Today, the Righteous Brothers will march on the Portuguese capital of Lisbon, banners proudly held aloft, ready to do battle in the endless contest between the clash of two fundamental rights: the right to freedom of expression and the right to reputation. They will demand that the Lisbon court treat the opposing arguments as being mutually exclusive and declare an outright victor.
The Portuguese court is due to begin the libel trial of a former senior detective who published a book alleging that Madeleine McCann died inside her parents’ apartment. Kate and Gerry McCann launched the legal action against Goncalo Amaral after he accused them of being complicit in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine.
In his book Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie, published in July 2008, Mr Amaral claimed that Madeleine died in her family’s holiday flat on the night she disappeared and questioned the McCanns’ account that she was abducted. A Portuguese judge granted an injunction in September last year banning further sale or publication of the book. The former policeman was also prohibited from repeating his claims about Madeleine or her parents.
The McCann’s will argue that the constant repetition of the opinions of the former coordinator of the investigation leaves them unfairly under suspicion – despite the decision of the Prosecutor General that there was insufficient evidence to bring any charges – and undermines the search for Madeleine. They reject any suggestion that Madeleine is dead and continue to investigate the probability of an abduction.
The value underlying the right to reputation that has most resonance is human dignity, while the value that is most apposite to freedom of expression in this context is the argument that free speech is integral to democracy. The argument from democracy emphasizes that speech on matters of public interest should receive greater protection than private speech.
The lawyers will deliver emotive speeches invoking inalienable Human Rights; lacunae in the law will have been pored over late at night, competing cases examined in minute detail. It will be an intellectual tussle, between competing adults. Another army of adults will gather raucously outside the court room; the intransigent adults of the late night Internet chat rooms, who have long since drawn up their battle lines and staked claim to their righteous views, in what has become an obscene on-line version of Cluedo – “it was Kate wot did it, in the conservatory, with the lead pipe”- versus those who believe the parents to be benighted victims of a vicious assault on their reputation. It is hard to believe at times that they are all adults, but adults they are.
However, although the adversarial nature of law scarcely admits the fact, there is another participant, a Silent Voice, but a no less important voice for that, clinging to the legs of both parties, who will, God willing, turn this race for righteous victory into a three-legged race.
It is the oft-forgotten, unheard, voice of Madeleine.
Those who clamour noisily behind the banner of Free Speech and demand that ‘their man’ has the right to publish his theories based on his part-participation in the still incomplete investigation into her disappearance forget that if he is wrong, if his views that she is dead, bolstered by his apparent ‘professional expertise’, gain ascendancy, they are effectively curtailing the search for a small child who may be enduring unimaginable terrors. Madeleine’s ‘right’ to the benefit of doubt as to whether she is rescuable or beyond hope trump any adult right to Freedom of Speech for me.
Those who clamour noisily behind the banner of Reputation and Human Dignity and demand that ‘their champions’ deserve the right to a ‘clean reputation’ until a court can prove conclusively that they were complicit in her demise, forget that, if they are wrong, they are effectively curtailing the search for justice for a small child who cannot speak for herself. Madeleine’s ‘right’ to the benefit of doubt as to whether she was the victim of infanticide or not, trump any adult right to Reputation and Human Dignity for me.
The only outcome of this case which would appease my belief that this clash of the adult Titans is riding roughshod over Madeleine’s rights, would be one which ruled that a former policeman cannot use that platform to promote his personal beliefs as though they were facts, and former arguidos cannot sue for compensation for damaged reputations until such time as Madeleine is found.
Dead or Alive.
Live commentary from the Lisbon courtroom can be found HERE.
{ 30 comments… read them below or add one }
agree with you
For the McCanns it has never been about Madeleine but about trying to protect their reputations.
as a former police officer I totally agree with you.
“No-one can be allowed to say that our daughter can’t be found without very good evidence. That’s what this court case is about,” Mr McCann said in Lisbon this week.
“We’re looking for justice,” Mrs McCann said.
what about justice for Madeleine?
Doesn’t it behove the courts to go down any alleyway to find some answers and doesn’t it behove the McCanns to do the same? What are the restrictions all about? Reputations?? – who was it left their three children alone in a villa?
Thi s has nothing whatsoever to do with the right to privacy/freedom of expression dichotomy…this is simply the McCanns trying to use the law to silence their critics.
Those of us who have followed the case from the first day – when the McCanns immediately claimed abduction, something which no other parent would have done (they would have considered all the many other possibilities as well) – have no doubt that at best the McCanns are trying to avoid the ‘duty of care’ argument being aired as a charge in a court of law and at worst.
