McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Mr Gray]

It’s not for the ECHR to determine that tho?
Isn’t it that the complaint is against the SC of Portugal  for not understanding where they went wrong ?

looking at other cases the ECHR will look at the evidence on which the allegations are made....and whether its been presented in a balanced way...they will then decide on the balance of articles 10 and 8

[Mr Gray]

But of course that isn’t what the book did.

You have to ask yourself a question.

Did the police at a certain point in the investigation believe that Madeleine had accidentally died and K&G has hidden her body?
If you believe that then a book stating that is factual and not libellous.

The court said amarals claims were mainly based on the police files...that means some were not. He presented the dogs as having solved 200 cases...absolute rubbish.....vastly over stating their reliability....many other things he said were not in the files. He claimed he could prove maddie died in the apartmenta nd her death was covered up..again he couldnt ...he made a case against the parents on evidence taht did not exist

[jassi]

The job of investigating police officers is to collect enough evidence with which to make a charge against a suspect stick, not to decide who dunnit and then publicise their thoughts on the matter in the media.

The job of serving officers, not retired ones.

[Mr Gray]

They were being investigated! They were suspects. They invited the media.  They were told not to contact the media or talk about the case.

 They shot themselves in the foot, and now hobble along complaining someone gave them a loaded gun.

This is to do with SC ruling. You need to cite exactly the bits in that SC ruling which the ECHR will find in McCann favour.

No point in citing other cases, as they are not this case. Stick to this case and keep it simple.

its to do with the SC ruling on the balance of article 8 vs article 10....and almost certainly the presumption of innocence

[Snowgirl]

looking at other cases the ECHR will look at the evidence on which the allegations are made....and whether its been presented in a balanced way...they will then decide on the balance of articles 10 and 8

So you keep on repeating but its only your opinion  that's what they'll do . It might yet not get accepted . Have you found evidence of that yet ?

[John]

Porcine squadron- stand by for takeoff

An interesting word jassi which in the context of this case and Eddie conjures up all sorts of possibilities.

[Eleanor]

Didn't Amaral say that he would appeal to The ECHR if he lost against The McCanns?  So we would be sitting here discussing this anyway, just from a different angle.  And Sceptics would be saying the same things that Supporters are saying.

How does that grab anyone?

[Mr Gray]

So you keep on repeating but its only your opinion  that's what they'll do . It might yet not get accepted . Have you found evidence of that yet ?

Do you have a reason why it would not be accepted... From what I have seen if it had been rejected there would be a statement on the ECHR site

[John]

Do you have a reason why it would not be accepted... From what I have seen if it had been rejected there would be a statement on the ECHR site

Actually no.  There will only be a rejection notice if it has been received and registered.  Many Applications are never accepted in the first place if they fail to comply with the ECHR criteria, are incompetent or are not submitted correctly.

[Mr Gray]

Actually no.  There will only be a rejection notice if it has been received and registered.  Many Applications are never accepted in the first place if they fail to comply with the ECHR criteria, are incompetent or are not submitted correctly.

What do you mean by ECHR criteria... What criteria

[John]

What do you mean by ECHR criteria... What criteria

Does the Court have jurisdiction to deal with your application?

To determine whether the Court is able (has jurisdiction) to deal with your application, please consult our online checklist questionnaire for guidance.

The purpose of this online checklist is to help you decide whether your case has any chance of being declared admissible.

As you answer the questionnaire, you will be given an indication of whether there may be an obstacle to admissibility. Please note that the form is for guidance only and not an official response from the Court.

Welcome to the European Court of Human Rights' applicant checklist. This checklist aims to give you guidance on your application to the Court. Before you answer the questionnaire, we would like to draw your attention to some facts and figures relating to admissibility.

Facts about admissibility
Did you know that 82% of all applications (a total of 38,505) decided by the Court in 2016 were declared inadmissible?

The principal reasons why applications were declared inadmissible in 2016 were as follows:

51% were rejected as manifestly ill-founded
19% of applications, the applicants did not exhaust domestic remedies
11% were lodged more than 6 months after the final decision taken by a domestic court
10% were rejected because the applicants wanted the Court to quash, rehear or revise decisions taken by domestic courts ("fourth instance")
9% of applications were found to be incompatible with the provisions of the Convention or its Protocols

The Court does not act as a court of appeal vis-à-vis domestic courts incompatible with the provisions of the Convention or its Protocols

http://app.echr.coe.int/CheckList/?cookieCheck=true

[Mr Gray]

http://app.echr.coe.int/CheckList/?cookieCheck=true

That's.. Admissibility... And if it's not admissible... From what I've seen a rejection statement is issued

[John]

That's.. Admissibility... And if it's not admissible... From what I've seen a rejection statement is issued

I believe only two cases were recorded as being rejected recently despite the Court receiving hundreds of Applications.

If its not admissible it doesn't get registered.

[John]

Graphic

[Mr Gray]

I believe only two cases were recorded as being rejected recently despite the Court receiving hundreds of Applications.

If its not admissible it doesn't get registered.

There are lots of records online that have registration  numbers but have been declared inadmissible ..

The European Court of Human Rights has today rejected an application from the family of Alfie Evans
in the case of Evans v. the United Kingdom (application no. 18770/18).
The case concerned the family’s argument that the prevention of Alfie’s transfer from Alder Hey
Hospital constituted deprivation of liberty and a violation of Article 5 (right to liberty and security) of
the European Convention on Human Rights.
In its decision the Court found that the application was inadmissible