McCanns seek to have Supreme Court judgement annulled in libel damages case.

[Mr Gray]

...and you still don't understand.

i read the original portuguese....http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4644.jpg


see if you can....there is no...it appears


bottom two lines

[slartibartfast]

From the translation in the OP of this thread:

" the non involvement of the parents, assisted witnesses, in any penally relevant action stems from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when Madeleine disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they displayed until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the reports from the (Birmingham) Forensic Science Service (FSS) and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.

Please point out the "it appears" or "it seems", thanks muchly.

Well we seem to have a b........ version with bit from both. You would have to ask Davel.

[stephen25000]

i read the original portuguese....http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4644.jpg


see if you can....there is no...it appears


bottom two lines

Just keep to the Supreme Court Judgement dave.

The McCann's lost.

That won't change.

So, time to pay up.

[Mr Gray]

Well we seem to have a b........ version with bit from both. You would have to ask Davel.

I have supplied a link to the original portuguese statement...there is no...it appears

[slartibartfast]

I have supplied a link to the original portuguese statement...there is no...it appears

Now link to the source of your post.

[Mr Gray]

Just keep to the Supreme Court Judgement dave.

The McCann's lost.

That won't change.

So, time to pay up.

you are more than abit slow tonight...the SC were quoting the archiving report....and the quoted it incorectly

[slartibartfast]

you are more than abit slow tonight...the SC were quoting the archiving report....and the quoted it incorectly

It's the same Portuguese.

[Alfie]

Well we seem to have a b........ version with bit from both. You would have to ask Davel.

Why?  Did he supply the translation in the OP?

[Mr Gray]

Now link to the source of your post.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

[slartibartfast]

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Which says...

The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.

[Mr Gray]

It's the same Portuguese.

so where has your claim of ...it appears ...come from....link

[slartibartfast]

so where has your claim of ...it appears ...come from....link

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Supreme_Court_31_01_2017.htm

[G-Unit]

Do you have  a link to the original portuguese ...are they talking of evidence of innocence or proof of innocence

My take on it is roughly;

Evidence was collected 'which proves' that the defendants didn't commit any crimes

Over to you;

http://pjga.blogspot.co.uk/

Scroll down to Page 6.

[slartibartfast]

ROFL   is so  10 years ago in internet speech only old people think it is funny

1989 Usenet

[Alfie]

1989 Usenet

off topic.  ROFL.