Gerald himself admits that there was only one ‘eyeball’ check that night…his own.
Now the McCanns claim that their story must be beleived because no one has challenged it, yet they seek to prevent it being challenged…a cyclic and redundant argument if wever there was one!
Oh, and I disagree with you totally regarding Amaral – someone has to fight for justice here – Amaral is a hero, unconventional, revolutionary, yes – but if people didnt make a stand, there would never have been a revolution in the world. Without him, who knows what the situation would be, we’d probably have Gerry standing for Parliament and Kate heading up the CEOP!
Your problem is you are firmly rooted in the establishment – afraid to step outside the status quo. As revolutionary as ‘Private Eye’ – never breaking the rules but pretending to be anarchistic.
Rofl.
As Joe Friday would say, “just the facts, ma’am” – there is a huge difference between testing evidence in a court of law, as is currently taking place, and trying to influence public opinion, via a complacent media, through PR representatives. A cursory glance at today’s proceedings (covered under privilege by Sky, of all people) will clearly show that Amaral’s thesis was backed by his fellow officers, working the case at the time. Unfortunately, Scotland Yard have prevented their officer from giving evidence – one can only wonder why, as his UK perspective would have been invaluable. One can also only wonder why the McCann legal team sought to prevent the inclusion of the official police files as evidence – one would imagine that their accusation, of Amaral misrepresenting the evidence to fit his thesis, would be borne out by a simple comparison against the recorded data. Sorry Anna, but you’ll have to do better than that – it was the McCann’s who instigated this action, hoping that Amaral would crumble and settle, when faced with the might of Carter-Ruck. They now have to prove their case in court and, to be honest, it’s all looking a bit Aitken-like, at the moment – still, tomorrow is another day.
The welfare of the people is the ultimate law.
Cicero
Thank you Anna – the voice of sanity.
“former policeman cannot use that platform to promote his personal beliefs as though they were facts”
but they are facts aren’t they? His entire book is based on his experience of the investigation and the facts. Or have I missed something?
If they aren’t facts then why didn’t Scotland Yard send an officer to dispute the Portuguese police report?
Hopefully with this case we will get a little closer to the facts.
It would be helpful if those responsible for her disappearance, the parents, for ultimately they are responsible for their own children, would just tell the truth. They have been truthful throughout, that is indisputable, we just don’t know how big the lie is.
haven’t been truthful throughout …I meant to say.
Refreshing though, wasn’t it, to see Sky report on the trial without the interference of the McCanns PR.
No msmarmite. He says his opinions and personal beliefs are based on facts, that doesn’t make the conclusions he draws into facts. There is a difference.
Nor does it make it right and proper that someone who was only involved in part of an investigation should financially profit from writing a book about it, effectively declaring that the case is solved, before the case is resolved.
Nor is it right that people should financially profit by claiming damages for libel before it is clear – by the case being resolved, not shelved – that their reputation is entirely blameless.
This is all about adults shouting ‘me,me,me’, my rights, and precious little about a small child who is but a pawn in this game.
It’s a thought provoking article, as usual Annaraccon.
“until such time as Madeleine is found”
But who’s searching for her? And who will alert the authorities if they see her (no matter how unlikely that might be) but think it can’t be her, because she’s dead?
Perhaps the best solution is stopping the former detective making money out of Madeleine, stopping him declaring her dead and donating the money to a fund that’s for all missing and abused children in Portugal.
Funny, when I wrote that, I hadn’t read your comment Anna.
Long time no see Totje!
I’ll settle for that, can we stop the parents and anyone else from making money out of this?
We don’t allow newspaper comment that could be prejudicial to a trial after an arrest – we need something similar to prevent any money making or comment that could be prejudicial in this sort of situation.
Edited to add: It’s hard to believe that a rapist, once charged, can have more rights than a missing child……
McCanns just doing the usual ; on the assumption that if they attack first then they can stifle the truth and stifle investigations: It was a high risk strategy but very successful; but having nearly got caught out when they ****** ***** ***, went for the “get your retaliation in first ” tactic. Seems to have worked: everyone knows that they are guilty; but no-one can say it.
MODERATOR: Don’t try that again George. Its not big and its not clever.
Amaral’s facts like Bennetts are merely opinions.
George. The attorney General ruled that there was no evidence to link the McCanns to the disappearance of their daughter.
I respect the AG’s verdict.
As a student of human behaviour, I always found it odd that Mrs McCann rushed into the restaurant shouting “They’ve taken her”.
Why the use of a personal pronoun?
