Er, the fact they left their kids completely alone with the patio door unlocked… which means some of us disapprove of them… and libel doesn’t come into it cos it is an opinion about an admitted act???

And they’re lucky they did it in PDL… some woman in Britain is apparently going to be charged with manslaughter and child neglect for being asleep in the same house when her kids came to harm…

I’m thinking, and this is my opinion, thought up by myself (so no more bullying replies from Artemis please, just do your job delete this if you have to or want to, no problem). Because I’m also wondering if Anorak has been brought to a certain extent, or maybe funded? could be a better word, but that’s another topic, sort of. So these are my thoughts on the suing…..
IMO……..To me it is obvious that the parents have had political help, wether directly or through wealthy backers, reason as yet unknown.

These helpers have also in my opinion been responsible for my perception of the dire and unbalanced newspaper/television/radio reporting that the British public has been subject too, somehow creating a mine of misinformation gleefully published without retraction.

So, these same helpers persuade the media to release some material that could be seen to be upsetting and faintly libellous to the McCanns who will threaten to sue.

The media backs down and (in a prearranged senario IMO) is seen to settle out of court.
In reality the helpers were slipping sections of the media the money to pay the McCanns and a good backhander for hush money. Did the money go into the fund I wonder?

So it could be the media realised they would have to pay Murat too and this (ficticious)payout to the McCanns set a benchmark, limiting Murats claim. I think if Murat had sued first he might have got quite a bit more. So that was another incentive for the media to swallow the McCann bullet as they knew Murat was coming to get them too.

So my overall thoughts and opinion are that the McCanns sued themselves, paid themselves and in doing so courting public sympathy, apparently showing all that accusations were lies. Would guilty people sue? They must be innocent. It also served to put other media on red alert some who are now so frightened of legal action, that sometimes they actually oppose the very rights they promote. Fear is a wonderful thing.
As I have stated above, this is all my twisted opinion only.

-agw Willo. One of the joys of being a UK resident is the confident and sure knowledge the Judiciary are independent. Independent of politics and politicians, crime and criminals and prosecution and plaintive. They judge. The situations you refer to were agreements and no judges would ratify such an agreement unless they were totally satisfied it was a just and fair thing. In both the McCann and Murat agreements there can be NO doubt the payments avoided a costly trial and, in the opinion of the media’s own lawyers, a hefty settlement and punitive costs awartds. The right and wrongs of that are neither here nor there the media involved agreed it was wrong to print what it did
The suggestion that Anorak has made a similar sort of agreement is both wrong and grossly offensive.
There is no need to make agreements if no offence has been given or allowed.

Coco,
There will not be a happy ending because Madeleine has gone and will never come back
but I know what you are saying,yes : the bastards will get done
Sleep well xxxx