Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.

[Alfie]

Apparently that is what the judges have said.  Who are we to argue ?

Not me!  Judges are like Gods to me.  Their word is unassailable and must never be questioned.

[Robittybob1]

I wasn't aware that a police officer had.

Well in this case a retired one using investigation material.
I think he is a police officer whether or not he is retired.

[Alfie]

If police have a suspect, can't find enough evidence to charge them and shelve the case that says nothing about the suspect's guilt or innocence. Nothing! All it says is that the police were unable to find enough evidence to solve the case.

So what is the legal status of that person?   Innocent or guilty of the alleged crime?

[jassi]

Not me!  Judges are like Gods to me.  Their word is unassailable and must never be questioned.

Quite right.  No doubt if you are ever up in front of one of them you'll say the same thing.

[Robittybob1]

Quite right.  No doubt if you are ever up in front of one of them you'll say the same thing.

I doubt that emphatically.

[jassi]

Well in this case a retired one using investigation material.
I think he is a police officer whether or not he is retired.

Well you think wrong  IMO

[Alfie]

Quite right.  No doubt if you are ever up in front of one of them you'll say the same thing.

Of course.  Never been a judge who made a bad call, that's why miscarriages of justice never, ever happen.  It's all an illusion created by the forum owner to give us something to chatter about in our spare time.

[John]

Of course.  Never been a judge who made a bad call, that's why miscarriages of justice never, ever happen.  It's all an illusion created by the forum owner to give us something to chatter about in our spare time.

Those within the justice system have their own agenda.  Try googling crooked lawyers and see what comes up.

[Mr Gray]

So ? The post should be read as a whole
Try reading the other papers linked.
Reference is made to deterrence.

It isn't
Reference is made to making the public feel more comfortable
Read it again

[G-Unit]

Robittybob1


If you had read my post properly in the first place the information was there all along.

Reply #24 on: February 24, 2017, 07:59:46 AM »

My assessment of the contents;

Pages 1-39/40 Taken from the first judgement.
Pages 40, 2.2-44 Duartes arguments.
Pages 45, 2.3-48 Guerra & Paz response.
Page 48 onwards; the judges findings.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7937.msg385533#msg385533

[misty]

If the McCanns had been prominent Portuguese citizens, I wonder if the SC would have reached the same decision?

The SC concluded that Amaral wrote the book with no intent to libel the parents, merely to defend his own reputation & give his own account of the investigation. If his intention was not to defame, why does every chapter, bar one, contain innuendo or implication of the McCanns' guilt?

[G-Unit]

If the McCanns had been prominent Portuguese citizens, I wonder if the SC would have reached the same decision?

The SC concluded that Amaral wrote the book with no intent to libel the parents, merely to defend his own reputation & give his own account of the investigation. If his intention was not to defame, why does every chapter, bar one, contain innuendo or implication of the McCanns' guilt?

Do you have any evidence to suggest that the Portuguese Courts favour their prominent citizens or are you just slinging mud by implication?

The book described the investigation and the investigation suspected the McCanns. What would you expect him to write?

[misty]

Do you have any evidence to suggest that the Portuguese Courts favour their prominent citizens or are you just slinging mud by implication?

The book described the investigation and the investigation suspected the McCanns. What would you expect him to write?

The case Fernandes & Fernandes v Portugal, which went to the ECHR, is a prime example of the SC having favoured the reputation of a leading judge over the freedom of expression of a journalistic source.

The investigation also suspected RM. He warranted 2 chapters.

[stephen25000]

I would second that too but add that FairPlay and justice is exactly what supporters believe in too but feel there hasn't been much of that in respect to the McCanns

The McCann's have their own way for several years, and they lost the court action.

Meanwhile I saw this in the Daily Star...........

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/594216/selfie-queen-Karen-Danczuk-twitter-rant-kate-gerry-mccann-Madeleine


' The pal said: “People need to remember the family’s lawyers are kept fully informed of all social media and broadcast remarks which are malicious and libellous.

“These minor celebrities think they can say what they want without a shred of evidence and rehash all the old rumours.” '

So from this, is it inferred the Mccann's are celebrities ???

[Mr Gray]

The McCann's have their own way for several years, and they lost the court action.

Meanwhile I saw this in the Daily Star...........

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/594216/selfie-queen-Karen-Danczuk-twitter-rant-kate-gerry-mccann-Madeleine


' The pal said: “People need to remember the family’s lawyers are kept fully informed of all social media and broadcast remarks which are malicious and libellous.

“These minor celebrities think they can say what they want without a shred of evidence and rehash all the old rumours.” '

So from this, is it inferred the Mccann's are celebrities ???

it is not implied
Is that what you meant