This is one of the few things about the case that has never been contested; and yet it strikes me still as strangely damning.
This is a great piece Anna: devoid of brainless conspiracy theory while still staying close to the rights of a little girl. I stay wondering what on earth lies behind this horrible mystery, but ultimately it remains a question of familial responsibility. I defy any parent to tell me they haven’t done similar things on holiday. But even so, I find it odd that the McCanns have never shown remorse about any aspect of this business.
Hi Anna,
I agree with your writings, no -one should make money from a missing child, it is so unjust imho….the McCann’s say the money they recieve into the fund via donations and sueing, goes to searching for Madeleine….but up to now, the so-called private detectives (searching for Madeleine) have been no more than villains, (ommitting Edgar & Co) which really doesn’t go good for the McCann’s.
Amaral said that any monies he made from the book (The Truth of a Lie) would be donated to a childrens home, which as far as I know, didn’t happen…he seems to have kept it to himself, which doesn’t look good for Amaral.
Madeleine is the most important person, and she is still missing…and from the start, I never believed the Tapas 9 timeline….so until someone tells the truth regarding the timeline and the checks on the children, then it will be harder for people to believe that Madeleine was abducted, if they didn’t do the 30 minute checks, then there would have been a more plausable believable window of oppertunity for an abduction to have taken place….but if that timeline is false…then that small LIE has caused this whole sad charade to rollercoaster out of control for over 2 and 1/2 years, meanwhile Madeleine is still missing and maybe could have been found in May 2007….IF Only the Tapas 9 had told the gods honest truth way back in May 2007.
It has became a battle between Amaral and the McCann’s…each of them screaming ME ME ME Believe ME….when it should be about finding out the truth about what happened to an innocent little girl. Who is searching for Madeleine now! No one will find her behind a p.c screen, or inside police files, it’s all down to getting the truth out from the people whom were responsible for her and the people in and around PDL….sadly I can’t see that happening any time soon.
Kind Regards
Chaz
I think I support the concept of police officers writing books in cases where their endeavours and talent have led to the solving of a case and/or the removal of a criminal from from society at large.
In this case the detective has not solved or proved a thing. Morally, he has no right to profit financially from this tragic case. It is repugnant.
However. As has been pointed out, the McCanns have squandered their own reputation – incontrovertibly they left their young children alone whilst they went out for food and drink.
Moreover, my instinct tells me that there was something very wrong about the manner in they conducted themselves in the aftermath. The tackiness of the nouveau riche in New Labour Britain, or people propagating the maxim ‘if you’re gonna tell a lie, tell a big one’?
It is impossible to say, and unless one of them has a Lady Macbeth moment that is how it will remain.
Seeing that poor girl’s photo again chokes me up a bit.
Anna thank you for the calm voice of reason in your post #13 and the clarity you have brought to this matter.
The most important part of the McCanns argument from my point of view is that if people think she is dead, they would not bother to look. How would that be justice for Madeleine if she is still alive no matter how slim the chances of that?
As for all this making of money on Madeleine’s back? I think it is wrong and terribly sad.
Yes – what you write is fair.
I agree with JLawyer.
And futhermore I do not trust the McCanns. They are bound in a conspiracy of what sort I do not know. Their reactions and statements display a weird thought process which leaves me with a vague feeling of unease as to whether they have told the whole trusth and nothing but the truth.
I am not saying that they are directly implicated.
I don’t see any conspiracy here and never have as there is nothing to indicate it. I don’t think the McCanns behaviour is suspicious given the theory put forward in Amaral’s book.
Madeleine is still missing, that’s what is important to resolve.
Moderator:
You prove the point:
The tactic prevents proper discussion of the obvious facts.
Moderate this out if you like, frankly I don’t care;
No one has the guts to articulate what every one thinks.
I am not being “big or clever”; just stating what everybody knows and is stifled from saying.
Not only that; but how come they were not even prosecuted for child neglect? if they had been some poor council house chavs, the world would have vilified them and hounded them. But they are doctors and so “must be upstanding citizens etc..”
Piffle
MODERATOR: The three words deleted from your comment are not a FACT, it is your opinion, a libellous opinion, a libellous opinion which you wish this blog to take responsibility for, kindly post it on the front of YOUR house, and then you take the legal liability, NATCH?
