Papers Pay McCann's For Defamation

idlesupernova

Four newspapers are set to pay damages to the parents of Madeleine McCann, after settling a libel case, the BBC has learned.
The Daily and Sunday Express, along with the Daily Star and Daily Star Sunday are to pay a "substantial" sum and print front-page apologies.

Kate and Gerry McCann's lawyers said that some of the newspapers' articles were "grossly defamatory".

The couple say all the damages will be donated to the Find Madeleine fund.

The Daily Express is to carry a full front-page apology in Wednesday's paper, while the Star's apology will take over half its front-page.

The papers are expected to apologise for suggesting Kate and Gerry McCann were involved in their daughter's disappearance.

The action relates to more than 100 stories across the four titles, including 42 printed in the Daily Express.


I think this is an amazing stand-down, u-turn, by the Express newspapers
Media commentator Roy Greenslade
Under the terms of the settlement - at Kate and Gerry McCann's insistence - Express Newspapers' barrister will also read out an apology before a judge at the High Court on Wednesday.

The Express group has agreed to all the McCanns' requests. It is also paying all their costs.

The McCanns have promised that the damages will be paid into the "fighting fund" set up to pay for efforts to find their missing daughter.

'Trust and credibility'

Media commentator Roy Greenslade said that for two national newspapers to carry front-page apologies at the same time was "unprecedented".

"I think this is an amazing stand-down, u-turn, by the Express newspapers," he said.

"I think when people realise that more than 100 stories have been complained about as being grossly defamatory, it will annihilate the Express' readers sense of trust and credibility in their newspaper."


Madeleine McCann went missing in Portugal in May 2007
Media lawyer Paul Gilbert from Finers Stephens Innocent said the courts encourage early settlement of defamation cases.

"Clearly the Express' lawyers felt this was a case they should settle without a high-profile trial - which it would be - and as a result have saved considerable costs," he said.

"It certainly is a warning sign to newspapers in the future, if they're going to speculate, they've got to be very careful about what they speculate about."

lostexpectation

greeat stuff

Mossy Monk

She is still missing? Didn't think anyone cared anymore.

slipss

Are you watching Sunday World?

Raspberry

Who?

phantom_lord

idlesupernova wrote: »

"I think when people realise that more than 100 stories have been complained about as being grossly defamatory, it will annihilate the Express' readers sense of trust and credibility in their newspaper."

lol, as if the express even had a shred of credibility in the first place.

WoollyRedHat

If they are going to go accusing people of murder and such, they might as well accuse the Duke of Edinborough of killing Princess Diane on their front page.

Oh that would be a fun lawsuit! As least in that case it's more credible.

Oh great now the frigging duke is going to sue ME!

togster

OOOoo

banderras

it would interesting to know if many readers out believe the Mccanns were involved in their daughters disappearance????

togster

it would

Stench Blossoms

So what happens if years down the line they find out that they did actually kill her? Will they have to pay all the money back?

Red Alert

Did the courts ever decide whether the mccanns could use the money to pay their criminal legal bills?

source

I find it hilarious that they're gonna put the money into the find madeline fund, isn't this the same fund they used to pay off their mortgage???? :mad:

GhostInTheRuins

Easy life? They're paying £550

ibh

Dudess wrote: »

Have they been found guilty of her murder? No. Has a body even been found? No.
I'm absolutely appalled at how people are so quick to make up their minds the McCanns are involved in their daughter's disappearance, or even that they've killed her.
It's as if people want the McCanns to be guilty of some sort of sinister operation that night in Portugal. This is not a soap opera. If you want OTT scandal, watch Desperate Housewives.
True, the McCanns have done stuff that one might deem strange for a couple whose child is missing - so what? Who the hell are we to judge how a person should behave when their child is missing? How on earth could we know?
So they're doing their utmost to raise awareness/money - damn right. When a person disappears they're forgotten about pretty quickly unless something is done to keep them in our collective consciousness.

