McCanns application to have Supreme Court judgement annulled dismissed.

[carlymichelle]

Well there still appears to be no sign of what happened yesterday in the MSM.

I wonder why, as they reported the Supreme Court Decision rather quickly.

our australian  media are making up for that   

[G-Unit]

 *&*%£ *&*%£

I wonder if they will go to the European Court (European Court of Human Rights, ECHR)?

They would be very foolish to do so. The case is littered with references to human rights laws and judgements. They are taken into account throughout.

[stephen25000]

*&*%£ *&*%£
They would be very foolish to do so. The case is littered with references to human rights laws and judgements. They are taken into account throughout.

Also, the success rate for UK cases is abysmal, and any potential compensation minimal.

Do the McCann's seriously imagine they can take the State of Portugal to court and win ?

[carlymichelle]

Also, the success rate for UK cases is abysmal, and any potential compensation minimal.

Do the McCann's seriously imagine they can take the State of Portugal to court and win ?

its awesome our aus media  ??   fora long time they were pro mcann

[Brietta]

*&*%£ *&*%£
They would be very foolish to do so. The case is littered with references to human rights laws and judgements. They are taken into account throughout.

Indeed so ... and the European Laws on defamation enshrined in the Portuguese Republic's Constitution have been totally disregarded by the Portuguese courts.

What price democracy?

[stephen25000]

Indeed so ... and the European Laws on defamation enshrined in the Portuguese Republic's Constitution have been totally disregarded by the Portuguese courts.

What price democracy?

Time to get a grip Brietta and accept the decision.

[G-Unit]

Indeed so ... and the European Laws on defamation enshrined in the Portuguese Republic's Constitution have been totally disregarded by the Portuguese courts.

What price democracy?

Two blatant injustices that we know of.  There must be many more.

The judges reached their decisions with references to human rights laws and judgements throughout. Please explain just how you think the judges disregarded the defamation laws. Otherwise you are making unsupported allegations.

Do you really expect judges to reach their decisions by scrutinising the characters of the parties involved and finding for the most 'deserving'? That suggests a grave lack of understanding of how Judicial systems work. I thought each case was judged according to the evidence presented in that case only.

[carlymichelle]

Time to get a grip Brietta and accept the decision.

they never  will   also amaral  has talked about  counter  sueing the mcanns i hope he does

[Robittybob1]

they never  will   also amaral  has talked about  counter  sueing the mcanns i hope he does

He will look low if he does.

[Benice]

Indeed so ... and the European Laws on defamation enshrined in the Portuguese Republic's Constitution have been totally disregarded by the Portuguese courts.

What price democracy?

Apparently there has never been a 'miscarriage of justice' case in Portugal.   Every single person in prison is guilty.

The first time a prog equivalent to our 'Rough Justice' prog is aired in Portugal - will be a great day for the Portuguese people as it will denote a giant step forward in support of real justice.          Unfortunately judging by the snails-pace speed anything 'judicial' appears to move in Portugal - that day will be a very long time coming.
AIMHO

[Brietta]

Time to get a grip Brietta and accept the decision.

To what decision of the Portuguese courts do you refer?

The one recognising torture and punishing the victim?

Or the one recognising the right to honour enjoyed by a dishonourable ex-policeman at the expense of the right to honour of the victims traduced by him?

In Portugal it seems the scales of justice seem to be a little out of kilter with the European Laws they signed up to without the slightest pretence of compliance.
This is a modern democracy? ... I rather think not.

[stephen25000]

To what decision of the Portuguese courts do you refer?

The one recognising torture and punishing the victim?

Or the one recognising the right to honour enjoyed by a dishonourable ex-policeman at the expense of the right to honour of the victims traduced by him?

In Portugal it seems the scales of justice seem to be a little out of kilter with the European Laws they signed up to without the slightest pretence of compliance.
This is a modern democracy? ... I rather think not.

Perhaps you could try a more original approach than supporting Correia.

[Brietta]

The judges reached their decisions with references to human rights laws and judgements throughout. Please explain just how you think the judges disregarded the defamation laws. Otherwise you are making unsupported allegations.

Do you really expect judges to reach their decisions by scrutinising the characters of the parties involved and finding for the most 'deserving'? That suggests a grave lack of understanding of how Judicial systems work. I thought each case was judged according to the evidence presented in that case only.

I expect judges to make their rulings according to the law of the land and without bias.  If you are content that applies to the Portuguese appeal court judges that is your privilege.
My right to freedom of speech regarding what I believe an obvious miscarriage of justice is my privilege.

[Brietta]

He will look low if he does.

From what I have read I believe to do so would involve him raising an action in Britain and arguing his case under British Law.

I rather doubt that would be a wise move on his part.

[Benice]

The judges reached their decisions with references to human rights laws and judgements throughout. Please explain just how you think the judges disregarded the defamation laws. Otherwise you are making unsupported allegations.

Do you really expect judges to reach their decisions by scrutinising the characters of the parties involved and finding for the most 'deserving'? That suggests a grave lack of understanding of how Judicial systems work. I thought each case was judged according to the evidence presented in that case only.

I haven't followed the ins and outs of this like you have G - but I have to say that:-

I would not expect Judges to promote virtually as an established fact that  'insufficient evidence' always means that other evidence is definitely around to be found - and completely ignore the possibility that the reason 'insuffiicient evidence' was collected was simply because no other evidence existed to be found in the first place.