My heart goes out to little ones more than the parents. Lie detector tests should be mandatory in this country and the Mc Caan’s including all the members of the ‘Tapas 7′ should be forced to take one to clear the fact that they were not involved, or do not know of the person who took the child… as the word ‘They have taken her was used .’ The shocking bit of the whole sordid ordeal was that the Mc Caan’s have globe trotted with such sheer determination to prove that they are responsible adults searching for their lost child, when in fact critics say that they are not, their irresponsibilty including those of the Tapas 7 caused the problem, a baby sitter could have been called in. Did the Tapas 7 have any kids on holiday who took care of the other’s kids that night,? In the psychological analysis of both parents…remorse…is missing from the start. Mr Mc Caan has a face of steel as some critics would say, but not of genuine emotion. The fear that sends shivers down the spine of the critic’s is if they were’ indeed’ not responsible for desposing her body or not : who was? The child has to be found dead or alive. The intricate sheer scale of the cover-up if this is true, by all the ‘Tapas seven’ who are all professional people with too much to lose, have fuelled the critics. The critics feel that they have succeeded in showing invisible two fingers the Police here and in Portugal, bearing in mind the Mc Caan’s have two more kids under their wing…this case can only be solved by the lie dectector. It would definitely clear their involment once and for all and the Police in both countries can go on with their search, the injunction on the book could be granted etc.
They have never looked like’grieving parents’ yes they looked ’shell shocked’ and three years on to show some emotion is a bit late. This is what is hitting hard and fuelling their critics. They have used the money donated to pay mortgages etc and then accuse the detective of making money out of their daughter. As the public have donated money for the search the public has the right to know both sides of the sordid affair. ‘On the scene evidence’ has been destroyed unintentionally or not as the detective states could be true. The man has a right to air his opinon as he was forced out of his job for standing up for his beliefs of what actually happened. If he hadn’t been forced out, this book would never have been written. I am finding it hard to believe that the Police dogs failed. The scent of death was in the apartment. There is a saying that a perpetrator always wants to go back to the scene of the crime. Mrs Mc Caan’s recent request to go back to the apartment is also questionable????Their continuous globe trotting has interferred with the investigation. The Police in both countries and Interpol were unable to do their job as on the scene evidence was hardly there, and could have been destroyed intentionally or not. The law should bring a speedy end by the introduction of lie detectors to this ongoing drama that will go on forever.
Thanks Anna for the voice of reason at last and I completely agree with your sentiments. This is not about warring adults or their apparent “human right” to insist on what happened to her, this is about demonstrating concern for Madeleine and seeking to learn the truth.
I think those who demonstrate they want to make money out of this tragedy are a grave cause for concern, most especially her own parents. To me, there is overwhelming evidence they were involved in her disappearance but I do not agree there is overwhelming evidence that she is dead and they disposed of her body. We get bloggers quoting Goncalo Amaral and Almeida but that is not evidence! They should look to what the Pt official file says and British Police also. There is a big difference between evidence against the parents of telling lies and seeking to cover up what happened and evidence that Madeleine actually died and they hid her body. I just find it offensive that so many bloggers feel the need to keep on and on repeating that and going into the gory details of what supposedly happened and the disposal of her body without any evidence to back these gory thought processes. When there is such a lot of other evidence against the McCanns why do they just ignore this? Because it does not specifically confirm what they seem to need to believe?
Mr Menezes has just stated in court the McCanns could have been charged with kidnapping and trafficking Madeleine, but when you point this out to bloggers they just ignore you. What is wrong with people? Are they more concerned about their conspiracy /death theories to the extreme extent that they do not even care that this little girl may still be alive and suffering terribly? Do they ever stop to think that if she were to be recovered she may read all these terrible things?
There is such a partisan approach between supporting these warring adults, Goncalo Amaral on the one hand or Kate and Gerry on the other, it is really unpleasant. So very many just do not give Madeleine a passing thought. When you read the arguments of either they are not backed by the genuine evidence (or lack of it) in the case.
Reasonable people know this couple were involved, there is ample evidence to confirm that, but do not know precisely how and that was the position of the Pt AG when he shelved the case. He did not say they were innocent, he said there was insufficient evidence to form the basis of any charge, the evidence such as it was did not even prove if she was dead or alive. UK have never shelved this case and I am sure try to locate Madeleine, with the assistance of Interpol and other jurisdictions including Portugal, dead or alive. They also make clear they intend to bring those behind her disappearance to Justice. To me those people quite obviously involve her own parents and I feel others too.
Maybe people could just start listening to and respecting the police instead of hurling insults from both sides of the fence and remember this is not about a win for the McCanns or a win for Goncalo, it is about Madeleine and what is best for her. If she is dead that means people showing her respect and understanding she has a right to a decent burial and to justice. But she may be alive and it is about time people accepted that and respected her human rights, to be treated as a missing person, until there is clear and unequivocal evidence to the contrary. Do people ever think of the rights of the twins and how distressing and damaging all these gory death theories would be for them to read? Children should come first, not adults, that should surely be the sad moral from all of this?