There are times when I've felt something fishy is going on, but then I remember this case: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/13/newsid_3638000/3638248.stm

It seemed that mother was as guilty as could be too, yet she was found innocent a number of years later.

+1

idlesupernova

D.T. Jesus wrote: »

Easy life? They're paying £550

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1309913,00.html

Express Newspapers have agreed to pay £550,000 to the Find Madeleine Fund after being forced to apologise over more than 100 articles written about her parents.The McCanns are understood to have been asking for up to £4m. Express Newspapers offered in the region of £250,000 to cover the entire group.

lostexpectation

the money isn't going directly to them but the find maddie fund, they still both working in the hospital arn't they and they are minus one child but still have two, easy life yeah right. shup up idlesupernova

Xavi6

Dudess wrote: »

Have they been found guilty of her murder? No. Has a body even been found? No.
I'm absolutely appalled at how people are so quick to make up their minds the McCanns are involved in their daughter's disappearance, or even that they've killed her.
It's as if people want the McCanns to be guilty of some sort of sinister operation that night in Portugal. This is not a soap opera. If you want OTT scandal, watch Desperate Housewives.
True, the McCanns have done stuff that one might deem strange for a couple whose child is missing - so what? Who the hell are we to judge how a person should behave when their child is missing? How on earth could we know?
So they're doing their utmost to raise awareness/money - damn right. When a person disappears they're forgotten about pretty quickly unless something is done to keep them in our collective consciousness.

There are times when I've felt something fishy is going on, but then I remember this case: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/september/13/newsid_3638000/3638248.stm

It seemed that mother was as guilty as could be too, yet she was found innocent a number of years later.

Meh. I expressed an opinion. Part of my post was tongue in cheek but I do believe that the whole thing is far too dodgy and I feel they are potentially guilty of more than just negligence. If you or others don't agree then fair enough.

projectmayhem

lostexpectation wrote: »

the money isn't going directly to them but the find maddie fund, they still both working in the hospital arn't they and they are minus one child but still have two, easy life yeah right. shup up idlesupernova

in fairness, the speculation is somewhat justified by the cold faces of the parents all the time, and the lack of conclusive answers. also the original case just spurred comments akin to "idiots" because of how THEY looked after their child. after that, the media reporting on their private jet flights etc. etc. don't help public opinion.

true or otherwise, the mccanns haven't exactly helped their own situation in getting public support...

bucks73

Very true. The fact remains that they left their kids alone in an apartment while they were out having dinner. Why havent they had social services on their case for failing to look after their children in a safe manner?

Terry

Sensationalist thread title edited and posts deleted.

The McCanns successfully sued for defamation.
They could do the same here.
Please be careful with your comments.
I will be quite liberal with bans.

Dudess

lostexpectation wrote: »

shup up idlesupernova

Oh good Christ, how many times do we have to say it?! No personal attacks.

Xavi6 wrote: »

I do believe that the whole thing is far too dodgy and I feel they are potentially guilty of more than just negligence. If you or others don't agree then fair enough.

It's not a case of agreeing or disagreeing. Yes, I'd acknowledge that some stuff appears fishy. Do I think it means they must be guilty of something? Absolutely not. We have no proof and we have no idea how we'd react in that situation. It really is appalling to just make up your mind based on stuff appearing fishy. The media has the power to manipulate certain facts anyway. And it's causing the public to bay for the McCanns' blood. It is exactly this that put Lindy Chamberlain behind bars for the murder of her baby girl - she served three years as a convicted child murderer before she was exonerated. Can you imagine the suffering that poor woman endured and no doubt still endures? It's too horrific to even contemplate. That was over 20 years ago - the media's hold on us, with the advent of the internet and an explosion in print publications and television channels, can only have increased several-fold since.

projectmayhem wrote: »

in fairness, the speculation is somewhat justified by the cold faces of the parents all the time, and the lack of conclusive answers.

