kept disconnected from the internet for 'security' reasons.
But what possible justification did he have for writing the memoir, the profits from which have been frozen by the court (though not before he could acquire a new Jaguar), if it wasn't to get rich and settle scores in the process?

The decision was not taken lightly, he says, but came after he had discussed the likely fall-out with his wife, a civil servant who has suffered clinical depression attributed to the stress of the case. (However, Mrs Amaral had recovered sufficiently several months ago to pose on the beach for a Hello-style photo-shoot with her husband, for which they chose to wear matching white outfits).
'This case finished my career and the British newspapers just vilified me. I saw it was necessary to defend myself,' he told me, insisting that though he lost a third of his pension by resigning early, money was not a factor.
'If everything had gone properly, I wouldn't have needed to write the book. (But) it was a need for me to write a testimony of all that was done.
'That was my intention: to make public that part of the investigation that was unknown, and defend myself before all those who were saying the Policia Judiciaria (Portuguese police) were incompetent; that I was incompetent.

Mindful-of the injunction, he declined to elaborate on his theories about Madeleine's disappearance. Whatever her fate that night, though, didn't he have some degree of sympathy for a couple who had lost their daughter?
'As a policeman I can't have sympathy or empathy because I have to be objective and leave my feelings apart,' he said.
'As a father, I sympathise with them and their pain and loss. It's not about blame or recrimination.'
This response is hardly convincing. As the case goes on, he will doubtless set aside his 'fatherly' sentiments to renew his damaging accusations.
Yet for all the torment the McCanns have endured this week (at one point, Madeleine's abduction was described as a 'fairytale' that saved them from prosecution for child neglect) and the harrowing accusations to come, they maintain they are right to fight this case.

'I'd like to remind everyone that the book is on trial - not Kate and I,' said Gerry.
While he believes in the principles of free speech, the rights of his family - including the daughter he and Kate steadfastly believe to be alive - have to be defended, too.
Though some will question the McCanns and their motives, according to the family's spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, the hope that Madeleine will be found alive is the main reason they dragged themselves back this week to a country that offers them scant welcome and has brought so much heartache.
'Obviously they were aware some of the old allegations and charges by certain police officers would be rehashed, but they feel this was a case that just had to be brought,' he says.



'They believe it's important not only for their good name and reputation, and the damage Mr Amaral continues to do to it, but also because his allegations are damaging their continuing search for Madeleine.
'People won't believe she is alive if they read this book and that could stop them coming forward with vital new leads.
'One of the things that greatly worries Kate and Gerry is this: if, as we now know, the Portuguese police did not investigate her disappearance properly from the outset because they didn't believe it had happened, then what has happened to all the information they received?'
What indeed? And assuming it was retained and is gathering dust in a police archive, might it conceal that one little clue upon which Kate and Gerry's hopes rest?
The clue which, if meticulously examined, could bring back their little girl after so many false dawns?
Even if this is only a remote possibility, surely it should be explored - but not by a flashy detective who is so cocksure he knows all the answers he can't see beyond his own giant ego.
• Additional reporting by Vanessa Allen

I dont think Kate and Gerry do anything lightly as Gerry said:-

"We take advice we listen to peoples advice and then we make a decision. The advice from Isabel Duarte some time ago was to take action legal action, that's what we have done and its now a judicial process and we are happy with the judicial process and it will be the judge who decides and obviously we are confident that the law is on out side."


Incidently whilst I agree Kate is painfully thin she has incredible inner strength and I admire her resolve and determination.

As for Gerry, I've watched most of his interviews and he has not once come across as boiling with rage. I think he has been very measured and showed incredible restraint considering the stress he must have been under. There was no expletives from him!

Snipped from the Mail:-

"This week's court case was brought by Amaral, who is seeking to have the injunction lifted so he can sell thousands more copies of his book, which his publishers hope to launch on the huge U.S. and British markets.
But the hearing would never have come about had the McCanns not sought the ban in the first place and instead allowed the public to make up their own minds about the unsubstantiated theories of a failed police chief with many axes to grind".

