Papers Pay McCann's For Defamation

idlesupernova · 19-03-2008 12:56AM #1

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 · 19-03-2008 12:58AM

greeat stuff

Mossy Monk · 19-03-2008 01:00AM

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

slipss · 19-03-2008 01:03AM

Are you watching Sunday World?

Raspberry · 19-03-2008 01:05AM

Who?

phantom_lord · 19-03-2008 03:04AM

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 · 19-03-2008 03:22AM

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 · 19-03-2008 08:11AM

OOOoo

banderras · 19-03-2008 08:41AM

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

togster · 19-03-2008 08:46AM

it would

Stench Blossoms · 19-03-2008 09:56AM

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 · 19-03-2008 10:03AM

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

source · 19-03-2008 10:09AM

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 · 19-03-2008 10:31AM

Easy life? They're paying £550

ibh · 19-03-2008 10:45AM

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 · 19-03-2008 11:19AM

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 · 19-03-2008 11:32AM

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 · 19-03-2008 11:35AM

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 · 19-03-2008 11:36AM

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 · 19-03-2008 11:46AM

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 · 19-03-2008 12:10PM

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 · 19-03-2008 01:16PM

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 · 19-03-2008 01:17PM

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 · 19-03-2008 02:42PM

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 · 19-03-2008 02:47PM

All this commotion over a court ruling.

The guy · 19-03-2008 02:48PM

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 · 19-03-2008 02:51PM

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

thelordofcheese · 19-03-2008 02:51PM

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 · 19-03-2008 02:52PM

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 · 19-03-2008 03:08PM

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 · 19-03-2008 03:22PM

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.

Papers Pay McCann's For Defamation

Comments