Still though, it's exactly the above that caused the public to turn on Lindy Chamberlain.

true or otherwise, the mccanns haven't exactly helped their own situation in getting public support...

I agree. Some of the stuff they've done has been downright bizarre - does it mean they're guilty? No.

boardinwork

slipss wrote: »

Are you watching Sunday World?

What are you talking about there?

How can you compare that with The Sunday World

They wrote about a man who had paid money before to the CRIMINAL ASSETS BUREAU and was friends with some of the top dogs of the CRIMINAL UNDERWORLD. The verdict in court was undeserved and will be appealed. He will end up with so much less than 900k.

What the papers wrote about the McCanns for months and months is a completely different kettle of fish. These were both doctors will no criminal past who had lost a daughter. To compare the SW to those cut throat, page 3, English tabloids is as ignorant as the comments you are trying to imply that they make.

idlesupernova

Terry wrote: »

Sensationalist thread title edited and posts deleted.

The McCanns successfully sued for defamation.
They could do the same here.
Please be careful with your comments.
I will be quite liberal with bans.

Can you remove my name from the person who started the thread please. That is not the thread name I created so please remove my name as the person who started the thread.

Mossy Monk

All this commotion over a court ruling.

The guy

The papers are expected to apologise for suggesting Kate and Gerry McCann were involved in their daughter's disappearance.

Well, they were negligent parents.

Mossy Monk

What would happen if a newspaper said they were negligient parents?

thelordofcheese

The guy wrote: »

Well, they were negligent parents.

Shhh, we're not allowed to point out the blindingly obvious anymore, it'd be defamation dontchaknow.

idlesupernova

The guy wrote: »

Well, they were negligent parents.

Well said. Leaving kids alone in a foreign country while you hob nob in a bar with the rest of your friends is disgusting. Should have been charged with neglect. This "We could see the apartment and checked every 5-10 minutes" guff doesn't wash with me, Any holiday resort is a Pedo's paradise and they left their kids alone. No child should be left alone. Appalling.

Dudess

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Shhh, we're not allowed to point out the blindingly obvious anymore, it'd be defamation dontchaknow.

Oh no, it's fine to express the view that they shouldn't have left the kids alone, it's just the accusations of murder thing that's a bit, y'know, dodgy.

Degsy

Dudess wrote: »

Oh no, it's fine to express the view that they shouldn't have left the kids alone, it's just the accusations of murder thing that's a bit, y'know, dodgy.

Maybe they didnt MEAN to kill the kid and then launched a cover-up,that was what a lot of speculation seemed to centre on,not an actual premediated murder.

GhostInTheRuins

idlesupernova wrote: »

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1309913,00.html

Express Newspapers have agreed to pay £550,000 to the Find Madeleine Fund after being forced to apologise over more than 100 articles written about her parents.The McCanns are understood to have been asking for up to £4m. Express Newspapers offered in the region of £250,000 to cover the entire group.

Oops, that makes more sense

Katzy

Leave them alone!!

Are'nt they paying the sentence - every minute of every day

Mossy Monk

Sure, but I think they should get off the tv and newspapers and internet also. If they want to insist on being in the media eye then they should expect some crticism

Terry

idlesupernova wrote: »

Can you remove my name from the person who started the thread please. That is not the thread name I created so please remove my name as the person who started the thread.

No.

Dudess

Mossy Monk wrote: »

Sure, but I think they should get off the tv and newspapers and internet also. If they want to insist on being in the media eye then they should expect some crticism

If they don't keep the public aware, Madeleine will be forgotten about (people might protest "We're more than well aware" but the McCanns' insistence on flagging their case ad infinitum is precisely the reason why). They have the means to use the media to their advantage while their child is missing. You can't begrudge them that. Sure, it's tacky at times but I've no doubt we'd all stoop that low if our child went missing. A lot of the tackiness is a product of the tabloid media itself.

idlesupernova

Terry wrote: »

No.

Why? They are not my words and I am being credited with them.