As far as I'm concerned, they could not sit back any longer, imo they should have sought this ban a lot earlier. They desperately need leads and these leads are somewhere within Portugal. Portugal needs to be left in no doubt that this man Amaral who is already a convicted perjurer has lied and mislead them over the disappearance of a little child. Then the McCanns might just get that breakthrough they so desperately need and this is why they are putting themselves through this.

Tinks

If the book had been published in the UK and the US, then there would be many more people believing that the McCanns disposed of Madeleine's body and are perpetrating a huge fraud. This book is based on a tremendous lie, but is portrayed as the truth. It cannot go unchallenged. By not challenging it earlier, it has led many Portuguese people to believe there is truth to what Amaral says. When from what we have seen so far, there is clearly no truth to it at all, and he knows that this theory is BS, but he is milking it for all its worth to make a profit.

The injunction was filed 4 days after the book publication! It couldn't be earlier! It is not the couple's or their lawyer's fault that it took that long to be decreed.

Sorry, 4 days after documentary exibition

maria wrote:The injunction was filed 4 days after the book publication! It couldn't be earlier! It is not the couple's or their lawyer's fault that it took that long to be decreed.

The wheels of justice grind slowly.

maria wrote:The injunction was filed 4 days after the book publication! It couldn't be earlier! It is not the couple's or their lawyer's fault that it took that long to be decreed.

Hold on, I'm not sure if I understand this correctly Maria.

The book was published, or ready to be published, by the end of July 2008.
And 4 days after it was published, the McCanns/their lawyer asked for a ban on selling the book?
And it took way over a year to get that?
And GA kept repeating his 'thesis', changing it day by day, and telling the world the McCanns didn't sue him? Even had this documockery based on the book.

Do you know when they filed the libel case, was it before or after they filed for the injunction?

I feel this could go on for years then if it's taking that long. Though the appeal didn't take that long before it went to court.

Cath wrote:

maria wrote:The injunction was filed 4 days after the book publication! It couldn't be earlier! It is not the couple's or their lawyer's fault that it took that long to be decreed.

Hold on, I'm not sure if I understand this correctly Maria.

The book was published, or ready to be published, by the end of July 2008.
And 4 days after it was published, the McCanns/their lawyer asked for a ban on selling the book?
And it took way over a year to get that?
And GA kept repeating his 'thesis', changing it day by day, and telling the world the McCanns didn't sue him? Even had this documockery based on the book.

Do you know when they filed the libel case, was it before or after they filed for the injunction?

I feel this could go on for years then if it's taking that long. Though the appeal didn't take that long before it went to court.

Yes this is what struck me too! But then Gerry did say they were advised to sue Amaral before and decided to try and concentrate on searching for Madeleine instead!

But did you read during the trial that the book publishing was agreed between Amaral and the publishers as far back as March 2008? This makes Amaral's insistence that his book was based on the police files, even more incriminating, although I see if the Daily Mail interview is to be believed that he has now changed his mind all of a sudden and is claiming that his book came straight form his memory! Balderdash! If that was so, how did he mange to get previously undisclosed information into it?

He's been telling for ages his book is based on what's in the files.
Now he's covering his back (or is it track?).
He realized he's in deep sh!t for breaching he secrecy law.
And while he was negotiating with the publisher, he was also negotiating about his 'early retirement'. Wouldn't risk to loose all that money because of a book as he couldn't be sure it would become a 'bestseller'.

maria wrote:The injunction was filed 4 days after the book publication! It couldn't be earlier! It is not the couple's or their lawyer's fault that it took that long to be decreed.

I'm genuinely shocked by this Maria. Basically this twit has been allowed to do and say exactly what he wants without restraint, and to the detriment of someone's reputation and rights, based on no facts or evidence. It's appalling.

Please note that my information back there was wrong. The injunction was filed 4 days after the documentary exibition, not the book publication. Sorry.