Goncalo Amaral.

[Mr Gray]

But at this moment in time, GA won his appeal against the mccs - therefore what he said still stands.

Not sure what you mean by "stands". Are you claiming the SC judement means his opinion is correct...it doesnt.
If you read his book and listen to the documentary its clear his opinion is based on his inability to understand the evidence....that's nothing to be proud of.
then we have Pedro da Carmo when he was head of the PJ confirming the Mccanns are not suspects and theres no evidence aginst them. it will be interesting to se what the ECHR say about the case.

[Mr Gray]

So at least you agree GA still has  honor - you are another one really pinning hopes on ECHR imo.

I dont think he has any honor and that isnt what Brietta said.

[barrier]

Not sure what you mean by "stands". Are you claiming the SC judement means his opinion is correct...it doesnt.
If you read his book and listen to the documentary its clear his opinion is based on his inability to understand the evidence....that's nothing to be proud of.
then we have Pedro da Carmo when he was head of the PJ confirming the Mccanns are not suspects and theres no evidence aginst them. it will be interesting to se what the ECHR say about the case.

Its not in the echr's remit to comment on supposed ongoing criminal investigations is it?

[Mr Gray]

Its not in the echr's remit to comment on supposed ongoing criminal investigations is it?

the case im referring to is mccanns vs portugal

[Brietta]

So at least you agree GA still has  honor - you are another one really pinning hopes on ECHR imo.

You misunderstand me.  I think Amaral has proved categorically that he is not a man who could be described as being honourable ... quite the reverse.

[Brietta]

Its not in the echr's remit to comment on supposed ongoing criminal investigations is it?

That's interesting you should mention an ongoing criminal investigation bearing in mind that there was a report Amaral was being investigated in the aftermath of Cristovao's crimes.  Have you heard anything further about that domestic action which seems to be under the veil of secrecy legislation and a suspiciously quiet Amaral?

As Davel has pointed out the present ECHR action concerns Portugal ... not Amaral.

[barrier]

That's interesting you should mention an ongoing criminal investigation bearing in mind that there was a report Amaral was being investigated in the aftermath of Cristovao's crimes.  Have you heard anything further about that domestic action which seems to be under the veil of secrecy legislation and a suspiciously quiet Amaral?

As Davel has pointed out the present ECHR action concerns Portugal ... not Amaral.

At last the nettle is grasped.

[kizzy]

That's interesting you should mention an ongoing criminal investigation bearing in mind that there was a report Amaral was being investigated in the aftermath of Cristovao's crimes.  Have you heard anything further about that domestic action which seems to be under the veil of secrecy legislation and a suspiciously quiet Amaral?

As Davel has pointed out the present ECHR action concerns Portugal ... not Amaral.

a suspiciously quiet Amaral?


IMO more a dignified silence

[Mr Gray]

At last the nettle is grasped.

Amaral will not be involved. But his statements and the validity of them will.

[barrier]

Amaral will not be involved. But his statements and the validity of them will.

Given there's no sign of Madeleine its hard to question the validity,thats more opinion based, more the validity of a Portuguese citizens right to free speech and all that jazz under their laws.

[Mr Gray]

Given there's no sign of Madeleine its hard to question the validity,thats more opinion based, more the validity of a Portuguese citizens right to free speech and all that jazz under their laws.

It's very easy to question the validity... From what I've seen of other cases it's whether those statements were based on sound evidence... They clearly were not.... And it's European law here... The balance between articles 8 and 10.
Remember that the right to free speech has limitations

[barrier]

It's very easy to question the validity... From what I've seen of other cases it's whether those statements were based on sound evidence... They clearly were not.... And it's European law here... The balance between articles 8 and 10.
Remember that the right to free speech has limitations

The validity cannot be determined until the fate of Madeleine is known.Its about the right of the Portuguese in allowing a book to be published under their laws.

[Mr Gray]

The validity cannot be determined until the fate of Madeleine is known.Its about the right of the Portuguese in allowing a book to be published under their laws.

Again you don't seem to understand.. It's not Portuguese laws on which the decision will be made... Its ECHR.
And from what I have seen in other cases it will be based on whether amaral statements were based on sound or reasonable evidence. They were not.

then we have the fact that the SC said the presumption of innocense does not apply in civil cases ,  according to the ECHR it does. Where the SC erred imo , was the exclusion of the presumotion of innocence does  apply to cases such as Barry George

[barrier]

Again you don't seem to understand.. It's not Portuguese laws on which the decision will be made... Its ECHR.
And from what I have seen in other cases it will be based on whether amaral statements were based on sound or reasonable evidence. They were not

If at some stage its found to be even in part to have been correct,the echr will have egg on its face should it rule against Portugal whilst the case is supposed to be ongoing,anyhow suns out and lots not to do,but some moron or degenerate will no doubt in the form of a mouthpiece in the not to distant future will say that covid crisis will mean a delay like the brexit debacle was supposed to have done.

[Mr Gray]

If at some stage its found to be even in part to have been correct,the echr will have egg on its face should it rule against Portugal whilst the case is supposed to be ongoing,anyhow suns out and lots not to do,but some moron or degenerate will no doubt in the form of a mouthpiece in the not to distant future will say that covid crisis will mean a delay like the brexit debacle was supposed to have done.

Again you dont seem to understand....madeleines fate is not in question...its whether the statements by amaral were based on reasonable evidence.