Karoma

idlesupernova wrote: »

Why? They are not my words and I am being credited with them.

For the reasons stated throughout the thread. If you insist on putting your title back: I'll delete the thread and ban you and pass your username on to an SMod for them to deal with you. PM me your choice, or create a new thread in the Help Desk. End of discussion here.

idlesupernova

I didn't ask for the title of the thread to come back I asked for my name to be removed as the thread starter, feel free to keep the new thread title but I did not write it and I'd like my name removed from it and whoever changed it can put their name in to it. Not a crazy request.

Tha Gopher

lostexpectation wrote: »

the money isn't going directly to them but the find maddie fund, they still both working in the hospital arn't they and they are minus one child but still have two, easy life yeah right. shup up idlesupernova

:rolleyes:

The papers ought to be ashamed of themselves. Instead of donating money to this questionable Madeleine fund why not donate it to a real charity? What exactly is the presumably massive stack of cash the McCanns are sitting on going to be used for?

The fact is, simply, that if they had not been negligent she would most likely not have gone missing. People who between them earn around 100 euro an hour minimum but will not shell out 12 euro for a babysitter do not deserve our sympathy.

slipss

boardinwork wrote: »

What are you talking about there?

How can you compare that with The Sunday World

They wrote about a man who had paid money before to the CRIMINAL ASSETS BUREAU and was friends with some of the top dogs of the CRIMINAL UNDERWORLD. The verdict in court was undeserved and will be appealed. He will end up with so much less than 900k.

What the papers wrote about the McCanns for months and months is a completely different kettle of fish. These were both doctors will no criminal past who had lost a daughter. To compare the SW to those cut throat, page 3, English tabloids is as ignorant as the comments you are trying to imply that they make.

I was just saying it seems to set a legal precedent for people sueing newspapers for suggesting that someone is guilty of a crime that they have never been convicted of. I wasn't refering to any particular story (900k?), just that TSW have a long standing tradition of implying the guilt of people in relation to certain things that they have never been proven guilty of.

Killaqueen!!!

I think everyone has been watching too much CSI here. If you're directly involved with this case i.e you are part of the police team launching the search, you are a family member or the mccanns etc. etc. feel free to give your opinion and back it up but why are people so soon to point the finger at the parents?

They shouldn't have left their kid alone. I think they're going to be regretting that every second of every minute of every day for the rest of their lives. Is that not enough? Of course not. You people read the papers and make up your mind on the spot that they're guilty of murder. Why? Because it seems a bit dodgy...they must have done it, right? This isn't CSI. Just because it seems dodgy didn't mean they did it. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

I hate the way people think they have all the answers after reading a few tabloids

Anyway, I think it's great the papers are apologising. Fair deuce. As if losing your daughter isn't bad enough, you have papers slanderising your name and accusing you of murder.

Mossy Monk

Killaqueen!!! wrote: »

why are people so soon to point the finger at the parents?

Are you suggesting that they were not neglegiable in any way?

Tha Gopher

Killaqueen!!! wrote: »

They shouldn't have left their kid alone. I think they're going to be regretting that every second of every minute of every day for the rest of their lives. Is that not enough?

If me and my best mate got very drunk, had an arguement about something stupid, it develops into a fight and I stab him (and not in legitimate self defence) I should avoid prosecution because when I wake up in the morning I will be devastated at what I done?

The McCanns didnt make a mistake. They took a decision to save 12 euro that caused the unthinkable. It isnt unheard of for those in control of public areas (building sites for example) to face prosecution if a death occurs after safety has been ignored to cut costs.

Dudess

Gopher, I've just done a Google news search and there's not one mention of Madeleine's body being found so, bearing that in mind, I have edited your posts.

Killaqueen!!!

Tha Gopher wrote: »

If me and my best mate got very drunk, had an arguement about something stupid, it develops into a fight and I stab him (and not in legitimate self defence) I should avoid prosecution because when I wake up in the morning I will be devastated at what I done?