I just wish people would start thinking about the human rights of a child, that is all I would like to see and for Kate and Gerry to just for once have the decency to walk away from their demands for one million pounds which they of all people, simply do not deserve! Particularly when we can see how that money is spent, on an endless line of bent detectives some of whom are even in custody or on reputation management and media manipulation, neither of which serves the McCanns stated goal of finding her. They have never demonstrated any concern for her, only themselves. I hope that before too much longer they are arrested and there is some resolution to this case, but have always been clear finding Maddie was so important to that.
I don’t come here much, most of the articles are far too ‘clever’ for a simple soul like me, but I spotted your response to my post. I see you grasped the argument with both hands and addressed the issues thoroughly! I remember on Anorak the so-called ‘Pro-McCanners’ had to resort to ‘ROFL’, ‘rolling eyes’, or appealing to my baser instincts in order to get that nasty little man (who’s true identity was known to me, thanks to ‘Stevo’) to ban me!
You seem to miss the point regarding Amaral, without him – who would have kept the McCann’s on the run? It matters little to me what his motives might be, as the (potential) ends justifies the means.
I don’t care who seeks to ‘out’ the McCann’s, as long as they do. After all, the McCann’s have the misplaced support of the UK establishment – some pretty unpleasant people with some dubious motives supporting them.
My own (and many other people’s) motive is simple – an injustice has occurred and continues to develop and grow. Even the basic wrong that a fund which was to find a child but has actually been used to pay off a mortgage and to defend the perpetrators of the neglect which resulted in the child being missing (regardless of the nature of the event) needs to be addressed – and is not being addressed by the ‘establishment’.
So, as I say, I think the motive of Amaral is irrelevant.
By criticising Amaral you display tacit (unintentional?) support for what must be, in my opinion, one of the most elaborate avoidances of a neglect charge of all time and it either displays an incredibly myopic viewpoint, or one which has a far deeper understanding and awareness of the issues involved than I enjoy (and would take us into the bizarre and kaleidoscopic world of conspiracy theories!).
Anyway, I too can respond to some of your views by rolling around the floor laughing, but I prefer to challenge than to blank another’s view…ROFL denies the others right to an opinion and their right to express it (i.e. ROFL clearly equates to a blank rejection of an opinion and is as much a ban on opinions as an injunction!).
You make some amazing assumptions there Ian, “the perpetrators of the neglect which led to child being missing”. Where is your evidence to support that claim?
I think there is a lot of hard evidence that the McCanns rely upon their freely admitted neglect (the facts but not the offence of course) as a means to defend themselves. The charge of abandoment was the only serious charge against the McCanns that the prosecutor specifically excluded as being inappropriate on the facts. In relation to the other more serious offences the were investigated for homicide, kidnapping, trafficking, no comment and I think that speaks volumes. He was leaving the way open for further evidence to be obtained to prove one of those more serious charges.
There was only jurisdiction for the neglect charge in Portugal and as noted the prosecutor was looking at a serious form of neglect but found this was inappropriate on the facts and I can clearly understand why from a legal point of view. It is their defence, weak I know but what they are saying is that neglect allowed some lurking predator to get in and steal Maddie, apparently. It does not form the basis of what it is thought the McCanns actually did with Madeleine.
There was no jurisdiction in UK to prosecute them for neglect as Tony Bennett found out. The charge is simply not serious enough. And do you know what they would have got, a smack across the wrists and interventions from SSD, which they got anyway.
There is a legal rule that says if you want to prosecute someone on any given set of facts you must bring your whole case before the court. You cannot keep coming back later to add more serious charges once there has been a prosecution for a lesser offence. So, upon your reasonsing, if they had got the slap across the wrists for neglect, they could not, at some future date have been charged with either homicide or kidnapping and trafficking, they would have completely got away with those far more serious charges. Now is that what you call Justice for Madeleine?
There is a similar rule in civil proceedings, it is called res judicata, look it up. It means the judgment of the court in the former proceedings stands and cannot be challenged in later proceedings. When the evidence is assembled by a number of UK authorities working on this case to hit them with the charges, they will get them, in full including for very serious fraud.
Oh, read the book. It’s based on statements and facts not wild opinion. Better still read the evidence files, they are now open.
Your blog is a breath of hot air but anyone wanting some actual meat with their gravy should look elsewhere.