Of course you should be prosecuted. If there is a witness/inevitable evidence to prove that you killed your best mate then yes. I don't know how to compafre your hypothetical situation to the McCanns but let's see. Should you be prosecuted for leaving your drunk mate on his own in a place where he may be vulnerable? And then he ends up being murdered/kidnapped/whatever? Should you go to jail for being a bad friend because you got into a fight?

The McCanns didnt make a mistake. They took a decision to save 12 euro that caused the unthinkable. It isnt unheard of for those in control of public areas (building sites for example) to face prosecution if a death occurs after safety has been ignored to cut costs.

You think the parents should be prosecuted for leaving her in the room? That's a fair point. Perhaps the struggling single mother down the road from me should be prosecuted for losing her 6 year old in Tescos last week.

Why should they be prosecuted for murder? Were you a witness? Have you heard all the evidence? Oh, I forgot. The only evidence you need is the front page of the Sunday Mirror that accuses the McCann parents of murder.

Killaqueen!!!

Mossy Monk wrote: »

Are you suggesting that they were not neglegiable in any way?

No, I'm not. I'm not suggesting they're guilty, I'm not suggesting they're innocent. I'm saying I don't know. And neither do any of you so stop making accusations you know nothing about.

Tha Gopher

Killaqueen!!! wrote: »

Should you be prosecuted for leaving your drunk mate on his own in a place where he may be vulnerable? And then he ends up being murdered/kidnapped/whatever? Should you go to jail for being a bad friend because you got into a fight?

2- You think the parents should be prosecuted for leaving her in the room? That's a fair point. Perhaps the struggling single mother down the road from me should be prosecuted for losing her 6 year old in Tescos last week.

3- Why should they be prosecuted for murder? Were you a witness? Have you heard all the evidence? Oh, I forgot. The only evidence you need is the front page of the Sunday Mirror that accuses the McCann parents of murder.

1- There is a difference in saying "fcuk off" and leaving someone who is making a twat of themselves, compared to leaving baby twins and a 3 year old alone in a hotel room.

2- Unless she was rolling a joint in the jacks while he wandered off, no. Similiarly, the McCanns wouldnt need to be prosecuted for negligence if she was kidnapped while they were in the apartment, as opposed to when they were drinking a considerable distance away from it.

3- I never said they should be prosecuted for murder. What I did say is that if or when she is finally declared legally dead I dont see any problem with charging them with manslaughter via negligence.

Dudess- fair enough, though I was only going on what the most likely scenario is.

Mossy Monk

Killaqueen!!! wrote: »

And neither do any of you so stop making accusations you know nothing about.

I have only ever said they were bad parents. Anyone who leaves their children unattended should be punished.

Trojan911

idlesupernova wrote: »

Four newspapers are set to pay damages to the parents of Madeleine McCann, after settling a libel case,

Right & proper too. If you get it wrong then pay up.......

KnifeWRENCH

Mossy Monk wrote: »

I have only ever said they were bad parents. Anyone who leaves their children unattended should be punished.

+1. It's disgusting that these people are being paid large sums of money for neglecting 3 children. The papers should print an apology but under NO circumstances should these people receive a financial reward.
OK so they may not like what the papers say. Well, if they didn't neglect their daughter, the papers wouldn't be writing about them now would they? If you do something wrong, you have to expect the media to report on it. And 9 times out of 10 they WILL blow things out of proportion.

Kate & Gerry McCann may not have killed her, but if someone else has then they must still shoulder the blame for allowing her to be taken.
If she's found alive, the first thing that should be done is for a foster family to be found for her. I don't know how they're still allowed keep the two even younger children they left alone.

Dudess wrote:

If they don't keep the public aware, Madeleine will be forgotten about

I don't think we're ever gonna forget this case. It's nauseating to constantly see these people in the news expecting sympathy, as if they're the victims! And as for the "Find Maddie" fund? I wouldn't give them a cent, and don't think anyone should contribute anything that would make their lives any easier.